1. Why the hell is it so damn hard to find a full time summer job in this city? I’ve been applying to places like crazy but everyone informs me they can only offer 15 hours a week. I’m a student, I need more than that!
2. To the bitch and her family JAYWALKING across Joseph Howe to get to the church across the street. Do not point your finger at me and tell me to stop my car. I obviously wasn’t going to run you over. Use a crosswalk, esspecially in traffic that heavy. Cars are coming off the bedford highway, it’s pretty busy. Also, I know you purposely took your time crossing the street just to piss me off even more. I hope you get what’s coming to you, you sellfish old hag.
What pisses me off even more is that if I hadn’t of seen you, and if I had run you over, I would have gotten in shit for it. This city is so fucking backwards when it comes to pedestrians. I walk and take the bus anywhere the majority of the time, but I’m not an asshole who runs out into traffic. People in this city need to start looking both ways and using the crosswalks that are clearly marked…EVERYWHERE.
3. What the fuck is this I’m hearing about the government not funding events such as the Halifax Pop Explosion this year? Are you fucking serious? Why does Halifax hate the music scene so much? We have so many talented artists, but hardly any of them credit for it. The government can shell out thousands of dollars for Celine Dion, but refuses to acknowledge their local talents. What a load of crap.
4. The Coast: Why are you so bias? You don’t give enough local bands any attention at all, and why? Because you dislike them.
This article appears in Jun 12-18, 2008.
Hey, no complaining. Say anything bad about the city of halifax and these people will tell you that you can leave if you dont like it.Nevermind that some of the best talent gets ignored here and willl never become as big as they should because the politics of this city doesnt allow them to come here.
You would not have gotten into trouble for hitting them (unless it was on purpose)…they just ticketed a 16 year old jaywalker that got hit last month…that old hag would have received a ticket as well.
On the subject of clearly marked crosswalks, do you really not know that there is a pedestrian crossing at every single intersection, regardless of whether or not there are white lines painted across the street? Even if you got your driver’s license in another province where this is not the case, didn’t you get the booklet that went out to every mailbox in the province last year?
Bedford highway, nearest to the church? As far as I’m concerned, there is no intersection there except for where the crosswalk is further up, Miranda.
I didn’t mean to imply that there is an intersection or a pedestrian crossing at that particular spot, Jenn. I was just drawing the OP’s attention to the fact that a crosswalk doesn’t have to be “clearly marked” to exist.
Halifax doesn’t need 4 crosswalks at every 4 way intersection, nor 3 at every 3 way intersection etc. A good example is the cross walk opposite Grand Parade at Barrington. The city only paints one of the crosswalks crossing Barrington, where two used to exist. Do people only use the painted one? No. So now you end up with folks clogging up the intersection when there is no need of it.The law should be changed to read “pedestrians can only cross at marked crosswalks”, those could include, signalled ones, painted ones or having signs installed in lieu of the previous indicators.
that’s an excellent idea ex-!
Yup. We should do everything we possibly can to make the streets more convenient for cars and less convenient for pedestrians and everyone else. Eventually, those annoying peds will start driving like normal people… o_O
I think 2 crosswalks at a 3-way intersection is a workable Idea (although slightly inconvenient to the pedestrian), but you would still need 4 crosswalks at a 4-way. How would you get to the opposite corner with only 2? you would need at least 3, and if you put in 3, why not 4? It would be super inconvenient to cross 3 times, when 1 would do. If the intersection is busy, it probably has crosswalks and lights anyway. If it is not busy, the intersection is the safest place to cross, since cars should be travelling slower or will be stopping there anyway. That is why it is implied that there is a crosswalk at each intersection. The alternative is the “scramble” light where all four lights turn red, all cars come to a stop and pedestrians are free to walk whereever they want for ~20 seconds at the intersection..even cross diagonally. I think they are testing this out at a couple of intersections in Toronto and are having some success.
Well I’m sorry Miranda but all I’m saying is that people ‘should’ expect to see people at crosswalks and yeild to them, as they do have the right of way. But drivers don’t expect to see people in the middle of the road, where they SHOULDN’T be, and sometimes, a driver just can’t stop in time no matter what their speed may be.
Miranda, please keep your comments a little more topical. The OP clearly mentioned a JAYWALKING bitch and her family. At least give the OP the benefit of the doubt that he/she knows the difference between crossing at a crosswalk and jaywalking. And nowhere has anyone suggested making the streets more convenient for cars and less convenient for pedestrians. Both groups have to recognize the dangers and the responsibilities As it is now, there are many pedestrians (not all, many) who feel such an entitlement they will immediately walk into the street without realizing that cars are not able to stop instantaneously. Some believe their pedestrian rights provide an invisible shield that should protect them as soon as they step onto the street regardless of how close a vehicle is. Then, they will often give a dirty look or the finger at the driver who had to screech to a stop in order to prevent making the pedestrian into a hood ornament.I’m not focusing on the rights or the laws that exist stating pedestrians always have right-of-way. That’s a given. More to the point, many pedestrians have to recognize that they do not have immunity when crossing the road. They must still be aware of the dangers and simple etiquette of making sure drivers are aware of them and it is safe to cross. At the end of the day, the pedestrian may have right of way but the car will win in a battle due to simple physics. The laws may give the pedestrian more rights but physics should also give the pedestrian more responsibility for a safe crossing. Will the pedestrian’s right-of way really make a difference when they’re in the hospital or, worse case scenario, morgue?Personally, I try to avoid crosswalks and only cross a street when there is little to no traffic. That way I don’t impede the driver’s progress, nor do I have to worry about the idiot that doesn’t provide my right-of-way. I accept my own responsibility to get across the street safely and it’s worked out pretty well so far.
I don’t think it really has to do with making the road more inconvenient for pedestrians, but I mean, it becomes pretty inconvenient having pedestrians run out into the middle of the road all the time. This happens a lot in Halifax. I don’t see this anywhere else. I do drive, however I walk and bus almost anywhere that I can, but I never dare run out into the street like some people here do. It’s very dangerous. Drivers need to be more conscientious yes, but what about pedestrians?
Katz, direct quote from the post: “People in this city need to start looking both ways and using the crosswalks that are clearly marked”. My comment was perfectly topical, as it was in response to something the OP actually said.
I know we’re getting away from the original topic here, but it really seems to me like every traffic “improvment” that gets made is pro-car and anti-pedestrian. Look what happened at Mumford Rd bus terminal. People were crossing directly from the shopping center to the terminal, where there was no crosswalk. So rather than do something to make it safe for pedestrians to cross where it is convenient for them to do so, the city spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to erect an insurmountable barrier to force them to cross where it’s convenient for cars to have them do so. I really think we should be moving away from this kind of car-centric thinking.
It’s really stupid to say that people need to move away from cars. It’s not going to happen, not in this century. People are always going to rather drive somewhere than take a bus or walk, there’s nothing that’s ever going to change that. What they did at Mumford was a good idea, because that was an incredibly dangerous spot for people to be crossing in the middle of the road. It’s a very busy area. Adding the fence there was a much safer choice for the cars and the pedestrians.
Fair enough Miranda. I felt you were pointing out the rather obvious concerning a rather specific bitch. My apologies.As far as the Mumford situation is concerned, I believe the city put the barrier in for the pedestrians’ safety, not to inconvenience them. As you said “People were crossing…where there was no crosswalk.” Considering the busy street they were crossing, it could have been a very dangerous situation. If pedestrians were allowed to cross wherever it was convenient for them, we’d have a LOT more collisions given the feelings of immunity I mentioned earlier. There obviously has to be a balance of convenience and safety and it was more convenient, and probably cost effective, to move the crossing ability of the pedestrians than to move the street or install yet another set of lights/crosswalk at that location.
I agree it was an unsafe place to cross, and something had to be done. But I really think that for the money that was spent, an alternate solution could have been found that would have been less inconvenient for pedestrians. I don’t think a pedestrian friendly option was even consideredAnd I think you’re wrong about moving away from our dependence on cars. People ARE doing it. I chose to get rid of my car a few years ago, and I know a few people who have done the same. Not many, but a few. And I know lots of people who have gone from being two car families to making due with one. It IS happening, albeit very slowly. Our leaders could speed the process if they had the political will.
I personally think it would have been a lot more inconvenient to put another crosswalk in the middle of the road only a few feet from the 2 crosswalks that govern each end of the road there.I can also assure yout hat a few people changing if they drive cars, or hwo many cars they have for their family isn’t going ot make a huge difference anytime soon. I’m not saying it sin’t possible, because it is possible, but nothing like this is going to change drastically , esspecially not anytime soon. People need cars. It’s a hassle having to bus or walk sometimes.
all I’m saying, is that people aren’t going to be ready to make this sort of committment towards always walking or bussing anytime soon.
But Jenn, if the city invested in infrastructure that was designed to make walking and bussing more convenient, then more people would walk and bus and drive less. This doesn’t mean people would ditch cars altogether. A good place to start would be facilitating how people get to work, which is a trip most people HAVE to take everyday. The city should encouraging more people to live near where they work and support initiatives to build apartments, homes and condos in these areas. Also, improving mass transit for those who have to commute would reduce the number of cars on the road. Instead, city planners tend to accomodate a driving culture and promote a sprawling city that faces traffic congestion problems.
I agree with you Jenn. People are not ready to make this kind of commitment in significant numbers. When you’re used to the convenience of a car, it’s hard to give it up. Nevertheless, I am convinced it is going to become more and more neccessary to reduce our dependence on cars. Our leaders could make the inevitable transition less painful by showing some vision.
Well really streets are made for cars and not pedestrians!
The reason why it’s hard to find a full-time job of 40hrs or more a week,is because the government has allowed businesses to get away with providing part-time jobs,so that they don’t have to give you benifits! Plain and simple.This wasn’t the way it was 20 years ago.