Woman pleads with driver to keep attention on road
Thank goodness that my sturdy Mini-Cooper was there between you and the people in the crosswalk. Was it a ringing phone or an urgent text buzz that pulled your attention away from the road? This ability to communicate is such a convenience. However, there is a cost for your convenience.
The people in the crosswalk were just leaving a meeting. Did you notice that they were dressed for our warm summer day as they stood by the road side getting soaked in the rain? Inconvenient. They were reluctant to leave me with the inconvenience of having my car towed. Your larger vehicle was conveniently still drivable.
As anyone who works long hours can tell you, routine things like grocery shopping are rarely convenient. I am grateful that you won’t be carrying the guilt of injury to anyone. If you’d like, you can imagine both the kind tow truck driver and me wincing as slivers of glass remind us that we shouldn’t have attempted to move the grocery bags from the back of the Mini.
The city of Ann Arbor recently tackled the issue of pedestrian safety by making it the law for drivers to stop. It is inconvenient at times, but safety rules. Life is busy and cell phone messages are insistent. I’m not really suggesting that it is only you. I’m wondering why we seem to have to learn this lesson one driver at a time.
Linda Williams
Ann Arbor
Comments
Atticus F.
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 1:16 p.m.
Here's a thought; Have you ever considered that some people are not from A2, and might be unfamiliar with our Pedestrian 'Safety' Ordinance? Also, while you ponder that, have you also considered that this law is inherently dangerous, due to the fact that it leads people to believe that it is safe to walk in front of a moving vehicle that might, or might not stop? This letter is clearly written by somebody with a narrow, one-sided view of the world, who is unwilling, or unable to see anybody elses point of view, other than their own.
mixmaster
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 11:06 p.m.
Having never met this woman who suffered a serious accident, clearly give you right to ascribe certain traits to her. Clearly.
Robert Hughes
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 12:24 a.m.
Glad that everyone was alright. Wondering why so many people had to read it twice, or just couldn't understand it at all.
mixmaster
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 10:58 p.m.
because most commenters here are slow on the uptake
mpope
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 7:48 p.m.
The offending driver probably would not have struck the pedestrians had it not been for the law abiding cooper. The pedestrians ( flashing lights at crosswalk notwithstanding) would not have stepped out had they seen BigCar barreling toward them unimpeded. Pedestrians have survival skills. The crosswalks seem to neither increase nor decrease pedestrian survival skills. People dont want to get hit by cars. That's pretty much, all people all the time. But those crosswalks have to be generating a lot of business for Tail-Lights-R-Us.
leaguebus
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 4:24 p.m.
I am amazed at the comments to this piece. If I hit a pedestrian with my car, they might die. Meanwhile, I replace my windshield or bump out the dent in my car and go on my way. No pedestrian in their right mind just walks out in front of a car. Most of the time, the driver is not paying attention as was the driver in this piece. I am in the car to drive, I look ahead for dangerous situations, and slow down or stop if I see one. When I see a pedestrian standing next to a road, I will pay full attention to them until I pass them or stop if they are at a crosswalk. Drive by the Golden Rule.
Skyjockey43
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 8:30 p.m.
Are you kidding me? Obviously you haven't spent much time driving around downtown or on campus while U of M is in session. People are constantly walking out in front of cars all the time! Everyone seems to be on their cell phones, have ipod earbuds blasting away, or just off on another planet contemplating their respective navels. Drivers have a responsibility to be aware of pedestrians, but that most definitely does not relieve pedestrians of their own responsibility for their own safety. When AAPD and UofM public safety start ticketing for jaywalking as well as vehicular crosswalk violations, maybe we might see a decline in scenarios such as this.
Deb Anderson
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 2:34 p.m.
Only in Ann Arbor can you find a surreal op/ed this good!!!
ViSHa
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 2:01 p.m.
So what are the chances the larger vehicle driver a) is reading this b) remotely thinks the writer is speaking about them? I guess if you need to publicly vent though...
mbill
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 12:50 a.m.
I only go to aa if I have to take someone to the hospital...
Brad
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 12:29 p.m.
I thought you were supposed to go to those AA meetings on a regular basis.
mike gatti
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 11:34 a.m.
It is really scary. I'd avoid it if I were you.
a2citizen
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 11:20 p.m.
I'm going to drink a few beers and chill for a couple hours. Then I will come back and reread this letter. Maybe then it will make sense.
mixmaster
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 10:58 p.m.
just don't drink and drive
Deb Anderson
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 2:38 p.m.
Good luck, I tried that too.
Ron Granger
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 9:21 p.m.
I see the "me me me" crowd has showed up and expressed their dismay at this notion that they should stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk. Oh the humanity!!
Brad
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 12:29 p.m.
Oh the predictability!
xmo
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 9:12 p.m.
Just another Mother complaining about how everybody else doesn't care! She is the only one! I personally think the Ann Arbor cross walk laws are dangerous because it lets walkers feel safe. Driving in Ann Arbor can be tough an it is hard to see cross walks and people waiting to cross, also we have a large foreign population and a number of out of town visitors who don't know about the law! Why the city of Ann Arbor wants to endanger its walkers is a question I can not answer!
mixmaster
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 10:57 p.m.
And no reference to Obama or Democrats?
shipdog7
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:54 p.m.
I also had to reread the article. So she got hit from behind by someone not paying attention. And that person could have hit the folks crossing the street if she wasn't in the way.. The police statement is that you should always have your vehicle under control. Even when someone slams on their breaks to avoid hitting something or someone. You hit someone from behind it is your responsibility and fault. Yes it would have been more than a nice gesture to stay around and make sure the party you hit was in a safe environment. Even at fault, I'm sure the party involved just wanted to get out of there. Get to a safe place called home. Shock and guilt will do that to you.
shipdog7
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:55 p.m.
sorry....brakes
Stuart Brown
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:09 p.m.
The particular ordinance you are referring to has made our streets less safe, not more. Your accident is an example of this. Yes, it is easy to blame inattentive drivers but what really matters is that at the end of the day, fewer people and property are damaged, maimed and killed. Pedestrians should wait for the vehicles to pass, even when it is raining. This seems rude, (and it is) but if it results in fewer accidents, it is the only defensible thing to do. This ordinance is not pedestrian, biker friendly but is sheer stupidity conjoined with pure arrogance by an opportunistic Mayor and Council.
GerryD
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 2:24 p.m.
@clara - I'd also really appreciate hearing more about that. While I seriously doubt he officer was correct (likely covering for his mistake), the fact that even the police run afoul of this is one more reason to reconsider it. It seems clear that a rational solution to this whole mess looks more like: 1) Eval all xwalks and decides if some are just too dangerous & eliminate 2) On remaining, non-intersection xwalks, HAWK or flashers are installed 3) Rescinds the law as the above should eliminate most of the problems for peds 4) Put in signs at xwalks reminding peds that they have right of way, but should look both ways and defer to fast/busy traffic as a mater of personal safety. Yes,this would cost some money, but this whole experiment in passing laws most people don't understand without spending any money to add necessary protections/alerts has, at nearly any observable level, failed and is leaving a trail of confused motorists, confused pedestrians, damaged vehicles and hospitalized people.
Brad
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 12:24 p.m.
Can we get some follow-up on that one, aa.com? That would make a *great* story.
clara
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:51 p.m.
Apparently the ordinance is no longer in effect according to the officer who rear ended me when I stopped for a pedestrian getting ready to cross at a flashing yellow, only the state law applies now.
Lola
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 5:12 p.m.
Was this some kind of creative writing assignment? If so I give it a C-.
CPS
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:43 p.m.
I like it--it is kind of like a very *nice* letter to the person who rear-ended her. It was subtle, and requires some imagination to envision the scenario and to properly absorb the lovely details of crunching glass and the feelings of relief that nobody was actually injured...perhaps that isn't what one expects to read anymore?
Superior Twp voter
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 4:32 p.m.
Tough crowd here! I "got it" the first time and thought it was a crafty message. Don't think it would pass muster if it was just another "hey this X%(#$@ dingbat hit me" letter...
mike gatti
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 11:32 a.m.
thank you for saying what I couldn't think of.
RunsWithScissors
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 4:27 p.m.
I get it! It's a mystery game. We have to guess the circumstances with a minimum of information: grocery shopping, rain, pedestrians dressed for summer, mini cooper, & Ann Arbor (the ringing phone is a red herring). My guess? The butler did it, in the crosswalk, with an Escalade.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 2:25 p.m.
The butler DONE it.
RunsWithScissors
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 8:46 p.m.
Aye. It was all in fun. I meant no disrespect to Linda Williams.
Carolyn
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 7:42 p.m.
Although I understood the article and am sympthetic with the author's point of view...I loved your "in the spirit of fun" (I hope) response.
Deb Anderson
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 2:40 p.m.
Yeah!!! Very good!
RUKiddingMe
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:21 p.m.
That's awesome.
Dog Guy
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 4:25 p.m.
Apparently the author obeyed Ann Arbor's unique "pedestrian approaching" ordinance and her little import paid the price for her smug self-righteousness. The following driver is, of course, at fault and will pay and pay for the inattentive driving. Lessons to be learned include pay attention to your driving, leave lots of stopping distance, and drive a "larger vehicle." There are no lessons to be learned by the author.
mike gatti
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 11:31 a.m.
she got creamed by someone on a cell phone why is that smug?
CPS
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 6:51 p.m.
I have stopped at crosswalks when I deemed it safe for me and the pedestrian crossing, and I have also chosen NOT to stop at crosswalks when I believed that the vehicles behind me were not likely to stop when I do . Does that make me halfway smug and self-righteous? I do understand the new law, but I conform ONLY when it is safe to do so and I will defend that in court should I be ticketed for not stopping. Without knowing all the details of this case, how do you know that the writer wasn't at a full stop for several seconds before an inattentive driver plowed into her from behind??? Does that still make her smug and self-righteous? I don't know, so I'm just taking this for what it's meant to be: a plea for ALL drivers to pay better attention, no matter what you drive and wherever you are.
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 3:59 p.m.
" my sturdy Mini-Cooper was... towed. Your larger vehicle was conveniently still drivable." what kind of car did the other guy have? I want one.
shutthefrtdoor
Mon, Aug 27, 2012 : 7:05 p.m.
What was it...a super mini? LOL!
nickcarraweigh
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 3:58 p.m.
Wow. Just wow.
GoNavy
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 11:44 a.m.
You need to figure out a better meme. This one is getting over played.
Dutch Thomas
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 3:32 p.m.
what the hell is this "article" about anyway? no facts just rambling about something or other.
mike gatti
Sun, Aug 26, 2012 : 11:29 a.m.
So much for subtlety. This woman was addressing the woman who rear ended her at a pedestrian cross walk. The woman was on her phone and she was admonishing her to be more careful and put the phone away while driving. Now I gotta get back to sports center.
DBH
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 4:20 p.m.
This Letter to the Editor was not a straightforward exposition of the events described in the Letter, but I don't think it was meant to be. I had to reread it once to reconstruct the likely scenario in the accident described, but it's not that difficult. I think it's an example of creativity in writing, engaging the reader's imagination, even in a situation such as this with unfortunate (though, thankfully, apparently not tragic) consequences. And the lesson the author is trying to convey was not lost on me. I agree with her - why do these lessons seemingly need to be learned one driver at a time? As Dave Barry has written, "The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status, or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we all believe that we are above-average drivers." Such hubris has, does, and will continue to result in harm and death on the roadways unless drivers' attitudes change. Pay attention, people!
Brad
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 4:03 p.m.
So then it's a letter to the editor that rambles about something or other? And the nerve of that person to have a vehicle larger than that driven by the letter writer. And speaking of that pedestrian ordinance, I was returning from the Farmer's Market this morning and already moving through a 4-way stop instersection when people on the other side of the street saw me already moving and started walking into the crosswalk anyway, giving me a very dirty look as though I was supposed to stop for them. I can assure you that nothing about their appearance suggested that they were anywhere near that important. So that's the kind of behavior the misguided ordinance elicits.
Craig Lounsbury
Sat, Aug 25, 2012 : 3:56 p.m.
It is a "letter to the editor" not an "article". As such its only qualification is that it catch the fancy of the editor in charge