You’ve heard it stated before that feminism is a death cult. Sure, it drives women to hate men and men to cut their wangs off in response, and the birth rate craters as a direct and intended result, but two recent pieces of Commiefornia legislation will prove it like you’ve never seen before! Alas, both were vetoed by Governor Gruesome. I kinda wish he was MORE wicked… we could have had ourselves some fun at wimmin’s expense.
Letters to the Editor: It isn’t ‘nutty’ to allow jaywalking. What’s nutty is driving hulking SUVs
By Los Angeles Times, 21 October 2021
To the editor: Columnist George Skelton deemed a bill vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom that would have decriminalized jaywalking “nutty.” Assembly Bill 1238 was actually sensible, and Skelton’s framing of it from the perspective of a weary “commuter driving home at night [with] enough hazards to worry about” was much nuttier.
Are these people serious?
Introduced by Assembly Members Ting and Friedman (Coauthor: Assembly Member Lorena Gonzalez), 19 February 2021
Feminist authors… check.
Existing law requires the driver of a vehicle and other specified persons, including a pedestrian, to obey the instructions of any official traffic signal applicable to the person and placed as provided by law…
This bill would exempt a pedestrian from that requirement until January 1, 2029.
They ARE serious! These wimminz tried to legalize pedestrians walking in traffic… defying the very traffic signals put in place to keep them safe!
Existing law prohibits a pedestrian from crossing at any place except a crosswalk… This bill would repeal those provisions until January 1, 2029.
Fried ice, man. First the women wanted flashing lights at crosswalks so we’d see them even better, now they don’t want to use the crosswalk at all.
Existing law declares that provisions relating to pedestrian access do not prevent local authorities from adopting ordinances prohibiting pedestrians from crossing roadways at other than crosswalks.
This bill would remove that authorization until January 1, 2029.
“No government in California shall prohibit feminists from playing in traffic.” Huh. Okay. *Gunner Q turns off his dashcam*
Existing law prohibits a pedestrian from suddenly leaving a curb or other place of safety and walking or running into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. Under existing law, a pedestrian who is not within a marked crosswalk or an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection is required to yield the right-of-way to all vehicles so near as to constitute an immediate hazard.
*singing* It’s beginning to feel a lot like Christmas… everywhere I go…
This bill would, until January 1, 2029, state that an immediate hazard exists [only] if the approaching vehicle is so near or is approaching so fast that a reasonably careful person would realize that there is a danger of collision.
A reasonably careful person would obey those traffic signals so… whatever.
Since 2010, Los Angeles pedestrian deaths have climbed higher than motorist deaths, despite the fact that many collisions are solely between people in cars. That uptick is due to trends on the driver side, such as increasing purchases of sport utility vehicles, which are up to three times more likely than sedans to kill pedestrians whom their drivers hit.
Penalizing jaywalkers will not keep pedestrians safe. It does the opposite by asserting auto and, by extension, white supremacy. Police in Los Angeles have been known to stalk Metro stations to fine transit commuters, who are more likely to be people of color and low-income than drivers.
Hello, death cult. These people taking the bus are so consumed with envy at car drivers that they wanted a legally protected right to walk into traffic in order to force us “white supremacists” to swerve around them.
That ain’t how it was gonna play out, girl. Two words: cow catcher.
Any serious investment in rail and greenhouse gas reductions requires progressive action to decriminalize jaywalking and place greater responsibility on the drivers of larger, more dangerous cars. Further, journalists should put on the brakes before speeding to a conclusion that reinforces our state’s tired reputation as a cartopia.
Alisanne Meyers, Los Angeles
Interstate 5: It’s not just for port traffic anymore.
To the editor: I can only guess that Skelton never did much cycling. That may explain why he sides with Newsom’s misguided veto of the bill by Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner Horvath (D-Encinitas) to let cyclists treat stop signs as yield signs.
Another feminist with a death wish!
I’ve been cycling for seven decades. In New York, jaywalkers are a constant threat. In L.A., it’s as if drivers can look at cyclists and not see them. And yeah, there are bad bikers on both coasts.
It’s like drivers can’t see us, therefore we should be allowed to get all up in their grill… literally! That’ll teach them to ignore us, when they have to buy a new radiator!
Yet when a vehicle stops at a corner (assuming drivers actually pay attention to stop signs and don’t consider them merely suggestions, which is all too common in post-lockdown L.A.), the only effort required to get going again is a little bit of pressure on the accelerator. When cyclists stop, it’s as if they parked, opened a car door and got out. To get rolling again, they have to get back in the seat and pedal from a dead halt. That takes a great deal more effort than stepping on the gas.
He wants to legalize ignoring traffic signs in order to prevent bicycling from requiring more physical effort than driving? I can’t count the ways that that is wrong, but a prominent one is the pleasant fantasy of two bicyclists refusing to stop at the same intersection at the same time… at right angles.
By vetoing this bill, Newsom makes it clear he’s in the driver’s seat, and not on the bike’s.
Peter Altschuler, Santa Monica
They say I shouldn’t assume xir gender but methinks Peter is a feminist. A lazy one, who rides the bicycle to show he cares about the environment while quietly pining for a truck. “Why should pedaling a bicycle be harder than driving a car? I’m breaking a sweat here, people!”
But because Newsom didn’t want to depopulate his state of his most loyal supporters… negresses riding the bus and entitled eco-bicyclists secretly wishing that their religion permitted internal combustion… he vetoed the righteous wrath of Henry Ford and Isaac Newton.