Version: 2008
  • On MovieTome: The 10 worst movies of 2009 so far!

February 7, 2007 9:29 AM PST

N.Y. lawmaker hopes to ban iPod use in crosswalks

  • 48 comments
A New York state senator has announced his plan to introduce legislation that would ban the use of electronic devices such as iPods, BlackBerrys and cell phones while crossing streets in major cities.

State Sen. Carl Krueger, a Democrat who represents New York's 27th district in the New York City borough of Brooklyn, claimed that the phenomenon of "iPod oblivion" has led to a number of fatal accidents on urban streets. While he did not cite any statistical studies that have indicated a rise in such incidents, he referred to the January death of a 23-year-old Brooklyn man who, tuned into his iPod headphones, walked into the path of a city bus.

The bill would effectively make it illegal to use any kind of portable electronic device--a music or video player, cell phone, smart phone, gaming device, etc.--while crossing the street in cities such as New York, Albany and Buffalo. Offenders would be slapped with a $100 fine and a criminal court summons. Joggers and bicyclists would have to limit their iPod use to city parks in which no street crossing would be involved.

"You can't be fully aware of your surroundings if you're fiddling with a BlackBerry, dialing a phone number, playing Super Mario Brothers on a Game Boy, or listening to music on an iPod," Krueger said in a statement. He added that while police in other major cities--such as San Diego, Calif.--have warned that tuning in to portable electronic devices may leave pedestrians vulnerable to threats from pickpockets and muggers, he believes the real threat is from road traffic.

The popularity of iPods and BlackBerrys has emerged over only the past five years, but handheld devices are by no means newcomers to city streets. The concept for Sony's Walkman was patented in 1977, a full three decades ago. Nintendo's original Game Boy is only two years away from its 20th birthday. And portable radios have been around for even longer.

Not only will music fans likely complain about an iPod ban, but in New York City, Wall Street's notorious BlackBerry addicts may be loathe to put away their business tools when walking about the streets. But Krueger stands fully behind his new bill. "Tuning in and tuning out can be a fatal combination on the streets of New York," he said.

See more CNET content tagged:
street, RIM BlackBerry, New York, Brooklyn, Nintendo GameBoy

Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (48 Comments)
Maybe cars not watching out for people should be illegal instead
by battlefella February 7, 2007 9:58 AM PST
Maybe the senator would like to make it illegal to be deaf, old, or a child as well?
Reply to this comment
Yes of course
by ajbright February 7, 2007 12:08 PM PST
drivers playing video games, surfing the 'net or talking on cell phones might share a bit of the blame..

but generally you have to be a complete moron to step into a street without looking.

Usually when the suicidally inclined Crackberry owner does this sort of thing, the driver has absolutely no opportunity to stop.

Still a law seems completely unnecessary, as the punishment already meeted out by the car owner is more than sufficient.

Deliberately making yourself "deaf" by listening to music or playing with a phone is hardly the same thing as actually being deaf or blind.

I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for the type of retard that kills themselves in this manner. Rather I think of the poor bast@rd driver, that has to live with what has happened for the rest of their lives, all because some selfish tw@t with a PSP thought that finishing a level was more important than looking where they were going on a busy street.
Dumb Law
by brianwolters February 7, 2007 9:59 AM PST
We don't need any more socialist type laws to protect people from being stupid.
Reply to this comment
dumb law
by helivet333 February 7, 2007 10:29 AM PST
When will law makers focus on lowering taxes and getting a handle
on runaway spending instead of playing nanny for us? I'm sick and
tired of these nanny laws! If dopes are stupid enough to walk in
front of buses, too lazy to wear seat belts or so stupid that they will
pay $7 for a pack of smokes to help them die sooner, well maybe,
just maybe, we should leave them to it. In any case most folks
don't need the gov't to require specific safety behavior that is
patently obvious.
What?
by ddesy February 9, 2007 5:50 AM PST
Dumb law, yes. Socialist? That doesn't even make any sense!
What? No Party association mentioned?
by deltasoler February 7, 2007 10:13 AM PST
Isn't it funny how when a Republican says/does something dumb the article would mention the fact that he is a republican at least 5 times, but when a Democrat says/does something dumb like this guy ... there is NO mention at that he is a Democrat ...
Reply to this comment
See the first sentence!
by hawtdog February 7, 2007 10:44 AM PST
So did you skim over the very first sentence, or did they change the post after your comment?
This isn't Bill O'Reilly's show
by vkri2 February 25, 2007 7:59 AM PST
<Tongue-in-Cheek>
The party affiliation was mentioned at the very top of the article. Aren't you glad this isn't BillO's show? He may have switch-labeled this guy a Republican just like Mark Foley, D-Florida!
</Tongue-in-Cheek>
survival of the fittiest
by marco3964 February 7, 2007 10:14 AM PST
if you can't cross roads without being killed because you are
using an iPod or a Blackberry you are better off dead, than
protected by a law. What ever happened to natural laws, to
natural selection, to evolution? "Difficulties" and challenges are
part of our life for us to overcome them and stay fit. I would
hardly call an iPod a challenge but evidently it is to someone if
they need a law to save their life while using it and crossing
roads at the same time. Now the fact that such persons exists is
one thing, but that, in the name of their condition, all the others
should be punished, is just plain wrong. Lowering the bar of
living standards to the level of the lowest, worst, most retarded,
less agile, fattest, etc. members of our society would only
produce as a result to flatten, over time or even generations, the
entire society to lower and lower levels. Involution instead of
evolution. Is that what we are up for?
Reply to this comment
Whatever happened to the notion...
by mathom--2008 February 7, 2007 10:25 AM PST
that pedestrians ALWAYS have the right-of-way. Maybe drivers
should pay a little more attention?

-- militant pedestrian
Reply to this comment
Not "ALWAYS"
by johnrdupree February 7, 2007 11:52 AM PST
Imagine you're driving down the left hand lane of a one way downtown street at a perfectly legal 30 mph. Parked at the curb before the crosswalk is a delivery van. As you approach the green light, you realize this could be trouble, maybe cover the brake in case somebody pops their head around the van to check for traffic. Instead, when you're about a car length from the intersection, some goob checking email on his phone walks right in front of you. Even with cat-like reflexes, your stopping distance is 45 feet. The goob is going to get hit and you did nothing wrong; he is completely at fault. That's the kind of thing this law is trying to address.

That being said, this law sounds like a pretty moronic idea. I would think that an existing code already covers this. I often wonder if lawmakers ever read current laws before proposing more.
Responsibility vs. Nanny Society
by dm717 February 7, 2007 10:30 AM PST
The last time I looked, this was the United States of America. The vast majority of iPod, cell phone and PDA users are competent enough to be aware of their surroundings when using these devices.

It's the responsibility of the individual to keep the volume at a level where they can still hear the traffic around them, or to pay attention to the crosswalk lights. The government has better things to do.

How would this law even be enforced? Are they going to station iPod police on every street corner? Install crosswalk cameras to take pictures of people and compare them to their MySpace and Flickr profiles to send them a ticket by email or SMS?

Enough of the nanny society!
Reply to this comment
Ban the knife
by Pixelslave February 7, 2007 10:41 AM PST
There are 1 million ways to hurt yourself using a knife. So, let's ban using the knife altogether. Tomorrow, we will be using our hand to tear off meat, peel fruits, etc.
Reply to this comment
Way Too Much Time On His Hands
by Equality2850 February 7, 2007 10:42 AM PST
I just love when I read about government attempting to pass laws that protect us from ourselves?but unfortunately, every time such laws pass, another of our freedoms is lost.
Reply to this comment
Bad drivers are the problem
by aspexil February 7, 2007 11:09 AM PST
It used to be back in the day when a driver hit a pedestrian it was the driver's fault. Now they want the cops busy chasing people down the street listening to a walkman? Why is the senator not blaming the driver for running someone over? Yeah, he wanted the easy way of making some publicity for himself.
Reply to this comment
Argument holds no water
by ronjay February 7, 2007 1:22 PM PST
Seeing that we neither know the state of mind of the pedestrian
killed, nor the reality that a CITY BUS CANNOT STOP ON A DIME,
we can only conclude that we cannot argue against the bus
driver at all. If the bus driver has the light, and is driving down a
normal street, WHY would they either be driving at 2 mph, or
stopping at every intersection, regardless of the state of the
lights?

I lived in New York for 17 years, and was just out there in
December. Granted, some of those city buses definitely do drive
too fast, but again, we don't know the circumstances.

That said, citing one case of pedestrian negligence does make
make a case for a bill of this type. Can you imagine, getting
directions via phone, live while trying to get somewhere when
lost, and being told to hang up at every intersection, and being
handed a ticket for $100 and a summons? That's patently
preposterous.
View reply
How's that work?
by phillynets February 7, 2007 11:10 AM PST
Call me a little too "practical" here... How do you enforce a "no walking while jamming" regulation? If you "pull me over" and I give you a false name or address since they haven't gotten around to issuing "walking licenses" What Are You Going to Do?

Besides the argument that cops have better things to do... doing nothing is better than apprehending someone for "strolling while singing." Or, "displaying exuberant enjoyment" - that could be a crime.
Reply to this comment
Stupid
by kvatzigen February 7, 2007 11:21 AM PST
Waste of time..what an idiot!
Reply to this comment
Legislating personal choice
by damalame February 7, 2007 11:24 AM PST
If someone wants to be careless and take their life into their own hands by listening to an iPod walking the streets-so be it. We cannot pass a law to try to pre-empt every single action of free individuals. Frankly, it is better for a few a pass away, than for freedom to be robbed of the masses. What next? What about people who are hard-of-hearing or deaf (like myself(; are we about to be banned from crossing the street because we cannot hear traffic?
Reply to this comment
How do you tell a legislator jerk he is a jerk..
by chiefhopper February 7, 2007 11:34 AM PST
? Oh. I already did, didn't I.

I'm from Phoenix and we have our share of them here. In the city council and in the state legislature. Must be a virus: LBJS (Leaders Become Jerks Syndrome). Once sworn in it takes affect immediately.

<ribbit>
Why do we try to outlaw Darwinism
by mghicas February 7, 2007 11:33 AM PST
Darwin's Theory of Evolution (even for the religious sect that does not believe in it) has worked for 1000's of years - why does yet another lawmaker want to interfere?
Reply to this comment
Call to action, New Yorkers!
by fredfass February 7, 2007 11:38 AM PST
Fellow New Yorkers, we have been called to action! Let's give Senator Kruger some company on his daily excursions about the city. Be sure to keep your video cell phones at the ready! Hmmm, I wonder... does Senator Kruger always wait for that darned crosswalk light to blink "walk." Would Senator Kruger's busy schedule force him to cut corners, literally, to ... GASP ... jaywalk?! Alas, should such lawbreaking committed by an elected official be captured on video, well, I think as law abiding citizens it's our duty to promptly post such horrendous illegalities committed by Senator Kruger on YouTube. Poor Senator Kruger, his travels around the city are... about... to... slowwww... downnnn...
Reply to this comment
Wouldn't
by ajbright February 7, 2007 11:59 AM PST
evolution take care of this problem for us?

Eventually the type of idiot that walks onto busy roads without looking, while talking on cell phones or playing games will be removed from the gene pool.

On the other hand Crackberries and iPods should be placed on the scheduled drug list. I hold their suicidally inclined owners blameless in this. Clearly some force has taken over their wills and nothing but extended rehab and a clean break will help them rejoin humanity.
Reply to this comment
Offensive
by taomander February 7, 2007 1:03 PM PST
Safer streets is the solution. Big Brother cannot legislate how I spend my time when I am walking around as a free citizen in a free society. I guarantee that the good Senator drives a car and stays quite far away from publicly used sidewalks that his constituents use as their daily commute. I also guarantee that he uses his radio/CD/MP3, cellphone and drinks coffee and/or smokes cigarettes, or otherwise multi-tasks freely, while he is driving. He is delusional or otherwise deluided if he thinks this won't be fought against fiercely. What a joke!
Reply to this comment
walkman
by randyc3 February 7, 2007 1:09 PM PST
The walkman came out in the 80's right? I want to know if anyone got hit back then.
Reply to this comment
Stop the insanity, PLEASE!
by RShea78 February 7, 2007 1:37 PM PST
First of all, as people, we need to keep the use of our toys to a minimum.

With under the influence alcohol and drugs being already being crimes of impairments, it isn't all that far off of being just as impaired with items such as a cell phone or some music box.

We do not need any new laws but lets just add to the older alcohol/drug impairment laws. Convictions then would make it a requireements for all the cell phone and music box abusers to abstain from their behavior.
Reply to this comment
reactions...
by batavier February 7, 2007 1:55 PM PST
Ah yes, looks like it really offended the Libertarian crowd in the C|Net readeship.
Reply to this comment
This is like a no spitting law...
by R.Jefferson February 7, 2007 2:08 PM PST
only black people are going to be cited for jay-poding.

A city in upstate NY enacted a no spitting in public ordinance. It turns out 5 of the 6 people cited were black. Bummer...
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (48 Comments)
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (-0.00%) -0.07 10,452.61
S&P 500 (0.01%) 0.14 1,109.38
NASDAQ (0.30%) 6.47 2,191.50
CNET TECH (0.56%) 8.90 1,602.54
  Symbol Lookup
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right