Pedestrians and the Law
The Oregonian recently reported on a pedestrian versus truck accident in Portland. The report indicates that the pedestrian "ran" out into traffic, and was seriously injured.
In my town, there are too many pedestrian accidents. Astoria, like a lot of small towns in Oregon, has its downtown core, where people often get from here to there on foot. If it's not a pedestrian injury, it is some one getting hit from behind when they stop to let someone cross the street. Do pedestrian's really have the right of way?
Well, there are two statutes at play. One, ORS 811.028 requires a driver to stop and remained stopped for a pedestrian while the pedestrian is in a crosswalk, even if it is in the lane next to the driver. Another statute, ORS 814.040 states that a pedestrian fails to yield to a car when he or she suddenly leaves a curb or other place of safety and moves into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.
How do you reconcile these statutes? Well, I guess that depends on what "immediate hazard" really means. If a car has enough time to see a pedestrian, react, and stop safely, then there is no immediate hazard. On the other hand, if someone darts in front of a car, and the driver has no way of safely stopping, or seeing the pedestrian ahead of time, then there is a failure to yield.
Any of us who have driven, or who have walked through the downtown have seen both sides of this situation. However, I can say that after seeing what a car can do to a person, I am much more alert when driving through the downtown area where I live.
