The History of Jaywalking (and what it says about you)

There was once a time, stretching for thousands of years, where humans had the ability to cross the road at their own leisure. They dodged donkeys, chariots, carts, camels, horses and their fellow sapiens. It was of high importance that individuals take care when doing so, to ensure a safe passage from point A to point B.

Following the invention of the motor, this freedom to cross the street changed. Cars, buses, motorbikes, mopeds, vans, trucks, taxis. A new predator was on the loose, disguised better than the Wolf, under the banner of convenience.

The issue with convenience, however, is that for the convenience to be realised, the road had to be cleared to confirm a faster route. There needed to be a free flow of traffic, whereby those in cars, vans, buses, taxis and trucks would enjoy a journey uninterrupted by pedestrians.

Pedestrians. The hide of some members of OUR society to believe that they deserve the equal right to the road. The road, built by contractors, awarded to the contractors by the government, funded for the government by the taxpayers, the taxpayers comprised of the Pedestrians wanting to cross the street at their own leisure.

Don’t be so daft.

The first Jaywalking edict was used in 1920, in San Francisco, concocted by the car manufacturers and spread to Detroit, Chicago, Cincinnati and New York. Rather than the car being responsible for two thirds of American deaths in cities of more than 25,000 people, it was the pedestrian’s for getting in the way. This warped division of road usage has since made its way to many shores and has not looked back since.

— — — — — —

The beauty of the Jaywalking legislation is two-fold:

Firstly, the Revenue Nexus:

a. Cars

b. Oil

c. Government

Cars (Motordom):

It’s the best sales pitch. Don’t be stuck on the side of the road. Make other people wait for you. And when you are held up at a crosswalk by people WALKING, don’t forget to hold your horn for an extended period of time. You see, we in the car industry want you to know that you’re important, and to allow others to realise that about you as well. By buying a new car from us just four times over your lifespan, we make over $100,000 from you. Multiply that by a minimum of 4 billion people, and you can see why we got into this business in the first place.

Oil:

We love Cars. Cars are so great; they’re colourful, they’re shiny, they smell great. The only thing Cars are missing is the power to go! Why don’t you pull into your local petrol station, and we’ll look after you by ensuring that the price you pay is fixed across suburbs, companies and day of the week. We will also refuse to allow the price of oil to influence how much you pay, unless it goes up, of course.

Government:

Wait, hang on. You’re saying that we can charge people to cross the road?! The public space? The bits of the ground that the taxpayer has paid for? And we are allowed to charge them the amount they would spend on filling up their petrol tank? That’s amazing. We’ve charged them to cover the cost of construction, and we get them again when they use it to jump off one concrete block to get to another concrete island. Holy shit!

Secondly,the Societal Contract

When you zap a mouse enough times due to stepping out of line, the mouse learns pretty quickly which are the lines to play in, and which are the boundaries not to be overstepped. What results is a timid mouse, using their time inefficiently, milling around until they have the all clear to move on.

While stymying creativity, individual decision-making has also been reduced. As this has been extrapolated out across suburbs, cities and countries, there has been an understanding reached that rules are not be questioned, that laws are to be obeyed and that it makes perfect sense for taxpayers to pay twice for the same piece of infrastructure.

— — — — — —

While common sense is not very common, to take away the right of an individual to cross a road should be seen on a much grander scale than a simple public safety measure. To argue that because of the deaths of some there should be a blanket rule covering all flies in the face of the “freedom” provided by Western democracies. As we move towards an era of Conservative governments supported by a larger cohort of older generations wishing for less State involvement in their lives, the draconian enforcement of the Jaywalking legislation is yet another policy tarred with irony.