I’ve only had the pleasure of traveling to New York a couple times in my life. However, during those brief visits, I quickly became immersed in one of the most highly chaotic environments known to mankind.
I’m a relatively laid back person who usually prefers a calmer, more anxiety-free setting. I’m not a huge fan of getting lost in crowds, nor do I enjoy having a three-second window to cross the street. Given this, one can only imagine how I felt navigating my way around Times Square for the first time.
Luckily for me, New York State Sen. Carl Kruger (D – Brooklyn) recently recognized how dangerous these overly-populated streets really are and proposed a new bill in response to the situation. However, rather than addressing the speed at which cabs travel or the number of sidewalks available to pedestrians, he is linking this safety hazard to the usage of electronics.
The New York Times reported that Kruger is in the process of “making it a crime to enter and cross a crosswalk while engaging in the use of an electronic device in a city with a population of one million or more.” Those who fail to comply will be faced with a court summons and a $100 fine.
I am in favor of this proposition because it is justified by actual facts. As a result of being distracted by electronics while crossing the street, three people have been killed since September.
It is clear that people’s attention and awareness of their surroundings should be heightened, and if passing a new law is the way to achieve this, then so be it.
I am also in favor of the bill because it reminds me of the many drivers who insist upon talking on the phone while behind the wheel. One of the most aggravating things in the world is driving behind someone who is too busy talking on a cell phone to realize that their car is drifting in and out of lanes.
By being so preoccupied by their vital phone conversation, these careless drivers are not only endangering themselves and their passengers, but they are also putting other drivers at risk.
Kruger is simply trying to put a stop to unnecessary dangers. No one needs to be listening to an iPod at maximum volume while attempting to cross one of the busiest intersections in New York City, just like no one needs to be driving with a cell phone glued to their ear.
Nevertheless, there are still those who can’t see the point of making any changes at all.
Critics are viewing this bill as an infringement of their rights. According to The New York Times, one person inquired, “Who will protect us from the lawmakers?”
It’s ironic because the lawmakers are the ones who are trying to protect the people. This is not being driven by financial reasons or even for the sole purpose of putting restrictions on an individual’s daily life. Rather, it’s about creating a safer environment.
An interesting point was made in a New York Times article:
“Sure, people will get hit by buses while listening to iPods. But then, they’ve been getting hit by buses for decades anyway – while reading a newspaper, talking to companions or simply daydreaming about a better day.”
It’s this nonchalant attitude that will continue to put individuals at risk while in the city. Yes, people have been hit by cars in the past; but just because it has happened doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be corrected. Three deaths are three too many, especially when there is such an easy answer to the problem. It doesn’t take much thought or effort to remove a set of headphones from one’s ears.
The prevention of potential injuries and deaths shouldn’t be associated with a lack of freedom or an unnecessary burden. Instead, it should be viewed as a justified precaution that will make big-city streets just a little less chaotic.
Leave a Reply