As an attorney, I once represented a guy who was charged with jaywalking & drug possession. The police stopped him for jaywalking, which lead to a pat-down. However, it turns out... you're only required to use a cross-walk if it's within a "reasonable distance". I argued the police had no right to stop him, and we won. The search was tossed, along with both charges (jaywalking and possession). Also, this is not legal advice. I'm now a comedian. Good stuff Adam.
Fun fact: There's no "jaywalking" crime in the UK. You can legally cross whenever you like. Funner fact: The number of road fatalities per 100,000 people in the US is 10.6. In the UK it's only 2.9. So creating the crime of "jaywalking" doesn't even result in things being safer.
This kind of thing is why I've done a complete 180 on jaywalking over the last few years. Gone from hating "those jaywalkers" to "it's unfortunate people have to go all the way down the street just to cross an area that was somehow designated for cars". Streets should be reclaimed and returned to people. /r/lowcar.
+braden7180 Oooooooooooh. This just got weird and juicy and weird. The cynicism of the statement condemning cynicism was crazy high, almost hypocritical but it's too hard to tell. I want to agree with you now instead of the other guy but your statement was so almost hypocritical that I'm torn. At least you're not doing this for attention, right? Oh, wait... What a juicy situation indeed.
+goyabee Easily the most dangerous and destructive invention on the planet available to the general population. I think within 100 years as mass transportation technology increases the idea of having a privately owned automobile will be mostly a thing of the past within developed nations. Sure you might get the occasional aficionados that want their own car just to have one, but this motor vehicle driven (no pun intended) culture that perpetuates the idea that each individual NEEDS their very own rolling metal cages will ultimately be short lived within the history of the human population.
okay think of this. no automobiles, no trucks, blah blah. so we can use bicycles (very low carrying capacity, low speed, but very maneuverable). walking (pretty much same as bicycles). buses (might be classified as an automobile, if not, they are people carriers). and finally trains (very high carrying capacity, decent speed, zero maneuverability, plus building rail lines to replace a good amount of roads).
Adam cites studies in this TV episode that have found that people who own cars with more safety features unconsciously compensate by driving more dangerously, but some people seem hellbent on doing things like texting and driving whether their car is actually safe or not.
Despite _how_ things became this way, I still think it's best to have a designated road for cars, a designated path for walkers, and, ideally, a designated path for bikers. Allowing everyone to run into the roads and drive up onto sidewalks would be chaos.
+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme I think it would make sense to keep cars out of at least central areas of cities. Trams, buses, metros and bikes are better alternatives. Cars should really be for going between cities and traveling in less-populated areas - I don't think it's an ideal situation where so many people go to work every day by car, for example. Obviously in some cases it's unavoidable but it'd be good to keep it to a minimum.
Saim Inayatullah Yeah, that would make sense. They would need to put in a crap ton more parking areas, though, and make something like trams free or more affordable than buses.
+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme Sure, but there are a lot of streets where it would still make sense for pedestrians to have priority over vehicles. Like shopping districts, or residential cul-de-sacs.
That's great you did this story. A few months ago, I finally researched it because I wondered the same thing. Growing up, I was told Jaywalking was when you crossed at the crosswalk, but then left the crosswalk early to reach the other side on an angle ... like drawing a "J". But when I did the research, I learned everything you covered here, except to add that folks were called Jaybirds as a derogatory term, too. Thanks, Adam, but you really didn't ruin this one. ;)
+macaroniandtuna Wait till you have to start writing scientific research articles... You can't write a sentence without referencing an original author.
I realize this wasn't the point of the video, but this has to said: So that bird outside my window is called more than a "blue jay," but also a "foul-mouthed dirty hillbilly?"
This is what I like about European cities, where they make the center or centre a pedestrian only shopping district. This is also great for a night out on the town. Where bars, pubs & night clubs are walking distance from each other. You just need to crawl yourself to the taxi area and catch a ride home.
european capitals are slowly Banning cars from circulating in them. Lisbon for example has started cutting in most historical neighbourhoods and all cars previous to 1995.
Words mean whatever the discourse community decides they mean. Obscenities and expletives are words that a discourse community has decided to use only to express extreme anger or disrespect. Children and indeed civilized adults ought to be spared such displays of verbal offense.
I live in Melbourne, where the streets are for cars and trams (streetcars). I like to walk through the center of the street when the road is clear of trams, it feels liberating.
In my town, people drive as if they've never seen a person walking or the fact that bicycles exist. They have a bad habit of damn near running me over on my bike continuously. I am sure eventually I'll get hit, so far I've survived though.
It has its merits, like allowing cars to maintain a reasonable speed without hitting anyone. Still, cars have no place in cities that still use a pre-19th century city-plan. I'm talking about you, every city in mainland Asia.
cars have no place in any cities even american sprawled one. Cars infrastructure is extremely expensive and it relies on government money, it all works like a giant ponzi scheme where the local government is maintaining it through debt, some city already collapsed and other will follow through. it's analysed better in Strong Towns
2:30 - "Think about it. A group of private businessmen coined an offensive slur to promote their product, and it worked so well that today it's a legal term." The United States federal corporation, since day one, described in a single sentence.
I love your shows and information...I wish you would do a show or 2 about the hospitals, AMA, doctors and just our health care system. You could have a lot of fun on that one. Just be careful or they might try to assasinate you LOL
When you put it this way, I suppose it's kind of like a school solving issues with running through the halls by imposing additional rules and restrictions on the people that DON'T run...
Australia noticed this and decided that a giant lump of metal had a section on a street and if you walk on that spot, that’s definitely your choice. If someone hits you when you’re on the side, that’s on purpose, you hit someone walking on there that’s manslaughter or murder. Well I think.
Interesting though this is the separation of vehicle and pedestrian is largely what has allowed for the global super cities we have today. I can't imagine a modern day city without efficient roads to get people around in vehicles. Everything would be forced to move too slowly. There are lots of interesting schools of thought when it comes to road design, specifically mixed use, but such ideas are mainly limited to downtown urban areas. You'd still need lots of high speed dedicated roads to connect things up.
TheGreatWazoo Maybe downtown parts sure but you'd still need high speed cars to support suburbs which is what have allowed cities to grow as they have.
Shoto A Yep been there. Great city. But the canals provide a natural pedestrian free area. Not to mention it's an extremely inefficient city to get around easily and has few major industries besides tourism because of that.
Jaqen True, I wrote that while still in Italy and after seeing Rome I agree, but I think a city could be made were public transport and bikes are the ways to get around. It would probably have to be underwater though.
Well not really. Railways largely gave birth to the suburbs (especially in Europe) and enabled workers to shift out of the city and commute in. Some cities still put an emphasis of cycling. It's more that governments have historically prioritized cars. Maybe because of the power ($$$$$) of car industry or just because of our love of cars. Recently though urban planning for lots of cities are reverting back to the thinking that streets should be designed for people.
this kind of thing is why I rather enjoy studying history. A lot of times people think that the reason why they do things is because that's just the way it's done, not realising that there is always a story behind it.
+Akil E. And then it improved several people's lives by giving jobs, more ways of transportation, and made roads safer. Without the term Jaywalker, we would probably have no cars today, lower employment rates, an entire market being completely gone, and several more people would probably be dead, before the possible banning of cars, with a block of metal going 30 mph being on the same ground as people. If anything, this video supports something instead of ruining it.
+Kyle Dean Funny because people would be employed more locally and would prevent things like outsourcing businesses because they couldn't ship in supply. Also the statement about more people being dead is rather arbitrary when in fact every engineering project does a cost benefit analysis of the number of lives that could possibly be killed with the product and how much money that would cost the company.
I acknowledge that I jaywalked. I apologize not for the act of jaywalking, but for how my jaywalking made you feel. I’ll try not to jaywalk in the future while you’re watching, but trust I’ma do it the rest of my life. It’s the best way to go about being a pedestrian. -Hannibal Buress
In Canada the pedestrian always has the right of way, which works in a weird way here, because jay walking is finable but if you jay walk and get hit the driver is still responsible.
What's funny is there is now 1 section of town with 2 crosswalks and 2 sets of traffic lights enclosed within 20 feet of each other and people still walk out into oncoming traffic without Even batting an eye. It's actually become dangerous since rescue services have to speed through that section.
Crossing the street far from the crosswalk? Sounds like a typical day in Chicago. I went to Newport Beach, California for a wedding and my cousin informed my dad & I that the cops give tickets for crossing the street other than the sidewalk. Big culture shock, that was.
Other than the origins of the word "Jay" and how they turned a offensive slur into something of a legal name now. X.x It means nothing now sure but when you think about it, it was sort of messed up to do back in the old days.
+Learn Quick It gave way to sprawl and automotive prioritization in transportation design. It's a huge drain on society. Dense areas should be hell for motorists because of the amount of space they occupy.
How about them lying to you to get you to but a car(thing that harms the environment in all ways imaginable) and remembered it's based on a lie like weddings car dealerships
+Brennan F Yes but that´s largely due to the fact that public transportation isn´t as developed as it could be if cars never existed.Imagine that instead of cars becoming the default means of tavelling trams/buses/trains were the go-to travelling method surely the invesment in public transport would be a lot higher than it is today.
I too have noticed that many conflict-ridden areas often have hot climates which contribute to things like water supply conflicts while freezing northern countries like Finland and Norway are relatively socially advanced. It almost makes me wonder how many global conflicts can be solved with better air conditioning.
It's not the air conditioning. Several countries that have "temperate" climates seem to "progress" a lot faster than places where the climate is unpredictable. Why Egypt did better than Mesopotamia: The Nile has a rhythm to its flooding, the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers had no rhyme or reason to their flooding. That's also why the gods of ancient Egypt were reliable and just while the Sumerian and Babylonian gods were just crazy.
It's not illegal where I live! It is legal for pedestrians to cross the street mid-block anywhere in Toronto as long as: a) they are not adjacent to a marked pedestrian crossing, and b) they yield to traffic. I'm used to yielding the right of way to big heavy vehicles when possible; it is the law on the rivers and seas too.
I think it's worth mentioning that even if someone is jaywalking and hit by a car, if the car still had ample time to stop, the motorist is charged with vehicular manslaughter (or first degree vehicular homicide in the state of Georgia if they're drunk). It's only in the case that a jaywalker walks right in front of a car that they're legally at fault for wrongful death. This is also true on crosswalks, a car going the speed limit or lower should have time to stop when you're' on a crosswalk. Really, jaywalking has close to the same "fault for accident" liability for crosswalks, although it's still a crime. (this is all based on my knowledge of Georgia state law, and pedestrian laws vary by state. This could also be inaccurate and should not be used as legal advice in Georgia court)
+DarkoTDR You mean like the evil to freely travel large distances efficiently and safely or the evil to use automobiles to distribute commerce and promote capitalism?
AndyFromBeaverton Cars are not the problem, people are, that kind of evil is what i meant, but it was more or less a comment about the fact that there was one more video earlier about cars on "Adam ruins everything". It was about car dealerships.
Umm there is:subways for fsst transport and thoes electric bus things with horns no cars and no jaywalkers and no that electric bus wont hit anyone because itll have its road whichll be fenced
+Vurtax Except that's not true. Violent crime national average is 1/4 of Britain's? I was about to question where you could have gotten such a crazy number, but then I did a search and saw it. And... saw how easily debunked that figure was. A single person claimed this, using sketchy data that didn't say what they claimed that it said. Do a websearch on "violent crimes per capita by country" and see that other places don't line up with that. While you're at it, "use guns to protect themselves?" See, I'm an advocate for our right to own things that do not present a harm, but I'm also an advocate to licensing and safety classes when they do provide harm. Ignoring murders, we've seen many cases where lack of basic safety knowledge has resulted in deaths in the US, which leads me to believe that we need a program similar to what we have for cars, where a person needs to prove a certain basic level of respect for the item in order to be allowed to use the item. I need a driver's license, which requires a driver's safety course, to drive a car. If I am proven to fail basic safety laws with that car, I can have my rights suspended, and in fact I can be required to show that I've attended additional classes in order to get my right back. Finally, should I be proven to be negligent and that's caused a death, injury, or even just property damage, I can be held liable for that. Seems as if guns have a perfect parallel there, where a person whose gun is involved in an accident should bear some amount of responsibility for that accident. If your gun is stolen, you should be required to report it stolen, lest you be responsible for what happened while it is out of your possession. These are both problems that guns have had, that cars have not had. (Many "illegal" guns on the streets are "stolen" from dealers who do not report them as such, because the laws have been weakened to the point where that is pointless... And in fact, many of those "stolen" guns could better be described as "sold without paperwork or accountability.") Our laws are stupid, and we can fix our laws without ever touching the guns of those people who are responsible and willing to prove that responsibility.
Daniel Chapman I'm not going to argue over every point with you on this. But here's a source for you from 2009. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html After doing a little more digging again, I can see how it is not as big of a gap as I first said. I'll admit that. But We're still better off than you are, and secondly: you are never going to get 300 million privately owned firearms out of a nation.Nor will it be done in any way less than full-blown violent. The dems here want to keep arguing that we'll never be able to deport all of our illegals which only number upwards of 10 millions. I'd like to see them try to argue that same logic with something we have 30x more of.
The problem is that you provide a false dilemma, no guns at all as the only alternative provided for the status quo. In my comment I said let's have registration, let's have mandatory safety classes, let's have legislation that lays fault on those who are careless. None of that suggested outlawing guns. In fact it was all very pro gun, as I see owning a gun as very similar to owning a car. A responsible adult can be trusted with something as dangerous as a car, and I think we have sufficient laws protecting us from irresponsible car owners, so I think it's very possible for people to come up with responsible gun laws that does not make it onerous to own one. Kids getting their paws on one, not too much different than kids getting car keys, and we have laws that do their job for that! We have laws that prevent people with illnesses that present a danger while driving from getting a license, I think we can get background checks that prevent those with a history of violence from getting one. Don't think it will catch them all, but right now I can buy a gun online with no check, but I can't get a driver's license without passing a test in my state, so I think we could do better. So it's not about outlawing but coming together to help mitigate that which we can.
That's actualy quite weird. because in England there is no such thing as Jaywalking. I actualy had a conversation with a police officer about the matter and he said there is no such law. it's obviously just an American thing. but I would have thought that in such a well developed country there wouldn't be such a very strange law.
That's what separates American and European cities. While European cities were built with pedestrians and public transit the top priority, American cities, with a few exceptions, starting after World War 2, were built around the car, with public transit and pedestrians being left behind. This can also be seen in how, unlike Europe, there are almost no high speed rail corridors in the US.
Cities in Europe have been making more and more of their central streets pedestrian and bike-only. Cars are fine out on the highway, but you can't deny they pretty much suck in crowded cities given traffic and lack of space.
"I thank you for allowing me passage across your asphalt streets. I thank you for sparing my dog Billy, simply taking away his leg. And I thank you most of all for being so selfless, sticking to the streets and leaving us lowly humans the sidewalks, so we do not have to walk across the ground like primitive apes. Amen."
"They're killing us out there!"
"Technically, WE'RE killing THEM, Bill."
*SLAP*
Gotta love TruTV's humor at times.
I genuinely laughed.
TheUnholyHandGrenade Blm in 2 sentences
college humor's humor
same
+Kenshin1998 Himura bada bing
i love the "thank you for granting us passage metal majesty"
Should have been "metal overlords"
That ending...
''The machines own the street now...'' ROTFL
"Thank you for granting us passage, your metal Majesty".
+Lee Hales We've slowly been entering The Matrix since the 50's
+Tyler Witt Even though you are operated by a human lol
+Jack Gonser That's what they want you to think...
+clicker123 are you have been slowly been entering the 50's since the Matrix came out.
As an attorney, I once represented a guy who was charged with jaywalking & drug possession. The police stopped him for jaywalking, which lead to a pat-down. However, it turns out... you're only required to use a cross-walk if it's within a "reasonable distance". I argued the police had no right to stop him, and we won. The search was tossed, along with both charges (jaywalking and possession). Also, this is not legal advice. I'm now a comedian. Good stuff Adam.
Fun fact: There's no "jaywalking" crime in the UK. You can legally cross whenever you like. Funner fact: The number of road fatalities per 100,000 people in the US is 10.6. In the UK it's only 2.9. So creating the crime of "jaywalking" doesn't even result in things being safer.
i literally can't get anywhere where i live without jaywalking because there's hardly any crossings lol
Did you ever consider that the US also has a much larger population than the UK?
@@143f7 Did you comment before you finished reading? Or do you not understand statistics?
@@143f7 Did you ever concider the UK has a larger population density than the US and that the US is addicted to cars!
@@143f7 So does China and India and they use public transportation more than the US does.
This kind of thing is why I've done a complete 180 on jaywalking over the last few years. Gone from hating "those jaywalkers" to "it's unfortunate people have to go all the way down the street just to cross an area that was somehow designated for cars". Streets should be reclaimed and returned to people. /r/lowcar.
I love this view on things! I'm going to work to adapt that thinking to my view on driving, and I've driven half a million miles so far. Thanks! 💚
As a Brit, jay what?
holy soviet womble upload a video goddamit!
i have no clue what jay walking is xD
+Dragmanguy getwrecked But....but...I uploaded one 4 days ago.
These things take a lot of work :S
i know they do :3 keep it up!
Lol wtf are you doing here ... ... ... nvm
SovietWomble Jay means hillbilly British girl
That makes the name Jay Gatbsy all the more appropriate.
Oh, ooooooooooooh
BRUH
Thank you for confirming that I'm not insane by thinking rolling metal cages through populated cities is insane.
+braden7180 Oooooooooooh. This just got weird and juicy and weird. The cynicism of the statement condemning cynicism was crazy high, almost hypocritical but it's too hard to tell. I want to agree with you now instead of the other guy but your statement was so almost hypocritical that I'm torn. At least you're not doing this for attention, right? Oh, wait... What a juicy situation indeed.
Oh my you are right! How crazy juicy weird is that! I am most certainly a nutter!
+goyabee Easily the most dangerous and destructive invention on the planet available to the general population. I think within 100 years as mass transportation technology increases the idea of having a privately owned automobile will be mostly a thing of the past within developed nations. Sure you might get the occasional aficionados that want their own car just to have one, but this motor vehicle driven (no pun intended) culture that perpetuates the idea that each individual NEEDS their very own rolling metal cages will ultimately be short lived within the history of the human population.
okay think of this. no automobiles, no trucks, blah blah. so we can use bicycles (very low carrying capacity, low speed, but very maneuverable). walking (pretty much same as bicycles). buses (might be classified as an automobile, if not, they are people carriers). and finally trains (very high carrying capacity, decent speed, zero maneuverability, plus building rail lines to replace a good amount of roads).
+sleepisforhumans forgot one thing on trains, people still get killed by trains every day.
Adam cites studies in this TV episode that have found that people who own cars with more safety features unconsciously compensate by driving more dangerously, but some people seem hellbent on doing things like texting and driving whether their car is actually safe or not.
Despite _how_ things became this way, I still think it's best to have a designated road for cars, a designated path for walkers, and, ideally, a designated path for bikers.
Allowing everyone to run into the roads and drive up onto sidewalks would be chaos.
yep. just look at Russia. everyone has to have dash cams because of how many accidents happen everyday.
+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme I think it would make sense to keep cars out of at least central areas of cities. Trams, buses, metros and bikes are better alternatives. Cars should really be for going between cities and traveling in less-populated areas - I don't think it's an ideal situation where so many people go to work every day by car, for example. Obviously in some cases it's unavoidable but it'd be good to keep it to a minimum.
Saim Inayatullah
Yeah, that would make sense. They would need to put in a crap ton more parking areas, though, and make something like trams free or more affordable than buses.
+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme Sure, but there are a lot of streets where it would still make sense for pedestrians to have priority over vehicles. Like shopping districts, or residential cul-de-sacs.
Andy Brice in those areas, it's generally accepted that pedestrians have the right of way
"The machines own the streets now. Thanks you for granting us passage.. Your Metal Majesty."
Subscribed!
That's great you did this story. A few months ago, I finally researched it because I wondered the same thing. Growing up, I was told Jaywalking was when you crossed at the crosswalk, but then left the crosswalk early to reach the other side on an angle ... like drawing a "J". But when I did the research, I learned everything you covered here, except to add that folks were called Jaybirds as a derogatory term, too. Thanks, Adam, but you really didn't ruin this one. ;)
Can I just say, I love that the videos (including the on-air TV ones) cite sources *in the video*? That's pretty great.
+macaroniandtuna Wait till you have to start writing scientific research articles... You can't write a sentence without referencing an original author.
i cant cross a road know without saying 'thank you for granting me passage, metal majesty' 😂
I realize this wasn't the point of the video, but this has to said:
So that bird outside my window is called more than a "blue jay," but also a "foul-mouthed dirty hillbilly?"
As is the baseball team!
A BLUE "foul-mouthed dirty hillbilly"
Sean Rosen times have changed a lot
Sad foul-mouthed dirty hillbilly.
As in feeling blue.
Nope. Adam has it wrong once again.
This is what I like about European cities, where they make the center or centre a pedestrian only shopping district. This is also great for a night out on the town. Where bars, pubs & night clubs are walking distance from each other. You just need to crawl yourself to the taxi area and catch a ride home.
"Seriously dude do you even think before you talk"
"No funny I don't"
This is my favorite "Adam Ruins Everything", although they are all good, the way they made this episode is really awesome.
That ending is like something out of the twilight zone.
european capitals are slowly Banning cars from circulating in them. Lisbon for example has started cutting in most historical neighbourhoods and all cars previous to 1995.
+Bernardo Santos Because Europe is mentally ill.
gophop oh really? That's why we dont go around shooting people in movie theaters.
+gophop * 'Murica. is mentally ill. fixed it for you.
Bernardo Santos
You may not. But Islamist are. It's only going to get worse.
gophop Yeah, but at least we dont kill eachother.
and so far, america has suffered far more than europe from extremists.
9/11 ring a bell?
Well, these slimy, tabloid methods of creating public opinion have not changed.
swaying, public opinion is swayed, not created
"Dude, there's a kid on set."
For such a smart show, I would have thought they would realize that 'curse words' are arbitrary nonsense.
Words mean whatever the discourse community decides they mean. Obscenities and expletives are words that a discourse community has decided to use only to express extreme anger or disrespect. Children and indeed civilized adults ought to be spared such displays of verbal offense.
"Well technically we're killing them" gets me everytime
And now I want to watch a film noir movie. Thanks
"The streets belong to the machines now..!" ROFL
I live in Melbourne, where the streets are for cars and trams (streetcars). I like to walk through the center of the street when the road is clear of trams, it feels liberating.
In my town, people drive as if they've never seen a person walking or the fact that bicycles exist. They have a bad habit of damn near running me over on my bike continuously. I am sure eventually I'll get hit, so far I've survived though.
Have you gotten hit yet?
I absolutely love this show!!!
Adam Ruins Everything? More like Adam Improves Everything. Adam for president!
More honest than Hilary!
THE ADAMS ADMINISTRATION
Hamilton is too good
" thank you for granting us passage , metal majesty " best part
"Why did the chicken cross the road?"
Because it's not a crime
Come to the UK jaywalking is not ilegal
I recently went to the UK on vacation and my dumbass kept forgetting which way the street goes and almost got hit by a car on several occasions
But memes are lmao
Yeah but yall be driving crazy on the road
Exactly. The UK didn't go completely car-crazy like America did.
This show is so educational.
"They're killing us out there!"
"Well technically WE are killing THEM Bill"
Slaps
EXTRA EXTRA ADAM CUSSES IN FRONT OF A CHILD.
Man, this is one of the most cleverest series I have ever feasted my eyes upon. love it!
It has its merits, like allowing cars to maintain a reasonable speed without hitting anyone.
Still, cars have no place in cities that still use a pre-19th century city-plan. I'm talking about you, every city in mainland Asia.
cars have no place in any cities even american sprawled one.
Cars infrastructure is extremely expensive and it relies on government money, it all works like a giant ponzi scheme where the local government is maintaining it through debt, some city already collapsed and other will follow through. it's analysed better in Strong Towns
NO ONE WAS HARMED IN THE MAKING OF THIS VIDEO
2:30 - "Think about it. A group of private businessmen coined an offensive slur to promote their product, and it worked so well that today it's a legal term."
The United States federal corporation, since day one, described in a single sentence.
thats just how culture and etymology works you spaz, most modern terms were just slogans and sayings at one point.
@@SomeGuy_Somewhere Awww...it's okay. Lil babby don't understand the world around him. You no cry moar!
I love your shows and information...I wish you would do a show or 2 about the hospitals, AMA, doctors and just our health care system. You could have a lot of fun on that one. Just be careful or they might try to assasinate you LOL
1:14 most epic slap.
Oh my god thank you so much truTV for granting us this and impractical jokers
When you put it this way, I suppose it's kind of like a school solving issues with running through the halls by imposing additional rules and restrictions on the people that DON'T run...
Australia noticed this and decided that a giant lump of metal had a section on a street and if you walk on that spot, that’s definitely your choice. If someone hits you when you’re on the side, that’s on purpose, you hit someone walking on there that’s manslaughter or murder. Well I think.
03:01 best quote so far!
"thanks for granting us passage, metal majesty" lmao!
Interesting though this is the separation of vehicle and pedestrian is largely what has allowed for the global super cities we have today. I can't imagine a modern day city without efficient roads to get people around in vehicles. Everything would be forced to move too slowly.
There are lots of interesting schools of thought when it comes to road design, specifically mixed use, but such ideas are mainly limited to downtown urban areas. You'd still need lots of high speed dedicated roads to connect things up.
Without this, many cities would be more compact and walkable.
TheGreatWazoo Maybe downtown parts sure but you'd still need high speed cars to support suburbs which is what have allowed cities to grow as they have.
Shoto A Yep been there. Great city. But the canals provide a natural pedestrian free area. Not to mention it's an extremely inefficient city to get around easily and has few major industries besides tourism because of that.
Jaqen True, I wrote that while still in Italy and after seeing Rome I agree, but I think a city could be made were public transport and bikes are the ways to get around. It would probably have to be underwater though.
Well not really. Railways largely gave birth to the suburbs (especially in Europe) and enabled workers to shift out of the city and commute in. Some cities still put an emphasis of cycling. It's more that governments have historically prioritized cars. Maybe because of the power ($$$$$) of car industry or just because of our love of cars.
Recently though urban planning for lots of cities are reverting back to the thinking that streets should be designed for people.
Anyone else heard that Wilhelm scream 0:37?
this kind of thing is why I rather enjoy studying history. A lot of times people think that the reason why they do things is because that's just the way it's done, not realising that there is always a story behind it.
Even before the car was invented, bicyclist never really knew how to share the road properly.
Then where exactly should cars drive? Or should cars be banned? What's so wrong with the street being a car-only area? It beats the alternative.
+lugialover09 I agree. This entry doesn't fit. w the other Adam Ruins Everythings
+Akil E. Exactly.
+Akil E. And then it improved several people's lives by giving jobs, more ways of transportation, and made roads safer. Without the term Jaywalker, we would probably have no cars today, lower employment rates, an entire market being completely gone, and several more people would probably be dead, before the possible banning of cars, with a block of metal going 30 mph being on the same ground as people. If anything, this video supports something instead of ruining it.
how about reducing the number of cars? Then more pavement space on A roads
+Kyle Dean Funny because people would be employed more locally and would prevent things like outsourcing businesses because they couldn't ship in supply. Also the statement about more people being dead is rather arbitrary when in fact every engineering project does a cost benefit analysis of the number of lives that could possibly be killed with the product and how much money that would cost the company.
I can already tell it's gonna be a hit! Love #AdamRuinsEverything since #collegehumor. Keep up the fun facts!
"Adam ruins everything: Why swearing isn't that bad"
i love this series so god damn much
+outrage mage it deserved to be its own show I think it is really well thought out
1:12 is that Shayne Topp from Smosh?
But... I'M WALKIIIINNNNN HEEEEEEAR
I vaguely remember something about if we didn't that the company or employers would have to pay the tax on the employee.
yeah but imagine if cars were made illegal instead
We would use alternatives for groups of people, or walk. Probably we would get e bikes years in advance
Public transportation, cycling or even walking are cheap forms of getting from point a to point b
I think I said this as an epic own 4 years ago but now I’d be totally down with making cars obsolete through a robust public transportation system.
I acknowledge that I jaywalked. I apologize not for the act of jaywalking, but for how my jaywalking made you feel. I’ll try not to jaywalk in the future while you’re watching, but trust I’ma do it the rest of my life. It’s the best way to go about being a pedestrian. -Hannibal Buress
Got the J's on my feet you know it! 😂😂😂
It's definitely a hit! Came here from Strong Towns
These clips need to be on their own dedicated channel.
In Canada the pedestrian always has the right of way, which works in a weird way here, because jay walking is finable but if you jay walk and get hit the driver is still responsible.
what if the pedestrian jumps out literally in front of you
3:06 Looooool, that is epic
Oh my god the end was so funny...thank you.
What's funny is there is now 1 section of town with 2 crosswalks and 2 sets of traffic lights enclosed within 20 feet of each other and people still walk out into oncoming traffic without Even batting an eye.
It's actually become dangerous since rescue services have to speed through that section.
Nicely done!
Good presentation!
"Extra Extra! Innocent boy killed by auto-mobileeee!!!"
Me, an Asian, gets A-
My mother: 2:18
Crossing the street far from the crosswalk? Sounds like a typical day in Chicago.
I went to Newport Beach, California for a wedding and my cousin informed my dad & I that the cops give tickets for crossing the street other than the sidewalk.
Big culture shock, that was.
THANK YOU!
so this is where Ray Bradbury came up with Fahrenheit 451
Actually, no.
this really didnt ruin anything.
Other than the origins of the word "Jay" and how they turned a offensive slur into something of a legal name now. X.x It means nothing now sure but when you think about it, it was sort of messed up to do back in the old days.
legal name* sorry when I'm tired I tend to suck at grammar lol.
+Learn Quick It gave way to sprawl and automotive prioritization in transportation design.
It's a huge drain on society.
Dense areas should be hell for motorists because of the amount of space they occupy.
How about them lying to you to get you to but a car(thing that harms the environment in all ways imaginable) and remembered it's based on a lie like weddings car dealerships
+Brennan F Yes but that´s largely due to the fact that public transportation isn´t as developed as it could be if cars never existed.Imagine that instead of cars becoming the default means of tavelling trams/buses/trains were the go-to travelling method surely the invesment in public transport would be a lot higher than it is today.
These are really well produced
0:56 is that Chris from Buzzfeed?
The ending was actually deep.
“Do you think before you speak?! ‘Funny I don’t’ ” he proved that on The Joe Rogan Experience
Telling people to look both ways before they cross the street seems like blaming the victim, but there's really no other way to cross a busy street.
I too have noticed that many conflict-ridden areas often have hot climates which contribute to things like water supply conflicts while freezing northern countries like Finland and Norway are relatively socially advanced. It almost makes me wonder how many global conflicts can be solved with better air conditioning.
It's not the air conditioning. Several countries that have "temperate" climates seem to "progress" a lot faster than places where the climate is unpredictable. Why Egypt did better than Mesopotamia: The Nile has a rhythm to its flooding, the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers had no rhyme or reason to their flooding. That's also why the gods of ancient Egypt were reliable and just while the Sumerian and Babylonian gods were just crazy.
1:52. If the camera man is being filmed, who films the camera man?
Shows like this often have multiple cameras. Plus, this is a show within a show.
It's not illegal where I live!
It is legal for pedestrians to cross the street mid-block anywhere in Toronto as long as:
a) they are not adjacent to a marked pedestrian crossing, and
b) they yield to traffic.
I'm used to yielding the right of way to big heavy vehicles when possible; it is the law on the rivers and seas too.
"Irish Walkers"??? That's really offensive!! As soon as I finish my beer I'm punching someone..
I think it's worth mentioning that even if someone is jaywalking and hit by a car, if the car still had ample time to stop, the motorist is charged with vehicular manslaughter (or first degree vehicular homicide in the state of Georgia if they're drunk). It's only in the case that a jaywalker walks right in front of a car that they're legally at fault for wrongful death. This is also true on crosswalks, a car going the speed limit or lower should have time to stop when you're' on a crosswalk. Really, jaywalking has close to the same "fault for accident" liability for crosswalks, although it's still a crime.
(this is all based on my knowledge of Georgia state law, and pedestrian laws vary by state. This could also be inaccurate and should not be used as legal advice in Georgia court)
Seems to me like automobile industry is the root of a lot of evils.
+DarkoTDR You mean like the evil to freely travel large distances efficiently and safely or the evil to use automobiles to distribute commerce and promote capitalism?
+AndyFromBeaverton The evil to run over a pedestrian and blame him or her. Seriously, drive safer.
AndyFromBeaverton
Cars are not the problem, people are, that kind of evil is what i meant, but it was more or less a comment about the fact that there was one more video earlier about cars on "Adam ruins everything".
It was about car dealerships.
How dare cars be able to drive faster than 20 mph
Well made video. Nice.
Added to my favorite list :D
The origin may be bad, but the end result is good and there is no alternative.
couldn't we just have cars slow down and hold drivers accountable?
drivers are held accountable, only in cases where people burst in to the streets is there a problem.
+joshngoozen There are many cases when drivers are not held accountable. It was an accident they say. It's manslaughter I say.
Umm there is:subways for fsst transport and thoes electric bus things with horns no cars and no jaywalkers and no that electric bus wont hit anyone because itll have its road whichll be fenced
Because every city has those?
The first minute of this is very relevant to guns nowadays
+aido46 And people say the comparison of Guns to Cars is silly.
+aido46 you're right, we should just ban murder.
+Vurtax Except that's not true. Violent crime national average is 1/4 of Britain's? I was about to question where you could have gotten such a crazy number, but then I did a search and saw it. And... saw how easily debunked that figure was. A single person claimed this, using sketchy data that didn't say what they claimed that it said. Do a websearch on "violent crimes per capita by country" and see that other places don't line up with that.
While you're at it, "use guns to protect themselves?" See, I'm an advocate for our right to own things that do not present a harm, but I'm also an advocate to licensing and safety classes when they do provide harm. Ignoring murders, we've seen many cases where lack of basic safety knowledge has resulted in deaths in the US, which leads me to believe that we need a program similar to what we have for cars, where a person needs to prove a certain basic level of respect for the item in order to be allowed to use the item.
I need a driver's license, which requires a driver's safety course, to drive a car. If I am proven to fail basic safety laws with that car, I can have my rights suspended, and in fact I can be required to show that I've attended additional classes in order to get my right back. Finally, should I be proven to be negligent and that's caused a death, injury, or even just property damage, I can be held liable for that.
Seems as if guns have a perfect parallel there, where a person whose gun is involved in an accident should bear some amount of responsibility for that accident. If your gun is stolen, you should be required to report it stolen, lest you be responsible for what happened while it is out of your possession. These are both problems that guns have had, that cars have not had. (Many "illegal" guns on the streets are "stolen" from dealers who do not report them as such, because the laws have been weakened to the point where that is pointless... And in fact, many of those "stolen" guns could better be described as "sold without paperwork or accountability.")
Our laws are stupid, and we can fix our laws without ever touching the guns of those people who are responsible and willing to prove that responsibility.
Daniel Chapman I'm not going to argue over every point with you on this. But here's a source for you from 2009. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html
After doing a little more digging again, I can see how it is not as big of a gap as I first said. I'll admit that. But We're still better off than you are, and secondly: you are never going to get 300 million privately owned firearms out of a nation.Nor will it be done in any way less than full-blown violent.
The dems here want to keep arguing that we'll never be able to deport all of our illegals which only number upwards of 10 millions. I'd like to see them try to argue that same logic with something we have 30x more of.
The problem is that you provide a false dilemma, no guns at all as the only alternative provided for the status quo.
In my comment I said let's have registration, let's have mandatory safety classes, let's have legislation that lays fault on those who are careless. None of that suggested outlawing guns. In fact it was all very pro gun, as I see owning a gun as very similar to owning a car.
A responsible adult can be trusted with something as dangerous as a car, and I think we have sufficient laws protecting us from irresponsible car owners, so I think it's very possible for people to come up with responsible gun laws that does not make it onerous to own one.
Kids getting their paws on one, not too much different than kids getting car keys, and we have laws that do their job for that!
We have laws that prevent people with illnesses that present a danger while driving from getting a license, I think we can get background checks that prevent those with a history of violence from getting one. Don't think it will catch them all, but right now I can buy a gun online with no check, but I can't get a driver's license without passing a test in my state, so I think we could do better.
So it's not about outlawing but coming together to help mitigate that which we can.
That's actualy quite weird. because in England there is no such thing as Jaywalking. I actualy had a conversation with a police officer about the matter and he said there is no such law. it's obviously just an American thing. but I would have thought that in such a well developed country there wouldn't be such a very strange law.
That's what separates American and European cities. While European cities were built with pedestrians and public transit the top priority, American cities, with a few exceptions, starting after World War 2, were built around the car, with public transit and pedestrians being left behind. This can also be seen in how, unlike Europe, there are almost no high speed rail corridors in the US.
And also the states are much larger than many Europe countries which cause the need for cars
@@lindsaydale307 Of course, it's physically impossible to travel more than one mile in a bus, tram, train, or bicycle.
John Rawlins the small game town I go to college has a three mile radius. My home town has a twenty mile
“Well developed”! HA
"They're killing us out there!!"
"Well technically....we're killing THEM Bill..."
Excellent.
Is that set supposed to remind me so much of "The City on the Edge of Forever?"
Even if the content is somewhat boring, the directing and creativity in these videos is awesome
Cities in Europe have been making more and more of their central streets pedestrian and bike-only. Cars are fine out on the highway, but you can't deny they pretty much suck in crowded cities given traffic and lack of space.
Hey Adam can you do one about the social security card and why we are told to not give them out but have to do so
The list of things the auto industry ruins keeps getting bigger.
"I thank you for allowing me passage across your asphalt streets. I thank you for sparing my dog Billy, simply taking away his leg. And I thank you most of all for being so selfless, sticking to the streets and leaving us lowly humans the sidewalks, so we do not have to walk across the ground like primitive apes. Amen."
Its funny, because I think the cities actually would be a lot more fun without cars
0:54 Hey it’s the Super Straight Guy!
1:52 why is drake holding the boom mic?