An illustration of a roadway right of way conundrum: a cyclist is about to cross against the light, as a person and their child walks along the pedestrian crossing. You’re reading The Ethicist newsletter, for Times subscribers only. Advice on life’s trickiest situations and moral dilemmas from the philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah.
I recently started using my bike as my main mode of transportation, and there are many intersections near my house that feature a pedestrian scramble (a.k.a. an exclusive pedestrian interval). When there are no pedestrians in the walkway but the signal remains on for them, I’m unsure whether I should go. On one hand, it would make my commute more efficient and probably safer (the risk of getting hit by a car is much lower). On the other hand, there’s a vanishingly small chance I hit a pedestrian and a much higher chance I undermine pedestrians’ confidence in their safety — if they see bikes crossing during the designated pedestrian time, they’ll feel less safe in the area in the future. Plus it’s technically illegal. What do you think? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
Those of us who walk in New York City know the unwelcome experience of having bicyclists whizzing through pedestrian crossings when we have the light. Each year, in fact, a few hundred unlucky pedestrians in town will be injured from encounters with bicyclists, a handful fatally. With a pedestrian scramble — also known as a Barnes Dance, in honor of the traffic […]
Continue reading the original article at: www.nytimes.com