Is America too safe?

Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #173777
    Chad Crutcher
    Participant

    As a trampolinist, I watched attorneys assault my sport because so many foolish people who did not take the time to understand the apparatus got seriously hurt. I could have, too, but the difference is I prepared myself with proper training. In the public realm, we cannot expect all to be properly prepared or even physically capable of addressing whatever inherent danger may exist. I think the conversation has floated a bit too far from being realistic. The real answer to your initial question might be, no it is not too safe…yet, the attorneys are still workin’ on it. The deeper question is how can we address the rabid penchant for tort litigation (read: ambulance chasing). Problem is, we would all want to be able to get blood out of a stone if we were the injured party.

    Ever heard the story about the City of Pleasanton, CA paying big bucks to settle a lawsuit brought by a motorcyclist who, upon running when the cops tried to pull him over for a traffic violation, lost control during the chase as he tried to make a turn at high speed, hit a wet patch of street (at 3AM) caused by irrigation overspray and was injured?

    Or, how ’bout the one where an architect in St. Louis who, while waiting for his bus to work, observed an unsafe condition at a construction site that his firm was not in any way involved with…and he said nothing to anyone. An injury resulted and somehow the parties in the case learned this guy had observed the unsafe condition and said nothing. Because he was a licensed architect, he was found to share in responsibility for the injury and was liable for a portion of the damages!!! Be careful. Be very, very careful.

    #173776
    Mike Tupa
    Participant

    Ah, Nick, Glad to hear you also joined “the group” of privilaged among those of us who have been pulled over by the res’ patrol. Me, on jet ski having fun while the wife is on the pontoon of friends. I motor up to say hi-ask if she would like to ride, and I get pulled over because I was following too close, another time just to make sure I had the appropriate license (it wasn’t my jet ski), flags, flairs, whistle, etc. Oh, yes, and another because we were pulling a couple others on one of those inflatable bouncing fun things with the jet ski, yep, pulled over because 1) we pulled them out through the marina and 2) because we couldn’t fit the 2 others on the jet ski? So he made us pull them to the nearest shoreline, (can’t return through the marina after all) and run back and forth to return the inflatable, then pick up each as they hung onto rocks and twigs at lakes edge, freezing, till we could get them all back to shore.
    I wonders: does their stewardship remove my liability? I don’t think it made me or others safer.

    No tickets or fines. Seems a white mustash gives me a bit of latitude.

    I know this isn’t LA related but is a good point about stewardship, responsibility, enforcement and our preception of responsibility withiin the environment we all live within.

    #173775
    Roland Beinert
    Participant

    My senior project in college was on the dutch shared street called a woonerf. The idea, for anyone who hasn’t heard of them, is that streets are safer when everyone (pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers) shares the entire street, as long as cars are not allowed to go more than about 16 mph. The separation of sidewalk and street is often only a visible separation (no curbs). Obstacles (traffic calming, parked cars, playgrounds, trees, etc.) are put in street to keep drivers at a reasonable speed. Obviously, a woonerf doesn’t extend too far, so that drivers don’t get too frustated. (here’s a wikipedia article on these concepts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space )
    The project brought about some interesting conversations. Often I was told that it would never work here in the US. Some suggested they could only possibly work as alleys. It was a very alien concept to some.
    I’m bringing this up, because I wonder if our ideas about safety in this country are too limited to regulations and laws. There are other factors involved like the perception of safety and danger and the presence of other people. I guess in remote locations, like recreation areas or large parks, maybe it is important to have regulations, since other people are scarce and people are doing things sometimes partly for a sense of danger and to test themselves. But in more populated areas, maybe we need to look at the role of other factors.

    #173774
    nca
    Participant

    I’ve missed out on the last week or so of replies on this thread because I was out dangling myself off mountain sides, fording rivers, and sleeping in remote wilderness.

    Anyway, I think everyone brought up great points. The question stands, where is the line?

    Roland, you once again bring up a great point regarding perception. I think perception plays a key role in the way America continues to build public places. I believe the rampant overuse of litlgation (ambulance chasing and the subsequent rules, laws, regulations) in America is degrading the innate ability of Americans to determine ‘real’ vs. ‘perceived’ dangers.

    Sterilization of public (and private) space is making the human organism fat, dull, and dopey. Is there a way, as designers who undoubtedly have some influence on shaping the places in which we live, to juxtapose this pattern in ways that are not directly harmful to the public?

    #173773
    Roland Beinert
    Participant

    I think the lawyers are just taking advantage of a situation where people have a freedom to do anything, anywhere, and no one is ever there to make them think twice. To a large extent, the freedom to do what we want is a good thing. It’s just that people need to understand there are boundaries. Since the boundaries aren’t apparent, people do stupid things. Since they were just excercising their freedom, the lawyers can point to someone else and say it’s his fault for not making the danger clear. This fingerpointing then makes us designers afraid to include elements in a design that might make people think twice about doing something stupid, like street trees or playgrounds in the middle of a woonerf. It’s kind of a positive feedback loop.
    Vitality and safety in public space, unfortunately, seems to have as much to do with the context of the space as the design of the space. You need a mix of uses around a space so that people have a reason to use the space at all times of the day. That’s why some really well designed places go under-utilized. Jane Jacobs (yes, I’m bringing her up again) devoted a whole chapter of Death and Life of Great American Cities to public spaces, and it’s worth a read.
    I suspect private space goes under-utilized, because we only use it for recreation. Recreation time is exactly the time when we are most prone to doing something stupid. People used to have things like outdoor summer kitchens, since they didn’t want to heat their homes up too much. These other uses drew adults outside where the kids were playing.

Viewing 5 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Lost Password

Register