Brace yourselves good people of New York, mother government is prepared to step in (again) and save you from yourselves. Senator Carl Kruger is reportedly set to introduce legislation that would ban the use of MP3 players, cellphones, and any other electronic device while crossing the street in New York City or other "big cities" in the state. The proposed ban follows two recent pedestrian deaths in Kruger's district where at least one is said to be the result of a person "listening to his iPod." We just gotta wonder: if police can't enforce jaywalking laws in NYC, how could they possibly enforce this?
Update: Instead of preaching to the choir on this, why not take Chris' advice from the comments section and
send Senator Kruger an email. We're sure he'd love to hear your thoughts on his proposed ban.
[Thanks Chris and Jusin Z]
posted Feb 7th 2007 at 9:01AM
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Matthew Brundage @ Feb 7th 2007 9:06AM
Welcome to the nanny state.
Jake @ Feb 7th 2007 9:09AM
Oh man. Now all the ads (pictured) will be taunting and jealousy-inducing.
ack154 @ Feb 7th 2007 9:13AM
Wow... I got nothing on this.
Maybe they should ban chewing gum and walking at the same time too. I still see people have trouble with that.
James @ Feb 7th 2007 9:16AM
I hope this Carl Kruger douchebag doesn't think that he can somehow get this law to cover Toronto as pictured.
Dan @ Feb 7th 2007 9:12AM
Anyone who is dumb enough to not look both ways before crossing the street in the middle of the Big Apple probably had their impending death coming for 'em. I don't think we need laws to protect the lesser gene pool members in New York, that is what the grill of a yellow taxi cab is for.
pfoleen @ Feb 7th 2007 9:13AM
here here
Sergio @ Feb 7th 2007 6:14PM
Hell yeah. Taxi drivers are merciless, they have no regard for human life, just fares.
Craig @ Feb 7th 2007 10:40PM
Yeah! Think of it as evolution in action!
Shawn @ Feb 7th 2007 9:14AM
Bahahahahah is it April 1st already?
Peter Adams @ Feb 7th 2007 9:25AM
This is one of the most stupid things I've ever heard. Two people die while wearing an iPod gives them the right to ban it? how can this be? it's just insane. If someone got injured in a car crash and they found in the car a dog, would that give them the right to ban dogs in cars??!?!
This is classic over reaction, trust me I come from England.
Mike @ Feb 7th 2007 10:51AM
"breaking news! Two people were killed in their house while listening to music and eating food! The governement immediately voted a new law forbidding people to eat food and listen to music at home!" This story was sponsored by Crooks Insurance. "Crooks Insurance, you pay, we don't!"
Dave @ Feb 7th 2007 9:23AM
When did it become the first priority of our government to try and secure our safety at the expense of our liberty?
Chocolate Starfish @ Feb 7th 2007 9:46AM
Laws like this are why we dumped all the tea in Boston harbor.
flix @ Feb 7th 2007 10:36AM
Actually the reason your ancestors dumped tea in the Boston harbor was because a) they didn't like free trade, and b) the fact that someone could grow tea in China, ship it half way around the world and sell it for less than it cost to grow it domestically.
Wow - that does sound similar to the current situation with goods from China. Maybe you should rebel against your current government....
Jon @ Feb 13th 2007 8:55AM
lets dump ipods and Carl Kruger into the harbor, another reason was the tax on tea without getting representation in the British government, its simple 8th grade history.
tom barta @ Feb 7th 2007 9:38AM
I'm picture a public service commercial with black sillohuettes.....
bneals @ Feb 7th 2007 9:34AM
It is amazing how politicians work. A tragedy occurs and an over-reation ensues. This is a typical government response. A particular group is a affected in a very minor way and government responds in a manner that affects the other 99.9% of the population. I am very sorry for the families of the people that were killed, but a free society will have traggedies. We could have a government that prevents people from doing all kinds of things. If the speed limit were 25 mph everywhere, for example, we could prevent thousands of deaths each year. We could also ban the consumption of butter, red meat, and candy. Banning these products would surely elimiate thousands of deaths from heart disease. The point that I am trying to make is that none of these things would equate to a free society. I don't want govenment telling me I can't cross the street while listening to music. That is a stupid law. The people of this particular community should send a message to this politian and put him or her back on the street. The passage of laws by our government should be resolved to an attempt to tackle real problems. Drug addiction, murder, rape, child porn, etc... I don't know about you, but I don't want my government worrying about what I listen to, when I listen to it, who I am talking to, or whether I eat french fries.
Maybe I am the minority?
Razor @ Feb 7th 2007 11:03AM
"We could also ban the consumption of butter, red meat, and candy."
You must have missed the discussion in Chicago and NY to ban transfats.
chicagostarbaby @ Feb 8th 2007 9:40PM
Yes I certainly agree with your comments, its was finely written and summed up very well...., but watch out big brother will be looking for you to cross the street and make a believer out of ya!
oh woe is me! Oh woe is you!
JeffNLA @ Feb 7th 2007 12:40PM
Excellent post bneals!
Jon @ Feb 13th 2007 8:55AM
amen... the only reason they're going after banning ipods and junk is because it is the only thing they can visibly see and change. child porn and rape is something they care about, but cant catch or see all the time. people rocking the bright white headphones are easy to see. just like in school, people will just hide them or, just brush off the rule.
Jimbo62 @ Feb 7th 2007 9:39AM
why bother - wouldn't this qualify for a Darwin Award? http://www.darwinawards.com/
pritesh thaker @ Feb 7th 2007 9:42AM
I heard going into space makes you want to kill people.....we should disband NASA ASAP!!!!
John @ Feb 7th 2007 11:14AM
That's hysterical.
morgan106 @ Feb 7th 2007 9:37AM
It's not about preventing anything. It's for after the fact, to help insurance companies avoid paying damages if a covered person hits a pedestrian who happened to be using an ipod or cell phone.
lukeskope @ Feb 7th 2007 12:00PM
Wow, that's a great point.
Galley @ Feb 7th 2007 10:41AM
When I'm riding my bike on bike trails and must drive on the street temporarily, I take my earbuds out. I'm not an idiot!
Brendan @ Feb 7th 2007 12:30PM
To whomever said you need to look both ways when crossing, it's even simpler in NYC...there's plenty of one-way streets.
PEZ @ Feb 7th 2007 10:26AM
And another thing... BAN stuff that actually kills people, like STUPID drivers, shitty car breaks and cross walks. Yeah, BAN cross walks. Make people float above the street. COOL. Ban walking altogether. WHat song was he/she listening too? BAN the band. Ban iTunes.
Steve @ Feb 7th 2007 9:48AM
Let's be perfectly clear... this doesn't stand a CHANCE. Carl Kruger is a State Senator (representing Brooklyn), and he's probably trying to get his name in the papers. Do you really think that ANYONE in NYC is going to support a ban on cell phones and iPods...
NYC!?
The business capital of the world!?
Really!?
Anita @ Feb 13th 2007 3:23PM
Steve,
Don't be so sure. NYC is also the city with three airports whose lounges do not have plugs to charge your cell phones or laptops. What the hell does anyone want wi-fi when you have no power?
I come from a redneck town called Atlanta, where even our own corruption hasn't reached these preposterous levels.
One more reason to avoid NYC...
everrette powell @ Feb 7th 2007 9:50AM
Darwin had a name for this “survival of the fittest” nature’s way of weeding out the idiots. Let them cross without looking.
Rob @ Feb 7th 2007 9:50AM
Ban deaf people from crossing streets too. Oh, and ban cars without horns, and definitely ban those quiet hybrid and electric cars.
Daniel @ Feb 7th 2007 6:53PM
no, that won't do...
you'd have to ban deaf people with ADHD and gadget fetishes.
;-)
PJK @ Feb 7th 2007 9:50AM
Stupid people will do stupid things and die.... stupidly. Laws should not be created that impinge on the rights of people, of above subhuman intelligence, because of this. Its not just nanny-state, its completely pointless because they will just find some other equally ridiculous way to kill themselves.
John @ Feb 7th 2007 11:15AM
Terrific, Mr. Orwell (Kruger) has figured out how to extort money from big businesses.
You think they could come up with better topics for regulation than this. First Trans Fat now Ipod next you can't look at your watch while walking, you must come to a complete stop.
fashionista @ Feb 7th 2007 9:58AM
I'm OK with this passing in Albany, the source of all evil in NY.
Banjoker @ Feb 7th 2007 10:12AM
Ok, I live and work in NYC. This ain't gonna fly here. iPods are how New Yorkers keep from killing each other. The mere fact that I no longer have to pay attention to other people is probably the only reason I've lasted here.
1. How are you going to remove an embedded element of entertainment (iPod) or COMMUNICATION (cell phone) from a person's daily commute? I've got an idea: let's ban people from listening to the radio while they're driving on the highway! Same idea - bad idea.
2. Even if it were "just while crossing streets," as the article seems to suggest, that would mean that, unless you were walking crosstown (longer distance between avenues than streets), you would have to hit the pause button every ten seconds.
I think by the end of the first week of that particular ban, the homicide rate in NYC would increase ten-fold. Let's let this one go, buddy.
Dr. Benway @ Feb 7th 2007 10:00AM
Let's break with US political tradition and take a look at the facts:
1. In NYC, almost everyone on the street is using an iPod or similar music player.
2. Only 2 people have been killed crossing the street, wearing said music players.
3. Everyone else wasn't.
4. Wearing an iPod while crossing the street is obviously safer. It's non-iPod users who should be banned.
MikeTLive @ Feb 7th 2007 10:00AM
precicely -- you dont need another law. jaywalking is already the problem. should crossing the street while deaf also be illegal?
hesh @ Feb 7th 2007 10:14AM
"Lemme call you back in a bit, I have to cross the street."
Yeah, that's gonna go over realy well.
This is one of the dumbest proposals I've ever heard of (and that's not including marriage proposals!).
Nick @ Feb 7th 2007 10:03AM
maybe if the people hadn't been crossing during the "not a good time to cross theres other shit going on here" signal was on.. they wouldnt have been hit. And if it happened during the "okay cross" signal then maybe they still woulda been hit. Ive seen people in Chicago almost get hit by a cabby or some Indiana person who doesnt understand traffic lights and not even know what could have happened.
Is NYC really the business capital of the world? JW never heard it refered to that before.
Lee @ Feb 7th 2007 10:13AM
HAHAHA
It figures - these are the same people who gave us Senators Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer. These dumbasses deserve to live in a fascist nanny state.
Rivet @ Feb 7th 2007 10:50AM
What about the hundreds of thousands that die EVERY DAY without wearing an ipod? Doesnt that mean you should make a bill REQUIRING ipods?
Charles R Hamilton @ Feb 7th 2007 10:17AM
Carl Kruger is a Democrat. Just thought I would mention that, because all the news story on this (conveniently) neglect to mention it.
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
xxdesmus @ Feb 7th 2007 10:24AM
Wow, this will never happen.
Even if they did pass it, people would never actually listen to something this stupid.
blaQ @ Feb 7th 2007 4:09PM
told you so....iPods cause death, avoid them.
Texan @ Feb 7th 2007 10:36AM
Darwin Awards, smarwin awards, who cares. If Darwin were REALLY correct, there is NO WAY we'd have the idiot we call President in office right now.
To bad his grandpappy didn't have an ipod when he crossed in front of a horse n buggy.
jdkchem @ Feb 7th 2007 10:33AM
Yet another reason to avoid urbania.
Texan @ Feb 7th 2007 10:36AM
Does this mean we can ban the President? After all hasn't HE killed 3,000+ of our military personnel?
Or MAYBE we should stay with this line of thinking and ban condoms! Yeah, cuz after all, if we don't have them, then according to our Prez, people WON'T have sex and AIDS will be cured.
Damn, i think i'm a politico in the making.