Someone should redo it.
Vandalism for CHALK! I live in Virginia and it’s been raining virtually nonstop for a month. This crosswalk would have been washed off in a couple days, max. This is obviously butthurt local officials on a power trip
officers were unable to determine whether his improvised crosswalk had been created with permanent paint. Officials determined the crosswalk could not be removed, so city workers covered it with black paint.
Apparently it was very tricky.
He sent them a fucking email:
"It’s chalk[,] not paint[.] Please replace it with a real one.”
Police subsequently called Cox and accused him of committing vandalism. He soon surrendered and was booked with intentional destruction of property, which carries up to a year in jail as well as a maximum fine of $2,500
What was that pavement made of, to be destroyed by chalk?!
I suppose they have to arrest all those kids RUINING property with their coloured chalks on their sidewalks.
Good thing they have those night vision goggles and automatic rifles, you just can’t trust a kid armed with chalk these days.
Somewhere, a Karen is smiling while reading this, thinking about those brats down the street…
THEY WENT OUT WITH A CREW AND PAINT AND STILL DIDNT MAKE A CROSSWALK
Their pettiness knows no bounds.
Authorities responded by covering Cox’s handiwork with black paint
A healthy reminder that laws and especially their application are completely arbitrary and often follow the whims of people with money and power.
It is a choice to apply law to every day life. When we start applying the law to wage theft, skirting income taxes, lobbying for sales taxes which most affect poor people, and the systematic divestment of minorities and the indigent, then I’ll be ever so slighty little less ACAB.
Who is the victim in this “crime”?
There doesn’t need to be a victim but it’s actually fairly dangerous. Crosswalks typically, and maybe by law/code, have signage ahead of the crosswalk to warn drivers.
This could make things more dangerous for pedestrians by giving them false trust that this crosswalk is signed and known to drivers that frequent the route.
I generally approve of this kind of vigilante civil engineering. But, safety should be taken into account so I’m a bit torn.
Either way, it’s civil disobedience which comes with a potential cost. It has worked by drawing more attention to the issue and nobody got hurt. Hopefully, they get off with a slap on the wrist.
Here’s one of the best vigilante traffic control projects.
Life was simpler before 9/11.
Uh, I’m pretty sure you can still buy reflective vests at Home Depot.
It was already a crosswalk, just unmarked. Adding road markings cannot make it less safe.Ugh, I misread the article and thought he marked an unmarked crosswalk because of the article image and the comment I was responding to calling it “this crosswalk”.
Wait, is it the empty two-line path on the south side of the intersection? If so, that needs better marking anyways.
Just give the guy a list of materials, tools, and relevant safety and installation codes, and let him cook. He’s already willing to do the job for you, help him do it right, and also save some taxpayer dollars in the process.
There’s no such thing as an “unmarked crosswalk” in Virginia. Pedestrians can legally cross at “marked crosswalks” and intersections if there are no marked crosswalks.
The difference is that drivers are legally required to stop at marked crosswalks. This is not an “unmarked crosswalk. It’s just an intersection.
It’s just an intersection.
I get that you are referring to legal definitions here, but that’s exactly what an unmarked crosswalk is: an intersection without crosswalk markings. Same thing, different name.
deleted by creator
And are drivers not required to yield to pedestrians at intersections? With or without crosswalks…
The real climate terrorists are oil, shipping, and car companies.
If this is the punishment for doing nothing then might as well delete some CEOS.
“A police report that Cox shared with the news station alleged that officers were unable to determine whether his improvised crosswalk had been created with permanent paint. Officials determined the crosswalk could not be removed, so city workers covered it with black paint.” So…some stupid MFs who don’t know how to use water or a pressure washer FFS
For once, we shouldn’t assume stupidity when malice is a perfectly valid explanation.
Can’t harass activists with the threat of jail time for some chalk drawings, better claim it might not have been chalk.
The drawing in question
She SHOULD have just Killed millions of Poor People! THEN she would become a Millionaire CEO or even PRESIDENT!
On Reddit you’d be banned for that statement. Good that this is not Reddit.
I’m new to this community, but don’t feel like this post resonates with my views.
Do we hate cars because they are spewing out CO2 and are more risky to drive than most other alternatives, or because driving a car is isolating, toxic and boring?
I believe infrastructure made for cars makes for a super ugly and detaching area. I hate cars because they make places less cozy
Why not all of those
Cars are a pollutant that is accelerating climate change.
Cars are a danger to everyone involved.
Driving is isolating as compared to walking or biking or commuting.
Car-first infrastructure makes cities uglier and uglier.
These are all true.
Multiple reasons can be true at once.
yes
Personally I hate cars for all the reasons you mentioned and more.
The article certainly speaks more to the “dangerous” part as well as to general car-focused and also fascist state tendencies, but it’s at minimum adjacent to c/fuckcars matters.
