They might get a few scratches from those flimsy flexible plastics but it's not dangerous.

They'll definitely compassion about the possibility for scratches screaming, "that could damage my property!" though.

I'd be more worried about them coming back down on pedestrians.

You can do the same thing without cops more cheaply in the long run. Just raising the crosswalks to sidewalk height completely changes driver behavior, as it's both a speed bump, and it's clearly communicated that the crosswalk is the pedestrians' territory that the driver is crossing through.

We can deal with most of these issue through design rather than a threat of fines.

Cyclists have a name for that and I think it's something like "the life saving look". Usually used when changing lanes or at an intersection.

That's a very outdated view of traffic engineering and psychology. People (and animals in general) don't stop doing things in response to punishment unless they have a very high chance of expected punishment, way higher that any society could afford in case of traffic control.

If you want people to stop, you've got to build the infrastructure in a way that makes it psychologically natural to stop. Some paint on an otherwise Amercan road won't do shit. You've got to visually and physically narrow the space for drivers to make it uncomfortable or even damaging for them to pass through at unsafe speed.

That low speed is also slow enough that drivers don't feel like they're losing as much by stopping, making them feel like stopping for pedestrians is a lot more fair.

Look at Dutch traffic engineering standards for pedestrian crossings. They're a car-centric country that puts a lot of effort into getting cars everywhere in a relatively safe way.

I'm not convinced it's all about enforcement. In Portland, Oregon, there's not much threat of enforcement but cars stop at the slightest hint of a pedestrian crossing anywhere. Not sure how they pulled it off but there it's a culture thing, not enforcement.

As a headsup, pedestrian deaths at crossings is consistently higher in places where right on red is legal. It's not bad drivers, it's a bad law enabling bad driving.

Montréal never banned right on red.

No right on red was the default, then most of Canada enabled right on red in the 1970, but Québec did not. Québec later enabled right on red by default in 2003, but Montréal (island) retained no right on red.

And RToR is bad everywhere. We'veknow it for a long time, but have jsut collectivelydecoded the cost was worth it. Here's an article from Victoira in 1981 talking about it https://www.newspapers.com/clip/107821508/times-colonist-victoria-may-5-1981/

I kind want to see what that does to a car that doesn't stop. Probably rips their front wheels off

Carry a closed umbrella and hold it out in front of you as you approach the crossing.
This triggers the car brain's panic button, since it would scratch their paint if they hit it, which is much, much worse than endangering a human.

We have those where I live. Crosswalk compliance is decent here, but these don't get anyone to stop who wasn't going to stop anyway, and they get stolen all the time.

Which law does that break?

Man I remember when they used to take away peoples licenses in the USA. Good times. It’s like the only way you can get people to recognize that it’s a privilege and not a divine right is by taking it away.

There are plenty of structural changes that can help.
Raised crosswalks are a major one.

Yeah obviously this is a film set. That's what PSAs are, little government adverts. They didn't deploy this on the street and they're not suggesting this as a solution to a problem. It's a fun little sort of advertisement that has been created to try and make a point.

It's like the Swedish advert from the other day.

It’s a controlled film set…Every single face you see is a unionized actor, any “candid” feelings are purely manufactured for effect.

It's a brilliant campaign because of lack of enforcement and entitled drivers that treat traffic laws as suggestions.

Not so brilliant for the people killed before the culture shifts, if it does at all.

LMAO works flawlessly in other countries is a hilarious way to say that people still get hit by cars and are injured, or worse, in crosswalks where countries do have hefty fines for not stopping for pedestrians. Also someone would have to actually enforce that.

As a, quite sad, example - a child was killed at a crossing near a school near me when a person who wasn't paying attention ran them over in the crosswalk. Guess what, here in America where I live there is a fine and it's even more if you're in a school zone. Did not flawlessly stop that kid from dying.