[toast0]

I've always been taught that pedestrians have the right of way, even when they don't. But I don't think that applies to invisible pedestrians.

Of course, Seattle is home to lots of terrible traffic designs and practices. I have relatives in Ravenna; in their neighborhood people park on either side of the street and residential intersections signal a 4-way stop by absence of any stop signs.

[seanmcdirmid]

I teach my son that he doesn't have the right away, no matter what the laws really say, because even if the car is at fault, he is still dead (and that scares me). Cross walks only for now, and definitely no going to try and cross 15th NW (a four lane that carries lots of traffic) like that.

It does apply to invisible pedestrians, but cops are more likely to rule it a drive-at-fault accident than something more serious like negligent homicide. I live in Ballard, people park on either side here also, and...there isn't much buffer even at designated cross walks to see people waiting (or just going) to cross.

[parineum]

That's the exact reason for the law.

The law is on the pedestrian's side, physics is on the car's side.

Pedestrian's should be cautious because they have more to lose.

[seanmcdirmid]

It’s a half assed law that puts way too much faith in drivers and is not a real solution to pedestrian safety, which requires actual road redesigns.