Here are my thoughts on this particular article (selected quotes in italics) published on Cebu Daily News.
“A Cebu Council proposal to increase anti-jaywalking fines up to P1,000 is “anti-poor” and would not solve congestion traffic congestion, stakeholders said in a public hearing yesterday.”
Who do you consider “poor”? Please educate me. I may just be a civilian ignorant of the law but I’m not aware that there are separate laws for the rich and for the poor.
“Most pedestrians are the poor who belong to classes C, D, E,” and cannot afford the new fines, said Brenette Abrenica, a teacher from the University of San Carlos.”
What’s the exact figure for “most”: 90%? or perhaps 80%? If you see a person traveling on foot (pedestrian), do you automatically perceive him / her belonging to classes C, D, E? Setting aside my humility, I eat three times a day and can still afford to savor on several indulgences. Yet, I prefer to walk and commute everyday to work. Which class do I belong to: B, C, D?
“Sonny, a USC political science student, said the proposal was “excessive” for students like him who barely have enough for their baon.”
Such a shame you bring to my alma mater for you intend to break the law. You must know better.
“If approved, the proposal would raise jaywalking fees from a range of P50 to P500 on one hand, to a range of P200 to P1,000 on the other.
Osmeña said the increase would discipline pedestrians and bring order to city streets.”
Why not model Singapore where the fines are even more expensive than anybody’s life? In that way, discipline will be enforced and laws will no longer be considered as mere suggestions but LAWS we need to act in accordance with.
“Most jaywalkers are students, low-wage earners and the marginalized who can’t afford to pay higher fines, Yap replied.
“These are people who cannot afford to pay their fare and use walking as a mode of transport,” he told the council.
A minimum wage earner who gets P285 per day does not normally carry P200 in his wallet, he said.”
Shallow. It has never occurred to me that “jaywalking” equates to “walking”. Again, there is not a law that alienates anybody because of his / her low income.
“The city should instead ensure that pedestrian lanes are painted and that signs to guide them are in place, Yap said.
The anti-jaywalking ordinance applies to all city streets, but Citom implements “selective enforcement” in downtown streets especially because of the lack of zebra crossings and signs in other areas, he said.
Jaywalkers are apprehended on Leon Kilat Street near E-mall, along N. Bacalso Street and on Colon Street near Metro Gaisano.”
I speak with conviction and I can talk all day about pedestrian lanes and (probably) won’t get tired of it. I have this firm inclination to affirm my desire for an orderly community. I walk by those streets everyday and I see not a need to jaywalk.
“Citom’s 2012 budget should include outlays for the installation of signs and painting of road marks, Yap said.
“By then we could already start looking at proper enforcement.”
And I see no reason to take a bath everyday because nobody has ever been reported dying because of it.
“But while the anti-jaywalking ordinance has been in effect for 10 years, Citom still lacks data on the common violators.”
Do you want to know why? Because I can always sign the paper and claim that I am Angelina Jolie. No questions asked.
“‘Sonny, the student, said more Citom enforcers should be seen on the street instead of imposing large fines. He asked the council to review which streets should be strictly monitored for jaywalkers.
Councilor Jose Daluz III said it may be better to implement the anti-jaywalking ordinance only on congested streets.”
Selective enforcement? Prerogative? You just gave me an idea to steal my friend’s iphone 4 when she isn’t looking.