Connecticut Lawmaker Cited for 'Reckless' Jogging

Connecticut Lawmaker Cited for 'Reckless Jogging'

www.foxnews.com

GLASTONBURY, Conn. — A Connecticut lawmaker who deals with traffic safety issues has been cited for being an alleged "reckless" pedestrian, after police say he jogged into a moving truck and broke a rib.

Glastonbury police say they gave state Rep. Thomas Kehoe of Glastonbury an infraction ticket for reckless use of a highway by a pedestrian for Sunday's incident on Main Street. Kehoe serves on the legislature's Transportation Committee.

Police say Kehoe ran into the side of a pickup truck that had just started moving after the traffic signal turned green.

Kehoe denies hitting t

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 31-7-2009 by KSPigpen]

What's next? Are we so strapped for cash that we are now charging people for running into something while jogging?

No mention about how much the fine is. Does anyone live there and know? I bet it's about a hundred bucks, once you add court costs.

What I find halfway amusing is that it was a lawmaker involved with traffic safety. To me this reeks of revenge by someone that got ticked off about something else. Has anyone ever heard of someone getting a ticket for jogging into something?

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

CT has been bankrupt since the late 70's. The way they've managed to fool folks is by claiming annual "surpluses" while not factoring in their outstanding debt.

I'm sure most of the overspending and overtaxing states follow the same practice.

Who the hell writes up a budget and consciously omits their debt?

The state looked at its spending as an investment rather than an expense and borrowed against the would-be worth of the investment before paying off the bills for the investments. Like taking out multiple mortgages on your home that still has an original mortgage to pay off so you can buy an RV and a speedboat.

If it is an actual law and he broke it then he deserves to be fined.

Don't like the laws, don't vote in the lawmakers.

Running into the road while there are oncoming vehicles has been illegal for a long time.

And rightly so, many joggers complete with blaring headphones and a complete lack of situational awareness are the "before" picture of roadkill.

Was he black?? It's racial profiling!!! I'm sure of it!!!!

So you get charged for an accident where you're the only victim? WTH? Next thing you know you get charged for spilling milk or hitting your toe on a bedpost.

Rule number one (unless you live in Alaska) pedestrians always have the right away so technically the truck driver is at fault, unless there is a local law that says otherwise.

Originally posted by Darthorious
Rule number one (unless you live in Alaska) pedestrians always have the right away so technically the truck driver is at fault, unless there is a local law that says otherwise.

Rule number 2

Don't be an a@@ and run into an intersection when they have a green light. That not only puts you in danger but others as well.

Originally posted by KSPigpen


What's next? Are we so strapped for cash that we are now charging people for running into something while jogging?

No mention about how much the fine is. Does anyone live there and know? I bet it's about a hundred bucks, once you add court costs.

What I find halfway amusing is that it was a lawmaker involved with traffic safety. To me this reeks of revenge by someone that got ticked off about something else. Has anyone ever heard of someone getting a ticket for jogging into something?

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

New Zealand is even worse, every thing you do you get a fine. I mean common, everyone I know at least once got a huge fine example 1000 dollars. It is freaking frustrating.

Why did this make me think of this immediately?

Originally posted by Darthorious
Rule number one (unless you live in Alaska) pedestrians always have the right away so technically the truck driver is at fault, unless there is a local law that says otherwise.

That is true. There are some States and even more Municipalities that have ZERO Tolerance towards motorists failing to yield to a Pedestrian at a Crosswalk, even if the Traffic Light for you is GREEN and the Crosswalk sign for them is RED. I live in a small tourist town that is very Pedestrian friendly and triples in size during Tourist Season. Drivers sometimes are stuck waiting in excess of 5 minutes for pedestrians to cross against the light when the many theatres get out. If you so much as try to move forward when you have a Green Light and there is a pedestrian crossing, you'll be pulled over by multiple police cruisers so fast you won't even know what hit you. Actually, Failure to Yield to a Pedestrian carries a stiffer penalty in our town than being caught with Possession of a Controlled Substance ($450 fine for the former compared to your choice of a $60 fine or 4-8 Hours of Community Service for the later).

Matter of fact, just this morning I started running across an Intersection when the light turned green for oncoming traffic before I got 3/4 of the way across. A motorist started honking his horn and flipped me off. He pulled over to start a fight and I explained to him that in this particular city pedestrians have the right of way whether they are jay-walking or are against a light at an intersection. He drove off angry for being lectured and flipped me off a second time. Apparently a cop had pulled up behind us and overheard the conversation so the cop pulled over the guy to give him a more stern lecture about yielding to pedestrians. (Made my day!)

Still, this is a Connecticut lawmaker who deals with traffic safety issues being cited in his own State. He knew the traffic laws, or at least should have. If it is indeed against State Law then he had it coming to him. If it was a local Municipality Law in Glastonbury, well then that must be really embarrassing for Rep. Thomas Kehoe as he lives in Glastonbury and doesn't have an excuse to be ignorant of local Municipal law there either.

The police, true to proper Connecticut form, cited the driver as well. Both parties were found to be at fault which is generally the case in most traffic accidents.