Culture differences and points of view

[minsue]

I am constantly amazed and amused by the culture differences between the US & UK. Case in point is the two different articles here reporting on an incident where a visiting British historian got himself arrested in Atlanta. Depending on which article you read, the American one or the British one, the man was a hapless victim of horrid armed American police or an arrogant idiot who feels he can simply ignore cops and pay no consequence for it.

I have no point, really. I just found the two stories amusing.

From Reuters

Jaywalking historian causes stir
Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:37 AM ET

By Matthew Bigg

ATLANTA, Jan 19 - Maybe, like the pronunciation of tomatoes, some things -- like jaywalking -- just don't travel well between the United States and Britain.

A British history professor has caused a stir in Atlanta, and back home in Britain, over his arrest this month after he tried to cross the road outside an Atlanta hotel where he was attending a conference.

Felipe Fernandez-Armesto has complained his arrest was a "violent assault."

According to a police report, officer Kevin Leonpacher, working off-duty for hotel security and wearing a jacket marked "Atlanta Police," blew his whistle for Fernandez-Armesto to stop crossing Courtland Street in central Atlanta on January 4 and directed him to a crosswalk.

The historian ignored Leonpacher who then asked "as many as ten times" for Fernandez-Armesto's identification. When he refused and instead demanded Leonpacher's identification, the officer made an arrest, the report said.

"I asked him to put his hands behind his back so that he could be handcuffed .... He pulled away and began to wrestle with me. After about a minute I was able to wrestle him to the ground ... as I called for backup," the report said.

Fernandez-Armesto said he was not aware it was an offense to cross the street at that point.

"I was an absolutely innocent person. I am very sorry to have crossed the road when I shouldn't have and to have failed to recognize he was a police officer but I cannot find anything I did as not the normal behavior of an honest person," he said in an interview on Friday from Tufts University near Boston where he is teaching.

Fernandez-Armesto was detained for eight hours before being taken before a judge who dismissed a charge of disorderly conduct.

The case might have ended there. But in an opinion piece in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week, the historian said being "assaulted by the police and locked up for hours in the company of some of the ... dregs of the American underclass" had taught him something new about the country.

"No one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails," he said, quoting former South African President Nelson Mandela, although he added he was well treated by staff at the jail and by the judge.

Subsequent comment in the newspaper and on the city's talk- radio shows was largely unfavorable to the historian.

One letter called him an "arrogant Englishman," although the newspaper said in an editorial the incident had "bruised Atlanta's reputation as a ... city known for Southern hospitality."

From BBC News

What every Brit should know about jaywalking

In the UK no one would bat an eyelid. In Atlanta, you could be wrestled to the ground.

It is a cautionary tale for any traveller - distinguished historian Felipe Fernandez-Armesto tried to cross the road while in Atlanta for the conference of the American Historical Association, only to find himself in handcuffs and surrounded by armed police.

"I come from a country where you can cross the road where you like," said the visiting professor of global environmental history at Queen Mary College, University of London. "It hadn't occurred to me that I wasn't allowed to cross the road between the two main conference venues."

The bespectacled professor says he didn't realise the "rather intrusive young man" shouting that he shouldn't cross there was a policeman. "I thanked him for his advice and went on."

The officer asked for identification. The professor asked for his, after which Officer Leonpacher told him he was under arrest and, the professor claims, kicked his legs from under him, pinned him to the ground and confiscated his box of peppermints.

Professor Fernandez-Armesto then spent eight hours in the cells before the charges were dropped. He told the Times that his colleagues now regard him as "as a combination of Rambo, because it took five cops to pin me to the ground, and Perry Mason, because my eloquence before a judge obtained my immediate release".

Not every jaywalking Brit abroad will be similarly blessed, nor enjoy the intervention of the city mayor.

Culture clash

Just because you can do something in the UK doesn't mean it's OK in another country. Jaywalking is an offence in most urban areas in the United States - although enforcement varies between states - and Canada, and in places such as Singapore, Spain, Poland, Slovenia and Australia.

In Brisbane, police have begun doling out fines after complaints from motorists involved in near-misses with jaywalkers. In Beijing and Shanghai, city officials have clamped down on jaywalkers in an attempt to improve public behaviour ahead of the 2008 Olympics and 2010 World Expo respectively.

But there is no such offence in the UK, where it is considered a personal responsibility to cross the road safely (although London mayor Ken Livingstone last summer proposed making jaywalking illegal). The Highway Code recommends that all pedestrians abide by the Green Cross Code: "Where there is a crossing nearby, use it. Otherwise choose a place where you can see clearly in all directions."

In Germany and the Netherlands, the onus is more on the motorist. Not stopping for pedestrians on crossings is an offence, and a driver can be issued with a ticket even if they are waiting on the kerb (again, the expectation is that pedestrians should cross safely).

Some road safety campaigners claim that with traffic heavier, where light phases are timed to allow as many vehicles through an intersection as possible, pedestrians are increasingly taking risks in order to cross the road.

At least Prof Fernandez-Armesto can relax in the knowledge that it's not just outsiders who commit such heinous offences as crossing the road where they please.

Back in 1915, the Atlanta Constitution reported that the practice of "jay walking" was all too commonplace.

"People cross the streets any and everywhere, without regard to traffic, darting in front of fast-moving motor vehicles, dodging horses and street cars, and even braving ambulances and fire apparatus with no satisfaction except the consciousness that 'they did it,' and then having plenty of time to turn and contemplate the danger they have escaped."

Having been carted off in a "filthy, foetid paddy wagon" as the professor described it, that last observation was one denied to him.

 

[R. Richard]

Jaywalking in the US doeds not vary from state to state, it varies from town to town! If you jay walk in San Diego [and apparently in Atlanta,] it is a major crime. In many other towns it varies from a nasty lecture to "Who cares?"

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I heard an interview with officer Kevin Leonpacher on an Atlanta radio station, as he explained it there were signs as you came out of the Hotel that said don't cross here go to the corner and cross. He said he pointed those out to the prof. but the prof. chose to ignore them. Then officer Leonpacher identified himself as an Atlanta Police Officer and told him to go cross at the corner. The prof told him, and this is the quote as I remember it, 'Thank you officer I'll keep that in mind for next time' and tried to continue to cross at the wrong place.

So after reading signs pointed out to him and being told by a cop not too, he assumed that it didn't apply to him.

 

[Vermilion]

Wait? You seriously can get arrested for crossing the road where you choose in the states?

And they call the UK a 'nanny state'. You are told where to cross roads, arrested for committing adultery - doesn't it piss you off?

x
V

 

[Vermilion]

So after reading signs pointed out to him and being told by a cop not too, he assumed that it didn't apply to him.

Or thought that the police officer was merely being helpful and suggesting a safer place to cross, as such actions would be intended by an English policeman...

The only place that you could probably get arrested for crossing at your own choice over here would be a motorway or dual carriageway (major road). Any street in a town w/o a barrier running down the central reservation would be crossed at your own risk, no matter what suggestion a copper made...

x
V

 

[scheherazade_79]

Last time I was in the States, I got picked up by the police just for walking - not crossing the road, but walking quite innocently on a quest for a McDonalds or a Taco Bell.

Apparently hookers used that street a lot, and I was taken back to the hotel for my own safety.

I wasn't even dressed like a fucking hooker! I was wearing a baseball hat, damn it!

 

[TheeGoatPig]

Wait? You seriously can get arrested for crossing the road where you choose in the states?

And they call the UK a 'nanny state'. You are told where to cross roads, arrested for committing adultery - doesn't it piss you off?

x
V

The jaywalking case does. Jaywalking as a crime in the first place seems unconstitutional to me, but unfortunately I don't see it being brought up with the supreme court any time soon.

 

[minsue]

Wait? You seriously can get arrested for crossing the road where you choose in the states?

No, you can't. At least, I've never heard of anyone being arrested for jaywalking alone.

You can, however, be arrested for being belligerent and refusing to identify yourself and resisting arrest. That's why he was charged with disorderly conduct, not jaywalking.

 

[Vermilion]

The jaywalking case does. Jaywalking as a crime in the first place seems unconstitutional to me,

Not to mention it assumes you are all morons incapable of crossing a road w/o being a danger to yourselves and others!
x
V

 

[glynndah]

Last time I was in the States, I got picked up by the police just for walking - not crossing the road, but walking quite innocently on a quest for a McDonalds or a Taco Bell.

Apparently hookers used that street a lot, and I was taken back to the hotel for my own safety.

I wasn't even dressed like a fucking hooker! I was wearing a baseball hat, damn it!

Hot pants and thigh high boots are so passe, my dear. All the best working girls wear baseball caps these days....

 

[minsue]

Not to mention it assumes you are all morons incapable of crossing a road w/o being a danger to yourselves and others!
x
V

Having seen plenty of moronic pedestrians on both sides of the pond, I'd have to say, "Yes, they are incapable of crossing a road w/o being a danger." I don't agree with the law against it, but then I also hate the ugly barriers you all have over here to keep stupid people from crossing the streets where it's not safe. If I had to choose between the two, I think I'd reluctantly choose the jaywalking laws.

 

[only_more_so]

It is especially telling that the BBC article thinks something published in a paper in 1915 is an acceptable precedent.

Anyway, I think the police in the US get a bad rap much of the time. Although that is probably true in most countries.

 

[only_more_so]

Wait? You seriously can get arrested for crossing the road where you choose in the states?

And they call the UK a 'nanny state'. You are told where to cross roads, arrested for committing adultery - doesn't it piss you off?

x
V

I think someone already mentioned this, but you don't get arrested, you get a ticket. This guy got arrested for fighting with a police officer and being belligerant. We get real touchy in the US over such things.

And yes, we are a nanny-state and it pisses me off. I am a strong believer in survival of the fittest. I think it is positively criminal the things people sue about (like a moron who thought the cruise control on his winebago meant he could get up and make a sandwich, which he won.).

 

[Stella_Omega]

I think someone already mentioned this, but you don't get arrested, you get a ticket. This guy got arrested for fighting with a police officer and being belligerant. We get real touchy in the US over such things.

And yes, we are a nanny-state and it pisses me off. I am a strong believer in survival of the fittest. I think it is positively criminal the things people sue about (like a moron who thought the cruise control on his winebago meant he could get up and make a sandwich, which he won.).

The nanny-state thing is SO embarrassing.

Luckily, the Winnebago story is an Urban Myth...

 

[oggbashan]

The professor was an idiot for not taking account of cultural differences.

In the UK, jaywalking isn't an offence.

Here. you are not obliged to identify yourself to a police officer (unless he considers that you have committed an arrestable offence), nor are you required to carry any proof of identity.

I know that it is different in France. I treat French policemen with caution, view gendarmes with trepidation, and run with the rest of the fleeing crowd when the CRS hits the street.

When in Rome...

Og

 

[only_more_so]

The professor was an idiot for not taking account of cultural differences.

In the UK, jaywalking isn't an offence.

Here. you are not obliged to identify yourself to a police officer (unless he considers that you have committed an arrestable offence), nor are you required to carry any proof of identity.

I know that it is different in France. I treat French policemen with caution, view gendarmes with trepidation, and run with the rest of the fleeing crowd when the CRS hits the street.

When in Rome...

Og

Actually, in the US you don't have to carry identification, although it isn't a bad idea. I just looked up whether you have to identify yourself to police, and there was a Nevada law that says you must identify yourself to police if you are under suspicion. Of course, what is suspicious and what isn't is rather vague.

 

[SimonBrooke]

Arresting logic

No, you can't. At least, I've never heard of anyone being arrested for jaywalking alone.

You can, however, be arrested for being belligerent and refusing to identify yourself and resisting arrest. That's why he was charged with disorderly conduct, not jaywalking.

I know it's Joe who pretends to be the logician around here, but I actually am one. You cannot - you cannot - be arrested for resisting arrest. Before you even can resist arrest, you have to be arrested.

And having heard the professor interviewed on the radio, I simply don't believe he's even capable of being belligerent. Arsed, yes, certainly, but belligerent? No.

 

[cloudy]

I know it's Joe who pretends to be the logician around here, but I actually am one. You cannot - you cannot - be arrested for resisting arrest. Before you even can resist arrest, you have to be arrested.

And having heard the professor interviewed on the radio, I simply don't believe he's even capable of being belligerent. Arsed, yes, certainly, but belligerent? No.

In the States, you can be arrested for whatever the cops decide they want to arrest you for.

Been there, done that.

It may work differently in Scotland, but here they pretty much do whatever the hell they want.

 

[Guest]

The professor was an idiot for not taking account of cultural differences.

And the US officer could stand to have a little intercultural training since he works with the public in a country full of people with varied cultral backgrounds. I work in an American hospital emergency room and have such annual training.

 

[minsue]

I know it's Joe who pretends to be the logician around here, but I actually am one. You cannot - you cannot - be arrested for resisting arrest. Before you even can resist arrest, you have to be arrested.

Logic and reality are not one and the same, Simon.

 

[S-Des]

Wait? You seriously can get arrested for crossing the road where you choose in the states?

And they call the UK a 'nanny state'. You are told where to cross roads, arrested for committing adultery - doesn't it piss you off?

x
V

This completely misses the point. If I'm driving along and an idiot runs out in front of my car, one of three things will happen. First, I swerve and narrowly avoid him, scaring the shit out of myself and possibly the family that is in my car. Second, I swerve to miss him and am involved in an accident (while the jerk-off skips merrily away), either alone or with another vehicle. Third, I hit him/her and have to live with that for the rest of my life (not so easy to kill someone and not feel guilt). Not to mention he or his family will probably sue me for a million dollars (the lawyers fees alone would bankrupt most people).

No, I'm not annoyed by these kinds of laws. They are there because people don't think about anything other than themselves. We all jaywalk and the police rarely care, but if it's causing a hazard, the police should have the right to stop you. It's not just about the pedestrian and if he/she is too stupid to survive. It's also about if he/she is so stupid that they get someone else killed.

 

[matriarch]

This completely misses the point. If I'm driving along and an idiot runs out in front of my car, one of three things will happen. First, I swerve and narrowly avoid him, scaring the shit out of myself and possibly the family that is in my car. Second, I swerve to miss him and am involved in an accident (while the jerk-off skips merrily away), either alone or with another vehicle. Third, I hit him/her and have to live with that for the rest of my life (not so easy to kill someone and not feel guilt). Not to mention he or his family will probably sue me for a million dollars (the lawyers fees alone would bankrupt most people).

No, I'm not annoyed by these kinds of laws. They are there because people don't think about anything other than themselves. We all jaywalk and the police rarely care, but if it's causing a hazard, the police should have the right to stop you. It's not just about the pedestrian and if he/she is too stupid to survive. It's also about if he/she is so stupid that they get someone else killed.

I was going to reply.........but really, I just can't be bothered. You have your ways, we have ours.

Like Og said, when in Rome...........

 

[starrkers]

That UK article said there are jaywalking laws in Australia. They're never used.

I once had an idiot step off the footpath without even glancing at the traffic lane into the rear side of my car. Scared the crap outa me. I came back around the block and found a park. As I opened the door to get out, he came up and abused me for nearly hitting him, obviously feeling his suit, briefcase greying hair and overbearing attitude was all the right he needed. I informed him he needed to look before stepping onto the road, that he had hit the car, not vice versa and that even had he been in the right, if I had hit him, he'd be just as dead.
I will cherish forever seeing that twit spluttering on the footpath as the little girl he had planned to browbeat got cheered by the crowd that had gathered.

Some idiots just ask to be run over.

 

[JamesSD]

Jaywalking in the US doeds not vary from state to state, it varies from town to town! If you jay walk in San Diego [and apparently in Atlanta,] it is a major crime. In many other towns it varies from a nasty lecture to "Who cares?"

But really in San Diego there aren't that many streets you'd be arrested for jaywalking on. I've jaywalked in Pacific Beach all the time, which is crawling with cops Friday and Saturday night, and they don't arrest anyone.

Whenever a pedestrian sets foot in a street they have the right of way, (although I'm not 100% sure this applies to limited access freeways such as interstates). Jaywalking laws are intended to protect the flow of traffic and effectively commerce.

My understanding is not producing identification makes it all but impossible for an officer to issue a citation. Sounds like a dual fault situation, where the professor was probably indignant and the cop overreacted.

When in Rome...

 

[S-Des]

I was going to reply.........but really, I just can't be bothered. You have your ways, we have ours.

Like Og said, when in Rome...........

What an interesting response. You feel the need to tell me (and everyone else) that you can't be bothered to respond, yet you quote my post? If you disagree, please tell me why? If you don't really care, why tell everyone you don't care? It seems like a pretty obnoxious thing to do, to post just to say you don't care. BTW, thanks for responding to one of my posts for the first time in 12 months. Now I really feel welcome to the AH.