Probably because they don’t need laws about people, on foot, traveling. It’s part of the constitution that you have freedom for traveling.
They don’t need extra laws to say that yes, you can travel by foot, in a publicly owned space that doesn’t otherwise have laws restricting or prohibiting access to that space, like a military base or something would have…
Operating heavy machinery (automobiles) in the space is generally regulated, by law, and you need a little document to certify that you call legally operate a motor vehicle on public roads, but beyond that, your freedom of movement is otherwise unhindered.
It very quickly becomes a constitutional argument, so even places with laws on the books about jaywalking, have all largely been nullified by freedom of movement enshrined in the constitution; they’re unlawful, and unable to be enforced in any meaningful way.
Long story short: there aren’t anti-jaywalking laws because they don’t require them. Allowing “jaywalking” is a right allowed for by freedom of movement, which is part of the constitution.
The US is also in an fairly select minority with having laws around where you can cross the road as pedestrian.
Probably because they don’t need laws about people, on foot, traveling. It’s part of the constitution that you have freedom for traveling.
They don’t need extra laws to say that yes, you can travel by foot, in a publicly owned space that doesn’t otherwise have laws restricting or prohibiting access to that space, like a military base or something would have…
Operating heavy machinery (automobiles) in the space is generally regulated, by law, and you need a little document to certify that you call legally operate a motor vehicle on public roads, but beyond that, your freedom of movement is otherwise unhindered.
It very quickly becomes a constitutional argument, so even places with laws on the books about jaywalking, have all largely been nullified by freedom of movement enshrined in the constitution; they’re unlawful, and unable to be enforced in any meaningful way.
Long story short: there aren’t anti-jaywalking laws because they don’t require them. Allowing “jaywalking” is a right allowed for by freedom of movement, which is part of the constitution.
This is the weirdest version of the sovereign citizen argument I’ve ever heard.
Freedom of movement is freedom of movement between States.
It has nothing to do with walking in the middle of the road.
The point is that these places are mainly in America (and Germany).
theyrethesamepicture.jpeg