Why does it matter whether it's redundant or not? You can be charged with everything the DA thinks he can make stick and maybe even a few things he knows he can't make stick, just to have something to plea bargain with.
I wasn't trying to argue a case, just speaking my mind. I know it doesn't matter.
But it isn’t redundant. It would more likely be complementary as it covers situations the general pedestrian laws do not address. Redundancy is having two systems that perform the same action. The bus laws don’t do that. They address a unique condition and put rules on dealing with that unique situation.
Regardless, my point is that especially given you were given notice of student activity by the display of the lights and signs, it would be more difficult to defend a charge of negligence on your part. In a situation where there is no notification of pedestrian activity you have more argument that the pedestrian was negligent and acted such that you did not have time to renact prior to hitting them. If warnings are given, you are put on alert of pedestrian activity and have no real defense to hitting a child. In other words: it makes it easier to convict you
and the discussion has pretty much concluded the must stop for bus lights law doesn’t apply in a tropical parking lot or private drive.
Actually he stated precisely that.
Cbg asked :
Op responded:In other words, if the law doesn't obligate you to stop, you're willing to risk hitting a child to avoid a short wait.
With that logic, driving past any stopped vehicle could yield the same results. If I'm 100% sure there are no children outside the bus and, like this morning, I'm moving very slow, then yes, I'm willing to take that risk.
Exactly.
Methinks "used by" is a fairly simple term. If this isn't simple enough, then all wording for all laws should be wiped by the books. If a school bus is using a parking lot to unload and load kids - that property is "used by". Just because it s private property does not excuse it from the simple definition of "used by".
So riddle me this:
if the bus service is not owned by the school district (which is the case in my area with some of the school systems) would the school still,be using the private lot since the law specifies when the private property is being used by the school or educational institution?
a) that is stopped upon property owned, operated, or used by a school or educational institution,
maybe it’s not so simple after all...or it is that simple and you are adding the unnecessary complexity by trying to interpret it to mean something it wasn’t intended to mean.