I had a very "interesting" experience yesterday in Zug.

I was getting a lift home at about 1900 in the evening, through a street with a 30 km/h speed limit (which we did adhere to).
There are several apartment buildings along this street, hence kids playing on the side walk is not an uncommon sight, and also why the speed limit is as low as 30.

As we were driving along we came up to one of the pedestrian crossings, and as we came up to this crossing, we both saw an 8-10 year old kid standing on the opposite side of the street next to the crossing. The kid was just standing there with his hands in his pockets, making no indication to actually cross the road, so we carried on past without stopping.

There was no dangerous situation in any way, and as we passed, the kid still did no indication to move towards the street in order to cross nor did he even look at the cars coming up the street. Had he made the slightest indication showing that he was intending to cross, we would have had ample time to come to a gentle stop well in front of the crossing and well before the kid had reached over to our side of the street.

He did not, but remained stationary on the side walk with his hands in his pockets and looking aimlessly around him and up into the sky. My friend who was driving even commented as we passed that it was an odd place to just stand like that.

However as we came around the next corner the, reason for the kid just standing there the way he did became clear.

There the police had set up a check point with uniforms and cars, and was stopping everyone that failed to stop for this kid who they obviously had planted there in order to create a “situation”.
They did not even attempt to hide the fact that this was a trap they had set, but bluntly proceeded to issue a fine for not stopping.

In any other country I have lived in, this behavior would be considered a clear case of entrapment, and would be illegal for the police to conduct.
Is this really an acceptable method of work for the Swiss police?

obviously it is.. what else do they have to do, motorists are easy results

Are you sure the kid wasn't stopped there waiting for you to stop before he proceeded to cross? They are taught to do it that way. They are not taught to start to cross to make the cars stop. So it may not have been a trap, just a coincidence?
It's your first post I see... maybe you don't know the rules for pedestrians crossing the road here?

In my experience, kids are taught to stand with their arm oustretched, not just loiter in the vicinity of a crossing.

The fine is for not stopping.
Cars that did not stop deserved to be fined.
If a pedestrian is at the crossing, stop. There should be no exceptions to this rule for the sake of clarity.

I doubt the Police were bored, it looks to me that they may have received complaints about this particular crossing, and ended up catching the guilty. Lesson learnt by the caught, before someome gets run over.

It is not entrapment, you had to stop.

You were not 'persuaded' or coerced into breaking the law.

Kids cannot be trusted/expected to remember the rules methinks.
Who would want to win the argument after knocking a kid over that they thought stopping was not necessary based on the pedestrians body language.

Welcome to the forum.

I don't know what other countries you've lived in, but this definitely wouldn't be considered entrapment in the US. Giving someone an opportunity to break the law and standing back to see what they do is not entrapment; persuading someone to break the law and then arresting them for doing so is entrapment.

Wait a minute, that's a bit harsh. Just because someone is in the vicinity of a crossing does not mean they want to cross it. The OP saw the kid, made a judgement based on the kid's demeanour and concluded he had no intention to cross. OP is familair with the raod and wasn't speeding. Police are taking the piss IMHO.

It's a bit weird that the kid didn't cross even after the OP and friend had driven on, though.

Part of the crossing-the-road lessons for kids should incorporate a rule that says don't dither around by pedestrian crossings. That's just dangerous.

Sounds like the OP and friend exercised caution before proceeding rather than just barreling through like some of the other drivers I have witnessed over my time here.

Are you saying that police are employing children to entrap criminals? I'm pretty sure, if nothing, child labor laws would frown on that.
Can you imagine the liability if the kid started, well, being a kid and got hit by a car 'while on police stooge duty'?

Perhaps I (somehow) have it wrong but surely someone (anyone!) standing at a crossing is indication enough of their desire to cross that you would be "required" to stop?

I've seen elsewhere on the forum that children are supposed to wait at the crossing, not making any gestures (as they could be interpreted many different ways) and wait for the cars to stop before beginning across.

Perhaps the youngin in question WAS placed there purposefully by the police but drivers were not "tricked" in any way... if someone is at the crossing, you are to stop.


It's no different than police waiting just past a speed change to catch folks who don't slow down.

I think such efforts are probably going to be increasingly prevalent as it gets closer to Easter (my thinking being that it's likely that the kids will have some break from school then) and again as it comes toward summer break. The idea is that drivers hopefully become more aware of children at crossings, the coppers helping to establish some new habit of watchfulness on the parts of the drivers perhaps.

__________________
The Joys of Opticianry

We have an old lady living near us that stands at the pedestrian crossing for absolutely ages waiting to cross. The cars stop for her but she just gets agitated and waits and waits to the point where the cars end up driving on.

I asked her once, when I was crossing with my son, if she wanted any help but she just got even more agitated and started scaring my son so we left her to it. She may not be "all there with her cough-drops" but it's a bit of a hazard for drivers, too.

That was the 30km/h zone. Pedestrians have priority and the driver should assume the worst - that the kid will try to cross. Not a big problem to stop while driving 30km/h. Wave to the kid to cross - if he declines then go.

It's obvious to me that the kids was selling drugs..

maybe it's because im mexican.

"we both saw an 8-10 year old kid standing on the opposite side of the street next to the crossing"

Thus the driver has to stop... Drivers should train themselves not to question this, as it will lead to hesitation and mistakes. A trained driver will alway stop.

There is no excuse for not stopping. Cars have to stop. There is no argument to allow interpretation. The kid was at the crossing, not just n the vicinity. See someone at a crossing ? Stop.

I've actually never seen the holding out arm thing unless like a lollipop lady when there is a group of kids to cross the road but in the case of young (8 for example) children I would stop and to see if they want to cross for safety. They could be loitering or they could be just distracted like any normal eight year olds and forget to behave with concentrated effort for the task in hand...
A case of if in doubt, stop.

Police (or the relevant authorities), both here and in the UK, send minors into shops to buy alcohol and cigarettes (plus knives, motorcycles and glue in the UK).




Beware stopping for children at the side of the road. They may be bait for an underage prostitution sting.

I have stopped for many false crossers from children fooling to groups of ladies having a natter on the edge of the crossing. It can be frustrating but then again I haven't run anyone over so .......

Motorcycles?

The UK has an age limit for buying motorcycles?

Tom

Thanks for this Paddy. This is exactly the feeling we are left with after this experience.