HB941 would add a new section to Hawaii’s traffic code governing when pedestrians may cross roadways contrary to existing pedestrian-crossing rules. Under the bill, a pedestrian could not be stopped by law enforcement, fined, or otherwise penalized for violating specified crossing provisions unless a reasonably careful pedestrian would know the crossing would likely cause a collision with a moving vehicle or force a vehicle to slow or stop. The protection applies only when the pedestrian is more than 200 feet from a marked crosswalk.
The bill also preserves the general duties of care for both pedestrians and drivers. It states that pedestrians still must use due care for their own safety and the safety of others, and drivers still must exercise due care for pedestrians in the roadway. The measure would take effect upon approval and would not disturb rights, penalties, or proceedings that arose before its effective date.
Impact
HB941 would amend chapter 291C, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by creating a new pedestrian-crossing rule that limits enforcement of certain existing crossing restrictions in sections 291C-33, 291C-71, 291C-72, 291C-73, and 291C-75. In practical terms, it would narrow when pedestrians may be cited or otherwise penalized for crossing outside a crosswalk, while leaving intact the broader duties of care owed by pedestrians and motorists. The bill would affect law enforcement practices, pedestrian conduct, and driver obligations on public roadways statewide.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript, vote history, or recorded opposition, so there is no direct evidence of debate or partisan division in the materials provided. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears safety-oriented and permissive toward pedestrian crossing in limited circumstances, while still emphasizing caution and driver responsibility. The overall framing suggests a policy balance between pedestrian mobility and traffic safety.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the bill’s relaxation of enforcement against pedestrians crossing outside marked crosswalks, which could raise concerns about roadway safety, driver expectations, and police discretion. Supporters would likely emphasize pedestrian access and reduced criminalization of low-risk crossing behavior, especially far from crosswalks. Opponents or safety advocates could argue that the standard is too vague or could increase conflict with vehicles, though the bill attempts to limit that risk by requiring a distance of more than 200 feet from a marked crosswalk and by preserving due-care obligations for both pedestrians and drivers.