RIP, Steve. Only the good die young.

Man, woman, child or wheelchair. 'Cause it's Ok as long as you have a green light to run over anything in your path with your rolling weatherproof sofa.

Hey Garth, he was not "run down," he was hit accidentally.  "Run down" implies that it was intentional.

A southbound Acura struck him, killing him instantly.
Speeding maybe? Breathalyzer?
 
Pulled over a block away and called 911.
To finish his txt msg? Any skid marks?
 
There should be a federal (USMC, NTSB) investigation to find out what happened and why to this brave service personnel on the Joe DiMaggio Highway, an "urban boulevard" built with federal and state funds.

Automotive violence. And the beat goes on.
So very sad.

Or, jaywalking.

Geez, so exactly what happens when you miss your curfew? Any navy guys here?

missing curfew could result in being confined to the ship during times when he's allowed leave.

Of course had the poor guy been killed in Afghanistan, it's entirely likely we would never know his name. Somehow, dying needlessly in a stupid fucking pointless war is not as juicy a story as dying needlessly in an unfortunate accident.

very true...

a totally senseless death.  the cops crack down on bicyclists, who, as far as the DOT statistics are concerned, have killed *no one* in nyc.

but god forbid we crack down on automobiles.  god forbid we treat a soldier's death by civilian automobile as anything other than an unavoidable tragedy.  

there is no reason why a marine, who fought for our country and who is currently celebrating in nyc, shouldn't be able to get drunk and safely get back to his ship without being run over by someone.  THAT is business as usual?  come on!  

this death could have been avoided.  most automobile deaths can be avoided.  here's how:

1. more pedestrian plazas
2. more pedestrian bridges over the west side highway
3. more money for mass transit
4. more traffic calming (speed bumps, traffic lights, etc.)
5. more bike lanes
6. more aggressive policing of automobile traffic

things like this will make the death of people in our streets far less common.  

"crack down on automobiles" that were on the, eh, highway?  How about we 'crack down on pedstrians crossing busy highways'?

hey there talking farm animal.

one way to "crack down on automobiles" is to strictly enforce speed limits.  especially when there are navy ships docked there and cops can be certain that drunk sailors will be tottering around there.

that is a small law enforcement sacrifice our men and women in uniform might deserve.

crossing a surface street in manhattan should NOT be an automatic death sentence.  especially since this area of manhattan is highly trafficked by pedestrians.  and especially since there are Navy ships docked there.  

but hey, you are probably too lazy, too stupid or just too much of a jerk to understand this sort of reasoning.  stick to the fart noised trash that bubbles from your pie hole and that your mommy is nice enough to call "words."

Not so fast, transplant (i'll assume that if you can call names, i can, too).  I argue for a living, professionally even, so you're not off the hook just yet.
I see, so rather than attempt to be civil, you resort to name-calling and childish meme'ing.
at last check, crossing a street in manhattan is NOT an 'automatic death sentence'; the vast, vast majority of us do it several times a day, some even dozens and without any problem.
You assume three things, namely that I’m condoning the diminished or lack of a police presence there and more importantly that the driver was even doing anything wrong, and that he was speeding, as you have no proof of the last two.  What would a police presence have done to save a potentially drunk young person from jaywalking or not across a busy highway to have met an unfortunate scenario that was a car driving unobstructed down a major highway?  Nothing. 

oh twat faced arguer.

you prolly wont look at this. alas, i dont check gothamist all the time.  but tonight i had to be home. couldn't resist responding to someone who clearly thinks he's such a brilliant mind. i wish to learn something from such a genius!

but wait maybe i've erred? maybe you are as dumb as the lint i find on my dog's ass**le?

here's the deal:

1.  i described you as i did not as a form of ad homniem argument (look it up) but because you are as dumb as a farm animal and what you say makes no sense.  i just described what i saw.

2.  why do i do this?  you challenged the basic premise of my argument, namely that more aggressive enforcement diminishes the probability of death due to human-car collision.

3.  strong, strong evidence suggests that more aggressive enforcement of speed limits generates lower speeds of traffic.  in particular if the speed limit is 30 mph, and the cops enforce that, then people are much less likely to drive 50 mph

4. strong, strong evidence suggests that a healthy marine hit by a car traveling at 30 mph is much more likely to survive than a marine hit by a car traveling at 50 mph

5. so, strong enforcement would have increased the probability of the marine's survival.

6. even if the marine had died, strong enforcement would slow down drivers.  the slower people drive, the fewer fatalities.

7.  so strong enforcement generates safer streets.

8.  regardless, the point about the death sentence is the following: most people treat some person jaywalking as a fair excuse for that person being killed by car.  i say: no way.  jaywalking, most of the time, should not make excuse that person's death.  it might excuse injury, but not death.

9.  but why think you follow this?  you are clearly a low watt bulb.  a small minded fellow who, despite your claim to be able to argue, cannot discern the contours of an argument at all.  

10,  probably, you are a lawyer.  most lawyers think they are smart.  i have had the dubious privilege of teaching lawyers.  most of whom: not that smart.  smarmy!  not bright, though.

11.  smarmy gets you far!

12. you, though, are clearly a burping twat of a person.  maybe you'll get run over soon!  i'll make this same argument, then, even as you curse me from the heavens.

Aw, back to name calling (aka your cute little defense mode fetal position) when you feel your argument being shred to pieces? how cute!

1. ad hominem, there i fixed it!10. correct, except I didn't go to Tuoro, NYLS, or Yeshiva lames.  So you'll have to do a lot better.  Also, you more likely taught a LSAT prep and NOT law students (and certainly not ones who are at a white shoe), and more than likely not lawyers after graduating, unless it was to teach them how to act when they make weak arguments.  12. sure, just wish death upon those who tear up your argument and who don't agree with you.  how mature.

you probably find it difficult to process critical reasoning, logic, and euclidean proofs (as from your attempt to set up even a logic proof failed miserably), so there will be no more reply from me to you, junior.

you must have serious mental issues that you need to use this sad event as a platform for your whining about bike enforcement

Keeping in mind that the grieving family might very well be reading this, sometimes the best thing to do is to keep your negative and insensitive thoughts about the deceased to yourself.  This is one of those times. 

For chrissakes, have some decency and compassion.

You must have serious reading issues. 

1. more pedestrian plazas
2. more pedestrian bridges over the west side highway
4. more traffic calming (speed bumps, traffic lights, etc.)
6. more aggressive policing of automobile traffic

FYI:

Bike lanes act as traffic calming measures.

God forbid we use a senseless death as motivation to try to prevent future ones.

Sorry buddy, no amount of car enforcement, pedestrian dream plazas and any other whiney BS would have prevented this marine from running out into the highway against the light and outside of a pedestrian crosswalk and having a high chance of being struck. Sometimes pedestrians are at fault as shocking as it may seem