I strongly disagree with Dante Ramos’s column “For jaywalking, even a $1 fine is too high’’ (Ideas, Feb. 21). It is crucial that there be sensible enforcement of jaywalking rules — that is, policing of infractions that are potentially hazardous, not those that happen when “the coast is clear.’’ This is not about “emotionally satisfying’’ drivers who’ve been “delayed by a jaywalker,’’ but about deterring dangerous pedestrian behavior and preventing tragedy. It’s also about protecting drivers, who shoulder the burden of proof in the event of a traumatic pedestrian–vehicle collision.

Several years ago, as I drove lawfully through a nearby town, two boys leapt out of the stopped traffic in the opposite lane and into the path of my vehicle. I realized, terrified, that there was no way I could avoid a collision. Mercifully, only one boy was hit.

When the police arrived, the area became a crime scene, with me and my minivan the suspects. Physical evidence alone might have proved my innocence, but fortunately, witnesses spoke on my behalf. A seeming eternity passed before I was informed that charges would not be pressed, and I was allowed to leave. However, the boy had left in an ambulance, and I had no peace until the next morning, when I learned that his only injury was a facial abrasion.

In that case, jaywalking provisions did not apply. However, I learned how horribly easy it is to have such an accident while lawfully operating a vehicle. I know that any law that discourages irresponsible pedestrian movement is essential and could save lives.

Kate Feininger

Acton