Even if they do cross, they have the right of way. Outside of maybe the autobahn, you should never be driving a car fast enough to where you cannot see a pedestrian in time to stop for them. It's pretty unlikely that the pedestrian is ever found at fault for an accident in Germany.
No, that’s entirely not true. See http://www.iww.de/va/archiv/unfallschadensregulierung-der-fu... for a summary in German with citations of relevant cases. It’s unlikely that the pedestrian is found to be entirely at fault, though. Tables with with cases and the resulting distribution are at the end.
What is the alternative? That vehicles have no obligation to stop when a pedestrian is in the road?
I think your reasoning belongs with whatever lies behind the need for the "State law: Yield to Pedestrians in Crosswalk" signs[1] which I find confusing in the USA. In which states am I not supposed to yield?
That when you disobey an explicit traffic signal, you’re responsible for your own fate?
Everyone has a duty to try and prevent an accident if possible, but you do generally get to trust that a green signal means no pedestrians are going to dart out.
Giving a green light when pedestrians actually have right of way is incredibly dangerous. Why not a 4-way stop or uncontrolled to avoid a false sense of security?
Where I live the signals are compulsory for drivers and advisory for pedestrians. It is not unreasonable for the regulation to apply only to the people who choose to create the risk.
