133
Why are Stop Lines (in the US, at least) often set too far back to see any crossing traffic?
(sub.wetshaving.social)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
133 points (95.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43971 readers
1148 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
This is a carbrained perspective. If an intersection is designed for cars to the exclusion of other uses, then others are unlikely to use it, which perpetuates car dependency. Even if all cars were electrified, car dependency would still be a massive problem in the US.
I guess my thought process is if they placed the line a tad further forward where you can see crossing traffic, including pedestrians, more people would actually stop at the designated spot. The way I see it most often now is people ignore the line completely (boy who cried wolf effect maybe), further endangering pedestrians.
Regulatory measures shouldn't be relaxed because people aren't following them, they should be enforced better. Of course how to do that in many situations such as this is the question. Other things are similar, like group speeding or smart phone use while driving.
Sometimes relaxing regulatory measures leads to people following them better, as they better match the intent of the regulation rather than being seen as absurd. It also lowers the 'benefit' of deviancy from that regulation.
Sometimes you're right, you regulate more extremely than the intent because people will follow it better, or it makes it easier to enforce.
The point is there's not a one size fits all.
Traffic laws aren't enforced where I am, but I wish they were. People routinely run stop signs.
Same here. When I stop at a stop sign and there is a car behind me, I routinely take bets in my head to see if the next car just goes through it. Most often they do. Running red lights is another...if you are at a red light waiting for it to change to green, always wait a split second before going and also give a glance both ways. Don't assume because the light is good there isn't someone trying to beat the red. Or just going through an obvious red because they're more important than everyone else in their head. I've gone through many a yellow light thinking to myself that I really cut it close, then I notice one or even more people have followed me through the intersection. Boy they get upset too if you actually stop for that yellow.
No, road design should be improved to make it comfortable and reasonable to follow the laws, and uncomfortable to break them. Think raised crosswalks that function as speed bumps at intersections, narrow roads to reduce speeding, that sort of thing.