160
It’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’
(www.fastcompany.com)
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 30 Dec 2023
160 points (66.7% liked)
Fuck Cars
9664 readers
28 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm pointing out that the accident data doesnt corelate with the implementation of the rules. There being a change now indicates something else is at play. Then I gave my opinion of what could cause it based on real world experiences.
There are real-world benefits to right on red and it can be done safely.
Its true "Because that's how we've always done it" is not a strong argument of its self, but let me submit: changing the rules makes everybody student drivers again.
Now that puts a shiver down my spine.
It's not a change "now", it was when the rule was implemented. From the article I'm sure you read before posting:
And this is the study linked in that paragraph.
Right on red does work, that's why UPS and other delivery companies prioritize it. They save 10's of thousands of cars worth of gas a year. Not only that, but any meaningful study would include congestion statistics of additional right-turning cars.
Don't know about other cities, but the bike issue wouldn't apply since they wouldn't cross paths. Well... I guess now they do actually post-construction. Guess that adds to the cognitive load the author talked about.
All in all, I'm not a journalist, and I can only point out results of these measures as I've witnessed. What I have experienced is much more congestion due to cars unable to leave the main flow of traffic. I can not enphesize it enough; It's significant
Just make eye contact peeps. Seriously. Problem solved.
"Saving the gas is worth hitting a few of those pesky cyclists or pedestrians anyway. Just a cost of effeciency in the system" -your selfish car brained argument in a nutshell.
I know you are trying to make this big, meaningful statement, but no, it doesn't. At all. Not even close. This is a bad statement and you shouldn't use it, it makes zero sense
I hear you, but im going to stand by my statement.
I see the confusion on the roads; drivers with the right of way second guessing themselves on the rules of the road. Can I turn? In a neighboring city: looks wide enough and the line is dashed. Great! But in my city, no because there is a cement curb jutting out. Oops!
This is dangerous in the same way as a teen learning to drive. Its not standardized rules anymore, but city-centric. I have decades of experience to rely on and never caused an injury. knock on wood
But there have been some changes that had me confused especially in cities I don't frequent. For example, a crosswalk that had horizontal flashing OR solid lights indicating different actions. The first time I encountered one one of those, it took longer to read and process the conditional argument then I had time before the situation was upon me. I lucked out, totally admit that, but it was a terrible, terrible design for out-of-towners learning on the road. I can not rely in my experience as I have in the past.
Our city downtown is a Mario cart track of green and white. There are hazards like curbs jutting out, bus only lanes, light rail in lanes. It is utter chaos. Drivers reach maximum cognitive saturation quicker. It is overwhelming at times; I get overwhelmed. It is simply not possible to read all the warnings and rules in real time. Its why we memorize them beforehand and take a test.
Rules for pedestrians and bicyclists keep changing. Are they going to run that stop sign? Who knows. At least they are on the right side of the road this time. Does that pedestrian between parked cars know they can't cross with me approaching? Is that jogger with airpods going to ignore traffic control signs?
I guess we're just a city that's fed up. We all want our way and more rules are how we impose our will and wants on others. Some of us want predictable, some embrase the chaos.
Meeeh, going to be honest, it's extremely late and I'm super exhausted. When the rules change frequently to mean what's popular, they stop mattering when its important.
Example A: San Jose
Q. E. D.
Peace out, it's been fun. :)
Figuring out you can’t do one unsafe action isn’t the same as having to learn to drive all over. It’s restrictive, not like having to all of sudden learn to do right on reds. The only problem I see, besides people sometimes having to wait when there is no traffic, is people behind the person front in line freaking out because they don’t understand it’s been banned. Eventually everyone would learn though.