3 ms·

> frustrating and illogical! That’s certainly a matter of opinion (and as a German currently living in the UK I disagree): Having separate green light for pede

by klmr 7y ago

> frustrating and illogical! That’s certainly a matter of opinion (and as a German currently living in the UK I disagree): Having separate green light for pedestrians means that the average waiting time is much longer (both for cars and pedestrians) and, further, green light times are often kept much shorter. Having simultaneous green light for parallel car and pedestrian traffic does mean you have to pay more attention, and could theoretically increase the risk of accident (but I’m not convinced that this is the case in practice — in my experience it definitely isn’t!). But on the other hand it means that my time waiting at traffic lights is greatly reduced on average. I thus find the UK system a lot more frustrating. I actually see the point of the UK system and think it’s entirely defensible. But both systems have their pros and cons.

alistairSH 7y ago
I'm in the US, which also allows cars and peds to share a "green" in the same direction. I regularly have cars nearly run me over when they turn left/right while I'm in the crosswalk with a valid crossing signal. The problem, in the US, is that drivers don't give a shit about anybody but themselves. They are completely self-centered. If there were penalties for hitting pedestrians or cyclists, this might change. I presume Germany has stricter enforcement of rules with regard to vehicle/ped/cycle interaction. In the US, there is almost none. Hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is almost always deemed an accident, with no fault assigned (or, if fault is assigned, a $200 fine is the result, not loss of driving privilege).
- kqr 7y ago
  > Hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is almost always deemed an accident, with no fault assigned (or, if fault is assigned, a $200 fine is the result, not loss of driving privilege). This is common also in Sweden, but parallel green still generally works well. So enforcement cannot be the only explanation.
  - alistairSH 7y ago
    Two other things come to mind... - culturally, people in the US just don't walk for transport (outside NYC and a few other places). So, when they get in cars, they don't think to look for pedestrians or cyclists. - the roads are more car-centric than European cities and suburbs. Crossings are poorly timed, poorly lighted, too wide, in the wrong places, etc.

by klmr 7y ago

alistairSH 7y ago

I'm in the US, which also allows cars and peds to share a "green" in the same direction. I regularly have cars nearly run me over when they turn left/right while I'm in the crosswalk with a valid crossing signal. The problem, in the US, is that drivers don't give a shit about anybody but themselves. They are completely self-centered. If there were penalties for hitting pedestrians or cyclists, this might change. I presume Germany has stricter enforcement of rules with regard to vehicle/ped/cycle interaction. In the US, there is almost none. Hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is almost always deemed an accident, with no fault assigned (or, if fault is assigned, a $200 fine is the result, not loss of driving privilege).

kqr 7y ago
> Hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is almost always deemed an accident, with no fault assigned (or, if fault is assigned, a $200 fine is the result, not loss of driving privilege). This is common also in Sweden, but parallel green still generally works well. So enforcement cannot be the only explanation.
- alistairSH 7y ago
  Two other things come to mind... - culturally, people in the US just don't walk for transport (outside NYC and a few other places). So, when they get in cars, they don't think to look for pedestrians or cyclists. - the roads are more car-centric than European cities and suburbs. Crossings are poorly timed, poorly lighted, too wide, in the wrong places, etc.