4 ms·

There's no competition here, the pedestrian has the right of way. Just start actually enforcing it. Use those red light cameras and send a ticket to anyone who

by c22 3y ago

There's no competition here, the pedestrian has the right of way. Just start actually enforcing it. Use those red light cameras and send a ticket to anyone who cuts off a pedestrian or fails to come to a complete stop before turning.

eyelidlessness 3y ago
Um. I think you’ve misunderstood my point. By the time any ticket is issued, the driver has already either hit a pedestrian or used the vehicle’s superior weight and velocity to threaten same (“won” the “competition”). Sure, they’re breaking the rule which already exists, but it’s far less likely to happen if both vehicles and pedestrians aren’t expected to share the same space in the same traffic phase.
- c22 3y ago
  No, you've misunderstood my point. If you enforce the laws then people are more incentivized to follow them, and in this case more people following the law would likely reduce the number of car-pedestrian collisions. Nobody really wants to hit a pedestrian, if they slow down and pay attention most people will avoid it. If you don't enforce the laws then making them more comprehensive is unlikely to fix anything.
  - eyelidlessness 3y ago
    You are still misunderstanding my point. A driver doesn’t have to want to hit a pedestrian for right on red to be dangerous. They just have to want to move their dangerous vehicle through an intersection in a dangerous way (ie when pedestrians may also be entering it). A want which right-on-red inherently promotes. It’s not like traffic cops are just watching drivers run rights-on-red. It’s not like red light cameras aren’t in use, and tickets aren’t being issued for violators that get caught, no matter how they enter or exit an intersection on red. The law isn’t unenforced. The law, where it exists, is inherently dangerous. And it incentivizes dangerous behavior that makes being a pedestrian disproportionately less safe than being a driver. A ticket is far less risk to a driver than getting hit is to a pedestrian. There is no good reason to continue to allow an inherently dangerous traffic maneuver, full stop.
    - c22 3y ago
      Do the cameras ticket you for rolling right on red? Because I've never heard of it and I see people doing this all the time. I've definitely seen it happen in the presence of cops who did nothing.
      - eyelidlessness 3y ago
        The cameras don’t ticket anyone for anything, they just take photos. I don’t know what determines whether a ticket is issued for any red light photo. I’ve seen cops ignore all manner of traffic violations, yes including running a right on red. I’ve also seen it enforced, and know people who’ve been on the enforcement end. If you’re moving the goal posts to “enforcement must be total before stricter laws”, you’ve basically eliminated the basis for any traffic law besides vehicular manslaughter. Which is perhaps a logically consistent position, albeit one I can’t take seriously. Do you have any interest in engaging the actual point I’m making? Which, again, is that right on red is inherently dangerous and unnecessary. Here, I’ll even throw your preoccupation with enforcement a bone: prohibition of right on red is significantly more enforceable in the first place. To the earlier point about red light cameras, I imagine photographic evidence of a right-on-red violation is among the more worthless bases for automated enforcement. For actual traffic cops on duty, a no-stop violation is likely much easier to miss than a prohibition of the maneuver altogether. And I’ll ask you this: what is your actual motivation here? Are you focused on enforcement of existing law on some principle? Or just a blanket reluctance to expansion of law in general? Do you specifically prefer allowing right on red, for any particular reason? Something else I haven’t considered?

by c22 3y ago

eyelidlessness 3y ago

Um. I think you’ve misunderstood my point. By the time any ticket is issued, the driver has already either hit a pedestrian or used the vehicle’s superior weight and velocity to threaten same (“won” the “competition”). Sure, they’re breaking the rule which already exists, but it’s far less likely to happen if both vehicles and pedestrians aren’t expected to share the same space in the same traffic phase.

c22 3y ago
No, you've misunderstood my point. If you enforce the laws then people are more incentivized to follow them, and in this case more people following the law would likely reduce the number of car-pedestrian collisions. Nobody really wants to hit a pedestrian, if they slow down and pay attention most people will avoid it. If you don't enforce the laws then making them more comprehensive is unlikely to fix anything.
- eyelidlessness 3y ago
  You are still misunderstanding my point. A driver doesn’t have to want to hit a pedestrian for right on red to be dangerous. They just have to want to move their dangerous vehicle through an intersection in a dangerous way (ie when pedestrians may also be entering it). A want which right-on-red inherently promotes. It’s not like traffic cops are just watching drivers run rights-on-red. It’s not like red light cameras aren’t in use, and tickets aren’t being issued for violators that get caught, no matter how they enter or exit an intersection on red. The law isn’t unenforced. The law, where it exists, is inherently dangerous. And it incentivizes dangerous behavior that makes being a pedestrian disproportionately less safe than being a driver. A ticket is far less risk to a driver than getting hit is to a pedestrian. There is no good reason to continue to allow an inherently dangerous traffic maneuver, full stop.
  - c22 3y ago
    Do the cameras ticket you for rolling right on red? Because I've never heard of it and I see people doing this all the time. I've definitely seen it happen in the presence of cops who did nothing.
    - eyelidlessness 3y ago
      The cameras don’t ticket anyone for anything, they just take photos. I don’t know what determines whether a ticket is issued for any red light photo. I’ve seen cops ignore all manner of traffic violations, yes including running a right on red. I’ve also seen it enforced, and know people who’ve been on the enforcement end. If you’re moving the goal posts to “enforcement must be total before stricter laws”, you’ve basically eliminated the basis for any traffic law besides vehicular manslaughter. Which is perhaps a logically consistent position, albeit one I can’t take seriously. Do you have any interest in engaging the actual point I’m making? Which, again, is that right on red is inherently dangerous and unnecessary. Here, I’ll even throw your preoccupation with enforcement a bone: prohibition of right on red is significantly more enforceable in the first place. To the earlier point about red light cameras, I imagine photographic evidence of a right-on-red violation is among the more worthless bases for automated enforcement. For actual traffic cops on duty, a no-stop violation is likely much easier to miss than a prohibition of the maneuver altogether. And I’ll ask you this: what is your actual motivation here? Are you focused on enforcement of existing law on some principle? Or just a blanket reluctance to expansion of law in general? Do you specifically prefer allowing right on red, for any particular reason? Something else I haven’t considered?