4 ms·

Right turns are really dangerous for pedestrians. A lot of localities started banning right-on-red because cars look left only.

tbrownaw 1y ago
There's an intersection here where the crosswalk button lights up a "no right turn" light hanging next to the usual stoplights.
- mitthrowaway2 1y ago
  That's brilliant. I just wish the crosswalk button could pop up some bollards too.
karma_fountain 1y ago
Cars don't look at all.
- teytra 1y ago
  Quite a few modern cars do. Drivers often don't, so it might be an improvement.
- softwaredoug 1y ago
  I've done my fair share of screaming "HEY!!!" as they pull out
- LeifCarrotson 1y ago
  Cars (or more precisely, drivers in cars - that false equivalence is part of the problem) look for other cars. They do not look for pedestrians, cyclists, or motorcycles, they assume that if there's not another 5000 lbs shiny steel box in the lane that they're clear to go. Last weekend after my son's elementary school soccer game, someone wasn't interested in trying to join the line of cars exiting the parking lot, and tried to pull forward over a grass patch that separated the parking area from the driveway by the field. Except there was a 2000 lbs boulder, 3' tall, just in front of their car... which they entirely forgot about after walking past it. Their head was on a swivel looking for a gap in the line of cars on the driveway, but not for anything else. They destroyed their bumper, probably damaged their radiator or suspension, and got the left front tire partially up on the rock. I was just glad it wasn't one of the multitude of 3' tall kids at the game.
potato3732842 1y ago
The problem is that even if they look back and fourth and know you're there the "go" condition (no incoming cross traffic) is the same for both parties so it's a ready made "two idiots trying to pass each other in the hallway" situation. I think it speaks volumes that the discussion is anchored around whether cars look or not despite the fact that the underlying algorithm will produce conflicts even if they do.
- ajuc 1y ago
  The algorithm (if followed) does not produce collisions. Pedestrians have the priority, and in many countries (inlcuding Poland where I live) cars have to stop even if nobody's on the pedestrian crossing yet - it's enough that pedestrians are approaching the crossing. This has changed in the last 10 years in Poland, and there have been numerous angry debates. It was introduced anyway, and the safety improved. It's only a problem if we let drivers get away with making it a problem. The inherent asymmetry in the driver-pedestrian relationship must be taken into account by the law and road design.
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    >The algorithm (if followed) does not produce collisions. Pedestrians have the priority, Yes, in magical textbook land sure. In reality there are signaled crosswalks and most pedestrians abide by them so it's not clear if any given pedestrian wants to cross at that time and the pedestrian is also looking for traffic coming from the right if they're crossing against the signal (perfectly legal, but ill advised in the face of social norms) it's a recipe for confusion. Multiply by a nation of hundreds of millions and you get a lot of near misses and accidents. >It's only a problem if we let drivers get away with making it a problem. The inherent asymmetry in the driver-pedestrian relationship must be taken into account by the law and road design. I propose a 3 step solution to this "problem": 1)ignore anyone who talks like that from any side of the issue because they're probably gonna make it worse and not better and piss everyone off in the process and make the problem harder to solve. 2) Slap up "no right on red" signs and adjust signals accordingly 3) Measure results and address gaps.

tbrownaw 1y ago

There's an intersection here where the crosswalk button lights up a "no right turn" light hanging next to the usual stoplights.

mitthrowaway2 1y ago
That's brilliant. I just wish the crosswalk button could pop up some bollards too.

karma_fountain 1y ago

Cars don't look at all.

teytra 1y ago
Quite a few modern cars do. Drivers often don't, so it might be an improvement.
softwaredoug 1y ago
I've done my fair share of screaming "HEY!!!" as they pull out
LeifCarrotson 1y ago
Cars (or more precisely, drivers in cars - that false equivalence is part of the problem) look for other cars. They do not look for pedestrians, cyclists, or motorcycles, they assume that if there's not another 5000 lbs shiny steel box in the lane that they're clear to go. Last weekend after my son's elementary school soccer game, someone wasn't interested in trying to join the line of cars exiting the parking lot, and tried to pull forward over a grass patch that separated the parking area from the driveway by the field. Except there was a 2000 lbs boulder, 3' tall, just in front of their car... which they entirely forgot about after walking past it. Their head was on a swivel looking for a gap in the line of cars on the driveway, but not for anything else. They destroyed their bumper, probably damaged their radiator or suspension, and got the left front tire partially up on the rock. I was just glad it wasn't one of the multitude of 3' tall kids at the game.

potato3732842 1y ago

The problem is that even if they look back and fourth and know you're there the "go" condition (no incoming cross traffic) is the same for both parties so it's a ready made "two idiots trying to pass each other in the hallway" situation. I think it speaks volumes that the discussion is anchored around whether cars look or not despite the fact that the underlying algorithm will produce conflicts even if they do.

ajuc 1y ago
The algorithm (if followed) does not produce collisions. Pedestrians have the priority, and in many countries (inlcuding Poland where I live) cars have to stop even if nobody's on the pedestrian crossing yet - it's enough that pedestrians are approaching the crossing. This has changed in the last 10 years in Poland, and there have been numerous angry debates. It was introduced anyway, and the safety improved. It's only a problem if we let drivers get away with making it a problem. The inherent asymmetry in the driver-pedestrian relationship must be taken into account by the law and road design.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  >The algorithm (if followed) does not produce collisions. Pedestrians have the priority, Yes, in magical textbook land sure. In reality there are signaled crosswalks and most pedestrians abide by them so it's not clear if any given pedestrian wants to cross at that time and the pedestrian is also looking for traffic coming from the right if they're crossing against the signal (perfectly legal, but ill advised in the face of social norms) it's a recipe for confusion. Multiply by a nation of hundreds of millions and you get a lot of near misses and accidents. >It's only a problem if we let drivers get away with making it a problem. The inherent asymmetry in the driver-pedestrian relationship must be taken into account by the law and road design. I propose a 3 step solution to this "problem": 1)ignore anyone who talks like that from any side of the issue because they're probably gonna make it worse and not better and piss everyone off in the process and make the problem harder to solve. 2) Slap up "no right on red" signs and adjust signals accordingly 3) Measure results and address gaps.