Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with your conclusions about safety and revenue generation.
I do not understand how you arrive at your opinion on signage. The line is the sign. It is a thick, white standard stop line. Nothing confusing or misleading that I can see in the photo. By your logic, every stop line should have a sign for "stop here" (and people would still ignore it).
Yes, most people don't seem to know what a stop line is or what it means. That's just ignorance.
The stop line is faded and its on a curve/entry ramp. I don't think its all that clear and, apparently, a lot of other drivers don't either.
^ they could just as easily put more cops on the road and ticket every driver going 1mph over to get what they need. Is that what you'd prefer? I don't think anyone would.
The premise that laws and fines should be enforced in a manner designed to ensure that law enforcement gets the revenue "they need" is the entire problem. Fines should not be about generating revenue or bridging a budget gap. They should be about deterrence. This is the same problem (on a smaller scale) that you see with the enforcement of civil asset forfeiture laws. When you incentivize (or mandate) that law enforcement generate a set amount of revenue, then the police become a tool to monetize behavior at the expense of the community instead of protecting the community at large.
As an aside, I don't think I've ever seen such a cowering, meek poster as you. You seem to be more than willing to just accept whatever is given to you, be it from your employer or the government. Hasn't anyone ever taught you to stand up for yourself?
No, people complain about an obvious money-grab in a manner not designed to increase safety. I would find red-light cameras coupled with longer yellow lights more palatable.
The curve entrance at Old Country Road by Roosevelt Field appears to be a perfect example. Its confusing and the camera seems to be planted there to capitalize on the confusion, not to promote safe driving habits.
The signage should say both "stop here on red" at the line and "right on red after stop" because it is really not clear where you have to stop.
Intuitively, you should be stopping at the end of the curve (e.g., just before entering the intersection), but the camera is set up to take photos of cars passing an arbitrarily painted (and partially faded) line before reaching the intersection. I've never received a red-light ticket, but this offends me.
There are two signs (on same pole) at the white stop strip: 1) "Right Lane Must Turn Right" and 2) "Right On Red After Stop"
I would agree that the white stop strip should be thicker and well painted but the location of the sign post is also indicative of where one should stop (but perhaps not if there were absolutely no white stop strip). I don't see why one would characterize the road markings as "arbitrarily painted".
Also, in the Winter, the painted road markings, in general, may not be visible but that doesn't seem to cause complete confusion to most drivers.
Hi My husband recently got a ticket for legal right on red too. It's on old country road turning into Roosevelt field mall. He drives really cautiously and he can even spot the stop sign behind the trees (which I can't and often just drive through them if it is blocked).
We are confused as the intersection is allowed to turn after stop, which he did a full stop, but we could not recall if it is 3 seconds (the 2 pictures were taken 4, almost 5 seconds apart from each other, though).
I feel we may have some ground to challenge the ticket, but we just do not want to take half day off and go to the traffic court, which we may better off to just pay for the fine. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.
I'm sure "nattino" will look at the video and determine whether or not the stop-and-turn-on-red was done correctly.
I would agree that the white stop strip should be thicker and well painted but the location of the sign post is also indicative of where one should stop (but perhaps not if there were absolutely no white stop strip). I don't see why one would characterize the road markings as "arbitrarily painted".
Also, in the Winter, the painted road markings, in general, may not be visible but that doesn't seem to cause complete confusion to most drivers.
Assuming you can even see the crosswalk (also faded), intuitively, I would think the appropriate place to stop is before the crosswalk, not 7-10 feet before the intersection. My point was not that the existing signage and markings are grossly insufficient such that no one could figure out what to do there. Rather, it was just that they could be much, much more clear as to the appropriate place to stop. The "right lane must turn right" sign is really superfluous but a "stop here on red" sign would be clear and helpful.
White stop lines at crossing intersections obviously indicate where to stop. On an approach ramp such as this, where there is a line many feet before the intersection or crosswalk, it is less clear.
Assuming you can even see the crosswalk (also faded), intuitively, I would think the appropriate place to stop is before the crosswalk, not 7-10 feet before the intersection.
White stop lines at crossing intersections obviously indicate where to stop. On an approach ramp such as this, where there is a line many feet before the intersection or crosswalk, it is less clear.
It looks like we're in agreement on nearly everything.
Where I come from, we tend not to need any white lines or signs to make a right turn on red.
We stop where the road begins to curve at intersections and stay stopped long enough to know if there are any pedestrians or bicyclists approaching the intersection. If so, we let them through. Then we slowly advance forward, far enough for others to clearly see us, stop again, re-check to see if we may safely continue, and then do so.
If the light is green, we slow down to check for pedestrians and bicyclists, give them the right-of-way, and then make our turn. People with white canes and service dogs get the right-of-way no matter what colour the light is.
It looks like we're in agreement on nearly everything.
Where I come from, we tend not to need any white lines or signs to make a right turn on red.
We stop where the road begins to curve at intersections and stay stopped long enough to know if there are any pedestrians or bicyclists approaching the intersection. If so, we let them through. Then we slowly advance forward, far enough for others to clearly see us, stop again, re-check to see if we may safely continue, and then do so.
If the light is green, we slow down to check for pedestrians and bicyclists, give them the right-of-way, and then make our turn. People with white canes and service dogs get the right-of-way no matter what colour the light is.
100% in agreement. The white line is pointless, especially when there is a clearly marked pedestrian crossing.
As an aside, I don't think I've ever seen such a cowering, meek poster as you. You seem to be more than willing to just accept whatever is given to you, be it from your employer or the government. Hasn't anyone ever taught you to stand up for yourself?
Here goes the personal stuff again. What I stand for on these forums, with every post, is objectivity. When someone like you claims the middle class should get theirs because others are getting rich, that's basically all we need to know about your objectivity (and the reason you refuse to respond to who's taking our tax dollars causing this). If you want to talk about "the entire problem", you know where to start. No, don't start at where "the man" shouldn't be doing this to the community. How about the community shouldn't be causing this for the community? The words I've used cover my position pretty clearly.
Standing up for myself? I've done that more than enough times in threads involving your BS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey
The white line is pointless, especially when there is a clearly marked pedestrian crossing.
Wrong, just so wrong. Because pedestrian crossings don't exist everywhere, drivers rely on the white line, which needs to be consistently present.
Why does it not surprise me that you need someone to paint a white line on the ground for you to figure out how and where to stop at a red light?
Really? You're going with that after your whole argument was this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey
There should be a sign next to the line that says "stop here on red" coupled with a "right on red after stop" sign.
Quote:
The signage should say both "stop here on red" at the line and "right on red after stop" because it is really not clear where you have to stop.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
