General > General Technical Chat
some USA states replaces trafic lights with flags
Halcyon:
--- Quote from: Someone on September 16, 2022, 09:14:56 am ---You have ingrained in you what is/was enforced and "normalised" not what the law actually is. You talk about "safe to proceed" when the point I am discussing is not just is it safe to enter, but whether the driver can exit the intersection. Which is its own standalone rule and consistent with the other road rules. There is no requirement to enter an intersection, and none that overrides the law obliging people to not enter an intersection they cannot exit.
--- End quote ---
I have ingrained in me the correct way of driving defensively. Not interpreting the rules how I see fit. I was taught from a very young age how to read, understand and apply the road rules. Those skills were only further enhanced by paying for additional driver training when I was younger, plus my experience within the emergency services (not to mention, I was also a police driver trainer). I'm not pretending to be the worlds best driver and like everyone else, I have made mistakes before, but driving according to the rules is the reason that I've never been involved in an at-fault collision in 20+ years of driving.
Crashes happen when the law isn't followed and people decide to do their own thing or take risks which backfire.
As for "no requirement to enter an intersection", I literally just provided you with legislation that says that's just what you do (in normal circumstances). That's why I emphasised the word must, it wasn't optional. Of course safety overrides everything you do as a driver (which is why legislation is written the way it is), but 99.9% of the time when you're driving on a road and nothing unusual it's going on, it's safe to follow the rules to the letter.
Good driving isn't just about understanding and following the law, but also about being predictable as a driver. Take an intersection controlled by traffic lights for example, if someone is waiting to turn and is given a green signal and doesn't move forward into the intersection, to me, my spidey senses go off and I automatically assume the person in front of me is inexperienced, inattentive, or unpredictable, because that behaviour in that particular circumstance is abnormal.
--- Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on September 16, 2022, 09:38:50 am ---In a previous century, I failed a driving test for not moving into the intersection under the green but not green right arrow situation.
--- End quote ---
Yep, because, as we've discussed, moving into the intersection was the correct thing to do, even then.
Someone:
--- Quote from: Halcyon on September 17, 2022, 02:51:23 am ---I was taught from a very young age how to read, understand and apply the road rules. Those skills were only further enhanced by paying for additional driver training when I was younger, plus my experience within the emergency services (not to mention, I was also a police driver trainer).
--- End quote ---
Were taught, under the prevailing rules and standards of the past. But it appears your teaching of how to read and understand is faulty.
--- Quote from: Halcyon on September 17, 2022, 02:51:23 am ---As for "no requirement to enter an intersection", I literally just provided you with legislation that says that's just what you do (in normal circumstances). That's why I emphasised the word must, it wasn't optional.
--- End quote ---
Which you have completely misinterpreted. Lets run it again as a worked example of language:
--- Quote ---32 Starting a right turn from a multi-lane road
(1) A driver turning right at an intersection from a multi-lane road must approach and enter the intersection from within the right lane unless--
--- End quote ---
(A driver) (turning right) at an (intersection (from a multi-lane road)) must (approach and enter the intersection) from (within the right lane) unless--
rearranging that to a more natural phrasing:
Drivers must remain within the right lane on approach and entering an intersection if they are turning right at an intersection with multiple lanes, unless--
the must is not on the action of entering, it is in the situations of both approach and entering that a driver must remain within the right lane
Your comprehension is woeful, but you come back with more bluster and no actual progress. None of this is inconsistent with rule 128 that drivers must not enter an intersection from which they cannot leave (because for instance there are cars or pedestrians in the way blocking the exit)
But hey do link back out to the legislation just to throw shade as if these direct quotes of the road rules arent verbatim... ;)
--- Quote from: Halcyon on September 16, 2022, 07:51:26 am ---Linked for your information: https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/sl-2014-0758#sec.61
--- End quote ---
When you are the one taking partial quotes out of context.
Someone:
--- Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on September 16, 2022, 09:38:50 am ---In a previous century, I failed a driving test for not moving into the intersection under the green but not green right arrow situation.
--- End quote ---
Absolutely, what used to be the priority (moving into the intersection) has changed (not blocking the intersection).
As an example the current NSW driving test has the specific example:
--- Quote ---You will fail if you unreasonably obstruct other vehicles or pedestrians during the test. This includes if you:
enter an intersection without enough space on the other side due to traffic, blocking the intersection as a result
--- End quote ---
hard for teachers/examiners to reliably create that situation!
While failure to enter an intersection is still assessed but downplayed (not explicitly listed as a standalone rule as above) and left with more judgement for the examiner:
--- Quote ---During the test you will be expected to demonstrate smooth, flowing decision making. If you reject safe gaps or unduly stop at intersections when it is clearly safe to proceed, you may fail.
--- End quote ---
Jester:
We live in Canada and spent too long in a large city (Toronto, 3 million people).
Toronto
Walking even on side streets was often hazardous because there are way too many distracted drivers racing home at 7pm, hungry and probably still thinking about work and their gazillion dollar mortgage as well as all the problems big city life brings with it. Common for a car to pass within a foot of you at 50km/hr on a side street when the road is otherwise empty.
We also have a summer place near a small tourist town in the Laurentians (hilly countryside in Quebec)
St. Jovite
Complete opposite of Toronto and a complete pleasure to walk or drive. When driving and trying to enter a road from say a parking lot, 90% of the time the cars going down the road will yield to you with a little smiling wave, in Toronto they would speed up and shift over to make sure you would not even think about entering.
Walking is similar, they have "crosswalks" but "J-walking" is super common, you make eye contact with the driver, they slow down to give you the 5 seconds it takes to pass in front, a little smile or nod and traffic resumes without skipping a beat.
The dichotomy when transitioning between the two environments surprises me even after 25 years.
Monkeh:
--- Quote from: Jester on September 17, 2022, 02:26:34 pm ---Walking is similar, they have "crosswalks" but "J-walking" is super common, you make eye contact with the driver, they slow down to give you the 5 seconds it takes to pass in front, a little smile or nod and traffic resumes without skipping a beat.
--- End quote ---
Wait wait wait, you mean it's possible for people to cross the road without flashing lights, painted crossings, and ten minutes of advance warning to drivers? And that it doesn't actually impact the drivers getting where they're going? Don't tell james_s or Rick Law, you might give them an aneurysm.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version