Comment on California father arrested after repainting crosswalk, adding stop signs near children’s park
IWW4@lemmy.zip 16 hours ago
I don’t have a problem with this.
Random people don’t get to decide where stop signs go and do not go.
How about if someone just decided to remove a stop sign.
How about if someone just decided to remove a stop sign.
Are those 2 situations equivalent at all? I can’t think of a situation where adding a stop sign up would make the intersection more dangerous whereas the removal of one would almost certainly make it more dangerous. In your mind is the only way to regulate this to ban both for some reason?
Traffic control is a massive issue that involves numerous factors beyond “danger”.
So yes you can not have random entities making those decisions, There has to be a single governing body.
I agree, just addressing your hypothetical at the end and how that doesn’t follow logically.
The cops don’t care if the stop sign wasn’t there. They’ll give you a ticket anyway.
While yes, you get out of the ticket if you prove the sign was missing at the time of the infraction.
He’s not a random person, he’s a resident of the neighborhood where he made the change. City officials and this alleged traffic engineer would be considered the “random people” here as they have absolutely zero stake in any of this.
kurikai@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
car drivers would learn to be more careful and less selfish
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 8 hours ago
I prefer selfish car drivers; they’re predictable. I’m fine with them stopping only because there’s a stop sign. When a car driver decides to be “nice” and gestures for me to go, that’s when I get concerned.
kurikai@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
selfish car drivers certainly aren’t predictable as they break laws already inplace
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 4 hours ago
If they’re ignoring the law, then the sign isn’t changing their behavior.