• 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    In the event that the driving culture in the city (light timing, other drivers’ expectations, etc) makes it so that you are encouraged to run a red light, do it in such a way as to minimize any danger to yourself and anyone around you.

    This is asinine. The way you minmize danger to yourself and anyone around you is not running a red light. “My justified running red lights due to other driver expectations” vs. “Her obviously dangerous running red lights because I don’t wanna wait” isn’t even a false dichotomy, it’s not even a dichotomy. That’s the same thing except you figure it’s fine when you do it.

    • KnilAdlez [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      In the city I used to work in, there were the number of accidents went up due to the city putting up red light cameras because the culture at the time was to run reds for a bit after the light changed. When they put up the cameras, people would slam on their brakes and get rear ended. Do not ever, EVER follow the law if other drivers are expecting you to break it. That is far more dangerous. If the speed limit is 35 and everyone is going 80, you need to match their speed or you risk someone no paying attention slamming into you. Same with stops, lights, etc. It comes down to the culture in the city.

      It is dangerous to drive distracted. It is not dangerous, comparatively, to drive the exact same way everyone else does.

      • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        In the city I used to work in, there were the number of accidents went up due to the city putting up red light cameras because the culture at the time was to run reds for a bit after the light changed. When they put up the cameras, people would slam on their brakes and get rear ended.

        This is quite obviously not the fault of the red light cameras, it’s the fault of people who don’t know how to keep a safe distance to the car infront of them.

        Do not ever, EVER follow the law if other drivers are expecting you to break it. That is far more dangerous. If the speed limit is 35 and everyone is going 80, you need to match their speed or you risk someone no paying attention slamming into you.

        Sounds like maybe someone should do something about people doing 80 in a 35, distracted.

        This entire line of argument is a race to the bottom, even for car drivers, nevermind anybody not inside a car who is far safer around somebody doing 35 than 80.

        • Z_Poster365 [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 days ago

          Car brain has spread even here. People convinced they can break all the rules because they understand the “culture” lmao. car brains are the ones creating this toxic dangerous “culture”

        • KnilAdlez [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          This is quite obviously not the fault of the red light cameras, it’s the fault of people who don’t know how to keep a safe distance to the car infront of them.

          Moot.

          Sounds like maybe someone should do something about people doing 80 in a 35, distracted.

          Moot.

          This entire line of argument is a race to the bottom, even for car drivers, nevermind anybody not inside a car who is far safer around somebody doing 35 than 80.

          Moot.

          It doesn’t matter what driving should be like. This is what it is, and if you don’t follow it then you are putting yourself and others in danger.

          • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            4 days ago

            It doesn’t matter what driving should be like. This is what it is

            It’s not an immuteable fact, you know? In fact, you could help change it by not blaming red light cameras for people being rear ended by people not keeping a safe distance

            • KnilAdlez [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 days ago
              1. When did I blame the red light camera? When did I assign any qualitative attribute to anything at all?

              2. Are you 13 or something? Live in a nice city with public transport? This is what driving is like. There is a sociological component to it, and in certain places it makes a more dangerous maneuver the safer option. I can tsk tsk other drivers in Boston or LA but it doesn’t change reality. The people in these places have, collectively and unconsciously, chosen for this to be the way it works. I don’t like it but outside of not driving in these places, there’s not much I can do about it.

              • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                4 days ago

                there’s not much I can do about it.

                You could stop defending it as an immutable fact and calling people who question this 13 year olds

                • KnilAdlez [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I am not defending anything? Why are you assigning any intent to my comments besides to give information? Driving in different cities requires understanding the cities culture. In some extreme cases, you have to break traffic laws because the actions of others will make adhering to those laws is the less safe option. I am not saying that it’s a good thing or that it should stay that way, but it is the way it is at this time.

            • Dessa [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              The purpose of traffic laws and enforcement is to kake things safer for people. If people are crashing over new enforcement policy, the moral choice for a city to make is to determine what will save the most lives. It’s of no consequence to the city if they look at who caused the accident and they say “Guy in the back drove too close, lol, not our fault. Our laws are clear.”

              Yes, the trailing driver should leave space, but its the job of a traffic engineer to account for human variability and advise ways to minimize risk despite the tendency of some people to acy irrationally

              • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                4 days ago

                The purpose of traffic laws and enforcement is to kake things safer for people.

                Outside of a few specific places if we’re talking car dominated societies this is demonstrably untrue, the point is to make it faster for people in cars, maybe a bit safer and the rest is at best an afterthought. If you wanted to make things safer for everybody, including people in cars, you’d see a lot less wide roads, more obstacles and such.

                If people are crashing over new enforcement policy, the moral choice for a city to make is to determine what will save the most lives. It’s of no consequence to the city if they look at who caused the accident and they say “Guy in the back drove too close, lol, not our fault. Our laws are clear.”

                Again this is only looking at this in the context of cars and nothing else. What kills people when cars run red lights is sometimes cars, but most often people not in cars. And the latter is how the entire system is resolved and is what you’re defending here - what’s the other option? You can’t actually enforce running red lights anymore?

                Yes, the trailing driver should leave space, but its the job of a traffic engineer to account for human variability and advise ways to minimize risk despite the tendency of some people to acy irrationally

                Should be, sure, but that entire field basically runs on the fiction of the ever competent driver who doesn’t fuck up. And anytime you try to change this people get up in arms because obviously they’re the one person who doesn’t make mistakes and as such would like to not be impeded

    • Dessa [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      There are intersections that are so open and clear that you can ascertain with full certainty that there is NO risk to others.

          • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            this is basically the infallible car driver fallacy again. This is inevitably going to fuck up while being entirely preventable. Eventually people get distracted, or someone rides around in the dark with broken or turned off lights, or maybe it’s just a pedestrian, cyclist, scooter or motorcycle that the quick scan car drivers do just looks right past because it’s not car and then somebody gets injured or hurt.