• Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      Badly designed roads, badly designed traffic systems, badly designed everything means it’s pretty much the only reason anything can move here. Idk how the traffic system would even function without right on red. Or, rather, it would fail to function even more than it already does. Fuck this country.

            • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              1 year ago

              Urban planning here is ridiculous. Every single petty land owner has to be fairly compensated at the market rate for their 30m wide parcel of land before any authority can build a road across it. If they’re a minority their land just gets seized and they’re given a pittance, if they’re white it’s a decade long process in the courts that is hilariously expensive and may or may not result in a city or state getting access to the land. It’s a big part of why we can’t build rail - Every single fucking landowner has to be sued for the land, in separate lawsuits, that take years and years and years.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Apparently there are but I’ve never encountered one. Plus traffic laws in the US are very vibe-based. It’s more of a set of cultural norms than actual rules. You do what everyone else does, regardless of the law, or you get hit by another vehicle.

        • Helmic [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          inconsistent traffic laws make you safer by keeping you on your toes

          in practice we just have “no right on red” signs or specific right turn signals at intersections where it would be problematic. out where everything is so spread out there isn’t any pedestrian traffic and bikes act like vehicles (and so are not alllowed to cut past cars on their right where they are liable to get hit).

          as typical, american imagination about change is based on the assumption there will be no infrastructure to support it. no turn on red wouldn’t make sense as a blanket rule given current infrastructure due to a lack of bike or pedestrian infrastructure to take advantage of it and the obvious congestion problems that come from cars idling at a traffic light. actually create that infrastructure and the time lost to needing to sit at a red light so non car traffic can cross safely will be less than the time saved due to there being fewer cars on the road to begin with. imagine if the light wasn’t red to begin with because there weren’t other cars. imagine not having to drive at all.

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

            creating pedestrian and cycling infrastructure while not abolishing right on reds is like a few steps removed from just randomly killing people

    • WoofWoof91 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      iirc most states(?) allow a right turn on a red light as it doesn’t involve disturbing the flow of traffic too much
      i still think it’s bad to be clear, but i think that’s the reasoning