| > The reason we "ended up with this turning right at a red light rule" is simply that it is more efficient For whom? Drivers? Is any consideration for those who cannot or do not drive to be sacrificed at the Altar of the Automobile because cars? > This negation of the common-sense logic found in marine navigation is why our streets are always reported as "becoming more dangerous". The major difference I find between those who pilot boats (and aircraft) vs those who drive is how serious the former take their responsibility. I met a UPS pilot once who we got to talking to and he said that he doesn't drink anything alcoholic within 12 hours of flying. That's clearly more precautious than he needs to be but this anecdote highlights the point of how serious this guy took his responsibility. Compare this to drivers who routinely: - Speed dangerously - Drive while intoxicated - Text or otherwise get distracted by their phones while driving - Drive in spite of medical advice to the contrary [1] - Run red lights - Speed up when lights turn orange (knowing they'll be red when they pass through the intersection) as some lie to themselves that they couldn't stop (as a pedestrian I can nearly always tell lights are changing because I hear cars accelerate). - Don't maintain their vehicles All while being at the helm of two tonnes of metal hurtling down a highway at 85mph (with a speed limit of 55mph), all while tens of thousands of people die on the roads every year in the US. A defense of some of these is "what choice do they have (but to drive)?" Well, that's the result of a society that is so totally geared towards car ownership. So excuse me if "efficiency" for drivers isn't my primary concern. [1] https://www.etonline.com/driver-charged-in-death-of-ruthie-a... |