Crossing the road, cars failing to stop - Page 4

Brass427 · #61 26.02.2011, 20:35

Wouldn't it be easier to have a crossing light instead of 'eye contact'? Sure, the lights are more expensive, but you don't need them at all intersections. If there is a large amount of wheeled traffic and pedestrian traffic at the same intersection, put in a light. If the intersection isn't that busy, then the pedestrian should wait. They can stop a lot easier than a car and create fewer potential accidents by waiting. It's quite simple.

crystalshui · #62 26.02.2011, 22:42

hmmm, come to Ticino, you will know how crazy the drivers here are...

Wollishofener · #63 27.02.2011, 01:18

	Quote:	Pather
	why do u even bother to post?

because to me it was a good lesson for life. If I see very old persons or children at a pedestrians crossing I go to the "traffic-side" of them and in case of doubt wave to the drivers. You can do a lot with not so much "work" really to help.

and again, it at times is NOT the fault of the driver(s)

Wollishofener · #64 27.02.2011, 01:22

	Quote:	Brass427
	Wouldn't it be easier to have a crossing light instead of 'eye contact'? Sure, the lights are more expensive, but you don't need them at all intersections. If there is a large amount of wheeled traffic and pedestrian traffic at the same intersection, put in a light. If the intersection isn't that busy, then the pedestrian should wait. They can stop a lot easier than a car and create fewer potential accidents by waiting. It's quite simple.

there are intersections where the road traffic does not stop for many minutes. And no crossing light is around. So that your expectation simply is not realistic.

#65 27.02.2011, 01:25

	Quote:	Wollishofener
	there are intersections where the road traffic does not stop for many minutes. And no crossing light is around. So that your expectation simply is not realistic.

Er, yeah. That's what he said:

Busy intersection: light

Quiet intersection: no light

araqyl · #66 27.02.2011, 05:02

	Quote:	Brass427
	Wouldn't it be easier to have a crossing light instead of 'eye contact'? Sure, the lights are more expensive, but you don't need them at all intersections. If there is a large amount of wheeled traffic and pedestrian traffic at the same intersection, put in a light. If the intersection isn't that busy, then the pedestrian should wait. They can stop a lot easier than a car and create fewer potential accidents by waiting. It's quite simple.

In Zurich City there are many intersections / crossings with lights, as the traffic flow during the day could fairly be called continuous.

Where I live (Adliswil) I have never seen a single traffic light as, even on the main street, there are many breaks in traffic.

So, in my experience, this is the case: busy places have lights, 'quiet' places don't.

I do not agree with the 'pedestrian should wait' option - especially in rain (or other uncomfortable weather). Drivers are sitting back at ease, enjoying their favourite music, in climate-controlled comfort ... while pedestrians are on their feet, possibly carrying a heavy load of shopping (or tired after a long day of work!) and just want to get to their destination so they can relax.
Oh, and a car driven by an aware and capable driver can stop quite easily at a crossing without creating an accident, as the driver will recognise that there is a crossing ahead, slow down a little and check for pedestrians.
It's quite simple.