Quote:
Originally Posted by Aveomiler
As most of my driving is done in the city, I have a feeling that unnecessary stop signs are a real killer to my FE. When there are consecutive stop signs at every street it is very tough to get good gas mileage. I cannot engine off coast in my car, and putting my car into neutral while I coast only raises my fuel consumption at speeds above 10-15 mph. As a result my routine when going through multiple stop signs involves a lot of braking, which indirectly kills my fuel economy.
|
It's the same situation here in the suburbs of NY City. The perverse logic is that if two stops signs are good for an intersection, then 4-way stops must be even better. In the past 40 years I've facetiously mused that I'd eventually see the day when they would put a stop sign in the middle of a block. That day has arrived, and these are now often seen at a cross street that does not pass through, being in effect a three way intersection. The neighborhoods that are worst in haviong abundant stop signs are usually those that want to drastically reduce all vehicular traffic - so the residents lobby to erect a stop sign on literally every corner. It does nothing to improve traffic safety, but it does give a sense of empowerment to those who push to keep all traffic out of their domain. And of course, as with most laws, once implemented they are never repealed - nor are stop signs ever removed, once erected.
Most stop signs could be replaced with yield signs. But there are several reasons why this will never happen. First, most brain-dead American motorists either cannot read English or can't comprehend what 'yield' means. Also, since running a yield sign and causing an accident is a 'prima facie' case, most lawyers would be opposed to it because there is nothing to argue about. Most police departments would not appreciate this either, as the opportunity for 'revenue enhancement' in monitoring stop sign violations would be reduced.
I can remember when permitting a 'right turn on red' was introduced here. It was seen as radical, dangerous and fiercely opposed by some at the time. Guess which side of the political spectrum opposed it most vehemently?
