Readers Sometimes Come To A Full Stop
The poll last week was about the St. Louis rolling stop:
Q: When coming to a stop sign or red light I:
- sometimes do a full stop, other times I don’t, just depends 72 [41.14%]
- come to a full & complete stop at every stop sign/red light 62 [35.43%]
- only do a complete stop if I see a cop or a camera. 18 [10.29%]
- Stop means roll, right? 10 [5.71%]
- I don’t drive a car 9 [5.14%]
- Other answer… 4 [2.29%]
I’d like to think I always come to a full stop, but i know I don’t always. Here are the four other answers:
- Cant compare the two.
- treat as yield, use discretion, be responsible
- stop signs and red lights are totlly different. This poll is dumb
- I do a rolling stop if 3 black punks are on the corner waiting to rob me if i st
Hmm, “stop signs and red lights are totlly [sic] different. This poll is dumb” Â Are they totally different? From the Missouri Driver Guide:
Both require a full/complete stop. The rules about proceeding after coming to a stop are different, but otherwise they are very similar.
– Steve Patterson
Through it all, City Hall must partner with the local economy by creating LA City Works, a one-stop shop for small businesses, complemented by full support of the entertainment industry, arts & culture, and tourism as the economic drivers that will
In downtown St. Louis is a left-on-red allowed when turning onto a one-way street? I know I do it, and I can't see why it would be illegal, but a relative tells me it is.
It is my understanding a left turn requires a green light, even if turning from a one-way onto another.
Bah, that is stupid. If it is a one way, you should be able to turn left on red. Ill rebel and continue my left on red on one ways.
In the 2003 edition of the AAA Digest of Motor Laws, the state safety chart shows (somewhat inaccurately) that it is legal to turn left on red in all but the following states (and city):
Connecticut
Missouri
New York City (where there is no turn allowed on red)
North Carolina
Rhode Island
Vermont
Kansas
… unless otherwise posted or directed by a police officer.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/In_w…
Illegal in Missouri, legal in Illinois
Most of the time I do a semi-rolling stop, except when some jerk is tailgating me, then I come to a complete and full stop, and take my time in moving forward again. Fun! There is one signed intersection at which I just blow completely through, if I can get away with it: the intersection of Alfred and Magnolia, which now has a completely unnecessary sign. My sister-in-law put it in (apparently you can order signs off of the internet) herself. I told her that I just ignore it as often as I can, and that if I had a cordless angle grinder, I'd go out there at three o'clock in the morning and slice the posts down, and take the whole thing. She laughed, but got a little huffy when I said I am serious about this, it's an idiotic place for a stop sign. My brother got a good chuckle out of it.
Seriously,with a metal cutting blade on a good angle grinder, you could be in and out of there in two minutes, or less, after cutting down both signs on Magnolia.
There are 3 stop signs at Alfred and Magnolia (a 3 way intersection) and it's labeled as a 3-way. Are you trying to tell me that your sister bought all 3 of these signs off the Internet, installed them herself and then painted stop lines on the street? Really?
I could see getting rid of the east/west signs (Magnolia is the busier street of the two) and just make the guy going southbound on Alfred come to a stop and wait until it's safe to go but your still going to need at least 1 stop sign there.
Sorry, just the two on Magnolia. As for the lines, she and my brother are tight with the nabe group and the alderman, etc., ergo, it was probably just a matter of a phone call. Considering the relatively low level of traffic along Magnolia in that stretch, I see no point to those extra signs. Heck, if one simply followed the right-of-way law, the sign on Alfred is not strictly necessary either. Fer instance, @ the intersection of January and Columbia is the same: January t-bones into Columbia, yet there is no signage on either street. Well, the last time I noticed, anyway.
I've said it before, I'll say it again . . . Laws without enforcement aren't worth the paper they're written on! It doesn't matter if they cover stop signs, smoking, snow removal, littering, whatever, we've reached a point where every time there's a “problem”, we pass a law, then, too many times, we don't invest the resources to actually enforce the laws. And by doing so, we've both created a nation of scofflaws and we're foregoing massive amounts of revenue that could offset shortfalls in other areas of the budget. The real solution for the reality of the rolling stop in St. Louis is actually quite simple – replace 90% of our stop signs with “YIELD” signs, to actually reflect reality and the way most drivers already behave . . .
Your completely right. I wonder why the Police don't enforce this law in the city? To busy dealing with the significant crime issues? Pressure from STL constituents? Police are as bad as everyone else and there can't really enforce a law they don't follow?
I was reading something a few years ago about this topic and the author mentioned something about STL having a lot of “boulevard stops” back in the day. He equated them to being about the same as yield signs. Supposedly there used to be many of them but at some point the civic leadership thought it best to get rid of them. Anyway, he attributed the historical proliferation of these boulevard stops to the infamous STL rolling stop we have today. Old habits die hard I guess.
Anyone else know anything about that?
I've heard the same thing, but I'm guessing the pressure came from the feds, through the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Much like how the states were forced to raise the minimum drinking age to 21 or to enforce seatbelt and open-container laws, the threat of withholding federal funding meant state and local laws were changed, albeit grudgingly.
While the whole “being forced to change” issue is one discussion, the reality remains that a) the law is the law, and b) the Yield sign would address many of the current non-compliance issues. The “historic” boulevard stops argument is just that, historic. The full-stop law has been in effect for decades, so rolling has no legal basis, as much as locals and old-timers want to argue it.
And “from the LA Dept of Transportation:
“California is the only state in the nation to have always had red Stop signs. All other states have used yellow Stop signs.
In 1924, the First National conference on Street and Highway safety recommended white on red for Stop signs. The Automobile Club of Southern California (ACSC) and the California State Automobile Association (CSAA) responded by developing a porcelain enamel “Boulevard Stop†sign with white letters on a red background using the established diamond shape.
In 1927, the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) developed a manual on signing for rural areas. This manual adopted the octagon as the shape for Stop signs. But after much debate, yellow was adopted as the background color for danger, caution and Stop signs. The red color for Stop signs was rejected, due to inadequate visibility at night. ACSC and CSAA then adopted the octagonal shape but not the yellow color for Stop signs. They addressed the concern for night-time visibility by the use of glass button letters. California thus refused to join the rest of the nation and was the only state to retain the red Stop sign.
Ultimately, the holdout state was able to gloat when in 1954, the MUTCD changed the color of the Stop sign from red or black on yellow to white on red.”
The name is illustrative. BOULEVARD stop. The full, mandatory stop is only neccessary when moving from a side street to a boulevard. Otherwise, simply wait your turn.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say? That a rolling stop is OK? Define “simply wait your turn”. As Steve's original post notes, STOP means stop, not just slow down . . . .
Your interpretation of “boulevard stop” sounds right. I like it. I like the idea of certain stop interchanges only applying to those entering a main street from a side street. It would work very well for certain kinds of traffic, but we'd probably just install a “yield” sign rather than go back to whatever signage the “boulevard stop” would have required.
Okay, I give up. Arrest me I broke the law, please more rules. but less for wall street of course.
More rules please, run the lights that are monitored and counted. More money please.
Surely everyone has noticed the social engineering style of stop lights. Stop, yes, stop again. And then stop signs?, what is the purpose?
Urban planning is the development of routes that dominate for some reason and then the interaction of their collecting routes.
There is no debate about simple concepts, only simple ideas.
The
variety of wheels you can equip grinders with (wire, wire cup, stone, sanding,
flapper, and diamond masonry joint blades) makes them
highly versatile.