Nate Nagel
Report Proves RLCs Cause RearEnd Collisions 4002N8N ----- Oh. I thought the argument was whether or not RLC's "*caused* rear-end collisions"... not what they are "about". The entire premise is ridiculous... but I like it. dimwit hits 'em, I say, great...
Obviously the solution to -that- is to ban out-of-towners.
How do you know what out-of-towners expect? How do you know how the lights are timed "where they come from"?
I don't believe yellow lights offer "hints".
And the onus to anticipate another driver stopping to their front falls on the driver behind. Too bad, that's the way it is.
The solution to THAT problem
No, they haven't.
Traffic engineers can't even agree on what consbreastues a properly timed yellow light... and nobody has an ironclad butturance of anything else, why should they be buttured the impossible?
If you could just cite the criteria-formula for a properly timed yellow... I might feel differently. It must be out there... somewhere.
Well... you're taking the "oblivious driver" perspective. I'd just have to say you better start paying f***ing attention. Nothing about -not- having a RLC precludes anyone from slamming on their brakes because they -thought- they spied one. If you hit 'em, it won't make any difference if the camera is there or not... will it?
However, if -you're- struck from behind... no matter the other driver's hometown, or if there is or is not a RLC... you won't be forking over any money to anybody, you'll be collecting. -----
- gpsman
