iirc you aren't in the US, but at least here the deer crossing signs are actually bullshit lol (in that deer will cross most anywhere, not just the 1-2 mile stretches indicated by the signs)
But yeah people love to just go 70mph down a road signed at 55 (and at dusk it should probably be even lower,) and then get surprised/angry when they total their car and kill a deer :/ rural car-drivers are universal I guess
iirc you aren't in the US, but at least here the deer crossing signs are actually bullshit lol (in that deer will cross most anywhere, not just the 1-2 mile stretches indicated by the signs)
For a speed limiting sign to be even put up here people have to have crashed and gotten hurt like, a lot. Otherwise the first person to sue against it, which inevitably happens because my right to kill myself running into woodland creatures is attacked, would get them taken down.
Every deer crossing speed limit is quite literally written in blood. They wouldn't be there if nothing happend.
ours are just advisory and don't even ask people to reduce speed. Just a sign with a deer on it, randomly sprinkled around the deep woods. People still get mad
You can sue against traffic signs here. The reason is that the legal logic presumes every road is either 50kph (inside town) or 100kph (outside town) - barring the autobahn, obviously. That's the max limit.
Anything lower than that is an infringement of your rights to drive your cat at 50 / 100kph. As such, you can sue the responsible government entity for putting up the sign.
As noted above, most speed signs and nearly all of them outside of town can only be put in place because a lot of people already crashed there. There's very little wiggle room in the law to put up a sign as a preventive measure, unless things already happened, and basically zilch of that for deer crossings, only exceptions would be things like declaring a 70kph limit infront of a school or nursing home.
Here's a fun one: There was a section of autobahn, standardly at unlimited speed, that had a max speed of 120kph put in, because people kept crashing there. A few years, just about a year ago from now, the signs were removed because there weren't sufficient crashes to justify having them anymore. Immediatly, crash numbers shot way the hell up.
god, no. 'nother fun fact: the aforementioned legislative logic is straigt up what the nazis implemented to facilitate more car traffic.
Yet I whenever I point out shit's never going to meaningfully improve if the core logic isn't adressed I still come of like gods strongest turbocrank, even to other activists. I think the most radical demand that has any organized capacity behind it is that towns get an exception written into the federal laws that they can decide 30kph limits within city bounds at will instead of having to make a legal case for it
iirc you aren't in the US, but at least here the deer crossing signs are actually bullshit lol (in that deer will cross most anywhere, not just the 1-2 mile stretches indicated by the signs)
But yeah people love to just go 70mph down a road signed at 55 (and at dusk it should probably be even lower,) and then get surprised/angry when they total their car and kill a deer :/ rural car-drivers are universal I guess
For a speed limiting sign to be even put up here people have to have crashed and gotten hurt like, a lot. Otherwise the first person to sue against it, which inevitably happens because my right to kill myself running into woodland creatures is attacked, would get them taken down.
Every deer crossing speed limit is quite literally written in blood. They wouldn't be there if nothing happend.
ours are just advisory and don't even ask people to reduce speed. Just a sign with a deer on it, randomly sprinkled around the deep woods. People still get mad
What?
You can sue against traffic signs here. The reason is that the legal logic presumes every road is either 50kph (inside town) or 100kph (outside town) - barring the autobahn, obviously. That's the max limit.
Anything lower than that is an infringement of your rights to drive your cat at 50 / 100kph. As such, you can sue the responsible government entity for putting up the sign.
As noted above, most speed signs and nearly all of them outside of town can only be put in place because a lot of people already crashed there. There's very little wiggle room in the law to put up a sign as a preventive measure, unless things already happened, and basically zilch of that for deer crossings, only exceptions would be things like declaring a 70kph limit infront of a school or nursing home.
Here's a fun one: There was a section of autobahn, standardly at unlimited speed, that had a max speed of 120kph put in, because people kept crashing there. A few years, just about a year ago from now, the signs were removed because there weren't sufficient crashes to justify having them anymore. Immediatly, crash numbers shot way the hell up.
That's a very stupid law situation, does anyone have at least a project to end it?
god, no. 'nother fun fact: the aforementioned legislative logic is straigt up what the nazis implemented to facilitate more car traffic.
Yet I whenever I point out shit's never going to meaningfully improve if the core logic isn't adressed I still come of like gods strongest turbocrank, even to other activists. I think the most radical demand that has any organized capacity behind it is that towns get an exception written into the federal laws that they can decide 30kph limits within city bounds at will instead of having to make a legal case for it
Wow, America needs to up its carbrain game! That's really top-shelf stuff.