All of my descriptions have pretty much been predicated upon obeying the
law (on both sides). In the example about "capturing the intersection",
it was meant that the car was turning right on a green light, legally.
If you know of intersections where the WALK light doesn't seem to function
properly, you should report it to the city. I don't know whether there are
still signals without walk/don't walk lights. I would imagine that if such
exist, they are at lesser used intersections and might be hard to convince
the powers to upgrade the lights.
Bruce Gaarder
Highland Park Saint Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Josh Kroll wrote:
> I find this very interesting and I think that both parties, pedestrian and
> driver should yield to common sense.
>
> Otherwise, what happens when the car has captured the intersection by
> illegally stopping in the first crosswalk, does this illegal action allow the
> driver to capture the intersection before the pedestrian has a chance. Or is
> it this insane battle to infringe on the proper flows of traffic that cause
> pedestrians to await their Walk sign with their feet in the intersection.
> Just being devil's advocate. :)
>
> One other thing, some intersections NEVER display the Walk sign. I know in
> the past that the intersection on the East side of the Franklin Bridge used
> to have some signs that never displayed Walk sign. For many years, maybe
> still today the flashing Don't Walk would flash 15 times at the intersection
> of 26th Ave and Franklin.
>
> To me it is all about being aware of your surroundings, other cars and
> pedestrians. I will especially yield to pedestrians during hailstorms and
> other very bad weather. Common decency of others.
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
