▲ 434 ▼ Pride month (slrpnk.net) submitted 1 month ago by Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world 121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -15 points 1 month ago (1 child) How does rushing yellows put people's lives at risk, exactly? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 13 points 1 month ago (1 child) Because you don't know when exactly the red will come, so you might blast through on red, which should be obvious enough as to why it's dangerous. The point of amber/yellow lights is a signal to stop that you can ignore without risk if it's already too late to stop, as opposed to reds which are the actual protection against conflict. Is that not fucking obvious? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -15 points 1 month ago (1 child) The state of the LEDs doesn't mean anything for safety. It is however dangerous to impede on opposing traffic's right of way. Reds don't provide protection, it's just a clear signal for right of way. It's also dangerous AF to drive assuming green lights give protection. It's just right of way. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 11 points 1 month ago (1 child) Do you think running reds doesn't risk lives then, wise -ass? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (1 child) It doesn't necessarily risk lives. "Running red" is dependent on the state of some LEDs. It's dangerous to impede the right of way of a vehicle traveling at high speeds. It's much less dangerous to run a red that's been red for one second rather than, say, 15. Driving itself risks lives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago I think we're done here. Don't drive. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 13 points 1 month ago (1 child) Because you don't know when exactly the red will come, so you might blast through on red, which should be obvious enough as to why it's dangerous. The point of amber/yellow lights is a signal to stop that you can ignore without risk if it's already too late to stop, as opposed to reds which are the actual protection against conflict. Is that not fucking obvious? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -15 points 1 month ago (1 child) The state of the LEDs doesn't mean anything for safety. It is however dangerous to impede on opposing traffic's right of way. Reds don't provide protection, it's just a clear signal for right of way. It's also dangerous AF to drive assuming green lights give protection. It's just right of way. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 11 points 1 month ago (1 child) Do you think running reds doesn't risk lives then, wise -ass? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (1 child) It doesn't necessarily risk lives. "Running red" is dependent on the state of some LEDs. It's dangerous to impede the right of way of a vehicle traveling at high speeds. It's much less dangerous to run a red that's been red for one second rather than, say, 15. Driving itself risks lives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago I think we're done here. Don't drive. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -15 points 1 month ago (1 child) The state of the LEDs doesn't mean anything for safety. It is however dangerous to impede on opposing traffic's right of way. Reds don't provide protection, it's just a clear signal for right of way. It's also dangerous AF to drive assuming green lights give protection. It's just right of way. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 11 points 1 month ago (1 child) Do you think running reds doesn't risk lives then, wise -ass? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (1 child) It doesn't necessarily risk lives. "Running red" is dependent on the state of some LEDs. It's dangerous to impede the right of way of a vehicle traveling at high speeds. It's much less dangerous to run a red that's been red for one second rather than, say, 15. Driving itself risks lives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago I think we're done here. Don't drive. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 11 points 1 month ago (1 child) Do you think running reds doesn't risk lives then, wise -ass? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (1 child) It doesn't necessarily risk lives. "Running red" is dependent on the state of some LEDs. It's dangerous to impede the right of way of a vehicle traveling at high speeds. It's much less dangerous to run a red that's been red for one second rather than, say, 15. Driving itself risks lives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago I think we're done here. Don't drive. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] LodeMike@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (1 child) It doesn't necessarily risk lives. "Running red" is dependent on the state of some LEDs. It's dangerous to impede the right of way of a vehicle traveling at high speeds. It's much less dangerous to run a red that's been red for one second rather than, say, 15. Driving itself risks lives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago I think we're done here. Don't drive. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago I think we're done here. Don't drive. permalink fedilink source parent