Are The Roads Safer Without Any Traffic Signals And Lane Markers?
from the controlled-anarchy dept
There is a school of thought that suggests making things more dangerous is actually safer - since the more obviously dangerous a situation is, the more careful people will be. In some sense, this is part of the theory behind parts of open source philosophy: if the source is open, security is likely to be tighter, since everyone knows that the source is available to be combed through for vulnerabilities. That is, by making something less secure in some sense, it can create a situation where it's actually a lot more secure. Apparently, a growing group of people are applying that concept to traffic engineering. The thinking is that the more chaos there is in the road, the more careful drivers are, and the less likely an accident occurs. Urban planners and traffic engineers are recommending removing traffic lights and stop signs, taking away lane markings, getting rid of crosswalks and bike lanes - and just letting everyone share the road however they feel appropriate. In areas where it's been implemented (whether officially or by default - as in some developing nations), there are plenty of stories about how, despite the chaos, the roads actually appear to be much safer. Part of this is that people end up driving slower - because they know that they may share the road with others. Merging and cutting in are less of a problem, because it's easier to make eye contact with other drivers (who are paying more attention and driving slower) and while the overall speed that the roads are designed to encourage may be slower, the lack of any congestion actually makes traveling through the areas faster. The focus, clearly, is on urban areas and not highways and such. Obviously, not everyone agrees with these theories - despite the evidence that's out there. People in the US are especially horrified by the idea - especially in areas where traditional "traffic calming" is a big deal. They argue (somewhat persuasively) that US culture really couldn't handle such a thing - since we pride ourselves on our individuality and our ability to express ourselves often via our cars and how we drive. That makes some sense, but the more I thought about the article, the more something I've been pointing out for years made sense to me. Driving in Manhattan has a terrible reputation. People talk about how it's pure chaos. Red lights are "optional," lanes mean absolutely nothing, and people and bicycles wander in and out of the streets everywhere. However, personally, I enjoy driving in Manhattan. Once you're in the right mindset, the chaos of driving there makes perfect sense, and it's almost easy. I'll admit I'm much more vigilant, but it's because I realize the rules are different. Meanwhile, here in California, driving is a different sort of adventure. Everywhere I drive, it seems like half the people on the road aren't paying attention. In NY, if someone cuts you off with an inch to spare, it's because they know they're cutting you off with an inch to spare. It may seem dangerous, but people are aware of what's happening. In California, if someone cuts you off with an inch to spare, it's because they couldn't be bothered to look or to realize that a car approaching in the next lane may be going much faster. In a situation where people naturally assume things are safer because the "chaos" is removed, perhaps things are actually made worse.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Roads without traffic lights
Cars speed, and speed and speed. Pedestrians are secondary and have to take care before they cross the road. Speeding even in residential areas. On bigger roads, cars are trailing each other and a distance of 1 meter is a lot, even when you drive fast. If you leave more space for safety, someone is bound to cut in. Lanes that are made for one car, are made into a two or three car lane.
So my comment? Leave the traffic lights where they are. People are used to it, and they will get used to speeding and more careless driving when traffic lights are gone. Just a comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Roads without traffic lights
Pedestrians look out for other vehicles,
cyclists look out for bikes and cars,
bikes look out for cars and buses...
The smaller vehicles look out for bigger ones, not the other way around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Darwinism sounds good to me
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Safety through Danger
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
I mean in my city, traffic laws are merely a suggestion at this point and bad drivers abound. Walking anywhere within 15 feet of an intersection is risking life and limb and traffic ticket revenue is at an all time low, drunk driving offenses (recidivists) are at an all time high and people don't even get out of the way of (and at times even viciously cut off) emergency vehicles.
I've stopped walking and taking the bus to work simply to protect myself...I have better survival chances armored in a car than I do on the sidewalk (which I've actually seen cars drive on to get maybe two cars ahead in a traffic jam...sigh)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Horrified American
Yes Mike,
I am horrified ( and an American ) @ the thought of no rules driving. As it stands now, our police don't patrol the roads and people regularly go 80 - 90 miles an hour on the freeways, turn signals are options & most drivers put more faith in their brakes then they do in God. As much as I despise government intervention, I do not want to see Mad Max driving ( any worse than we already have it ) here in the states.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
deeper debate needed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We have This in the Snowbelt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I've seen this work
What makes me think it won't work is that my best friend was killed by a motorcycle on a busy street in Indonesia (he was in a pedicab), and everything I've heard about travel suggests that transportation is the number one killer of tourists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a hoot!
A stretch of street I travel on to go home is exceptionally wide and unstriped. It goes up a slight incline and there are bushes on the drivers (right in US) of the lane, nothing overhanging the road just big and, well, bushy. I am constantly amazed at how many drivers drift over to the far left, almost to the curb. I've followed more than one person who had to make an panic movement back into the right lane as oncoming cars pop over the hill.
Amazing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What a hoot!
In Hong Kong, for example, road rules are "optional". In Toronto, pedestrians will take the right of way whether they have it or not - they'll simply walk in front of your car, daring you to hit them. San Francicso? Different again.
I don't see it working all over, for every culture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
montana
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It will work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It will work
;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: montana
If so, was the problem that people were going 90MPH when it wasn't a "reasonable and prudent" thing to do?
If speed limits weren't set so arbitrarily low, the police might spend more time going after genuine problem drivers (genuine unsafe behavior, not just being outside certain arbitrary bounds); instead of people who were just driving fast. Unfortunately, speed traps are a major source of revenue for some departments; so there's little chance that the laws will be changed soon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Removal of Traffic Controls
Lane lines around the circle, those entering have ROW, those in circle have ROW, etc.
They basically have ended up with a yield entering and no other markings in the circle at all. I have driven all of these as they made changes, and the 'no lines' works best.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Traffic without rules !
How can one suggested this but it looks ridiculous. Just go to Calcutta(India) or Karachi (Pakistan), one will see how the traffic is running without road signs and traffic lights. Traffic jams cost lives in these countries. Traffic jams of upto 5 hours, can we afford that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People not Laws should be fixed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Have to be cold to prove it
Of couse not, even if the end result really WAS worth it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
biological driving!
do you know the name of those cities?
best wishes
fazu
[ link to this | view in chronology ]