🚀 go-pugleaf

I didn't say I didn't like the idea, it's pretty good, as it gives a
clear go/no go signal to any officer that's watching.  the driver will
know if he is/isn't going to get nailed and can act decisively.  what
I'm thinking is that depending on where the line is placed it's possible
that someone in a shitty vehicle might be legally required to stop but
be unable to do so (no, I don't own any vehicles that would fall in that
category.)

nate

Paul R wrote:
> 
> I don't think the type of vehicle would matter.
> 
> If I understand the concept, the "dead line" would, itself, be advisory.
> The law would still apply to crossing the stop line on the red.  Seems to me
> if I'm driving something heavy and hard to stop, I should be driving slowly,
> and so the "dead line" would still work.  Now if I'm driving something hard
> to stop, and still insist on driving the speed limit, I deserve to get
> burned.
> 
> I *like* the "deadline" concept.  Might be interesting to see if we get some
> more comments on the idea.
> 
> Paul R
> 
> "Nathan Nagel" <njnagel@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:3B1F72DC.49A0AE14@worldnet.att.net...
> > John Gilmer wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Problem is that if don't know how hard a stop's required of me. If I
> knew
> > > > the length of the yellow, I could excersize reasonable judgement.  But
> > > > without knowing, I'm stuck.  Each light has a different requirement;
> but
> > > the
> > > > driver can't tell what that requirement is.
> > >
> > > What they need is a "dead line."   IOW  a line on the pavement which if
> > > before you when the light turns yellow you would be expected to stop at
> the
> > > stop line.    If you are past the dead line when yellow comes up you
> > > continue on through the interesection.    The spacing between the two
> lines
> > > would be determined with the assumption that the driver is going EXACTLY
> the
> > > speed limit.
> >
> > In what vehicle though? :)
> >
> > nate