The panthers used to get stop lights put in in weeks that localities had been refusing calls from for years. You want to do stuff like this, get organized. And not dancing in frog suits organized, militant, community focused organized with educational programs and childcare for your community.

If 50 people sign a petition, you don't need to do a study. Just put in the fucking stop sign.

Even if the vehicle traffic didn’t meet some imaginary quota, that says nothing of the pedestrian traffic. Just another signal of our car-centric society.

There are stop signs in the middle of nowhere Ohio, where there's literally a few cars on the road a day. I don't see how volume should come into play when you're next to a playground.

hey that's cheating. that was how i crossed busy streets when i was walking home from undergrad.

i had a bright neon painted metal water bottle. I would raise it and make eye contact. just like that. like, this is mine, but it can be yours. you don't know if it weighs an ounce or 5 pounds. stops traffic remarkably well, especially considering the law and the sign everyone ignored right above my head said "stop for pedestrians".

yes, i did have a death wish you don't need to ask. living in utah does that to you when you've seen life on the outside.

Courts and juries are somewhat good at identifying bureaucratic incompetence. Prison is unlikely, but the fact he will have to appear in court likely a few times to resolve this is still not great.

As much as this case might have been justified (which we just don't know without the traffic study), condoning random people fucking with street signage is a terrible idea. There are very good reasons not to randomly change traffic patterns, especially outside of a popular park; fuckcars, but also vigilante traffic engineering is an insanely dangerous game to play. If this brings attention to it and they reevaluate, well done this traffic martyr. But he absolutely should have been arrested for this, if only to prevent a precedent for people who decide to "fix" other traffic issues.

Much like that park bathroom that was going to cost something like $2M to install in San Francisco. Once the residents and news got ahold of the story, suddenly the bathroom would only cost $100k to install.

How about if someone just decided to remove a stop sign.

Are those 2 situations equivalent at all? I can't think of a situation where adding a stop sign up would make the intersection more dangerous whereas the removal of one would almost certainly make it more dangerous. In your mind is the only way to regulate this to ban both for some reason?