[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

Some of us won't get over it because we prefer to look at the way things should be and say "why not".

When you write "the way things should be" it certainly sounds like personal opinion to me (and you are entitled to your opinion). It is my personal opinion that the roundabouts are just fine. Have I seen people enter them who are clueless? Of course, but I've also seen people trying to drive their cars on multi-modal paths. I certainly wouldn't suggest to get rid of the paths.

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

But they won't, so the two lane roundabouts will remain unsafe..

Again I think this is personal opinion. Thousands and thousands (probably tens of thousands) of drivers use these roundabouts every day with very few incidents. Occasionally there are accidents--just like any other place I have ever lived.

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

Actually quite the opposite. Go to any roundabout and count the number of drivers who enter when both lanes are NOT free. I'd venture to guess it's the majority of drivers.

You might guess so, but that is only a guess based on anecdotal evidence that you have observed personally. That has not been my personal experience. I have certainly seen some boneheaded moves in the roundabouts, but I've also seen them on the turnpike, at the mail station, and in the Walmart parking lot. I have yet to see nay concrete evidence that the majority of drivers can't handle a simple roundabout.

I understand--you don't like the roundabouts and you don't think they are safe. I respect your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. I haven't been in TV very long, but I have driven on the streets here EVERYDAY for the last six months and I still fail to see what all the fuss is about.

[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

Some of us won't get over it because we prefer to look at the way things should be and say "why not".



But they won't, so the two lane roundabouts will remain unsafe.



Actually quite the opposite. Go to any roundabout and count the number of drivers who enter when both lanes are NOT free. I'd venture to guess it's the majority of drivers.

C'mon Ed. The two lane roundabouts are required by Sumter County. Do you really think they are going to change them because some residents feel they are unsafe? Where are the statistics that show they are "unsafe". Do they require some attention from drivers when entering and using them? Sure, but so do many regular intersections. Try getting onto 301 from 472, especially if trying to go south on 301. That certainly requires some attention.

And your last statement is definitely hyperbole. No way the "majority" of drivers enter when both lanes are not free. I travel Morse daily and have to use the roundabout at Morse and Stillwater several times each day. Each time I use the inner lane because I am going 3/4 around to enter Stillwater. Rarely has anyone entered on the outside lane beside me.

The most common error in the roundabouts, by far IMO, is the person who continues in the outside lane beyond the second exit. All it takes is recognition that can happen, and, with a little defensive driving, the potential for an accident is eliminated.

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by mikeod

And your last statement is definitely hyperbole. No way the "majority" of drivers enter when both lanes are not free.

Agree. I have seen some enter when only one lane is free and I will honk my horn at them for a long time to let them think about what they did and maybe they get the point.

Originally Posted by mikeod

The most common error in the roundabouts, by far IMO, is the person who continues in the outside lane beyond the second exit.

This is where you have to be real diligent. I have had to go 'with' them to avoid being hit a few times. But I always watch a car that is outside of me to see where they are going even if they are not supposed to.


Recent true story: I was talking with a gentleman who said he was fined $147 for being in an accident in the roundabout even though he thought he was not at fault. I asked how it happened and he started by saying "I was entering the roundabout and I had a good car length lead on the person already in the roundabout"!!!!!

I said that the roundabout needed to be completely clear of traffic in your direction and he argued for 10 minutes saying that I was wrong. He didn't get it and probably never will. So be careful.

[Bogie Shooter]

And the beat goes on.................

[Graytop]

There is personal opinion & personal interpretation of the law,....and then there is the officers' interpretation and enforcement of the law.

I remember that old song we do in our Sixties band,...."I Fought The Law",....what's the next line???

This thread really can hit 200!

[Bogie Shooter]

I did a search on roundabouts, only threads with roundabouts in the title.
Number of posts for each thread:
89
51
115
184
32
83
22
14
51
63
63
Let the silliness continue..................

[billethkid]

seems to me the problem is very simple. Some need to learn that right of way is theirs to give....NOT TAKE!!!

I hate to say it but there is a certain stubbornness that comes with aging....like it is my way whether you like it or not.

And I shan't address those behind the wheel that are way past tearing up their license.

Based on a significant majority, the traffic circles are fine. Let the minority grumble for a change!!!!!!!

btk

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by billethkid

seems to me the problem is very simple. Some need to learn that right of way is theirs to give....NOT TAKE!!!

I hate to say it but there is a certain stubbornness that comes with aging....like it is my way whether you like it or not.

And I shan't address those behind the wheel that are way past tearing up their license.

Based on a significant majority, the traffic circles are fine. Let the minority grumble for a change!!!!!!!btk

I agree.

[EdV]

Take a look at this site regarding roundabouts if you think I'm alone and misguided on this subject.

More to follow.

[Bogie Shooter]

Do we really need more??

[angiefox10]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Do we really need more??

No... but of course there will be.... hmmmm I wonder if it will catch up with the dog poop saga....

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

Take a look at this site regarding roundabouts if you think I'm alone and misguided on this subject.

More to follow.

Interesting that the article starts off with: "A roundabout is a type of circular intersection. Compared to signals, roundabouts tend to move traffic more efficiently, cut down on pollution, reduce the number and severity of accidents, last longer, cost less, and do not rely on electricity for operation.

A major benefit to roundabouts is that- by increasing intersection capacity- they prevent the need to widen the entire section of street. In other words, a two-lane road with roundbouts is often more efficient than a four-lane road with a traffic signals (because the traffic keeps flowing).

A study of 24 intersections in the United States that have been changed to roundabout showed an 89% reduction in fatalities and serious injury. The crashes in a roundabout tend to be 'fender benders' compared to the much more severe 'T-bone' crash typical at a signalized intersection."

I do understand that MIST advocates single lane roundabouts (never providing any data why they are superior), but as it has been repeated ad nauseum, the counties are not going to change from double to single lane roundabouts, so it is best for all concerned to learn how to navigate safely with what we have. If folks aren't up for that "challenge," then they should simply plan their routes to avoid the roundabouts or take a golf cart. Pretty simple stuff here.

[EdV]

Some of you are misunderstanding me. I never said that multilane RABs were not the more efficient. And I don’t believe that they will be changed. I’m simply responding to the naïve notion that all will be well if everyone will simply learn and obey the rules. It’s sad but true that many won’t and will continue to cause accidents. And in the end, nothing can or will be done about it.

I never said that they were less safe than straight intersection. I said they were inherently less safe than single lane ROBs because of the undeniable fact that they introduce the possibility of two vehicles crossing each other’s paths which cannot be done with single lane RABs

If the some of you want to continue to believe that the majority of the drivers know and obey the ROB rules so be it But since a picture is worth a thousand words, how much are 19 of them worth? I just went down to the El Camino/Morse roundabout and in the course of 7 minutes snapped these 19 drivers entering the roundabout with other vehicles already approaching.

Here’s a link to the photos. See for yourself.

[Bogie Shooter]

Ed
I am beginning to think you have way too much time on your hands.

[cappyjon431]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

Some of you are misunderstanding me. I never said that multilane ROBs were not the more efficient. And I don’t believe that they will be changed. I’m simply responding to the naïve notion that all will be well if everyone will simply learn and obey the rules. It’s sad but true that many won’t and will continue to cause accidents. And in the end, nothing can or will be done about it..

There is no doubt that it is naive to think that all will be well if everyone learned and obeyed the rules. There will still be accidents--that is why they are called accidents. But the same holds true with every other type of driving scenario: People know not to speed but they do it anyway, sometimes ending tragically. People know not to run red lights or stop signs, but it happens from time to time, often with terrible results. People know to look in their rearview mirrors before backing out of a parking space, but sometimes they forget/ignore this and it results in accidents (this one happened to me today). Learning the rules and obeying them simply minimizes the risk--but it will never eliminate accidents (even with single lane roundabouts!).

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

I never said that they were less safe than straight intersection. I said they were inherently less safe than single lane ROBs because of the undeniable fact that they introduce the possibility of two vehicles crossing each other’s paths which cannot be done with single lane ROBs..

I think the question that really needs to be asked is: How much safer would they be? A secondary question would be: Would the increase in safety offset the benefits of increased traffic flow that two lane roundabouts provide? I think a legitimate parallel argument could be made that we could dramatically decrease speed related deaths on the highways if we reduced the speed limits. Yes, it absolutely would be safer (how much is questionable), but would it be worth the slowdowns on all of the highways? Traffic would back up, it would take much longer to commute, longer for products to get to market, etc.

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

If the some of you want to continue to believe that the majority of the drivers know and obey the ROB rules so be it But since a picture is worth a thousand words, how much are 19 of them worth? I just went down to the El Camino/Morse roundabout and in the course of 7 minutes snapped these 19 drivers entering the roundabout with other vehicles already approaching.

Here’s a link to the photos. See for yourself.

I like that you actually went out and took the time to research this yourself, and I certainly wouldn't question what you saw. My question is: In this seven minutes of observation detailing 19 drivers entering the roundabouts "unsafely", how many accidents did you witness? Probably the same number that you would have witnessed if they had been single lane roundabouts.

Ed, I truly respect your passion for the subject and I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. While others appear to be bored with this topic, I enjoy the interchange of ideas. Perhaps because I am relatively new to TV and TOTV I am not bored with the discussion and i don't care if the thread count goes to 600 posts.