I have no idea what you're talking about.UnkleRukus wrote:
Those are the flashing yellow lights for one lane of 2 way traffic and flashing red lights for the perpendicular lanes of traffic. Those are way more dangerous over here than 4 way stops.DrunkFace wrote:
1 road has right of way (ie a green light) the other has to stop, check for traffic, then proceed when clear.Jay wrote:
How does one avoid creating four way stops anyway? Make all roads one way? Or are you talking about faggy ass jughandles like they have in Jersey?
I haven't seen one yet. Irony, in part because the cirlce slows down everyone and let's the jerk get through when all others are patient or courteous.13/f/taiwan wrote:
how many accidents?
Okay, picture one of theseDrunkFace wrote:
I have no idea what you're talking about.UnkleRukus wrote:
Those are the flashing yellow lights for one lane of 2 way traffic and flashing red lights for the perpendicular lanes of traffic. Those are way more dangerous over here than 4 way stops.DrunkFace wrote:
1 road has right of way (ie a green light) the other has to stop, check for traffic, then proceed when clear.
Except at a 4 way intersection. Two of the lights are red and flashing, and two of the lights are yellow and flashing. Yellow flashing lights mean "you have the right of way but you need to yield (slow down, which no one does.) The red lights you treat just like a stop sign. You stop, if there is no traffic then you can go.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
I agree, sounds retarded.
Where do you live?DrunkFace wrote:
I agree, sounds retarded.
DrunkFace wrote:
it's too complicated for me.
Sydney... did my avatar not give that away?
Why has this thread hit 16 pages? Is it worth reading?
OK, that explains it. No real suburban sprawl or metropolis.DrunkFace wrote:
Sydney... did my avatar not give that away?
Hardly, just pointless and impractical. And by the sound of it no one obeys the rules anyway so there's obviously something wrong.13/f/taiwan wrote:
DrunkFace wrote:
it's too complicated for me.
Not for your poor Scottish assFinray wrote:
Why has this thread hit 16 pages? Is it worth reading?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
How old are you?DrunkFace wrote:
Hardly, just pointless and impractical. And by the sound of it no one obeys the rules anyway so there's obviously something wrong.13/f/taiwan wrote:
DrunkFace wrote:
it's too complicated for me.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
I'd go Colarado
Unless you can still do snow activity, Lake Mead and the Colorado River from Nevada is good enough.jord wrote:
I'd go Colarado
NoFinray wrote:
Why has this thread hit 16 pages? Is it worth reading?
Ahh, so the 4th biggest city in the world by land area has no suburban sprawl... Which city does then?Ilocano wrote:
OK, that explains it. No real suburban sprawl or metropolis.DrunkFace wrote:
Sydney... did my avatar not give that away?
I watched that show "Cribs" and it's beautiful.Ilocano wrote:
Unless you can still do snow activity, Lake Mead and the Colorado River from Nevada is good enough.jord wrote:
I'd go Colarado
Exactly. By land area. You need more density to understand the necessity for 4-way stops.DrunkFace wrote:
NoFinray wrote:
Why has this thread hit 16 pages? Is it worth reading?Ahh, so the 4th biggest city in the world by land area has no suburban sprawl... Which city does then?Ilocano wrote:
OK, that explains it. No real suburban sprawl or metropolis.DrunkFace wrote:
Sydney... did my avatar not give that away?
Colorado or Nevada? Yes, Colorado is awesome all year long. But the Lake Mead area is an acceptable substitute considering how much Jaekus wants to cover.jord wrote:
I watched that show "Cribs" and it's beautiful.Ilocano wrote:
Unless you can still do snow activity, Lake Mead and the Colorado River from Nevada is good enough.jord wrote:
I'd go Colarado
Have you ever been to or even seen a picture of Sydney? But neither the less, why doesn't any of Europe or Asia or South America use them either?Ilocano wrote:
Exactly. By land area. You need more density to understand the necessity for 4-way stops.DrunkFace wrote:
NoFinray wrote:
Why has this thread hit 16 pages? Is it worth reading?Ahh, so the 4th biggest city in the world by land area has no suburban sprawl... Which city does then?Ilocano wrote:
OK, that explains it. No real suburban sprawl or metropolis.
There is no necessity and needlessly dangerous when other much better options exist.
Just because you use them, doesn't mean they're better.DrunkFace wrote:
Have you ever been to or even seen a picture of Sydney? But neither the less, why doesn't any of Europe or Asia or South America use them either?Ilocano wrote:
Exactly. By land area. You need more density to understand the necessity for 4-way stops.DrunkFace wrote:
No
Ahh, so the 4th biggest city in the world by land area has no suburban sprawl... Which city does then?
There is no necessity and needlessly dangerous when other much better options exist.
Have you been to America and used our road systems every day for years on end? I doubt it, so how can you say which is better.
Last edited by UnkleRukus (2011-03-22 12:46:43)
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
Road fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants per year:
Australia: 6.8
USA: 12.3
Road fatalities per 100,000 motor vehicles:
Australia: 10
USA: 15
Road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km:
Australia: 6.5
USA: 8.5
There's 3 statistics which would presume I'm at least partly right.
Australia: 6.8
USA: 12.3
Road fatalities per 100,000 motor vehicles:
Australia: 10
USA: 15
Road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km:
Australia: 6.5
USA: 8.5
There's 3 statistics which would presume I'm at least partly right.
Says the guy that's never experienced them.DrunkFace wrote:
Have you ever been to or even seen a picture of Sydney? But neither the less, why doesn't any of Europe or Asia or South America use them either?Ilocano wrote:
Exactly. By land area. You need more density to understand the necessity for 4-way stops.DrunkFace wrote:
NoFinray wrote:
Why has this thread hit 16 pages? Is it worth reading?
Ahh, so the 4th biggest city in the world by land area has no suburban sprawl... Which city does then?
There is no necessity and needlessly dangerous when other much better options exist.
Btw, the whole everyone else in the world does it so so should you argument is probably the worst you can possibly make.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
drunk shut the fuck up and stop talking shite. you have no idea how/why our road systems work. you've already made an ass out of yourself.
population of australia = 22,596,749DrunkFace wrote:
Road fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants per year:
Australia: 6.8
USA: 12.3
Road fatalities per 100,000 motor vehicles:
Australia: 10
USA: 15
Road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km:
Australia: 6.5
USA: 8.5
There's 3 statistics which would presume I'm at least partly right.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected] … endocument
population of US = 307,006,550
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usp … of+america
Actually, with valid statistics the poulation size doesn´t matter, cause they can be extrapolated. In this case, linking death statistics to the road system is dodgy at best, especially without a source where the data comes from.burnzz wrote:
population of australia = 22,596,749DrunkFace wrote:
Road fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants per year:
Australia: 6.8
USA: 12.3
Road fatalities per 100,000 motor vehicles:
Australia: 10
USA: 15
Road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km:
Australia: 6.5
USA: 8.5
There's 3 statistics which would presume I'm at least partly right.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected] … endocument
population of US = 307,006,550
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usp … of+america
