Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="schlimm"]Drivers are required to respond to flashing crossing lights and gates at a crossing.  The required response is to apply brakes to stop your vehicle.  The crossing can be seen far in advance of the distance necessary for stopping on a day with good visibility, which was present on the day of the accident.  This driver did not heed the lights and didn't begin to apply brakes until far too late.  The approach sign distance is completely irrelevant, as that is purely advisory.  [/quote]   I am not saying that the driver was not negligent.   Forget about that driver.  I am only saying that a driver of a truck such as the one the driver was driving, at a speed of 70 mph, has a 2.92-second warning.  That is more than enough time to see the danger and make a decision to apply the brakes.   <o:p></o:p> I don’t see anything that says the RXR sign is purely advisory.  But even if it is, why should a driver not take the advice it gives?  It marks the beginning of the approach zone in which a driver is advised to look for danger and make a decision by the time he or she reaches the non-recovery zone.   <o:p></o:p> Since the approach zone does not require a driver to slow down, even if the red lights are flashing, why should a driver slow down prior to the approach zone if the red lights are flashing?   <o:p></o:p> An informed driver will expect the zones to be properly set up with enough distance to begin the reaction and braking.  And they are.  But I expect that their margin of safety will be questioned in court.  Or maybe not.  But it is being questioned right now by the Nevada D.O.T.            <o:p></o:p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag