Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Yes, it is my understanding that crossing in your second illustration would not be permitted.  In that case, the standing train would have the warning signal activated (I am assuming there would be some type of pedestrian crossing signal at these crossings).  And a pedestrian would not be permitted to cross against that signal even though the train is standing still because of the danger of stepping in front of a second train on the middle track.  <o:p></o:p> With your first illustration, there is no reason a pedestrian cannot cross because there are no trains approaching, and the pedestrian can plainly see that to be the case.  However, where does this newly proposed law come into play here?  If there are no trains coming, there are no warning signals activated.  Or are they?  Are they active because of the train standing on the far track?  If there are no signals activated, why do they need a law permitting pedestrians to cross against activated signals?
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