Click on the images for a
How save are road-intersections with a 4-way stop?
Usually they are save, because people take care to assure each other's safety. Typically, the bigger and busier the intersections are, the more likely they will be of the four-way-stop type where traffic lights are not installed. Here, each driver is confronted with traffic proceeding from three different directions, creating different situations, and requiring appropriate responses in each case. In order to meet this complex challenge, so that smooth crossings happen routinely, three basic common-sense rules have been created that govern the right-of-way in each case.
The first rule is that every vehicle must come to a complete stop at the intersection, regardless of the laws of right-of-way.
Past this point, the timing determines the right-of-way to a large extent.
The rule of the right-of-way determines who gets to roll first.
Basically, the car that arrives first, gets to go first. When two cars arrive simultaneously, the car to the right, gets to go first. Two cars traveling in opposite directions may enter the intersection at the same time, each in its own lane. When four cars arrive simultaneously they must signal each other.
Once traffic has entered the intersection, it has the right-of-way. The traffic that would enter the intersection thereafter, has to yield till the intersection is clear. After this, traffic in the alternate direction has the right of way.
If this common-sense right-of-way rule is not applied, vehicles crash. If vehicles would be moving at the center of the road, and enter simultaneously, they would all crash at the center of the intersection.
Vehicles travelling in their own lane, would still crash under such circumstances, but would move a little farther before they would crash. This means that they would crash into each other's driver side. No other type of collision is possible with cars entering an intersection simultaneously.
A third type of collision is possible when a driver proceeds into an intersection that is already occupied.
In this case the impact would be on the victim's passenger side. Under those circumstances no other type of collision would typically occur.
This means that the type of collision that is inflicted provides by its type an indication which basic driving rule has been ignored.
When the rules 'are' applied that govern the right-of-way, these types of crashes can all be avoided.
This means that according to the right-of-way principle, the green vehicle has the right-of-way before everyone, since it is already in the intersection. Next the blue vehicle has the right of way, as it would travel in parallel with the green. If the green vehicle intended a left turn, it would have to stop to let the blue vehicle pass.
If two vehicles are facing each other, the left-turning vehicle must yield to the oncoming vehicle. In practice, the blue vehicle would hesitate for a moment and be cautious, not knowing what the intention of the green vehicle would be, in case the turn signal was not operational. This means that the blue driver would not know at this point if the green driver did intent to turn left, and if so, did intent to stop.
I have seen many cases where a car has pulled right in front of me on a four-way stop.
Only after the green vehicle had moved significantly further into the intersection, would it be save for the blue vehicle to accelerate and cross the intersection.
In some cases the delayed action might not be expected by others, who would then wrongly assume that the intersection is free, and proceed without visually verifying that it actually is free.
By the time the green car would be exiting the intersection, the blue car would be safe to go. The blue car, having the right-of-way by being partially in the intersection, would be accelerating to clear the intersection.
At this point, neither the white car, nor the yellow car would have the right to be entering the intersection, though they often do.
The rule that one should not enter an intersection that is already occupied, is easily ignored, and it is most often ignored when drivers get into the bad habit of not coming to a full stop at a stop sign.
A significant time difference is involved, of two seconds, between a full stop and a rolling stop. The extended stop time of two seconds, at a full stop, is required by law. It is also required by the driver entering an intersection. The time is needed for one to assure oneself that the intersection that one intends to enter, is indeed clear in both perpendicular directions.
In many places in the world this requirement is written into law, specifically that a driver approaching an intersection, must yield the right of way to traffic already in the intersection.
The rolling-stop practice typically does not leave enough time for this law to be fulfilled. It does not leave enough time for the critical visual verification to be carried out in more than one direction. Thus, it happens all-too-often that a vehicle enters an intersection that is already occupied.
Ironically, the habit is, to look to the right first, rather than to the left, where the traffic would come from in the closest lane. This means that in the case of a rolling-stop, the yellow driver would not have had the time to look to the left at all, to verify that the intersection is clear before entering.
Under these conditions a crash becomes nearly unavoidable. By the time the blue car would have recognized that the yellow car had started to roll, it would have been too late for the blue driver to avoid the fast accelerating yellow car colliding into its passenger side.
I have witnessed the result of such a crash recently. The yellow car was apparently still accelerating at the point of impact. The impact force was so great that the blue car was spun 60 degrees off its direction of travel, and with such an immense damage incurred, that the insurance company rendered the blue car a write-off.
The accident would not have occurred if the yellow driver had given himself the time to look to the left, where he would have noticed the blue car being already in the intersection.
Often, in a crash like this, a third factor is involved. In this case, the yellow driver would have seen that the green car was moving out of the intersection, and would have assumed from this, that the intersection would be free, and free for him to enter without any further verification.
These types of tragically incomplete assumptions are easily made, because in the vast majority of cases such assumptions turn out to be correct, even while technically speaking, they are not.
Then, when situations arise as shown here, the yellow driver would not be in the crash position without a glaring lack of due care and attention, which is evident by the physical damage. The yellow driver thereby shoulders the guilt for the resulting accident. No rational scenario is possible, in which the yellow driver would not be guilty.
The blue car could not have been hit if it had not been in the intersection before the yellow car started to roll. The travel distance from start to impact is too great to assume that the blue car had entered the intersection after the yellow car started to roll.
If both the blue and yellow cars had entered the intersection simultaneously, and a crash had occurred because of it, the blue car would have impacted the yellow car on the drivers side, instead of the yellow car impacting the blue car on the passenger side.
The physical evidence does not support the assumption that the yellow car had the intersection clear before him, before entering, giving him the right-of-way. The right-of-way was assumed, but is physically impossible.
An accident as shown here, can only occur when the blue car, that was impacted, was already in the intersection before the yellow car began to move. There is no way to get around the physical evidence, except to ignore it. This, unfortunately is happening a lot these days on many levels and with vastly greater consequences, and potential consequences, than those incurred here.
I am presenting the case as an example, to illustrate that a single second of insufficient care can result in rather significant tragedies. Fortunately, in the case illustrated here, none of the drivers where injured. The yellow car, an SUV, suffered some minor damage on the front bumper on the drivers side. The blue car, though, was demolished beyond repair. That's quite a price to pay, isn't it, for a one-second lack of attention? Still, the outcome could have been much worse if personal injuries had occurred.
In the case at hand the blue driver was assigned 100% of the guilt, for not yielding. The guilt was evidently assigned, once again, on the basis of false assumptions. False assumptions are often careless assumptions. When it comes to a case of failed justice, based on false assumption, serious injury can be inflicted on civilization itself. Justice is one of the precious pillars of civilization. Here, hard-to-repair damages can and do occur, when justice becomes lost and civilization is thereby diminished.
In the case cited here, the failed justice was further aggravated by an eye-witness report of the driver of the white car.
The driver of the white car stated 8 days later that the blue car was racing through the intersection, based on a flash recognition that the intersection. that was assumed to be clear, was in fact occupied.
Eye witness recollections, stemming from movements of shock, are rarely accurate and complete. Still, they are often regarded to be accurate. On this path of mistaken assumptions, even with the best intentions, justice drifts ever further out of sight.
When one sees these situations unfolding, one wonders how much we have already lost of our humanity by lack of attention, lack of care, and lack of truthfulness.
The law states that no driver has the right to enter an intersection that is already occupied. If justice becomes lost, the law becomes meaningless, and civilization becomes arbitrary.
If the rule is adhered to, a crash as it is shown here should not occur. Whenever a vehicle is hit on the passenger side, this basic rule has been violated. Impact damage on the passenger side is not possible if the basic rule is adhered to. Justice should reflect this.
In order for this type of crash to occur, if both vehicles enter the intersection simultaneously, the blue vehicle would have had to accelerate many times faster, which only a high-power racing car would be able to do.
How is it possible then for this type of crash to occur, where the impact is so strong that the damaged vehicle ends up spun 60 degrees? This is only possible if the yellow car had accelerated without caution, right to the point of impact.
When people fail to follow the required order and procedures, the lack of attention can result in confusion and frustration on the part of the drivers approaching from the three different directions. These cause crashes.
A particular threat is the driver who is in a hurry who does not take into account the possibility that the oncoming driver may be about to execute a left turn. Since this can cause unexpected hesitation, always be aware that a change in timing occurs with it, that results in situations that fall outside the parameters covered by common assumptions. In addition, even if all drivers are well intentioned, their driving skills and judgments vary.
It is wise to assume nothing, except to assume that the other driver is going to make a mistake. Thus, if need be, let the confused or aggressive drivers go first. The delay may only be for a few seconds. Those may be life-saving seconds. With them, your life may hang in the balance.
The big danger, however is, that truth is no longer weighed in the balance. - In this case, when truth no longer counts for much of anything, justice stands before us as but an empty shell. It no longer functions to uphold civilization. More importantly, how can we get back what we have evidently lost? How can we prevent civilization from crashing? Likewise, how can we prevent crashes in traffic? Do we need stricter laws, more law enforcement, and harsher penalties? Or do we need a more-deeply moving imperative, such as an increased sense of justice, and caring?
Indeed, how much have we already lost of the underlying sense of justice that should be one of the prime pillars of civilization? How much do we have left to lean on?
The case of the car crash tells us that we have lost more than we may realize. This is evident on numerous levels in the case of the car crash. Not only was the fault unjustly assigned, by ignoring the physical evidence. Several other types of injustice may have occurred too, in the background, that may have shaped the outcome. I have listed just a few elements that typically contribute to the loss of justice.
The first four items of discrimination may have all been a factor in the conflict for determining the guilt. The driver of the blue car, a young woman stood in conflict with an elderly man who is also a military veteran. Discrimination by age, sex, and status all too often stands in the background, often without being intended.
Furthermore, the police officer in the case of the car crash, comes from a cultural and religious background in which women are held inferior to men. While professional decisions are intentionally kept free of discrimination, unconsciously, discrimination remains a factor in modern multicultural society until society as a whole has healed itself of the scourge of religious, cultural, ethnic, and sex discrimination. While much progress has been made, the healing is not yet complete.
In addition to all that, self-incrimination is also a potential cause that shapes the course of justice. Traumatic experiences tend to inspire shame, and thereby inspire self-incrimination, unconsciously of course. I am not saying that any of these factors have been involved in the unjust assignment of the guilt for the car crash. However, when one sees a glaring injustice based on the evidence, one wonders what contributing factors may have caused the injustice to occur.
Another factor involved, might also have been the imposition of might. In the case of the car crash, guilt was assigned by the bureaucracy of the giant insurance corporation, a near monopoly operated by the state, which assessed the guilt based on hasty assumptions, before the police report had actually been received.
With all these factors standing in the background, one wonders where this all leaves us, in considering the case.
When one comes to a point where many forms of injustice appear to converge, it is always wise to stop for a few seconds, step back, look to the right and the left, to discover why the loss of justice has occurred. For this, let's step back a long way.
The Toltec book of wisdom
Let's consider the mentality of a people who had lived 10,000 years ago, of a culture that came through the extremely harsh times of the last Ice Age. What type of pillar had upheld the civilization they had built for themselves that had sustained them throughout these critical times? It would have had to be a platform on which gross injustice is not possible, or else people would not have been able to survive. While it is difficult to reach back in time over these long periods, researchers have found links of evidence that speak of a civilization that lived in the area of today's Mexico, who lived roughly ten millennia before our time, shortly after the end of the last Ice Age.
With this considered, let me present a brief story from the background of the ancients' ideology that presents some critical spiritual principles with which humanity had flourished throughout the most challenging times of the human journey.
The story is from the "Toltec book of wisdom," as the researcher Don Miguel Ruiz has called the ancient source that he presented in his video, The Four Agreements:
The selected story is about a dream in which the dreamer sees an old man by a river, in meditation. In the story, the old man has beautiful multicoloured light emanating from his head, something that we no longer see today or expect to see.
The dreamer is noticed by the old man. The old man smiles at him with eyes filled with love.
The dreamer asks the old man at the river what he is doing, being so serene. The man replies that he had asked this very question once to his own teacher a long time ago. He says that in response his teacher had opened his chest and taken out his heart, from where he took a beautiful flame.
The old man says that his early teacher then opened up HIS chest, and also HIS heart, and placed the little flame inside it and put the heart back.
The old man says that as soon as this was done to him he felt an intense love, because the flame of his teacher's love was now his own love.
The old man tells the dreamer that the flame grew and became a fire - a fire that doesn't burn, but purifies everything it touches. And so, as his flame of love burnt, it touched each of the cells in his body, and the cells of his body loved him back, and they became one.
The old man at the river says that he had felt a need to share his love further.
He touched with his love every tree, and as he did he noticed that the trees loved him back. He became one with the trees. And so, while this was happening his love grew still more.
He says that his love touched every flower and every blade of grass on the Earth, and they all loved him back and he became one with them.
The old man continues saying that his love kept growing still more and more.
He says his love touched every animal in the world, and they all responded and loved him back, and he became one with them in this love.
And still his love kept growing.
He says, it touched every crystal in every stone on the ground and in the dirt and in every metal, and they all loved him back, and he and they became one.
With his love growing still more, it touched the waters, the oceans, the rivers, and the rain and snow. And they all loved him back.
The old man says, “we all became one.”
The old man continues saying that his love kept on growing without end. It touched the air and the wind, by which he felt a strong communion with the wind, with the waters, and with all nature.
He says that his love grew so much that it touched the sky and reached to the Sun and the stars. And so it was that his love was reflected in every star, in the Moon, in the Sun, and he felt that they all loved him back so that he became one with them too.
And even then, his love kept still growing. He says it kept growing and touched the whole of humanity, and he adds, “I became so extensively one with the whole of humanity that wherever I go, and in whomever I meet, I see myself reflected in their eyes, because I am a part of everything - because I love.”
Then, as the old man says this, he opens his own chest and takes out his heart with the beautiful flame inside, and places that flame into the dreamer’s heart.
“Now that love is growing in you,” he says to the dreamer, “you are one with the wind, with all nature, with all animals, and all of humanity. You feel the heat and the light emanating from that flame in your heart. Out of your head now shines that beautiful multi-coloured light that you noticed in me, because you are now likewise radiant with the glow of love.”
The old man suggests to the dreamer that a sense of gratitude would emerge from this and grow into a great gratitude to the Creator of the Universe in the form of a prayer of love, saying:
Thank you, for the gift of life and for everything that I have ever truly needed.
Thank you for the opportunity to experience this beautiful body and this wonderful mind.
Thank you for living inside me with all your love, with your pure and boundless spirit, with your warm and radiant light.
Thank you for using my words, for using my eyes, for using my heart to share Your love wherever I go. I love just the way you do, and because I am your creation, I love myself just the way I am.
So help me to keep the flame of love, and the light of peace that radiates from it, in my heart, and help me to make loving a new way of living so that I may live in Love for the rest of my life.
With this the story ends, of the old man at the river.
How much of it is fiction, I do not know. But would I need to know, or would any one of us need to know?
If we can replicate the story, then we can feel its essence as a truth. Thereby alone would we prove that it is truthful.
The critical element in the ancient story evidently is love. This appears to have been the central pillar that upheld civilization during the last Ice Age.
Astrophysical evidence suggests that the Sun had gone inactive for most of the 90,000-year glaciating period called the Ice Age, except for 25 brief active intervals spaced 1470 years apart on average, named the Dansgaard-Oeschger oscillations. Living conditions would have been difficult during the long periods under an inactive Sun with a 70% lower energy output.
Civilization would have been restricted to the narrow band between the 40 degree latitudes, where the received solar radiation is the strongest, which includes Mexico. Living would have mostly depended on fishing, which can easily sustain a minuscule world population of 1 to 10 million people. The fishing, in turn, would have required extensive cooperative efforts, the kind that would inspire a far-flung ideology of universal love.
Living in the sparse world under a dimmer Sun, the required cooperation for survival would render each person a highly valuable asset for the community as a whole. This environment would inspire a sense of universal love. This sense of human value has evidently become largely lost over time.
If we had the kind of sensitive and care for one-another that once existed, many of the traffic crashes would have likely been avoided.
While traffic crashes are relatively rare in considering the great volume of today's traffic, they do stand nevertheless in metaphor as a warning for the vastly greater crashes that need to be avoided, crashes of civilization, that the modern world is heading towards, and this just as carelessly and with the same underlying injustice that reflects a lack of love and caring.
In the arena of nuclear-war terror, humanity stands terribly unjust towards itself. A single hour of war can create conditions on earth in which not a single blade of grass can grow, much less the needed food for seven billion people. We are nourishing a war machine that is capable of unleashing the destructive force of 500,000 Hiroshima bombs. The resulting crash of the world can happen as quickly and unexpectedly as the car-crash occurred. But why should society be content with this gross injustice against it? Shouldn't we rather come to a full stop, look in both directions to see where the traffic is going?
We also face the start of the next Ice Age in potentially, 30 years from now, if the presently ongoing astrophysical trends continue. The astrophysical dynamics point in the direction of a rapid ice age beginning that may be closer than we care to acknowledge. The details are too extensive to present here, which I have presented in a separate exploration video series.
On the day when the Ice Age begins, which could happen quickly and without warning, civilization will crash without fail if the needed preparations for it have been omitted. Canada, Russia, and Europe, for example, will become giant snowflakes then, when the Sun goes inactive and the next Ice Age begins. The uninhabitable polar regions will then extend towards the tropics to as far as the 40 degree latitudes. This takes Canada, Russia, and Europe off the map of the liveable zone, with climates in their regions comparable to today's Antarctica. Shouldn't society stop here too, for two seconds, consider where it is going and consider the consequences? Society has the option to treat itself justly in this case.
Civilization would crash almost completely for the lack of food when the Ice Age begins, unless large-scale preparations were made in advance for creating a new food resource, by building new infrastructures for agriculture, such as by placing agriculture afloat on the tropical seas for the lack of large useful landmasses in the tropics.
Humanity is presently terribly unjust to itself, with its complete lack of attention to the underlying astrophysical dynamics that lead to the next Ice Age cycle. This lack of attention almost assures the most devastating crash in civilization that only a few may survive, but which is completely avoidable with enough love in society for one-another as human beings. The physical resources to accomplish what is required, do all exist in abundance, to create a richer world than we presently have. Shouldn't universal love and justice impel us to go this path, rather than to gamble with the potential loss of humanity?
A great crash in the sphere of finance and economics is likewise in the making. The forces of oligarchy are crashing civilization. The great gambling game of financial derivatives is crashing the world. The more unstable the world becomes, the more money is being made by the gamblers who bet on economic upturns and downturns simultaneously, with a 50% margin; a game in with which they win either way, and society that foots the bill, gets robbed and is forced into austerity and death. Some people call this justice. The gambling houses keep the winnings, and society pays for their losses that become profits for the bankers' friends.
A law, the Glass Steagall law of 1933, had been in place in the USA for 66 years, that had protected society's bank deposits from the rapacious greed of the financial derivatives gamblers. The law created a protective barrier around commercial banking that serves the nation, and separated it from the rapacious greed of financial thievery. Under the umbrella of this protection of the nation, the USA had developed itself into the most-powerful economy on the planet. The principle of protection, of course, is not welcomed by the thieves of the oligarchic system who aim to loot the world. Consequently the law was repealed in 1999. Some say, this was done with the aid of a 350 million dollar bribery fund.
Nine years later, after the repeal of the protecting law succeeded, in 2008, the entire western financial system began to crash. The crash was unavoidable, because in a world where justice has been thrown out of the window, civilization breaks down to low levels where typically gross thievery rules. The loss of justice is always fatal to civilization, no matter how small or how huge the context may be in which the loss is manifested.
In order to save the crashing system of thievery, close to 50 trillion dollars in bailout funds have been poured into the feeding trough for the robbers, in the form of numerous types of gigantic bailouts, which are still ongoing. The term, gigantic, is justified. The flooding of fresh blood into the feeding trough, which the predators demand, presently, in 2013, under the euphemism of quantitative easing, amounts to 80 billion dollars a month. Comparatively, this sum amounts to a stack of hundred dollar bills, laid face to face, stretching all the way from Boston to Los Angeles and back again. Society is hugely unjust to itself to be trashing its economic existence with these ongoing, massive, give-away schemes. There is not enough love left in society to block this thievery, such as by bringing back the protective Glass Steagall law.
Since the giant bailouts are not enough to quench the thirst of the thieves, new laws have been passed in almost every western countries that permit "systemically important financial institutions" to confiscate society's bank deposits with bail-in schemes, when this becomes necessary to save the robbers from crashing. But this too, cannot solve anything. Not the grandest thievery is able to save the current financial gambling casino where every day a thousand trillion ride the dice in the form of financial derivatives contracts that have no relationship to the physical economies. This casino operation is so enormous that if the gambling contracts would be measured in hundred-dollar notes laid face to face, the money pile would stretch 26 times around the world. There is not enough money anywhere in the world to pay for the winnings in this huge casino operation, that has become the world financial system. Consequently the system is crashing. The system is on a collision course with reality. Nothing can prevent it from crashing. It is already crashing into the living of society. It is high time that the value of the principle of justice is being considered. In the aftermath of the car collision, justice itself crashed, as too little attention was given to its principles in disregard of the physical evidence.
The protection, which the Glass Steagall law had once afforded society, and had done so for 66 years, still fuels the assumption in today's world that people will have their bank deposits returned to them. This will never happen under the current, totally bankrupt system. Society's bank deposits and equity are now gambling chips in casino operation of unimaginable size. The bail-in practice that confiscates depositors funds, that is now a part of the new casino practice, has already shattered the illusion in Cypress that bank deposits will be returned instead of confiscated. The economy of Cypress has been deeply destroyed in 2013, by the bail-in as if a nuclear bomb had hit. Cyprus is said to have been not an isolated case, but was designed to serve as the new template for the world. On this platform of ever-greater thievery, humanity as a whole is doomed.
The crash of civilization cannot be avoided at the present stage. The collision is imminent. Survival depends on humanity pulling itself back from this trajectory, which in the financial world might still be possible by means of replacing the loveless platform, with the time-tested platform of Universal Love, respect, and caring, as outlined in the book of ancient wisdom.
Society has almost no real justice left for itself to protect its existence, nor a sense of universal love. The loss of love and justice is now so extensive, that in our world, which has a billion people living in chronic starvation as the result of economic destruction, enormous amounts of the world's food resources are being burnt in automobiles in the form of biofuels. The resources that are burnt in this manner are so extensive that they would feed 400 million people. Of these, society is committing at least 100 million people per year to the silent, agonizing death by starvation. This horrendous injustice adds up to the largest genocide of all times that pales the Nazi holocaust into insignificance. Humanity's love for itself is crashing, so that no justice exists on this front. Humanity is crashing for the lack of attention, because the simple fact is fairly obvious, that the biofuels process is not a net energy producer, but is merely an expensive energy conversion process. It takes nearly as much energy input for the production of biofuels, than the produced fuel gives back, while the process produces the largest genocide ever. If this path towards crashing civilization isn't utter injustice and lack of love, by humanity towards itself, what would qualify?
It is amazing to see how many aspects of the car crash are reflected in these larger worldwide issues that similar attention of justice, love, and the resulting care could avoid.
Society is equally unjust to itself by accepting the ongoing political control of its physical sciences, instead of its science being guided by the imperatives of physical evidence. In the case of the Manmade Global Warming doctrine, as an example of this type of tragedy, science has underwritten for its masters, the destruction of industries, economies, and civilization itself, by throttling human development and sounding the trumpet for depopulation..
Nothing could be more insane, unjust, and devoid of love by humanity for itself, than the glorification of the depopulation ideology that seeks to reduce the world population from the present 7 billion people to less than one billion remaining alive. On this road humanity has been declared to be a cancer to the Earth. The policy for the rapid 'cleansing' of the landscape of its cancer is already an established force of horrors. And it will succeed if humanity remains indifference to its innermost love for one-another, and thus remains blind to where it is going, before it is forging ahead to destroy its own civilization.
If humanity would choose to be wise, and would seek to avoid the crash of its civilization - the crash of its world, its living, and itself with it, it might choose to pull itself up as a sky dancer would, and in order for it to get there, borrow a page from the book of ancient wisdom that had enabled a people to dance in the sky in the harshest times under a dimmer Sun.
We can do this again. We are born as a society of creators and builders, not as consumers of what we have not created, such as the modern paradigms idealize. We are born with the flame of love in the heart for one another in all respects, and for life, and for the creative power we have as human beings, and the power to discover and to move ahead. Our civilization is a skyward flight. It is not designed to be let go in mid-air, to thereby crash as the oligarchic system demands, but is instead designed to become evermore powerful, joyous, and free. There is a spirit in man that points us to the stars, which at the same time furnishes the love, care, and justice in the smallest spheres, from which the majestic in civilization gains its momentum for good.