Friday, September 28, 2007

Whats The Deal With Stoplights In This Town?

I just don't get it. Who in the heck is responsible for the stoplights in town and the surrounding county?? Whoever it is they do a horrible job at it. Actually I spoke with someone close the the traffic committee and some of the problem lies in the State Highway department.

No surprises there really, but they are responsible for the moronic installation of a stoplight at Fullerton Pike and 37 (at the Monroe Hospital) that was unnecessary when it was installed (before the hospital) and ridiculously counter productive now that the hospital is there. The problem? When the lights were installed originally it never made sense. There were know plans for a hospital, the rumor was that it was going to be the home of the new Menards but in another travesty of local zoning management, Menards had to be moved because the zoning wasn't approved. That intersection was deemed dangerous because of accidents that occurred there. There were a few but in nearly all cases they were caused by idiot drivers in a hurry not by a lack of a traffic signals. The installation of the traffic signals never made sense because of two reasons:
  1. The didn't install turn arrows to allow for crossing traffic on green. Almost all the accidents that I saw or read about were caused by someone either trying to turn into highway traffic in a hurry or crossing on coming traffic. People in a hurry to get to work or school or home, simply can't wait for little obstacles like semi trucks doing 60 MPH on a four lane highway I guess.
  2. There was no need to cause highway traffic to stop yet again to allow for a minor access road to cross a major highway when you could see for over a half mile in both directions. Afterall that is why the over passes were installed at the crossings north of it (45/37 and 48/37) because in a 3 mile stretch on the only major north-south traffic route there were 4 or 5 stop lights along the way.
If you got hit by a semi truck while trying to cross at 37 and Fullerton Pike, it wasn't because a semi-truck materialized out of thin air and you didn't have time to react. It was because the world revolved around you and the truck should have stopped, swept the pavement of all debris and then directed traffic so you could cross without getting your tires dirty.

Now that the Hospital exists, I believe there is a necessity for a traffic signal. However not one without turn lights. I have seen more accidents at that intersection since the lights were installed than I ever witnessed prior to their installation. Now what you get is people travelling on the the higway looking turn accross on coming traffic to Fullerton Pike having to do exactly what the lights were installed to prevent, which is close your eyes and gun it to get across and hope on coming traffic can stop because there is no turn light insalled to allow safe turning. During peak hours like home rush hour, the North Bound turn lane on 37 is backed up 10 cars deep at times and only 1-2 cars have the ability to get turned during the long Green light so people are forcing their way across after the light turns yellow and sometimes red. A simple turn arrow would aalleviate a lot of accidents IMO.

Now on to the real reason for this post, which is another (previously unreported) idiotic stop light. This time I believe it falls under the jurisdiction of the City. Its at the corner of Thompson and Rogers (Across from the old RCA plant location). This light does have a turn signal attached to it, but the problem is it lasts all of 3 seconds. On a good day you can get 3 cars turned on a green arrow. Most times if the first car isn't rolling when it turns green you only get 1 through. Rush hour always bring huge lines at that light and most of it is turning south onto Rogers from westbound on Thompson (or what ever it is named between Walnut and Rogers. At 5:00pm on weekdays there is always 8+ cars trying to turn left at that light and dozens coming from the other direction going straight to Walnut. Makes for a ridiculously slow ride home when the line turning keeps growing and only 1-2 are turning during each light. If you added 3 more seconds to the turn arrow it would clear up half of the traffic congestion at that intersection during peak rush hour.

Rant over.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Teen Arrested After Altercation With Gun

From the Herald Times: Teen Arrested After Altercation With Gun

Coryell faces preliminary charges of intimidation with a deadly weapon and pointing a firearm.

Bloomington police were called to the 500 block of Granite Drive at 12:30 a.m. Police said a man told police he allowed Coryell to test his subwoofer that was for sale.

When Coryell didn’t return the subwoofer or pay for it, the man went to Coryell’s home and demanded the item be returned or paid for. The two argued outside before the man saw some friends. The man spoke to his friends about the dispute, then went into Coryell’s home. When he entered the foyer, he later told police, Coryell pointed a gun at him and told him to get out of he’d shoot.


Hold on just a second here. What is wrong with this picture?? Let me look at this again. Ok, the guy is approached by someone who wants to test out a speaker (oh, sorry sub woofer) before he buys it. The guy ok's this teenager (19) to install the subwoofer in his car. When the guy fails to pay for the sub woofer or return it, rather than call police to report an obvious theft he goes to the teenagers home and gets into an altercation. Then finds a 'group of friends' to report instead of police to discuss it with. After this 'discussion' the friends wait outside while he forcibly (assuming forcibly because it doesn't sound as if he was going to be invited) enters someone's home. Sounds about right .

So now looking at it from the teens side. You have just had an argument with the guy only to find him breaking into your house with a mob waiting outside for you. Do you not have a right to defend yourself and your home? I think yes and can guarantee you that if someone breaks into my home there is gonna be at least one armed resident prepared to repel boarders, if you know what I mean. ;) The problem in all of this is that this 19 year old stole property and rather than let the police do their job this guy went vigilante and decided to take care of his own business. I guess I can understand that in principle but if you go so far as breaking the law yourself by trespassing in a threatening manner (I fully believe unwanted entering of someones home and leading a gang to be seperate threatening manners) then you should fully expect to have a gun pointed at you.

This is NOT intimidation with a gun that should result in the 19 year old sitting in jail. Rather this is breaking and entering with intent to do harm, resulting in someone being forced to defened themselves and their home. What should have happened is the police should have been called and arrested the 19 year old for theft, not for defending his home from a vigilante and his gang...err discussion group.

Free Coryell now or charge him with theft, but do not charge him with intimidation for protecting himself.