While driving along a back country road heading home the other day, my observant and inquisitive daughter pointed something out to me for which I had no explanation. I add this particular observation to a long list of things that puzzle me. These are things I have encountered; heard about, read about or witnessed that seem to defy logic and reason. There may exist good explanations for some if not all of these conundrums, but at this moment, I have yet to discover them and so they remain on my puzzling list.
As we navigated through the now thawing rural countryside, we came upon an intersection with a stop sign and an added sign attached below it that reads “Right Turn Keep Moving.” We have driven this road thousands of times and I have never really absorbed the distinction of that sign, but my astute daughter asked me what the difference was between this particular traffic sign and the more frequently used “Except for Right Turn” variation.
I could not and cannot explain the difference.
In my simplistic mind, these signs both mean exactly the same thing and therefore I cannot figure out why two versions of this command even exist. Who came up with the notion that the original version of this required greater clarity and a small rephrase would help out motorists as they decided what to do at this intersection?
Indeed which sign came first in the chronology of signage?
And finally, how does the Department of Transportation decide which intersection gets which sign? What are the differing criteria for placing a “Right Turn Keep Moving” sign in lieu of an “Except for Right Turn” sign?
These things puzzle me indeed as I cannot tell the difference. Hmmmm….
I know this is trivial and I don’t spend too much time dwelling on it, but it is the type of conversation that I might tend to have now and then with one of my children as someone discovers an incongruent situation and we attempt to comprehend its meaning. We rarely make any headway, but we bat about random possibilities as to why these situations exist and then mentally write them off onto the Puzzling list.
Another oddity from this week occurred as I listened to the radio. They were discussing a news story about a grown woman who accepted a dare to take off all of her clothes and go sit outside of a department store in Florida. After being arrested and booked, they then released her on her own recognizance. This basically means that she was permitted to vouch for herself, promising to behave until she returns for court. Keep in mind that I said that she was a grown woman and she accepted a dare to sit naked in front of a store. Why are we presuming that a grown individual who is still playing Truth or Dare with her friends is capable of behaving let alone vouching for herself?
Yes folks, these things puzzle me.