Studies have shown that when stop signs are installed but are not warranted, they are ineffective for traffic calming purposes. It has been found that:

• Driver may not stop - Stop compliance is poor at unwarranted multi-way stop signs. Drivers on a major roadway either roll through, or run through, the stop sign because, in their experience, there is not enough cross-traffic. Residents complain that drivers do not come to a complete stop at a 4-way stop sign. If you observe motorists at many 4-way stop signs, you would find that nearly half fail to make the required full stop. The stop sign creates a false sense of safety for pedestrians because they expect the cars to stop.
• Stop signs do not slow speeds - Studies have shown that speeds may actually increase some distance from the intersection of the stop sign and speeds are largely unaffected by the stop. Naturally, motorists have to slow down when approaching a stop sign. But, they often speed up quickly after the stop to make up for lost time or out of frustration. Overall speeding is not reduced by the stop signs and frustrated drivers tend to not drive safely.

 When should all-way stop signs not be installed?

• As a means of protecting pedestrians, especially school children, since other means may be used to address such concerns;
• As a speed control device;
• As a means of deterring the movement of through traffic in a residential area;
• Where traffic would be required to stop on grades;
• Where visibility of the sign is hampered by curves or grades and a safe stopping distance is less than 100 meters exists; or
• If any other permanent traffic device controlling right-of-way (i.e. traffic signal or stop sign) is in place within 250 meters of the intersection.

Safety is always a factor. However, the setting of speed limits is for completely practical reasons. When setting speed limits, traffic engineers base standards on several fundamental concepts, which have been proven to be true over the years; including:

• The majority of motorists drive in a safe and reasonable manner.
• The normal careful and competent actions of a reasonable person should be considered legal.
• Laws are established for the protection of the public and the regulation of unreasonable behaviour of a few individuals.
• Laws cannot be effectively enforced without the consent and voluntary compliance of the majority.

Research and experience have shown that effective speed limits are those the majority of motorists naturally drive, and that raising or lowering speed limits does not substantially influence that speed.

It's actually more dangerous when motorists are travelling at varying speeds. With speed limits set at the 85th percentile, the speed differential (range of travel speeds) is reduced so that more vehicles are travelling at near the same speed, with fewer vehicles travelling at extremely high or low speeds. 

Statistics show that roadways with speed limits set at the 85th percentile speed have fewer collisions than roads where the posted speed limit is below the majority naturally travels.

What if people do not obey the posted speed limit?

The local OPP cover a very large area and cannot be in all places at all times monitoring speeds and other areas for compliance. The OPP rely on realistic speed laws to control the unreasonable speeder whose driving behaviour is clearly out of line from the majority of the traffic flow. A reasonable speed limit offers an effective enforcement tool to the OPP by clearly separating the occasional violator from the reasonable majority.

The solution is not to post a speed zone to an unjustifiably low speed and then expect law enforcement to control the violators by constant monitoring. The OPP cannot afford to sit in wait constantly for speeders in a multitude of locations.