Stop sign placement can pose an additional challenge to users. There is a tradeoff between the salient visual cues provided by increased limit line setback, and the crucial time that is lost in approaching the intersection from behind that line; being closer can provide a few additional seconds requisite for safe transit. However, common creeping into the intersection past the limit line causes drivers to lose the invaluable perspective of the visual acuity of lateral motion, crippling them to the more dangerous SAVT. This makes it very difficult to estimate the movement of oncoming traffic. As intersections are not engineered to be used this way, the traffic flow ideals have broken down when drivers consistently choose this method as the safer alternative. Stop signs are accompanied with a limit line, which has a mandatory setback distance which is often not less than 15 feet. While it may be negligence per se to prematurely pass the stop limit line, drivers may be unfairly denied sufficient time gap or opportunity to enter otherwise because of the through-traffic flow and speed; the inherent problem with this traffic control device. While stop signs are a relatively inexpensive method of traffic management, they can be expensive from perspective of the damage they cause users. Pricey but safer traffic signals, roundabouts, and traffic circles are alternatively used where traffic flow dictates it is inappropriate to use a stop sign. It is just as crucial for law enforcement to regulate traffic through-speed that is above the assured clear distance ahead ahead as it is to cite stop sign runners for this device to be a viable option.

Is it true that is a stop sign considered a traffic control device?
yes