The aim of this article is to outline the issue of paternalistic legal regulations being expressed through means of visual communication of law, such as often used in legal realm “optical signs, which are not expressions of ethnic written language”, that is, through traffic signs. Main focus is placed on one particular prohibitory traffic sign, “no entry” sign, which often is placed at the exit ends of one-way streets to determine traffic direction. On the one hand, this analysis can be treated as a specific attempt to supplement the debate on legal paternalism. Namely, it stresses the issue of characteristic features of danger, risk of harm justifying given legal regulation, which restricts its addressees’ liberty, whether to “protect (...) from self-inflicted harm or (...) to guide them (...) toward their own good”. It is proposed to distinguish two kinds of danger underlying paternalistic regulations: so-called “natural” danger and so-called “conventionally-made” danger. Apart from this, the problem of visual communication through traffic signs is outlined.