Hacker News Reader

Comment by pricechild | Hacker News Reader

> An emergency vehicle with lights on has the right of way through an intersection even if the lights don’t match.

Is this true in the US?

It sounds surprising to me. Here in the UK they don't get "right of way" by my understanding of the highway code. When approaching a junction they intend to pass through on red, you'll see vehicles slow to a crawl, quadruple check everyone is "giving way" (not the same as having right of way) before crossing.

Edit: "Rule 219" is the most I know about, and it explicitly warns:

> Do not brake harshly on approach to a junction or roundabout, as a following vehicle may not have the same view as you.

View on HN

Nobody ever "has" the right-of-way. You can only yield it, and, paradoxically, the person to whom the right was yielded also does not "have" it. Read the California Vehicle Code if you do not believe me. It never says "right-of-way" except when preceded by "shall yield the"

That's interesting thank you and matches my understanding in the UK. It's exactly the pointer detail I was looking for when asking my question, thank you.

The relevant chapter does seem to be labelled "right of way": https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.x...

...but again it never grants the right of way to anyone. It only instructs people to yield if safe: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...

before in https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

> The provisions of Section 21806 shall not operate to relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons and property.

Although https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio.... seems to exempt them from those regulations if on blue lights.

Given that 21807 only clarifies they are not "relieve"d from a duty, I'm hoping that duty is still present from a different location...

In Croatia, emergency vehicles don't have the right to run the red light (although they universally do, sometimes carefully - other times less so).

They do have right of way when the right of way is determined by traffic signs and not by traffic lights.

They have the right of way and they still exercise caution because it would be insane not to. Being in the right doesn't mean the universe gives you a do-over if something goes wrong.

Do you not look both ways at traffic before using a crosswalk, regardless of what the light says? When a car ignores the light and splatters your brains on the pavement, do you think the right of way will put you back together again?

Do you have a source for this?

The relevant UK Highway Code section begins (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-t... ) with the following:

> The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident.

Of course we should give way to emergency vehicles, and take care of ourselves. I was simply challenging the op about emergency vehicles having right of way. I don't believe that's the case in my country (UK) and I was politely asking if it was true in theirs.

A source for having the right of way meaning that you shouldn't exercise caution?

I don't care what the right of way rules in the UK are, I'm taking exception to your argument that exercising caution implies lacking a right of way, suggesting that having the right of way means you don't have to exercise caution. The right of way is only relevant if you survive to hash things out in court, it won't bring you back from the dead. Even if you have the right of way, you'd be suicidally stupid to not still exercise caution, particularly when doing something usual and obviously dangerous.

The original comment suggested that in their country (assuming US?), emergency vehicles have "the right of way".

I asked if this was true, and gave my understanding of my own country's laws, where emergency vehicles do not have a right of way.

I'm not arguing that exercising caution implies a lack of a right of way. I'm stating that in the UK although you should give way to emergency vehicles, they do not have a right of way and so exercise caution.

I understand other countries might be different, we're all surprising and different. That's why I asked my original question.

Just realised you missunderstood what I was asking for a source for.

I was asking for a source to your statement that "They have the right of way". I'm interested, because if so it would be a difference between countries that surprises me.

Everything else is perfectly reasonable to me.

Being cautious does not mean you don’t have right of way.

I highly doubt emergency vehicles in the UK lack right of way.

I've already done the hard work and pointed the discussion at "Rule 219". Here's a handy link: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/road-users-requ...

I would love to know why your understanding is different?

I’m confused how you can read this and come to the conclusion that emergency vehicles do not have right of way.

Because "A should give way to B" does not imply "B has the right of way over A".

I'm afraid that's just the case in the UK.

> The Highway Code is essential reading for all road users

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-t... in addition states:

> The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident.

The point here is just because you think you're in the right, you still have to do your best to avoid conflict. If that means you should give way to someone that should have given way to you, then you should give way.

I think this is really sensible. It puts the emphasis on everyone to avoid accidents and conflict. Nobody has "the right".

Just be nice to everyone...

They have the right. What those vehicles don't always have is the means.

Just because the law dictates something, it doesn't mean it's safe to act as if it's happening. In a similar way, pedestrians also look both ways before crossing a street.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com