| According to a national report by the Governors Highway Safety Association, more than 7,500 people walking were struck and killed by automobiles in 2022, the highest number since 1981. The spike, which included all accidents — not just those involving right turns on red, was attributed in part to an increase in larger vehicles such as SUVs and pickup trucks on the road.
| The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that the odds a pedestrian would be killed when struck by an automobile turning right were 89% higher when the vehicle was a pickup and 63% higher when it was an SUV, due to larger blind spots and the deadlier force associated with heavier models.
SUVs and pickups (I have a pickup, but I mostly only use it for activities that require a pickup) are extremely dangerous and should not be incentivized as they are by the current rules, and more, they should be taxed more heavily than sedans, coupes, and station wagons.
Then a bit further down:
| But Beeber said the National Motorists Association study of California found that even when there was an accident associated with right turns on red, at least 96% of the injuries sustained by pedestrians or cyclists were minor.
Mr. Beeber is biased, and so is the NMA, so it's hard to say, but not much other data is offered regarding right-on-red injuries/fatalities, so I'm inclined to want to see more data before agreeing that we should ban right-on-red generally, or even in the cities as opposed to in areas with high pedestrian traffic. (Even where pedestrian traffic is high, it being high means drivers will tend to not miss them.)
TFA makes a point of the dearth of data on right-on-red accidents. According to TFA there have been no new studies on the topic since 1994(!). I think the first step then would be to commission several studies.
| “One injury or death is too many,” said Washington state Sen. John Lovick, the primary sponsor of a bill this year that would have prohibited right on red statewide near schools, parks and certain other locations. “If it were me at that intersection crossing, I would want something done.”
This "one injury or death is too many" idea in general is very dangerous because it ignores unintended consequences completely. It's an idea that appeals to emotions rather than to reason.
The average American doesn't understand the concept of "have your head on a swivel" and maintaining situational awareness of what is going on in two different directions. Or of just always be looking the direction that you're going (if you're about to stomp on the accelerator you better first be looking forward).
The massive SUVs and trucks just make the problem worse, but they didn't start the problem.
And that is apart from the horrible level of driver education, and education in general in the US, where a lot of drivers don't seem to understand that you actually need to stop for a right on red, or even that you need to yield to traffic from the left and just blow straight through the light.
Entering straight into intersections on a red light is an extremely bad habit that the US has. Along with getting rid of right turns on red (80% of pop would still do it), some countries also move the traffic lights to the close side of the street (above the traffic it controls, as opposed to across the intersection), forcing cars to stop further back to be able to see the light. I think that would be a huge impact to traffic patterns that is more physics based rather than legislature based.
it's also people fucking scrolling on their fucking phones WHILE PERFORMING THE MANOEUVRE that's part of it
or people not being used to seeing pedestrians because they live in sparse suburbs where nobody walks or goes outside, really, so they roll through that right on red as that's what they're used to
driving is the fucking worst