Why do we have right-on-red, and is it time to get rid of it?
abc7.com
abc7.com
The only exception is maybe next to bike lanes.
As much as I love the right-on-red as a driver, I think it should be ended because drivers aren't responsible enough to use it safely. Perhaps when (if?) self-driving cars are ubiquitous it can be revisited.
IMO, pedestrians are obligated to have some sense of self-preservation, even though in theory drivers should fully accommodate all pedestrian antics. Is it really too much to ask for pedestrians to look left before crossing?
Yes, is that even a real question? A pedestrian with a walk signal should be able to cross without looking for traffic. They shouldn't need to anticipate that the car approaching a red light is going to just roll into the crosswalk without stopping.
Having said that, pedestrian wariness can carry one only so far.
if this is a possibility for anyone who gets behind the wheel of an SUV
then perhaps we should raise the bar for licensing drivers until they all can handle such a regular occurrence
That was a kindergarten lesson, and in my experience, those kids tend to be better about it than most people are when they're older.
If they're not going to do that, what is stopping them from just wandering into a road nowhere near a traffic light anyway?
When there is one lane, you do sort of have to pay attention to blinkers.
Well designed bike lanes, where they exist, typically already follow this pattern. If you're going straight it's pretty silly to be to the right of traffic that is turning right.
Thinking about the number of times a driver rolled through a stop sign or red light while looking at incoming traffic (or their phone) DURING THE TURN infuriates me.
Right on red, unless that arrow is on. Perhaps a blinking yellow arrow for when it isn't, just to avoid the ambiguity.
Or, when you're walking into the road, maybe make sure that drivers nearby see you. I played Ingress and Pokemon Go for years, in the city, at night, for years. Perhaps it's that I knew it put me at heightened risk so I paid more attention, but I really have a hard time understanding why people think that drivers are the only ones who need to pay attention when they're in the street.
What's that? Walking people???
Have they lost their car?
You have to know what it is to see it. :-D
v
> >
v^
https://jabberwocking.com/right-on-red-works-fine-theres-no-...
Of course, 19/20 intersections never have pedestrians anyway.
For some considerable subset of Americans the roundabout is an indecipherable creature that induces fear an panic. For a bit I lived in a more modern US neighborhood filled with them, including some larger ones on the main streets. Some people treat an empty roundabout like a stop sign coming up to it. Others panic and stop inside the 'about waiting for entering traffic. Then you get the occasional rebel that demands to go the wrong way.
I do like the roundabouts, but there are a lot of people still untrained in their ways.
Like here's one I still remember from living in Mountain View. https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3911031,-122.0805526,3a,75y,... Roundabout with straight/left traffic lights (not the right turn lights sometimes seen on large roundabouts in Europe), an oxymoron. Someone drives through a green as usual and bam, hit by someone still clearing the roundabout. Is right on red legal here too? Extra islands also add to the confusion, making people U-turn wrongly. Lots of foot traffic and peds don't know when to safely walk in this situation. Having tons of signs there just adds to the overload.
Two-way stop signs with a roundabout. Who has right of way here? "CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP," but roundabout normally means to yield to whoever's already in it: https://www.google.com/maps/place/37%C2%B023'14.3%22N+122%C2... Can they just remove the crap in the middle?
Or most commonly, zero stop signs but the roundabout is so tiny that it's unclear whether or not two cars can safely use it at the same time.
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3911031,-122.0805526,3a,75y,... with straight/left green lights and walk signals (and right on red I think?)
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3871436,-122.0803604,3a,75y,... with two-way stop, making right of way ambiguous
Some rules are more honored than others.
Consistent rules are more likely to be followed than ones that differ by state and even by city.
Rules which require more situational awareness - you may turn right if the light red, traffic is clear from the left, no people are in the crosswalk, and no one from the right is about to cross - are harder to follow than ones which require situational awareness - you may not move if the light is red.
Rules with personal choices are more subject to peer pressure. You aren't required to turn right on red, but if you don't, you may get honked at. This may encourage people to make the wrong decision, and turn even when not clear. If RTOR is illegal, honking is no longer peer pressure but only an "I am an asshole" indicator.
Depending on were I am in the US, it's common to see most drivers on the highways or interstates doing 10-25mph above the speed limit. Sticking to the speed limit often leaves you getting honked at, having drivers riding your tail, etc. Should we keep decreasing the speed limit until people follow the rules?
> Rules with personal choices are more subject to peer pressure.
A society with rules designed to remove personal choice for fear of peer pressure sounds absolutely miserable. I would never want to live in a world where rules are created by a higher authority with the specific goal of removing my ability to make decisions because it has been decided that its better for me that way.
> Should we keep decreasing the speed limit until people follow the rules?
That seems like a totally different topic. You commented that "Replacing one honored rule with another rule seemed illogical." I pointed out why that high-level characterization can be logical.
The devil is in the details, and the balance of factors concerning RTOR may be far different than the laws on speed limits.
Besides, the article points out the laws changed from the honored rule of no RTOR to a new rule. Using your characterization, that change was also illogical, right? Even though the article points out how it was to save fuel during the gas crisis.
Now that cars are much more efficient, it is certainly logical to ask if those those savings are still worthwhile.
> I would never want to live in a world where rules are created by a higher authority with the specific goal of removing my ability to make decisions because it has been decided that its better for me that way.
How is that relevant? I said was that it's one of several factors to consider when changing a rule, in order to decide if the rule change was logical.
I did not say it was or should be "the specific goal."
I assume you do not generally [1] run a red light whenever you see the cross-traffic is clear, even though that law was created by a higher authority with the specific goal of removing your ability to make a decision that would be allowed with a blinking red light.
I assume you also don't often drive when it's likely your blood-alcohol level is beyond the legal limit, even though that law has also removed your ability to make the decision if you are sober enough to drive safely, justified on the belief that it's better for you that way.
How do you manage to live in a world where one-way streets have severely restricted your ability to go in one direction?
I could go on, but I think you understand that I simply don't see how your comment has any bearing on the topic, except to understand that you are strongly against a whole lot of traffic laws that most people think are reasonable.
[1] Yes, there are exceptional cases when it's legal to run a red light, like if you are on a motorcycle, the traffic detector appears to be broken and you've been sitting there for minutes while no other traffic is present. https://www.startribune.com/the-drive-what-to-do-if-traffic-... . I believe it's still illegal if you are in a car, but it's an affirmative defense the judge will likely accept - same as if your passenger had a heart attack and you are heading straight to the ER.
Banning right on red is called a "protected" crossing - the driver has to very visibly violate the law (in a way that can even be enforced in an automated way) to even be in the situation with the pedestrian. That is substantially more protection and it works.
> crashes increased by more than 20% in states that allowed RTOR.
They also explained some of the mechanics: truck drivers don't see the bikers, SUV drivers don't see the pedestrians, other drivers press you to clear the intersection quicker than is safe etc.
Many drivers believe that getting to their destination is more important than yielding to pedestrians and minor traffic laws. It's important to enforce those minor traffic laws before that behavior/mindset leads to a fatality.
Instead of making it all worse by allowing traffic to flow more often, let's introduce stop lights in the middle of blocks so there's more equality in who get's to stop being distracted by the outside universe, and instead focus on our true selves, which of course involves our online accounts with large corporations.
Driving is such a distraction from being on the phone...
See: “Left or Right Turn: Two-Way Road to One-Way Road” https://www.oregon.gov/odot/dmv/pages/online_manual/study-se...
Being upside down doesn’t help either.
Where I live now is a hellish mix of 4 way stop signs, and lights that seem to be on a 60 to 120 second timer no matter what. It's infuriating driving in the evening, not another car in sight, and getting caught at a redlight for more than a minute. A lot of people here seem to run red lights, and I think that's a huge reason why.
Some cities like Cambridge, MA integrate a default pedestrian cycle at all phases of the lights, sync the lights to not provide a "green wave", and have an extensive arrangement of one-way streets to discourage drivers from using residential roads as shortcuts.
Camera technology will soon be able to detect pedestrians flawlessly, eliminating most of the risk of RTOR. We need to make sure not to ban RTOR before that happens, because it will be too hard to unban it.
I think the main reason why right on red is banned in NYC is for pedestrian safety and traffic flow reasons.
America is the land of "the rules are all there for someone else to follow."
See how we feel about genocide, presently.