turn left on red: no no no!

[Cyril Haearn]

In Germany there are fixed arrows at some traffic lights that allow turning right (nearside) on red. When the light is red one must stop before proceeding. One must not proceed if the light is red, even if "it is safe to do so".

Drivers who obey the stop rule are as rare as hens teeth.

We do not need more complicated rules and exceptions. We need the three EEEs: enforcement, enforcement and enforcement.


http://www.ln-online.de/Lokales/Luebeck ... nd-stoppt2

This article reports how the police exceptionally enforced the law and issued hundreds of tickets. A few months later the STOP sign had disappeared. One never read of more enforcement. Seems to me the best they could have done was to stop the drivers and roar at them: Können sie lesen? / can't you read?

"Accidental" deaths and injuries are rising steeply here.

[kwackers]

We need the three EEEs: enforcement, enforcement and enforcement.

Good luck with that.
Police rarely bother coming out for burglaries these days. They exist primarily to hand out 'crime numbers' so you can claim on your insurance so the chances of enforcement particularly in the politically sensitive area of the 'war on motorists' is a non-starter.

In the meantime, 100,000's of light controlled junctions and cyclists being squashed regularly by left turning vehicles - but not quite often enough to warrant paying millions for extra police that would barely scratch the surface anyway...

I'd be interested in knowing what you'd recommend that is realistically likely to happen? Perhaps the reality is the cost of a few lives lost each year is worth it to allow consistent rules??
(FWIW, there are a number of junctions I'm aware of where it's possible to turn left on red - albeit by using the tiny provided cycle lane to hop on before the lights and hop off after the corner. I use them where they exist and find them pretty handy...)

There's another thread about this somewhere.

[irc]

Turn left on red (or right for them) works perfectly well for millions of drivers and cyclists in the USA. Given a choice between treating a L turn on red as a give way or stopping alongside a large vehicle until the green I know which I think is safer for cyclists.

In Idaho they have gone further and brought in a law which allows cyclists to treat stop lines as give ways and red lightsa as stop signs. Guess what? No carnage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

Seeing the low standard of driving from many road users anyone trusting all drivers to do a mirror and/or shoulder check when moving off from rest and turning left is very trusting indeed.

[Bmblbzzz]

My German isn't that great, but the article about Lubeck linked to seems to refer to a stop sign where you're only allowed to turn right, not a traffic light.

[basingstoke123]

But we already have some traffic lights which cyclists can legally treat as a 'give way'. Not just for turning left, but going ahead and turning right on red.

What lights? Those that fail to detect cyclists, and thus are faulty.

[Cyril Haearn]

We need the three EEEs: enforcement, enforcement and enforcement.

... but not quite often enough to warrant paying millions for extra police that would barely scratch the surface anyway...

I'd be interested in knowing what you'd recommend that is realistically likely to happen?

..


Yes ja oui! Enforcement does not need to cost us anything, the criminals finance it. All the better if the fines are realistic and make a "profit" to fill the state coffers. Or maybe the whole should be cost-neutral.

I am lucky, have not had a car for a few years. But when I get one again I will set the navigation so that exceeding the maximum speed limit is not possible. In a decent society no vehicles would be able to go faster then allowed. I experienced 1989 and I believe that will happen soon.

[irc]

[Yes ja oui! Enforcement does not need to cost us anything, the criminals finance it. All the better if the fines are realistic and make a "profit" to fill the state coffers. Or maybe the whole should be cost-neutral.

Your idea has arrived sooner than you thought. Bedfordshire Police planning to use speed cameras to raise revenue. But as expected the police will go for the easiest to enforce camera offences. Enforcing cycle offences and things like driver mobile phone use or other bad driving takes good old expensive traffic cops. Don't hold your breath.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor ... 07426.html

[simonhill]

I'm touring in Korea (drive on right) at the moment and they have turn right on red at most lights. They have to give way to pedestrians crossing on the turned road and they do.

It helps traffic flow, but as a cyclist I don't like it. I can't safely sit on the right curb and wait for my green to go straight ahead. There isn't normally enough safe room on the edge of the straight ahead lane. What I do is advance ahead of the white line and sit in front of the straight ahead lane. I can then cut diagonally over to the right when light goes green and hope no one is steaming up the inside.

As you can see, enough things to make it unsafe for a bike. Also can't see our police happy with bikes advancing over the white line where there is no cycle box.

Also in the UK I can't see our drivers giving way to people crossing on the left turn, they'd just steam on, horn blaring. This is what happens in countries like Thailand and can make crossing the road almost impossible.

Sorry, not in favour of turn on red.

[beardy]

[Yes ja oui! Enforcement does not need to cost us anything, the criminals finance it. All the better if the fines are realistic and make a "profit" to fill the state coffers. Or maybe the whole should be cost-neutral.

Your idea has arrived sooner than you thought. Bedfordshire Police planning to use speed cameras to raise revenue. But as expected the police will go for the easiest to enforce camera offences. Enforcing cycle offences and things like driver mobile phone use or other bad driving takes good old expensive traffic cops. Don't hold your breath.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor ... 07426.html

I heard an interview with this PCC where he admitted that if people actually complied with the law it would ruin his plans. So he openly admits that he needs criminals in order to fund his Police force and would consider a reduction in crime a failure for that very reason.
So if anybody is planning on driving through Bedfordshire, I would recommend spoiling the PCC's day by obeying all their speed limits and depriving them of their income.

[irc]

I heard an interview with this PCC where he admitted that if people actually complied with the law it would ruin his plans. So he openly admits that he needs criminals in order to fund his Police force and would consider a reduction in crime a failure for that very reason.

Whether you agree with the set speeds or not anyone who gets fined by fully signposted average speed cameras is just getting taxed for being stupid. Hard to argue with. If you are told that you WILL be fined if you exceed the limit you can hardly complain.

I have less sympathy with the targets culture in some areas. Speed traps are set where they will get the biggest numbers rather than where there is danger from speeding. For example this motorway exit slip. 30mph limit. Still several hundred metres from the roundabout, no cyclists or pedestrians, no gardens, shops, schools, a railway on the L and the motorway on the right. No accident history. A frequent speed trap location. I'd rather see one speeder caught on a busy shopping or residential street than 20 caught here. But since traffic cops have targets a speeder is a speeder.

[Bmblbzzz]

I'm touring in Korea (drive on right) at the moment and they have turn right on red at most lights. They have to give way to pedestrians crossing on the turned road and they do.

It helps traffic flow, but as a cyclist I don't like it. I can't safely sit on the right curb and wait for my green to go straight ahead. There isn't normally enough safe room on the edge of the straight ahead lane. What I do is advance ahead of the white line and sit in front of the straight ahead lane. I can then cut diagonally over to the right when light goes green and hope no one is steaming up the inside.

As you can see, enough things to make it unsafe for a bike. Also can't see our police happy with bikes advancing over the white line where there is no cycle box.

Also in the UK I can't see our drivers giving way to people crossing on the left turn, they'd just steam on, horn blaring. This is what happens in countries like Thailand and can make crossing the road almost impossible.

Sorry, not in favour of turn on red.

Similar situation in Poland (to Thailand and Korea, different parts of!). You're supposed to stop at the red light, give way to pedestrians on the crossing, then advance to junction if there's a green arrow (which is timed), give way to traffic on road you're joining and turn. In practice, most drivers steam over the crossing straight up to the junction, making people on the crossing stop for them. For cyclists, the problem is as you're experiencing in Korea; there's normally a dedicated right-turn lane, which is no good to sit in if you're going straight on. When it's a straight on and turn-right lane, if someone behind you wants to turn, they will expect a bike to move out of the way.

(This sounds a bit negative: apart from these traffic lights, Poland is a great country to cycle in and drivers treat cyclists much better than they do other drivers).

[mjr]

Your idea has arrived sooner than you thought. Bedfordshire Police planning to use speed cameras to raise revenue. But as expected the police will go for the easiest to enforce camera offences.

The first wave will probably be easy high-speed locations like M1/A1(M)/A421 where they've still got working cameras, but there are plenty of other offences like red light jumping and yellow box blocking which could be enforced by cameras and raise revenue for policing while also improving the safety of cycling so I say bring it on!

[hamster]

I reckon outside most schools at 0825 on the no stopping area there would be £1000 per day waiting to be collected.

[rmurphy195]

We have all been brought up on the phrase "RED means STOP". As soon as this changes to "RED MAYBE means STOP, but you can go ig you think it's OK" - PEOPLE WILL DIE.

It's another chipping away at the safety-related habits that were built-in to our systems years ago.

But now we have traffic islands that occasionally have different priorities to the old, clear, unequivocal "Give way to traffic already on the roundabout" rule. So you have to look out for extra signage on the approach (which might be blocked by trees or vehicles) and the white lines being unexpectedly in a different place (an absolute hoot if you are not familiar with the area and the lines are worn-out, and it's dark etc.). In today's busy world it's easy to get overloaded with information when riding/driving about.

IMHO such things may or may not improve traffic flow, but certainly do not help improve safety! Things need to be simplified, not made more complex.

[kwackers]

but certainly do not help improve safety!

You'll have evidence to back this up yes?

Seems to contradict studies that suggest that cyclists are at their most vulnerable at traffic lights and would benefit from being able to treat them as give ways so it'll be interesting to see what you've got.