Gone through a red light...

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Ilivehereorland

Oh do Lets all go to a foreign country and only follow the rules when we have them in England, or when we see any gains. Sheer arrogance.

See more...

Logic is not your strong point

If I were being arrogant I'd refuse to turn at all, causing a lot of anger and frustration to all the vehicles behind, because we don't have turn on red in England

You have also conveniently ignored key points in my argument that contradict to some degree what you're saying.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by archibald

Fab, in that case, car travel is completely safe as I have not killed myself nor anyone else while driving.

I'm starting to see a flaw in your thinking ...

See more...

Good point. Please join me in banging my head against a brick wall here

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by fl-veteran

No, I'm not arguing any point, I'm pointing out a fact. A stationary car can't run anyone over.

I don't need statistical evidence because... physics...

See more...

I understand, but the US does permit turning right on red (most of the time), and that is NOT a stationary vehicle.

I believe that rule to be rational because it encourages the free movement of traffic in precisely the same way that a yield rule would.

If it were deemed necessary, because of the nature of the pedestrian crossing, i.e. a theme park entrance, then either install pedestrian lights, or deny the right turn altogether.

There is confusion in this precisely because common sense doesn't apply. Common sense is what people believe the law ought to be, i.e. rational, but sadly it seldom is.

[Mr Tom Morrow]

This thread is confusing me - and more importantly those who are new to driving in America.

Quite simple really . If turning right on a red you come to a complete stop. Not hard really and physics, opinions and rumour are just clouding the issue.
Stop!

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Mr Tom Morrow

This thread is confusing me - and more importantly those who are new to driving in America.

Quite simple really . If turning right on a red you come to a complete stop. Not hard really and physics, opinions and rumour are just clouding the issue.
Stop!

See more...

Hey, the law's discretionary and complex, what do you expect?

This clip from the Sentinel:

Drivers could no longer be ticketed for failing to stop during a right on red so long as they did so in a "careful and prudent manner."

What does that mean? Your guess is as good as mine.

"It's very confusing," said Ted Hollander with the Ticket Clinic, a law firm that successfully argued for all those tickets in Broward to be thrown out. "I don't know that most judges understand it."

Two state laws seem to be in direct conflict. The first says drivers must come to a complete stop. The second one says that when cameras are involved, they don't.

Because the second law is so vague, towns with cameras are making up their own rules.

Ocoee only tickets a rolling right on red if the driver is moving faster than 13 mph.

Orlando doesn't issue right-on-red tickets at all. In Apopka, Maitland and other places almost any right on red without a complete stop is game.

Everybody likes to say red-light cameras are about safety.

And there's little dispute that the most dangerous behavior — blowing through intersections on red — causes the worst crashes.

If cameras were really just about safety then cities would adopt a position similar to Orlando's and stop ticketing for right-on-red infractions.

See more...

Clear as mud right?

[Incarniac]

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

Clear as mud right?

See more...

What's clear from the Sentinel article is that it isn't clear at all and that different places practice different policies on stopping for right-on-red, particularly when it comes to cameras.

In the end it really boils down to: Where a right-on-red is allowed, you won't get ticketed if you stop before proceeding but you may get ticketed if you don't. Simples, as the meerkats say

Whether you agree or not, or think the manoeuvre is just as safe or not, is kind of beside the point.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Incarniac

Whether you agree or not, or think the manoeuvre is just as safe or not, is kind of beside the point.

See more...

That depends on what you view as "the point".

This is a discussion board, so I would think the point is to discuss things. Not just bleat whatever one person decides is the truth.

As far as I know no one is arguing against the idea that stopping is less likely to get you ticketed.

I would like to think people can draw their own conclusions without being spoon fed.

To make matters worse I haven't told you all about how my mate was rear-ended because the driver of his car stopped and the guy behind, an American, wasn't used to people stopping dead like that

[Mr Tom Morrow]

Forkbeard. I think you are mixing up what is law and issues surrounding cameras at certain juntion.

You mention Law is discretionary - No it's not. Law is law. It can be challenged and that happens everywhere but unless the statute was flawed it will stand. Judges and magistrates have powers to accept mitigation and thus not apply said laws.

One of the rules is that in all states you may make a right turn at a red stop light, unless otherwise indicated. The only exception is New York City, where there’s no right turn on red (although the rule does apply in other parts of New York State). You must, however, treat a red light as a stop sign and stop before making a right turn. You must also give way to pedestrians crossing at the lights. Busy junctions often have signs indicating that turning on a red light isn’t allowed (e.g. ‘NO TURN ON RED’) or is allowed at certain times only. Although it appears to be a sensible rule, some people claim that it increases accidents. In some states you can also make a left turn on a red light from a one-way street into another one-way street, where indicated.

[Forkbeard]

Originally Posted by Mr Tom Morrow

Forkbeard. I think you are mixing up what is law and issues surrounding cameras at certain juntion.

You mention Law is discretionary - No it's not. Law is law. It can be challenged and that happens everywhere but unless the statute was flawed it will stand. Judges and magistrates have powers to accept mitigation and thus not apply said laws.

One of the rules is that in all states you may make a right turn at a red stop light, unless otherwise indicated. The only exception is New York City, where there’s no right turn on red (although the rule does apply in other parts of New York State). You must, however, treat a red light as a stop sign and stop before making a right turn. You must also give way to pedestrians crossing at the lights. Busy junctions often have signs indicating that turning on a red light isn’t allowed (e.g. ‘NO TURN ON RED’) or is allowed at certain times only. Although it appears to be a sensible rule, some people claim that it increases accidents. In some states you can also make a left turn on a red light from a one-way street into another one-way street, where indicated.

See more...

I think we have a lot of different aspects to this here and they are getting crossed over in our "discussions":

- the law calls for a stop on red (even for permitted turns on red)
- the law is grey/confusing regarding enforcement from cameras for this same offence
- states have differing laws
- the police may ticket for this offence
- the turn on red has safety ramifications that differ from no-turn on red

Anything else?

[Mr Tom Morrow]

Originally Posted by Forkbeard

I think we have a lot of different aspects to this here and they are getting crossed over in our "discussions":

- the law calls for a stop on red (even for permitted turns on red)
- the law is grey/confusing regarding enforcement from cameras for this same offence
- states have differing laws
- the police may ticket for this offence
- the turn on red has safety ramifications that differ from no-turn on red

Anything else?

See more...

Thank the Lord we got there in the end!