Advocacy & Safety - Yet another "neat trick" by motorists...

So yesterday I am poised in the left turn lane ready to go when the light turns green... being all vehicular and all... and as the green comes on, I take off making my left into the far right lane of the cross road... only to be blocked by a right on red motorist who decided to take off right after I started moving.

So how in the world does a motorist, turning right on a RED light think they have priority over a cyclist making a left on a green light?

Yeah, I stopped and waited for mr clueless to get out of my ROW. I did give him a long blast on my Airzounds... got his attention... :notamused:

airzound is good for that

Meh. People pull that ***** in front of cars, too.

I've had similar things happen. Intersection with no turn arrows, I'm going straight, car across from is turning left. Light turns green, I start going, car turns left crossing in front of me. "Thanks for waiting!"

Yeah, I had a guy on a motorcycle make a right on red turn cut me off when I was making a u-turn on a green arrow while driving a large 4x4 pickup once and have had cars do it on many occasions. A blast from the horn usually results in lots of hand waving and dirty looks.

Guess folks just don't quite get that RED means stop, and right on red means stop and look first. Amazing. ROR is one of the worst pieces of traffic legislation ever made...

"Flow over safety."

Agree with Genec here. We have several high speed intersections around where I live with horrible sight lines. Still doesn't stop the idiots from pulling out and nearly getting spread all over the roadway. Our city fathers then wonder why one intersection near here is one of the worst in the province for safety. Never fear, however, they're going to turn it another intersection near it into a double roundabout. That should be a pile of laughs for pedestrians and cyclists.

I disagree. The problem isn't the law, it's the way it is commonly obeyed and enforced (as in virtually not at all). Just like any other traffic law, if you follow it, there is goodness in the world. But people are jerks.

Meh. People pull that ***** in front of cars, too.

yes they do, when I drove more there was much cursing at people brake-checking me because they didn't stop. However, it makes things really dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians. In State College, there is no right turn on red for most of the downtown area. This is good because the default is to go and then look. The one place I know where you can right turn on red is the scene of much motorist bullying of pedestrians.

I disagree. The problem isn't the law, it's the way it is commonly obeyed and enforced (as in virtually not at all). Just like any other traffic law, if you follow it, there is goodness in the world. But people are jerks.

Drivers are jerks... so change the law and make them stop, use cameras if needed.

yes they do, when I drove more there was much cursing at people brake-checking me because they didn't stop. However, it makes things really dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians. In State College, there is no right turn on red for most of the downtown area. This is good because the default is to go and then look. The one place I know where you can right turn on red is the scene of much motorist bullying of pedestrians.

Bullying of peds... I had forgotten all about that... saw that happening time after time down town when I was on Jury duty... motorists all but plowing into peds.

The thing that really gets me is that the one person in a car has NO MORE rights than one person on the street... but as soon as you put that one person in a car... they somehow feel that they are more important. Time for that to stop. We need laws that do not focus on "flow" but on safety.

Hey if you are late, you should have left earlier.

Never fear, however, they're going to turn it another intersection near it into a double roundabout. That should be a pile of laughs for pedestrians and cyclists.

What's a double roundabout? I actually prefer roundabouts to most intersections, but they're rare in PA.

Hey if you are late, you should have left earlier.

That's a good signature line.

I dunno man.. that's about par for the course for "people" not "drivers", I was picking up coffee for my dad this morning and on my way back to his place I got to the three way stop sign for our road.. I was turning left onto the road and had gotten there first, I saw a cyclist a ways back coming from the other direction but decided to exercise my ROW, anyways as it turns out the cyclist is either an ******* or oblivious. Once I'd stopped on the line completely he dialed it up and tried to blow the intersection.. too bad he hadn't entered it until I had already almost completed my turn.. he gave me one of those looks.. but I stared right back and he almost flinched with how fast he looked away... I think we encountered the same type of people Genec, just our transportation devices were reversed. Just to clarify, I stopped because I wasn't interested in playing chicken with him so I had to hang out in the intersection for him to gain 10-20 seconds, or probably a lot less since I'm guessing he dialed it right back down after that.

Meh. People pull that ***** in front of cars, too.

Exactly. I try not to take it personally.

Meh. People pull that ***** in front of cars, too.

Exactly - it's just the other driver's sense of entitlement kicking in. I see it all the time, literally every day, doesn't matter if I'm on a bike or car.

Yeah really. I don't know why they don't stay out of *MY* way.

you were going left and the guy was going right, but then what? he decided to go left as well? if you're going left and he's going right, how do you two meet?

you were going left and the guy was going right, but then what? he decided to go left as well? if you're going left and he's going right, how do you two meet?
Because the guy going right blows a red to do so, did you not actually read the OP and just skimmed it?

you were going left and the guy was going right, but then what? he decided to go left as well? if you're going left and he's going right, how do you two meet?

We were approaching the intersections from opposite directions... try this:

I was going north, he was going south, a left for me goes west, a right for him goes west... we met in the same spot. He had a red light, I did not! Who was wrong?

I take off making my left into the far right lane of the cross road

If the motorist was expecting you to follow the same rules as a car, and you started in the far left lane, you should have made your turn into the left lane and then signalled your lane change into the right lane after completing the turn. If it was a double turn lane and you started in the rightmost left turn lane, you were correct in taking the right lane on the crossing road, otherwise it may have been you who was in the wrong by simultaneously making the turn and changing lanes as there is no way to adequately signal both moves at the same time.

This assumes it was a four lane crossroad with two lanes or more in each direction as indicated by your reference to "the far right lane".

What's a double roundabout? I actually prefer roundabouts to most intersections, but they're rare in PA.

Below is the link for the planned changes to the intersections of Ottawa St with Homer Watson Blvd and Alpine Road in Kitchener. To add to the fun the interchange of the Conestoga Parkway for Homer Watson is in the middle of this dog's breakfast.

http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/resources/PC2010-1123.pdf

See page 24 Appendix C3 for the map of how this intersection will function.

I am generally OK with roundabouts but this is going to be a big mess.


Was in PA last month but was on the west side of the Susquehanna. Haven't been to Lancaster in quite a while. A good chunk of the people round here came from Lancaster County PA.

Guess folks just don't quite get that RED means stop, and right on red means stop and look first. Amazing. ROR is one of the worst pieces of traffic legislation ever made...

"Flow over safety."
ROR means YIELD TO OTHER TRAFFIC.

i grew up in NJ, which had ROR since long before i can remember, and also had NO TURN ON RED signs posted where they're appropriate. in my years as an EMT in NJ, i never once attended a ROR crash. NJ drivers are generally good about it. that's probably because it's been the law in NJ for so long and/or NJ has better education about it.

that said, there are dicks who will ROR in front of someone with ROW, but it's actually pretty rare.

i've been out of the states for the last few years, and IIUC all states now have ROR laws. based on the above statement about ROR requiring stop and look, rather than stop and yield, i'd guess that education about this "new" law is lacking.

FWIW, when i was growing up in NJ, roundabouts (aka "traffic circles") were being removed and being replaced with traffic lights. IIUC, that trend is being reversed. here in NZ roundabouts are common, and i've had no issues bicycling through them. again... education and familiarity are keys to making any traffic infrastructure, good or bad, work.

If the motorist was expecting you to follow the same rules as a car, and you started in the far left lane, you should have made your turn into the left land and then signalled your lane change into the right lane after completing the turn. If it was a double turn lane and you started in the rightmost left turn lane, you were correct in taking the right lane on the crossing road, otherwise it may have been you who was in the wrong by simultaneously making the turn and changing lanes as there is no way to adequately signal both moves at the same time.

This assumes it was a four lane crossroad with two lanes or more in each direction as indicated by your reference to "the far right lane".This is the correct legal traffic procedure, but somewhere along the line, even city and state governments have forgotten how the law works. Locally, the government has been putting up yield signs for the right turning vehicles even though they have their own lane to turn into and proceed.

No thanks, save the lane changes for later and just go into the left most lane, can't trust anybody out there! Also somebody might take a red light and come up behind you flying.

ROR is one of the worst pieces of traffic legislation ever made...

Every state I've lived in has had right on red in their traffic codes and it works just fine if people actually bother to read and follow the law the way it is written. ROR is treated much the same way as coming to a stop sign. As genec mentioned, you are supposed to come to a full stop and then proceed when the way is clear. You still have to yeild to crossing traffic or left turning traffic that has the right of way. ROR is not permission to completely ignore the light nor does it give you the right of way. ROR gives you permission to proceed after a legal stop, when you have a clear lane, but before the light turns green. Its a nice law to have if people use it correctly as it can prevent some unnecessary long waits at intersections, but abused it can result in some nasty accidents.

If the motorist was expecting you to follow the same rules as a car, and you started in the far left lane, you should have made your turn into the left lane and then signalled your lane change into the right lane after completing the turn. If it was a double turn lane and you started in the rightmost left turn lane, you were correct in taking the right lane on the crossing road, otherwise it may have been you who was in the wrong by simultaneously making the turn and changing lanes as there is no way to adequately signal both moves at the same time.

This assumes it was a four lane crossroad with two lanes or more in each direction as indicated by your reference to "the far right lane".

This is the case.. two left turn lanes. And bear in mind that I am on the outside of the furthest right lane.

I have an intersection near my house where this type of thing is always happening but I see a lot worse than just the ROR. Fortunately it's something you only have to deal with if you're a car...

There's a stop with 3 lanes facing west (Right turn-only, straight, left turn-only). I've been noticing a very large number of drivers don't like to wait at the light because it backs up so they get in the straight through lane and then make a left. There are two lanes there but the next right that most people take is within a short enough distance that you get it by turning into the far right lane instead of the left lane.

5 times in the last 2 weeks I've had some asshat turn left on the straight arrow because (I assume) they don't want to miss the light by waiting for all the people going left in the left-only lane. I've finally decided to just drive as I would normally drive and they can piss off. Twice now I've had some asshat get all angry that I wont let him turn into my lane from the right straight through lane.

This is fortunately an exit from a highway that's above the speed limit for bikes. If it weren't this corner would probably kill at least one cyclist a year.

Maybe I'll go over there with my cameras and record it. :)

This is the case.. two left turn lanes. And bear in mind that I am on the outside of the furthest right lane.If the double left turn guide line routed you into the farthest right lane, then the motorist is a JAM and deserved a ticket.

That would be an intersection that the "Yield to left turning" sign would be appropriate, rather than the intersections they are now going up in.

Every state I've lived in has had right on red in their traffic codes and it works just fine if people actually bother to read and follow the law the way it is written. ROR is treated much the same way as coming to a stop sign. As genec mentioned, you are supposed to come to a full stop and then proceed when the way is clear. You still have to yeild to crossing traffic or left turning traffic that has the right of way. ROR is not permission to completely ignore the light nor does it give you the right of way. ROR gives you permission to proceed after a legal stop, when you have a clear lane, but before the light turns green. Its a nice law to have if people use it correctly as it can prevent some unnecessary long waits at intersections, but abused it can result in some nasty accidents.

The problem is that, in practice, motorists almost NEVER follow those rules for RoR. I think it could be reasonably safe for everyone (pedestrians and cyclists included), if they did follow the rules for yielding right-of-way and coming to a complete stop before turning, but in the real world I'd guess that it's less than 10% of motorists that actually do that for pedestrians. They mostly just yield to other motorists; ie, those vehicles that pose a threat to themselves. If there isn't enough enforcement of traffic laws to encourage a higher compliance rate than that, then I would have to agree that the law itself is a fatally flawed idea. Most motorists simply aren't skilled enough or careful enough to be trusted with laws that require that everyone follow the rules all of the time in order to be safe.

If the double left turn guide line routed you into the farthest right lane, then the motorist is a JAM and deserved a ticket.

One of the most common "sloppy" driving techniques I see people engage in is turning into the wrong lane. The problem is that this kind of behavior gets reinforced because a) no one ever gets a ticket for it, and b) it doesn't result in a crash most of the time, except until it does.

Every state I've lived in has had right on red in their traffic codes and it works just fine if people actually bother to read and follow the law the way it is written. ROR is treated much the same way as coming to a stop sign. As genec mentioned, you are supposed to come to a full stop and then proceed when the way is clear. You still have to yeild to crossing traffic or left turning traffic that has the right of way. ROR is not permission to completely ignore the light nor does it give you the right of way. ROR gives you permission to proceed after a legal stop, when you have a clear lane, but before the light turns green. Its a nice law to have if people use it correctly as it can prevent some unnecessary long waits at intersections, but abused it can result in some nasty accidents.

I have a big problem with this at several intersections that allow left or U turns. I'm waiting to turn right and the cars on the cross street can make a left or U turn. I always wait to make sure no cars are making a U turn. I have had people behind me lay on their horns because I'm not moving. One guy actually drove around me and made his turn right as a car did a U, almost smashing into it.

I've also been the person making the U turn and almost plowed into the right turning people, and they get angry at me because I cut off their turn. It's like having to wait an extra 10-15 seconds is intolerable to some drivers.

If the double left turn guide line routed you into the farthest right lane, then the motorist is a JAM and deserved a ticket.

That would be an intersection that the "Yield to left turning" sign would be appropriate, rather than the intersections they are now going up in.

They should not need a yield to left turning, if their light is red... such a sign is just as redundant as the Turning traffic must yield to crossing pedestrians signs that are now popping up in so many places. The law gives the pedestrians ROW with a cross signal, but Right on red motorists fail to heed their requirement to stop and wait... meaning ROR is broken... Redundant signs to tell motorists to do what they should know and do is an indication of a failed system.

I wish police would start a campaign to let drivers know that when you try to go around a driver because of your impatience, that's when people die. That's EXACTLY how that 4yo kid was injured and the guy that threw the kid out of the way was killed.


I have a big problem with this at several intersections that allow left or U turns. I'm waiting to turn right and the cars on the cross street can make a left or U turn. I always wait to make sure no cars are making a U turn. I have had people behind me lay on their horns because I'm not moving. One guy actually drove around me and made his turn right as a car did a U, almost smashing into it.

So yesterday I am poised in the left turn lane ready to go when the light turns green... being all vehicular and all... and as the green comes on, I take off making my left into the far right lane of the cross road... only to be blocked by a right on red motorist who decided to take off right after I started moving.

So how in the world does a motorist, turning right on a RED light think they have priority over a cyclist making a left on a green light?

Yeah, I stopped and waited for mr clueless to get out of my ROW. I did give him a long blast on my Airzounds... got his attention... :notamused:

If it makes you feel better, this happened recently to me while driving a full size white Ford F150 pickup truck! The idiot that ran the red light (right on red/yield situation) actually honked at me too, even though it was my green left turn arrow light and theirs was red. I can buy "they didn't see you" on a bike (though I do not think that is an acceptable excuse) but a huge white truck?!

The horn is a good idea, might save my vocal chords ;)

So yesterday I am poised in the left turn lane ready to go when the light turns green... being all vehicular and all... and as the green comes on, I take off making my left into the far right lane of the cross road... only to be blocked by a right on red motorist who decided to take off right after I started moving.

So how in the world does a motorist, turning right on a RED light think they have priority over a cyclist making a left on a green light?

Yeah, I stopped and waited for mr clueless to get out of my ROW. I did give him a long blast on my Airzounds... got his attention... :notamused:

It is that stupid thing of 'my vehicle is bigger than your vehicle', so they think that gives them priority regardless of the law.

They should not need a yield to left turning, if their light is red... such a sign is just as redundant as the Turning traffic must yield to crossing pedestrians signs that are now popping up in so many places. The law gives the pedestrians ROW with a cross signal, but Right on red motorists fail to heed their requirement to stop and wait... meaning ROR is broken... Redundant signs to tell motorists to do what they should know and do is an indication of a failed system.Agreed, I only mention the signs because they are being put up at intersections where they should not be on Oahu. Even a bigger fail of the system when you have to take away a proper ROR so those that do not have ROR do not crash. It re-enforces the lack of understanding of the laws.

So yesterday I am poised in the left turn lane ready to go when the light turns green... being all vehicular and all... and as the green comes on, I take off making my left into the far right lane of the cross road... only to be blocked by a right on red motorist who decided to take off right after I started moving.

A couple months ago, I had someone do the same thing to me. I had a line of cars behind me, and this guy, after making his right turn, stopped in the bike lane, forcing me to pass him on the left. I threw my hands up, so as to gesture, "what the heck are you doing?". He then pulled up next to me, rolled down the window, started yelling at me, and then proceeded to attempt to run me into the curb. I hit my brakes, and he sped off.

Some teenage kids saw what happened, got in front of the guy, and slowed him down considerably (I was able to catch up and pass them at ~17mph in a 40mph zone). He wasn't too happy about that.

A couple months ago, I had someone do the same thing to me. I had a line of cars behind me, and this guy, after making his right turn, stopped in the bike lane, forcing me to pass him on the left. I threw my hands up, so as to gesture, "what the heck are you doing?". He then pulled up next to me, rolled down the window, started yelling at me, and then proceeded to attempt to run me into the curb. I hit my brakes, and he sped off.

Some teenage kids saw what happened, got in front of the guy, and slowed him down considerably (I was able to catch up and pass them at ~17mph in a 40mph zone). He wasn't too happy about that.

This wasn't quite that bad... but nearly so... with all the waving and gesturing going on... I just pointed to his light and said... RED. Of course through his rolled up window, that meant nothing.... I only had a couple of cars behind me.... they just stopped too. I think they too were wondering... uh, what's this guy doing.

Interestedly on that same road there is a center area that is a painted island... and down at the end it gives way to the left turn lanes... recently the other "trick" I have seen is motorists using that center painted island as a left turn lane all the way to the actual left turn lane. I just keep wondering where these folks learned to drive.

A couple months ago, I had someone do the same thing to me. I had a line of cars behind me, and this guy, after making his right turn, stopped in the bike lane, forcing me to pass him on the left. I threw my hands up, so as to gesture, "what the heck are you doing?". He then pulled up next to me, rolled down the window, started yelling at me, and then proceeded to attempt to run me into the curb. I hit my brakes, and he sped off.

Some teenage kids saw what happened, got in front of the guy, and slowed him down considerably (I was able to catch up and pass them at ~17mph in a 40mph zone). He wasn't too happy about that.

You've got some mighty-fine teenagers where you live.

You've got some mighty-fine teenagers where you live.

They were curious about the actions they witnessed. They asked me why he tried to run me off the road. My response was simply, "Because he ran a red light."

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I had another encounter with a car full of teenagers while commuting home - but it wasn't so pleasant. I saw the car approaching somewhat slowly in my rear-view, but couldn't quite hear it, so I knew they were coasting. They got up next to me, stuck their heads and arms out the window, and started screaming at me - apparently in an attempt to scare me. Maybe they were recording it and hoping for a youtube-worthy reaction? I wasn't about to give it to them.

Yep, that does happen but, since the motor vehicle is right there in front of me it's never been a big problem.

I'm not positive, but I think it's a traffic violation to change lanes in an intersection. If you're in the far left lane, isn't the correct turn into the left lane, and an illegal lane change if you turn into the right lane?

Another example -- you're stopped on the east side of an intersection facing west, and about to turn ROR to proceed north. A northbound car is approaching the intersection from the south to proceed straight and is in their left lane. You see the right lane is clear, so you turn ROR. Meanwhile, the approaching car changes from left lane to right lane in the middle of the intersection and hits you. I believe it is the intention to prevent just these kinds of collisions as to why it is illegal to change lanes in the middle of an intersection.

Questions:
1. Does a driver who is making an illegal lane change have the ROW over a driver turning ROR?
2. Is a left turn from the far left lane into the right most lane an illegal lane change?

I'm not positive, but I think it's a traffic violation to change lanes in an intersection. If you're in the far left lane, isn't the correct turn into the left lane, and an illegal lane change if you turn into the right lane?

Another example -- you're stopped on the east side of an intersection facing west, and about to turn ROR to proceed north. A northbound car is approaching the intersection from the south to proceed straight and is in their left lane. You see the right lane is clear, so you turn ROR. Meanwhile, the approaching car changes from left lane to right lane in the middle of the intersection and hits you. I believe it is the intention to prevent just these kinds of collisions as to why it is illegal to change lanes in the middle of an intersection.

Questions:
1. Does a driver who is making an illegal lane change have the ROW over a driver turning ROR?
2. Is a left turn from the far left lane into the right most lane an illegal lane change?You do not bother to actually read through the thread before you comment on the OP do you?

Try reading post 27 and the quote Genec responds to, in which it is made clear Genec was in the right lane of double left turn lanes. Genec's lane is the same lane that the right turning motorist tried to illegally insert himself.

You do not bother to actually read through the thread before you comment on the OP do you?



Apparently not

This is the case.. two left turn lanes. And bear in mind that I am on the outside of the furthest right lane.

In that case it sounds like you had the right of way the the ROR driver failed to wait until they had a clear lane before proceding. Unfortunately, there is a lot of abuse or, if you want to give motorists the benefit of the doubt, misunderstanding, of ROR. I see a lot of drivers who don't come to a full stop or who try to merge with crossing or left turning lines of traffic rather than stopping or waiting. In general, I see a lot of motorists flat out ignore cyclists and drive as if they were not even there.

Yesterday I was out for just an hour or so and had two incidents with drivers. One young lady pulled out from a parallel parking space right in front of me with no signal or, as far as I could tell, even looking. The other instance was more unsettling as an older woman in a big sedan was westbound and I was eastbound on a residential two-way street. The speed limit was 20 and I was doing between 15 and 18 mph. I saw her look straight at me but still she turned left across my path without even signalling. I had to get on my brakes fairly hard for that one. I'm a big guy wearing a long sleeve red jersey, silver helmet, on a red bike with white trim and brushed aluminum fittings. There is no way she shouldn't have seen me as we were the only traffic for a couple of blocks in either direction and it was a clear afternoon.

Honestly, I don't know what (or if) some drivers are thinking.

... an older woman in a big sedan was westbound and I was eastbound on a residential two-way street. The speed limit was 20 and I was doing between 15 and 18 mph. I saw her look straight at me but still she turned left across my path without even signalling. I had to get on my brakes fairly hard for that one. I'm a big guy wearing a long sleeve red jersey, silver helmet, on a red bike with white trim and brushed aluminum fittings. There is no way she shouldn't have seen me as we were the only traffic for a couple of blocks in either direction and it was a clear afternoon.

Honestly, I don't know what (or if) some drivers are thinking.

I think that 15+ mph for a cyclists is faster than a lot of (older?) motorists expect -- I think they are accustomed to seeing children or beach cruisers at 5 mph. She could have assumed you were moving at a pedestrian pace and gave the same clearance.

I suspect you may be correct.

It's legal in California to change lanes in an intersection. With two left turn lanes, the person in the left lane must turn into the left-most lane, but the person in the right hand left turn lane may take any lane to the right of the left lane.

It's legal in California to change lanes in an intersection. With two left turn lanes, the person in the left lane must turn into the left-most lane, but the person in the right hand left turn lane may take any lane to the right of the left lane.

You may change lanes only when it is safe to do so. If the lane change in the intersection is deemed to cause an unsafe situation, it could result in a ticket. It would be a judgement call and this pertains to any lane change.