![]() |
Sure, I think I get you and agree. I used a word that doesn't apply. I'm not a bad cyclist. Maybe I'm just a bad writer.
|
Originally Posted by HTupolev
(Post 19238002)
Interesting. AFAIK, here, the lines cutting through the "intersection" explicitly denote a dominant arterial which doesn't need to yield.
For Europe - if there is a road, you needn't look where it leads to (a parking lot, or a motorway), you needn't look if it's wider than the road you're on, you just need to look whether it has a yield/stop sign, or not. If it doesn't, the law requires you to give right of way to the vehicle on your right. Parking lots, roundabouts etc. have yield signs, if not - it's the right hand rule. |
Originally Posted by Slaninar
(Post 19238598)
For Europe - if there is a road, you needn't look where it leads to (a parking lot, or a motorway), you needn't look if it's wider than the road you're on, you just need to look whether it has a yield/stop sign, or not. If it doesn't, the law requires you to give right of way to the vehicle on your right.
In North America, in my experience, most roads have some sort of signage. So if the street I am on has no stop sign, I assume the crossing street does. I don't go out of my way looking for it. |
Originally Posted by chephy
(Post 19239883)
How can you tell? Signs tend to be positioned so they're visible to the driver on the road to which they apply, not to drivers on crossing roads.
In practice, sometimes, drivers on the main road have also a sign giving them right of way, but not always. Our law states that in situations where (this is a bit tongue in cheek) lower speed and caution from drivers on the main road is required, a sign giving them right of way is deliberately omitted, forcing them to slow down and check the signs on the road they are crossing.
Originally Posted by chephy
(Post 19239883)
Their placement, at least in North America, is not standardized.
In North America, in my experience, most roads have some sort of signage. So if the street I am on has no stop sign, I assume the crossing street does. I don't go out of my way looking for it. |
Hope it was Not the Dead guy who thought they had the right of way right to the end..
|
Originally Posted by HardyWeinberg
(Post 19235135)
In WA this is correct UNLESS one of the roads is classified as an arterial. (which is something you just have to know, there are no signs for that). Arterials have the right of way.
It's not clear to me if both the roads in this T are even roads at all (vs lanes in a parking lot). edit: But I despise how virtually no neighborhood intersections have a stop or yield sign out here.
Originally Posted by Slaninar
(Post 19238598)
If your laws differ, I have no argument there.
For Europe - if there is a road, you needn't look where it leads to (a parking lot, or a motorway), you needn't look if it's wider than the road you're on, you just need to look whether it has a yield/stop sign, or not. If it doesn't, the law requires you to give right of way to the vehicle on your right. Parking lots, roundabouts etc. have yield signs, if not - it's the right hand rule. |
Originally Posted by Sullalto
(Post 19241061)
A Clallam County Sheriff says A gets right of way.
edit: But I despise how virtually no neighborhood intersections have a stop or yield sign out here. Not in any of the nordic countries. A has right of way. |
Originally Posted by Sullalto
(Post 19241061)
A Clallam County Sheriff says A gets right of way.
edit: But I despise how virtually no neighborhood intersections have a stop or yield sign out here. Not in any of the nordic countries. A has right of way.
https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Driving_in_Norway But California vehicle codes agree with the Clallam sheriff. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:34 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.