What road traffic law would you introduce?

[ESOG]

chemistry said:

I was thinking (ranting...) the other day that if I were in charge () and could introduce one new road traffic law, it would be to allow a left turn at red traffic lights when safe to do so.

Overall, I can see very few reasons not to transplant the "Right turn on red" law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_on_red) from the USA etc. to here. For comparatively little cost (i.e. signs put up at the minority of junctions for which a left on red would be unsafe), we could avoid people sitting pointlessly at red traffic lights, which in turn would speed up traffic flows, reduce pollution, reduce stress and generally benefit all road users. Even better, it would be relatively safe to introduce, as folks who were unaware of the new law would just continue to stay put at a red light when turning left.

What law would you introduce?

In New York, Yonkers specifically, certain junctions give you the write to make a left hand turn but only under strict circumstances. For example only when coming to a full stop at the sign or red light and only if traffic clearly permits and left into a one way street only.

I cannot tell you how oblivious or scared dipsts clearly seem to be at more occassions than none and freeze at the red light completely unaware of the huge new sign stating LEFT TURN PERMITTED AFTER FULL STOPS.

[FiF]

ESOG said:

chemistry said:

I was thinking (ranting...) the other day that if I were in charge () and could introduce one new road traffic law, it would be to allow a left turn at red traffic lights when safe to do so.

Overall, I can see very few reasons not to transplant the "Right turn on red" law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_on_red) from the USA etc. to here. For comparatively little cost (i.e. signs put up at the minority of junctions for which a left on red would be unsafe), we could avoid people sitting pointlessly at red traffic lights, which in turn would speed up traffic flows, reduce pollution, reduce stress and generally benefit all road users. Even better, it would be relatively safe to introduce, as folks who were unaware of the new law would just continue to stay put at a red light when turning left.

What law would you introduce?

In New York, Yonkers specifically, certain junctions give you the write to make a left hand turn but only under strict circumstances. For example only when coming to a full stop at the sign or red light and only if traffic clearly permits and left into a one way street only.

I cannot tell you how oblivious or scared dipsts clearly seem to be at more occassions than none and freeze at the red light completely unaware of the huge new sign stating LEFT TURN PERMITTED AFTER FULL STOPS.

San Francisco too.

Generally I find many Americans are not especially clued up on their Highway Code, for want of a better description, much like too many in UK.

Having clued up I once encountered something not seen before, and was their version of a traffic light controlled on slip to a much bigger divided carriageway. Had travelled this way before and the lights operated normally, but this morning there were flashing red lights. The locals were all of a dither not knowing wtf to do, except I'd read this was a "come to full stop, proceed if safe". No one in the office understood it either. This was a few decades back so maybe they are more common now.

[Mr2Mike]

TooMany2cvs said:

Which is all very lovely, but both the HGVs are within the speed limit (60mph, remember), too. So the one overtaking is doing exactly the same as you think you're somehow more entitled to do.

The overtaking one hogging the outside lane for excessive distances (literaly miles sometimes) is clogging the road. Back to you.

[FiF]

Mr2Mike said:

The overtaking one hogging the outside lane for excessive distances (literaly miles sometimes) is clogging the road. Back to you.

Mentioned this on the punch in the face thread as someone nominated truck drivers so deserving.

When I first read on PH and probably Honest John too all this frothing about elephant racing I started noticing the mileage reading when I first had to back off from normal cruising speed, and again when normal progress resumed.

Never ever experienced it for the outlandish distances some claim. Suppose two miles qualifies as miles plural. Not exactly a delay though is it?

[Frank7]

Mr Tidy said:

Sorry, but you are just a PITA.

You personally may only hold people up for a couple of minutes, but a minute or so up the road is another trucker F*cker holding everyone else up for a "couple of minutes", then just repeat, repeat, repeat, etc.

Say hello to the moon for me BTW!

You’re ranting at the wrong guy, here’s a
quarter, call someone who’s interested,

[FiF]

Frank7 said:

Mr Tidy said:

Sorry, but you are just a PITA.

You personally may only hold people up for a couple of minutes, but a minute or so up the road is another trucker F*cker holding everyone else up for a "couple of minutes", then just repeat, repeat, repeat, etc.

Say hello to the moon for me BTW!

You’re ranting at the wrong guy, here’s a
quarter, call someone who’s interested,

Not to mention Mr Tidy is implying an unrealistic scenario. The couple of minutes travelling at a lower speed than normal does not translate into a delay of two minutes, it's actually delaying the journey by only a few seconds. As shown on the other thread you would have to have two trucks alongside each other for ten miles, which in my experience has never happened. The concept of two trucks blocking for ten miles, then another two for another ten miles, then another two, and another two each doing ten mile overtakes has almost certainly never happened in the history of the world, so the complaint is essentially bks. Maybe the actions might knock some sense in.

[heebeegeetee]

FiF said:

Mentioned this on the punch in the face thread as someone nominated truck drivers so deserving.

When I first read on PH and probably Honest John too all this frothing about elephant racing I started noticing the mileage reading when I first had to back off from normal cruising speed, and again when normal progress resumed.

Never ever experienced it for the outlandish distances some claim. Suppose two miles qualifies as miles plural. Not exactly a delay though is it?

Same here. In all my years I've only ever had pretty much one interaction with hgvs when in my car, which is I just seem to pass them by. That's all I ever seem to do. If the road is busy then it's busy.

[jamei303]

I'd ban road users other than me. Everyone else to trek across the fields.

[Frank7]

jamei303 said:

I'd ban road users other than me. Everyone else to trek across the fields.

Now you’re talking jamie, oh but wait, I live maybe 900 metres from Tower Bridge, where do I find these fields, would Southwark Park do?
Hold on, I know, London Fields, I can get the Overground from Rotherhithe, and trek across from the station.

[MKnight702]

Either

a) keep left unless overtaking

or

b) passing on the left is permitted

and what about mandating removal of "speed limit in place to protect workforce" when there clearly are no workforce in place.

[Frank7]

MKnight702 said:

Either

a) keep left unless overtaking

or

b) passing on the left is permitted

and what about mandating removal of "speed limit in place to protect workforce" when there clearly are no workforce in place.

Without fail, I ALWAYS do (a)
I quite often do (b), but only after very careful consideration.
This, (b), could be stopped, IF, they got realistic about Lane 2 hoggers.
Anyone in Lane 2, when there is nothing as far as the eye can see in Lane 1, should be forced to attend a seminar with videos of what is sensible Lane-wise.
The work force one makes sense, providing they’re not just up the bank having a break.

[rambo19]

I drive a lorry and having to overtake cars doing 45mph on the motorway annoys me.

I was on a D/C today all flowing nicely, brake lights start coming on and traffic starts to slow, some old numpty doing 40 mph, hands gripping the wheel and staring blankly ahead!

[Solocle]

rambo19 said:

I drive a lorry and having to overtake cars doing 45mph on the motorway annoys me.

I was on a D/C today all flowing nicely, brake lights start coming on and traffic starts to slow, some old numpty doing 40 mph, hands gripping the wheel and staring blankly ahead!

I do think that if NSL applies, car drivers should drive no slower than the wagons. But, when average zones come in, things often get reversed. And there are plenty of vehicles allowed on DCs that cannot achieve 50 mph - Tractors, Abnormal loads, Cyclists... the best rule would be minimum speed limit - your maximum attainable speed, or 50 mph, whichever is lower. That nicely folds in the conditions too.

[jfire]

Restrictions on commercial use i.e. delivering takeways on scooters on L-plates.

They're not intended as some gateway vehicle to proper bikes or cars so why are you allowed to drive them forever on a provisional

[catso]

I wouldn't introduce any more traffic laws, I think we have enough already.

I would however change the emphasis of enforcement towards what is important rather than what is easy.

[nonsequitur]

FiF said:

ESOG said:

chemistry said:

I was thinking (ranting...) the other day that if I were in charge () and could introduce one new road traffic law, it would be to allow a left turn at red traffic lights when safe to do so.

Overall, I can see very few reasons not to transplant the "Right turn on red" law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_on_red) from the USA etc. to here. For comparatively little cost (i.e. signs put up at the minority of junctions for which a left on red would be unsafe), we could avoid people sitting pointlessly at red traffic lights, which in turn would speed up traffic flows, reduce pollution, reduce stress and generally benefit all road users. Even better, it would be relatively safe to introduce, as folks who were unaware of the new law would just continue to stay put at a red light when turning left.

What law would you introduce?

In New York, Yonkers specifically, certain junctions give you the write to make a left hand turn but only under strict circumstances. For example only when coming to a full stop at the sign or red light and only if traffic clearly permits and left into a one way street only.

I cannot tell you how oblivious or scared dipsts clearly seem to be at more occassions than none and freeze at the red light completely unaware of the huge new sign stating LEFT TURN PERMITTED AFTER FULL STOPS.

San Francisco too.

Generally I find many Americans are not especially clued up on their Highway Code, for want of a better description, much like too many in UK.

Having clued up I once encountered something not seen before, and was their version of a traffic light controlled on slip to a much bigger divided carriageway. Had travelled this way before and the lights operated normally, but this morning there were flashing red lights. The locals were all of a dither not knowing wtf to do, except I'd read this was a "come to full stop, proceed if safe". No one in the office understood it either. This was a few decades back so maybe they are more common now.

I got honked for not turning left on a red light in LA. In fact it was three honks before I got the message. (this was many years ago).

[vonhosen]

nonsequitur said:

FiF said:

ESOG said:

chemistry said:

I was thinking (ranting...) the other day that if I were in charge () and could introduce one new road traffic law, it would be to allow a left turn at red traffic lights when safe to do so.

Overall, I can see very few reasons not to transplant the "Right turn on red" law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_on_red) from the USA etc. to here. For comparatively little cost (i.e. signs put up at the minority of junctions for which a left on red would be unsafe), we could avoid people sitting pointlessly at red traffic lights, which in turn would speed up traffic flows, reduce pollution, reduce stress and generally benefit all road users. Even better, it would be relatively safe to introduce, as folks who were unaware of the new law would just continue to stay put at a red light when turning left.

What law would you introduce?

In New York, Yonkers specifically, certain junctions give you the write to make a left hand turn but only under strict circumstances. For example only when coming to a full stop at the sign or red light and only if traffic clearly permits and left into a one way street only.

I cannot tell you how oblivious or scared dipsts clearly seem to be at more occassions than none and freeze at the red light completely unaware of the huge new sign stating LEFT TURN PERMITTED AFTER FULL STOPS.

San Francisco too.

Generally I find many Americans are not especially clued up on their Highway Code, for want of a better description, much like too many in UK.

Having clued up I once encountered something not seen before, and was their version of a traffic light controlled on slip to a much bigger divided carriageway. Had travelled this way before and the lights operated normally, but this morning there were flashing red lights. The locals were all of a dither not knowing wtf to do, except I'd read this was a "come to full stop, proceed if safe". No one in the office understood it either. This was a few decades back so maybe they are more common now.

I got honked for not turning left on a red light in LA. In fact it was three honks before I got the message. (this was many years ago).

left?

[nonsequitur]

vonhosen said:

nonsequitur said:

FiF said:

ESOG said:

chemistry said:

I was thinking (ranting...) the other day that if I were in charge () and could introduce one new road traffic law, it would be to allow a left turn at red traffic lights when safe to do so.

Overall, I can see very few reasons not to transplant the "Right turn on red" law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_on_red) from the USA etc. to here. For comparatively little cost (i.e. signs put up at the minority of junctions for which a left on red would be unsafe), we could avoid people sitting pointlessly at red traffic lights, which in turn would speed up traffic flows, reduce pollution, reduce stress and generally benefit all road users. Even better, it would be relatively safe to introduce, as folks who were unaware of the new law would just continue to stay put at a red light when turning left.

What law would you introduce?

In New York, Yonkers specifically, certain junctions give you the write to make a left hand turn but only under strict circumstances. For example only when coming to a full stop at the sign or red light and only if traffic clearly permits and left into a one way street only.

I cannot tell you how oblivious or scared dipsts clearly seem to be at more occassions than none and freeze at the red light completely unaware of the huge new sign stating LEFT TURN PERMITTED AFTER FULL STOPS.

San Francisco too.

Generally I find many Americans are not especially clued up on their Highway Code, for want of a better description, much like too many in UK.

Having clued up I once encountered something not seen before, and was their version of a traffic light controlled on slip to a much bigger divided carriageway. Had travelled this way before and the lights operated normally, but this morning there were flashing red lights. The locals were all of a dither not knowing wtf to do, except I'd read this was a "come to full stop, proceed if safe". No one in the office understood it either. This was a few decades back so maybe they are more common now.

I got honked for not turning left on a red light in LA. In fact it was three honks before I got the message. (this was many years ago).

left?

So that's why I got honked!

( Right turn of course. Thank you Von).

[FiF]

nonsequitur said:

vonhosen said:

nonsequitur said:

FiF said:

ESOG said:

chemistry said:

I was thinking (ranting...) the other day that if I were in charge () and could introduce one new road traffic law, it would be to allow a left turn at red traffic lights when safe to do so.

Overall, I can see very few reasons not to transplant the "Right turn on red" law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn_on_red) from the USA etc. to here. For comparatively little cost (i.e. signs put up at the minority of junctions for which a left on red would be unsafe), we could avoid people sitting pointlessly at red traffic lights, which in turn would speed up traffic flows, reduce pollution, reduce stress and generally benefit all road users. Even better, it would be relatively safe to introduce, as folks who were unaware of the new law would just continue to stay put at a red light when turning left.

What law would you introduce?

In New York, Yonkers specifically, certain junctions give you the write to make a left hand turn but only under strict circumstances. For example only when coming to a full stop at the sign or red light and only if traffic clearly permits and left into a one way street only.

I cannot tell you how oblivious or scared dipsts clearly seem to be at more occassions than none and freeze at the red light completely unaware of the huge new sign stating LEFT TURN PERMITTED AFTER FULL STOPS.

San Francisco too.

Generally I find many Americans are not especially clued up on their Highway Code, for want of a better description, much like too many in UK.

Having clued up I once encountered something not seen before, and was their version of a traffic light controlled on slip to a much bigger divided carriageway. Had travelled this way before and the lights operated normally, but this morning there were flashing red lights. The locals were all of a dither not knowing wtf to do, except I'd read this was a "come to full stop, proceed if safe". No one in the office understood it either. This was a few decades back so maybe they are more common now.

I got honked for not turning left on a red light in LA. In fact it was three honks before I got the message. (this was many years ago).

left?

So that's why I got honked!

( Right turn of course. Thank you Von).

As above left is permitted in some circumstances, more here

I got honked at by a yellow cab who got quite aerated in Florida, downtown Orlando, for not turning left on a red. Felt a bit hard done to frankly, true it was into a one way street, but we were on a two way, afaik in Florida it's permitted one way to one way but not two way to one way. Still taxi drivers, eh, worldwide asshats.

[Frank7]

FiF said:

As above left is permitted in some circumstances, more here

I got honked at by a yellow cab who got quite aerated in Florida, downtown Orlando, for not turning left on a red. Felt a bit hard done to frankly, true it was into a one way street, but we were on a two way, afaik in Florida it's permitted one way to one way but not two way to one way. Still taxi drivers, eh, worldwide asshats.

You’re right about it being okay to turn left on a red from a one-way, into a one-way in Florida, a New Jersey Guy transplanted to Florida told me that, years ago.
He’d left his car in a restaurant parking lot in Brooksville, and asked me for a ride to it from Spring Hill, I stopped at a red to turn left, and he said, “Waddya waiting for, an invite in the mail?”
He then explained that it was a Florida State Law.
So you’re right about lefts on red, but as I’m an ex Black Cab driver, you’re wrong about taxi drivers.