turning left on red?

[Steve]

I think this will be a fantastic idea. But only where the road infrastructure allows. In the states, it works because the roads are wide, and always have about 4 lanes approaching junctions.

Here, most of our junctions are smaller, and where there's only one lane, allowing left turn on red would be unfair. However, on a 2 or 3-lane approach, i see no reason why this would not work, with signs up to say when it is allowed.

The only problem i can see is where pedestrian crossings are integrated into traffic junctions where left turn on red is allowed - it would NEVER be fully safe to cross on the green man. But they manage with this in the states - its called being careful on and around roads, and IIRC, they have signs up saying "check right/left for red-light turners" or words to that effect.

 

[2scoops0406]

turning left on a red light is most definitely not permitted in Northern america, turning right however is I think that you are allowed to turn left on a red light in the republic of Ireland though

 

[Steve]

turning left on a red light is most definitely not permitted in Northern america

you know what i meant.

"A similar procedure is in place in North America" was probably the correct way to say it

 

[2scoops0406]

turning left on a red light is most definitely not permitted in Northern america

you know what i meant.

"A similar procedure is in place in North America" was probably the correct way to say it

True I [pendant]did[/pendant]

 

[noodlz]

Just thought I'd better point out....did you mean to say:

True I did

?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Overtaking on the LHS on motorways would also be handy...

And the fantastic system of junction numbering that they have (maybe only some states?) where each one is numbered according to how far it is from the start of the freeway / state line, so you always know how far you have to go, and new junction numbers just drop in.

And the automatic doubling of speeding penalties in roadworks.

And a non-911 number to call if you only want the Highway Patrol for non-emergency reasons.

 

[paulbrown]

The only problem i can see is where pedestrian crossings are integrated into traffic junctions where left turn on red is allowed - it would NEVER be fully safe to cross on the green man. But they manage with this in the states - its called being careful on and around roads, and IIRC, they have signs up saying "check right/left for red-light turners" or words to that effect.

This doesn't seem to cause as many problems as would be imagined. Having said that both drivers and pedestrians understand whats going on because it is an old system. I reckon the dangerous part here would be lax pedestrians, rather than motorists. The US also bans the practice when it isn't considered safe.

Pedestrians have the right of way if they are already crossing the road.

The US also has much fewer "give ways" preferring "stop" or "halt" signs. Wherever you can turn on red you have to come to a stop first and they are very strict on this.

In my experience of driving in many US states I find the drivers generally more courteous than here, except the big cities that is where they are just as impatient as us.

 

[Steve]

Overtaking on the LHS on motorways would also be handy....

Why? Perhaps the morons who drive at 70 in the right hand lane and never budge ought to be punished, rather than legalising LHS overtaking. Or were you being sarcastic because the Americans can overtake on the left . . . .

(I thought someone somewhere said that lane hoggers were going to be penalised soon????)

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Overtaking on the LHS on motorways would also be handy....

Why? Perhaps the morons who drive at 70 in the right hand lane and never budge ought to be punished, rather than legalising LHS overtaking. Or were you being sarcastic because the Americans can overtake on the left . . . .

No - no sarcasm, and I'd adjusted the "side" to make sense with a RHD environment. Why not allow overtaking on both sides?

(I thought someone somewhere said that lane hoggers were going to be penalised soon????)

I'd love to see how they would square that with:

a) The fact that on a dry road you can easily need a gap of nearly ¼ of a mile to safely move over (more in the wet)

b) If you are travelling at the posted speed limit you cannot legally be obstructing anybody (except emergency vehicles). Those "morons" as you call them can only be in your way if you are a law-breaker, and how much should the wishes of law-breakers be given precedence over those of the law-abiding?

 

[paulbrown]

They have to be able to do this(overtake eitherside), unlike the UK they don't always join or leave the highway on the same side.

I have found their system a tad tricky when following a map, you are unsure whether you will exit left or right. I can understand the reasons behind this though, it often reduces the ammount (or size) of bridges, one of the more expensive parts of roadbuilding.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I've never had a problem with exiting from the left-most lanes.

I will say though that I really don't like the way that junctions are often arranged such that traffic enters the freeway at a point before the exiting traffic leaves, resulting in two sets of vehicles trying to move diagonally in different directions on the same stretch of road....

 

[markie]

When i drive on the motorway i go into the outside lane and drive at 70 mph, just to pi#s off the law breaking idiots behind me, who want to drive well over the limit,

 

[Steve]

So nobody on this forum ever drives above 70? No-one? Not even when the motorway's empty?

 

[markie]

My car just does do 70 mph it's only a honda civic type R ,

 

[Steve]

i worked out my car would be doing 4000rpm at 100mph (based on 2000 at 50) - but its a diesel, so this is pushing it! Maximum ive tried in it is 90mph (empty motorways, 5:30am)