[Lord_Galva]

ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!????


I was stopped at a red light at an intersection where it crosses a 4 lane highway.
The light changed to green and I sat there for one whole second, normally I would just take off.
Once it occurred to me the light has been green for a second I put my car into gear.
<b>Then a truck with two trailers ran the light!</b>
I went to visit my doctor on the 3rd and was nearly plastered by a 18-wheeler.
I don't know if I would even be typing this had he hit me. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif[/img]

All I can say is WTF!!!!!

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

happens all the time - unfortunately too many people assume that because a light turns green, that it is safe to go

this is a very good argument for more of the already desperately needed red light cameras - red light runners have become the number 1 cause of urban traffic accidents

rules to remember:

yellow light means SLOW DOWN and prepare to stop - it does not mean "hurry up or you won't make it"

yellow light means that if you cannot safely get completely through the intersection BEFORE it turns red, you must stop

the intersection is defined by the OUTERMOST crosswalk line (or where it would be if there were a crosswalk) - this is called the "limit line" - it is not the innermost line

red light means STOP, not "i'll be through it before traffic an go, so it's ok"

if you are not entirely in the intersection BEFORE the light turns red, you have run the light

do NOT stop in an intersection EVER - if you cannot get through it without stopping, do NOT enter

in urban areas, 3 rights are almost always faster than 1 left

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Richard, glad to hear that was a miss. This is probably my biggest traffic related complaint and I'd go as far as promoting as severe of, if not even a more punishing penalty for red light running, than for DUIs !

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[sstman]

Glad to hear that second really counted in your favour that time!. Yes red light camera's have certainly made a downward move in the traffic stats here in the UK. Three points and £60 focuses the mind.... 12 points on licence and total driving ban for up to two years. However the speed camera debate is another whole bone of contention...... revenue generators is one nickname for them.....

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

they only generate revenue when people run the light, so i say "go ahead and rake in the money" - the only people who complain about them are the ones that run the lights, and they shouldn't be doing that, so...................

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[craigawoodman]

I am all for not running red lights as a matter of course, but mistakes happen. If you blatently miss the light fair cop - take the fine.

But be warned - we now have combination Red Light and Speed Camera's over here. So big brother is watching you everywhere.

Our Governments (remember there are around 25M people in Australia) take around $1.8Billion - yes Billion in traffic infringements every year. So, in USA terms, this would be around $25 Billion in additional taxation.

This does not include DUI fines or fines levied by Courts - it is Traffic Infringement Notices.

Be careful what you wish for - we now also have unmarked Speed Camera in cars (just another car on the side of the road).

I should post a letter from a State Politician who has statistical eveidence that a 2mph decrease in speed - somehow marke you 5% less likely to have a serious accident.

How about driver training?

How about drug testing for truckers?

Slippery slope indeed.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rxter]

In PA I learned to expect people to run the reds, and so I would wait a couple of beats and look both ways - as did most people. In CA its a drag race off the green - so I practically slam on the brakes rather than run a red. Different local customs mean a slightly different take on the rules. Cameras don't make people better drivers. Adapt or die.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Darryl]

Over the years, I have found myself waiting a good two or three seconds prior to pulling out from an intersection...especially onto higher speed main roads from secondary roads. Even as I pull into the intersection, I do my best to scan both ways as approaching traffic is coming to a stop just in case someone is texting, shaving, or reading the paper.

Speaking of running red lights, one of the biggest problems around here, and I'm guessing most urban areas, is the propensity for barely even yielding when making a right turn on red, let alone stopping. My wife has gotten herself in that habit but heaven forbid I mention it! I may not come to a complete stop but I certainly make enough effort that I doubt any officer would even think about chasing me down 'cause he didn't get a three count before my wheels starting turning again. Just another dangerous practice that is almost impossible to enforce. Be careful out there!

- Darryl

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

craig - i don't think that cameras make safer drivers either - they do reduce the number of incidents where they are though - the drivers are still lame, they just aren't as lame in those spots

i am all for more required driver training, higher driver's license fees, higher vehicle registration fees, and strict vehicle inspections for safety reasons - i think too many people have come to think of driving as a right, rather than the privilege it is, and we need to turn that around

i'd also like to see graduated driver's licenses, based on skill level and the car (i.e. you are a highly skilled and tested driver, so in your ferrari you can drive 100mph, but in your prius you are still limited to the speed limit)

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[mikeo]

Flash said: yellow light means that if you cannot safely get completely through the intersection BEFORE it turns red, you must stop

I was always taught that yellow means the signal will turn red soon and you should stop if you can safely do so. Red means you cannot cross the stop line. Clearing the intersection before the light turns red is not required. Here's a link to California law for the curious. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21453.htm

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

there is a lot of conflicting information out there - no worries - i did a stint teaching traffic school many moons ago, and we were instructed on very specific language to use on this:

"It is illegal to enter an intersection on a yellow signal without the full expectation of safely completing the passage through the intersection prior to the signal turning red."

for california law, it's usually easiest to refer to the section regarding gridlock (CVC 25526a)

also 22500 and 22450 are the sections prohibiting stopping past the limit line or in an intersection

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

"i did a stint teaching traffic school many moons ago"

Sheesh, is there anything you haven't done? [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]

I've always thoguht red light cameras were a good idea, too, but then I heard Clark Howard say on his show that studies have shown, contrary to all expectations, that they have actually done nothing to reduce the number of accidents at the intersections in which they were installed. I can't remember the supporting data behind this conclusion, and it is definitely counter-intuitive, but that's what he said.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

lol - yeah - plenty of things i haven't done, but i've always been one to try new stuff, change directions at the drop of a hat, and toss convention out the window - bottom line is that i did not want to grow up to be my dad, working the same job for 20 years, hating it, only to get laid off 11 months before retirement so that he could start all over at another dumb job he hated

clark howard is wrong - probably another study skewed to show what they want to show - we have a LOT of cameras in my area and they absolutely work - san francisco is another great example of how well they work - google clark howard and you will find that his conclusions are nothing more than conjecture and conspiracy theory - while it is obviously a revenue generator, it is still a problem that needs to be solved - if anybody has a better solution, i recommend contacting your local government and presenting it - running red lights is not the answer

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[mikeo]

Gridlock is, I contend, a special case which is not the controlling law in the issuance of red light camera tickets. In Florida the photos must show that you have not entered the intersection when the light changes to red and that you are in the intersection while the light is red. This would correspond to the California law reference in my post.

Yes, I am a nit picker [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

lol - well, if you want to nitpick, it would help if your link worked - your emoticon did not work either

but, if you want to cite the CVC section, i would be happy to send it to counsel for review

while semantics and unclear verbage may work in criminal cases, the intent of the laws are clear, and since no jury trial is allowed in traffic court, subject to the interpretation of the judge alone

so...............

we have an underlying law here, that is the basic speed law (CVC 22350) - it clearly states that you may at no time, signal lights notwithstanding, travel at a rate that is faster than is reasonable, prudent, or safe - this would clearly direct you that you may NOT proceed into an intersection when it is not safe, which would be without the full expectation of safely clearing the intersection BEFORE the signal turns red

the law is also subject to the presumption that any reasonable individual would know better than to enter an intersection when it is yellow, knowing full well that it is about to turn red (per CVC 21453a) - this is also per the agreed upon terms when signing for your license, which state clearly that you know, understand, and agree to obey ALL california traffic laws

so, there is no room here to wiggle out - you may NOT enter an intersection under the yellow without the full expectation of completing your passage through that intersection BEFORE the light changes red - to do so would put you in the path of cross traffic, and would not be safe

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Lord_Galva]

To say the least I am thankful that I wasn't hit.
I knew Hwy 12 was dangerous but never had an incident before that proved to me how stupid people are on it.
This is definatly a lesson I will try to convey to my siblings who are just getting their licences.

And just to throw my 2 cents in, I have heard some state (Utah?) has a high (75-85mph) highway speedlimit in some areas.
It was suppost to be a test run, and early results showed less traffic incidents than years prior with the higher speed.
I think.
I don't remember where I saw this or if it is a hoax.
Can anyone back me up? [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif[/img]

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Lord_Galva]

(CVC 22350) - it clearly states that you may at no time, signal lights notwithstanding, travel at a rate that is faster than is reasonable, prudent, or safe

On who's decision is it "reasonable or safe?" Yours, the cops, or the judge. I hate how vague laws are.
I think that it is perfectly reasonable to go 100mph on an open streatch of country road with no traffic or elevation changes.
However others would say differently.

If I ever did go over the speed limit (who doesn't) I determine on a personal level what is too fast for conditions.
For example driving on the highway at 83 when everyone else is going 80.
Personally I believe that 90mph in that situation is reasonable and safe considering the enviromental factors.

Now according to CVC 22356 b. No person shall drive a vehicle upon that highway at a speed greater than 70 miles per hour, as posted.
This clearly contradicts CVC 22350.
One law gives us the ability to determine a safe speed while the other forces a maximum.

Stuff like this makes me want to buy some property out in the country, pave my own dam road, and drive as fast as I freakn want. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif[/img]

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[craigawoodman]

The Northern Territory in Australia used to have no speed restrictions once you were out of the major (lets call them small) towns. The politicians made a lot of noise and threatened to remove federal road funding if maximum speed limits of 110km/h were not introduced.

The speed limits were introduced and guess what - the number of fatalities increased - not decreased. The Territory also lost a valuable industry, where the world's car industry used to come to Australia to do high speed, high temperature testing, because of the open speed limits. This valuable industry is now gone - all to appease some zelots who cannot drive.

Having lived in North Western Australia - where the next town is 650km south and 250 km north - it is boredom, not speed which is the issue.

Having dumbed down driving to where it is a chore - people cannot drive any more. They now believe that if you drive at the speed limit you will not be injured or hurt.

I believe it is Austria that you have to do mandatory driving instruction. along with Finland - the most WRC champions from a country with only 20 Million people. Got to be doing something right.

So "Speed Does Not Kill". Poor drivers kill. Ergo - lets deal with the poor drivers and we will be safe.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[williamoss]

I have taught defensive driving classes for years. I always tell my students that until I see a vehicle which is coming at right angles to me or in front /toward me I assume he is running the light, running the stop sign, or going to cut in front of me. When I see them slow down then I go.

William Moss
Tigard OR

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

while most of us disagree with the ruling, the state has determined that over 70 is not safe at any time, so 22350 still applies - they mean by the law that you must reduce your speed below that to a point that is safe for the conditions (weather, traffic, etc) - they do not mean that you can ever go faster just because there is nobody on the road

22350 gets involved in intersections when considering the traffic and the anticipation of a vehicle crossing and colliding - it also becomes an issue for pedestrians, who ALWAYS have the right of way, who could step off of a curb at an intersection immediately when the light turns green for them, only to find that you have not completed your passage through that intersection and consequently cream them - this would mean that you were going too fast for conditions, as you were unable to stop to avoid them, that you ran the light, as you obviously could not complete the maneuver in time, as well as nailing a pedestrian

this actually happened to me (ruined my tennis career) - long story for another day

as for who determines how a law is to be interpreted, that is the job of the judge

don't run the red - stop on yellow - period

get used to cameras - they aren't going away, are very effective, and as we all know, generate a lot of revenue, which in this economic climate is much needed

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.