85 points
*

I dislike these kinds of articles (as someone who bikes to work everyday) because of how they treat an urban perspective as if its the only perspective. Some highway stoplights are in the middle of nowhere, have no crosswalk, can go a full year without a single pedestrian, and often have mimal cars. People who sit at those lights every day get mad from articles (like this one) that are completely tonedeaf to their situation.

Yes, in a busy city it makes no sense to allow turn on red, and the article has some great info but it also makes no sense to wait 2 minutes on red when there isn’t a car or human within a 5 mile radius.

If we want people to be onboard with change we’ve got to include them. We can solve both; like getting rual lights to use a flashing red to indicate “allows for turning on red” and THEN get city lights to ban turning right on solid red. Solving one problem expense of another is a quick way to create enemies.

permalink
report
reply
21 points

Germany got a ‘right on red’ with reunification - it is allowed when there’s a small sign on the light that explicitly allows it. In any event even if it is allowed “stop sign” rules apply.

Interestingly the number of lights with such a sign drops each year (after a peak in the 90s) because of higher than normal accident rates and other drivers honking the horn if one driver does not choose to use the “right on red” (which is perfectly fine, you are free to wait till the light is green, turning on red is only an option)

After all for German cities right on red has rather been disappointing

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Yes absolutely. Also the problems of right on red are solved by bettee designs of the streets themselves. Dedicated, separate bicycle lanes. Curb bulbs. Raised pedestrian crossings. Stop lines farther back from the intersection.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Stop lines farther back from the intersection.

People don’t stop for the stop lines, nor the crosswalk, nor the red light. We haven’t even solved stop-on-red. Solutions that will only be implemented in the occasional rich neighborhood are a joke. The problem is that we never had a proper conversation of whether the general public can be trusted to operate heavy machinery. Some dickheads got rich selling the heavy machinery and that was enough to quash any discussion about people being squashed. We need car-free places where people can truly live their lives not only without cars, but without other people zipping by on their cars. Not just 14th Street but all of Manhattan. Make that the go-to move for rich parents who prioritize their childrens’ safety above all else. Make other cities get jealous of the money flowing into car-free Manhattan and implement their own car-free zones.

Tinkering around the edges is Vision Maybe-Marginally-Less.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Well yeah we should ideally abolish cars for all but the most necessary uses - rural living, etc. But that is something I think falls squarely in the “what we can do after overthrowing capitalism” vision bucket. Folks can grasp that even things more realizable under capitalism are simple and can be fought for. Those fights will also usually fail but in doing so can teach valuable lessons about the nature of bourgeois electoralism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

There’s a light next to where i used to live that, like you suggested, used the flashing to indicate when right turns were allowed. I liked it especially since there was a lot of pedestrian traffic during the day but basically none at night (and was thus able to handle the different needs of the road depending on time of day), and it was a really intuitive way to let drivers know what the pedestrian signals were doing. Best part was it was for a right-turn-only lane, and had flashing-yellow (no green at all) to remind you to check for pedestrians and bikes.

permalink
report
parent
reply

to wait 2 minutes on red when there isn’t a car or human within a 5 mile radius.

that sounds like a signaling issue? Using shorter signal cycles, tighten up the intersection and use medians for two stage ped crossings, more detection, better monitoring and remote adjustments can all make it so you don’t need to wait long at all.

(Edit: If it’s done really well it can actually be better than allowing turns on red, because the signal can detect you and give you a green if there’s nobody around before you’ve even come to a stop)

It also would be more better for the driving experience if it was consistent everywhere. When I’m driving, all these hodgepodge no turn on red signs is exhausting. I wish it was just banned everywhere (with better signals).

Some places are getting much better with signaling too. When I leave my hometown (Madison WI) I’m always amazed how long and annoying the time waiting at a traffic light is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Sure, there’s lots of solutions, but we have to talk about them. Even something as simple as “turning on red is often used as a crutch for signaling issues. We shouldnt be waiting at stop lights in the middle of nowhere when theres nobody nearby in the first place”

The key point is *include these people, their situation, their perspective, in the discussion"

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Flashing red is stop sign procedures here. Some, but not enough problematic places have no right on red signs which often get ignored. I mainly have issue with trying to go right on green but that’s when people are crossing, and when I have no choice but to drive near the stadium during a game or concert and people cross endlessly regardless of signals. We really need a separate all way pedestrian sequence in busy intersections and intersections with only 3 crossings at least, and some kind way of ensuring no actions are taken in a pedestrian only phase.

permalink
report
parent
reply
58 points

Recently in my area they posted signs saying no right on red on certain intersections, which is fine, until a few months in they change the rules again where it is only Mon-Fri, at rush hours. The signs posting the hours are small and hard to read. Everyone’s confused if they’re allowed to turn or not. I’d rather they just stick with a blanket no right on red.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

And when you legally stop at a red light, people will lay on their horn behind you because there’s no cross-traffic, even if it is a blanket “no right turn on red”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

And even when “right on red” is allowed, they will still lay on the horn when you stop. As if they don’t know you have to stop at the red and only proceed with your turn after a full stop and if the way is clear.

Actually, maybe they don’t know you have to come to a full stop before turning?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah they did that where I live. I get it that it’s work hours but the text was so small! As a driver it’s hard to tell.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points
*

I have to admit this thread and post are very informative. I have never questioned it, right on red has just always been something I could do since I got my driver’s license. Didn’t realize it was so controversial! TIL after ~20 years lol

permalink
report
reply
35 points

Didn’t realize it was so controversial!

If by controversial you mean dangerous, then yes, it is. It is one of the main ways in which pedestrians are killed in North America. In most developed countries it is illegal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Those last two sentences, replace pedestrians with hot topic victims and this could be any thread.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

It’s problematic at best, dangerously stupid at worst.

  • It introduces a conflict point between traffic coming from the left heading straight and traffic intending to turn right.
  • The driver that wants to turn right has to look very far to the left and to the right.
  • The driver that wants to turn right has to determine if they have the right of way.

In most European countries (maybe all), right-turning lanes often have an additional signal that allows cars to turn right even if the main signal is red. It serves the same purpose as right-on-red, but eliminates the issues I’ve listed because it’s green only when traffic from the left is stopped.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Makes sense. I’m never against more rules governing cars, personally. Sounds like right on red is a bit too much discretion for drivers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

There are times when, as a driver, I’m glad turning right on red is legal. I’d be perfectly fine if it was abolished, though. The risks massively outweigh the benefits.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

A person turning right on red fundamentally lacks right of way: when someone doing that gets in a collision, it was inherently an illegal right turn without the law changing. I don’t see how changing the law from one kind of that turn being illegal to another would change the risks in any meaningful way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Making right turns on red illegal would reduce the number of people attempting them. I think that would change the risks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

That’s an awful and enshitified website with ads for trucks.

But yes I agree it’s a very dangerous law

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Another pro-car law that you can only see in North America. After 10 years here, coming from Europe, I still feel iffy every time I turn right on red.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The city I live added the right to turn right on red as I was still a pedestrian. And I clearly saw the difference in danger of crossing the streets. Now ad a driver I don’t understand why so many drivers are in such a rush to buch up at the next red light. Here at least, you are supposed to do a complete stop for 4 seconds while checking both side before going only if it is safe to do so. But I see cars go right without even slowing down that much, and they will go even if a car is incoming thinking that they will slow down to let them pass. It’s so infuriating. Impatience is so dangerous.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Don’t read the comments. You’d think gasoline was still leaded with the aggressive position commenters are taking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I was there’s like seven comments and nothing so bad, then I checked the article comments and wow are you right !

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Jalopnik used to be great. Unfortunately, when a new company bought the site years ago, things started going downhill.

Ironically, it’s a site for car enthusiasts, and not the first place you’d expect to see an article like this. Yeah, they’re a bit more laid back and progressive than other sites covering similar topics, but still.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Fuck Cars

!fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

Create post

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

  • to raise awareness around the dangers, inefficiencies and injustice that can come from car dependence.
  • to allow a place to discuss and promote more healthy transport methods and ways of living.

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn’t choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don’t use slurs. You can laugh at someone’s fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don’t post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn’t a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

Community stats

  • 3.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 722

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments