Should traffic lights be higher??

As long as you're not in the intersection when you see the red light,
you're ok. If you're in the intersection when the light comes into
view, you are wrong for 1) following too closely behind the truck, and
2) entering the intersection without knowing you could get through it
before the light turned red.

Don't blame the truck or the height of the light for your bad driving.

Do them "Chicago style" : near side right on a pole, far side right
overhead, far side left on a pole

Some intersections also do far side right on a pole.

Hmmmmm...

Don't assume a light you can't see is going to be green.

Seems simple enough.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

In nearly every state I know of, except Louisiana, it is not illegal
to still be in the intersection when the light turns red, as long as
you entered before the red. You are permitted to complete your pass
through on red.

You're following too close. If you can't see the light, you can't
enter the intersection.
-----

- gpsman

It's also up to your mother to keep herself from becoming road kill.

--

We're all here
because we're not all there.

In the case of the original poster, PLEASE assume a light you can't

And PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE keep tailgating semis. :))

>Seems simple enough.

And yet it's still over SADDAM's head. :-)

Furthermore, if you can't see the light, you can't readily see
opposing traffic, hmmm? So if the semi barely avoids getting hit and
you're blindly following him, you hold a good chance of your car
becoming a crumpled hood ornament.

I forgot to mention, if the traffic light is too high, then you can't
see it at all, unless you have x-ray vision that'll allow you to see
through the roof of your car.

I think you ought to be thrown in prison, red light runner. It's
idiots like you that maim and murder innocent children.

I'd be surprised by that; it is law in most civilized places (but I've
never lived in CA)

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

I agree, and I agree with the other posters that stated that signals
should also be placed on poles on the side of the road. At least around
here, signals seem to be placed overhead only, which a) means that in
any of the cars that I regularly drive, I can't see the signal without
craning my neck when I'm the first or even second car in line and b) the
situation where I'm behind a truck and therefore can't see the signal
happens far too often.

Dunno about WA but everybody does it. Need to turn left. Pull into
intersection on green and wait for traffic to clear. Often that will
be after the light changes.

Harry K

This is a real problem. Traffic lights in cities used to be on the curb,
where everyone could see them.

Not everywhere. Many towns used to have just one signal hanging in the
middle of the intersection

I think the way the laws are written and.or enforced, if you enter on
green or yellow and have a clear space to move into when the light
turns red, you won't be ticketed but if you are stuck in the middle of
the intersection after the light turns red and can't exit quickly, you
will be ticketed (and rightly so)

Well, I meant *should* be ticketed. Haven't actually seen anyone
ticketed for anything but speeding in I don't know how long.

nate

Only if you want to kill someone. Smart people will wait till they
can see that they
have a green light and that it is safe to proceed.
-----------------------
Alex

So you're admitting to being a Red Light Runner. Fucking hypocrite.

They did that near my house in PA. However, they should have used a red
arrow on the signal on the left pole. I've seen that setup in Maryland and
I think it helps tremendously with visibility.

Woah...you can't see over a UPS truck? You mean the little trucks
making stops all day long? How close are you to these trucks??? A
semi, I understand (still no excuse). A UPS truck - you would have to
be on the guy's bumper - literally - to not be able to see over it.

You are a fricking disaster waiting to happen on the road. My only
hope is that you wrap yourself around a tree and not injure anyone
else.

<< reply limited to r.a.d >>

Methinks that the OP is trying to tell is something....

Not that you have to go far to go over SFB's head. ;)

--
S&DDAM indicating that it runs red lights:

--Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS, 8/8/07
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/26x4o2
Message ID: 13bl47n...@corp.supernews.com

It's not the law in PA or MD either. Not that I would call either civilized.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Huh? the average UPS truck is at least eight feet tall, maybe taller;
you'd have to be WAY back to be able to see a traffic signal over it.

nate

I was staying out of this.... but basically a short person has a lot more
window to look up at a steeper angle than a tall person who is looking
out of the top of the windshield. The tall person ends up looking at
headliner if needs a steeper viewing angle, the shorter person can see
through glass at the steep angle. the shallow angle requires being
further back, insanely and not practicible in many cases.

Although in these threads I think it comes down to the fact that most
people just don't pay attention for the light turning green, they notice
the other people moving... eventually. Quite often I end up at light
where both people at the front of each of two lanes just waits for the
other guy to move. So they both just sit there with the light green.

You need to wrap yourself around a pole also appearantly.

So, if you are in a left turn lane that's moving, and there's a 8' UPS
truck in front of you, are you riding the truck's bumper? I would
hope not. Thus, you would be - or should be - far enough back that
you can see the light.

Let me know next time you are behind a UPS truck as you approach a
traffic light. If you can't see over a 8' truck, you are driving WAY
TOO CLOSE.

Draw it out on paper, do the trig, let me know how far back I need to be
from the truck to see a traffic signal. When I'm sitting still, I only
need to be far enough back that I can change lanes without hitting the
vehicle in front of me if something Really Bad develops behind me;
anything more would be excessive and also very selfish, as it could
conceivably cause traffic backed up behind me to hang out into the
through lanes. To actually see a traffic signal over an average UPS
truck, I'd have to be back significantly farther than that, I'm guessing
at least several car lengths. When was the last time you left several
car lengths in front of you at a stop light? I'm guessing, about never.

If we're talking about a semi, I'm not sure it is even possible to see a
normal traffic signal over one from a regular passenger car.

Bullshit. Even if true you have no method of learning what any driver
is waiting for when the light changes.

Not everyone believes it is prudent to launch from a light as if drag
racing, because it isn't.
-----

- gpsman

--
No, no, you can't e-mail me with the nono.

You're simply a moron and a troll.

Like a trucker such as yourself would sit quietly behind something like
this.... all you truckers can't shut up about how you're so important and
time is money, so everyone should yield the roads to your kind.

When there are two more drivers just sitting there waiting on the green,
most always when one starts moving the rest immediately do so as well. If
they had 'other reasons' this timing wouldn't be so common, nor would the
behavior be in pairs so often.

Obviously you haven't realized that tailgating (at any speed) is as
murderous as speeding or driving drunk. Too bad the truck's exhaust
didn't poison you. I'm no criminal coddler. :)

I like the British style signals (on the sides of the roadway applying
to all lanes instead of the more typical style with one signal per
lane "floating" over it via cable or some kind of glorified erector
set widow-maker from a lamp post) when they can be practically applied
because they're more visible around heavy traffic.

Then you'd be wrong. Go re-read the law. The signals are standard
throughout north america in every state and province. If it turns red
while you're in the intersection, you ran the red. That's why there's
a yellow stop-if-you-can light before the red stop light.

Incorrect, exhaust breath, on more than one point.

I'd recommend reading the law in the first place, or having it read
and interpreted for you, rather than suggesting anyone else re-read
it.
-----

- gpsman

Um, I suggest you're the one who needs to bone up. I am apparently
more familiar with the law than you think you are.

I have read many states' red light laws, and so far *all* of them
except for Louisiana *allow* a driver to be in the intersection when
the light turns red, so long as the driver entered before that point.
Are you aware that RLCs activate *only* to cite vehicles that cross
the *stop bar* after red?

Yellow does not mean stop if you can in most states (although in some
states it does -- apparently state traffic codes are not as
standardized as you mistakenly thought).

Here, for example, are the pertinent sections of the California
Vehicle Code:

21452. (a) A driver facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow
signal is, by that signal, warned that the related green movement is
ending or that a red indication will be shown immediately
thereafter.

No obligation to stop is stated there. Now, for the definition of red
signal, the next section:

21453. (a) A driver facing a steady circular red signal alone shall
stop at a marked limit line, but if none, before entering the
crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then
before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an
indication to proceed is shown, except as provided in subdivision
(b).

See? It is not illegal to have crossed the stop bar or intersection
threshold already when the light turns red.

There are some intersections in my city that are so large, in some
cases traffic can actually enter the box on *green* and not be out
until after yellow has turned to red.

Yes indeed. The loonies here are acting like it's MY fault someone is
driving a vehicle 10 feet high!!!. I guess we should put periscopes on cars.

So what am i supposed to do?. Put a periscope on my car? THINK

Don't drive into an intersection unless you know you can be through it
before the light turns red. THINK.

It IS your fault if you recognize the truck in front of you is blocking
your view of the traffic light but you drive into the intersection
anyway, assuming (or guessing or hoping) the light is red. THINK.

I have. You're never supposed to enter an intersection even on green
unless you know you can clear the intersection before the red. I'd
say the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate when you can run a
red light except to turn right after stopping (or possibly left onto a
one-way in Oregon and Washington or from a one-way to a one way
everywhere), given that your claim violates common sense and defensive
driving practices.

These? http://tinyurl.com/28mh2y (image on MSN)

At a stop, even Robert Wadlow would have problems seeing over one of
those without leaving an unreasonable amount of space between his
vehicle and a delivery truck. If the light is short, and traffic starts
moving very slowly, it's possible to get caught by a red before your
speed-to-following distance ratio has built up to where you can see the
light.

However, if traffic is moving at speed, there isn't any excuse I can
think of right now to be so close to a truck that you can't see any of
the lights before entering the intersection. IOW, Aunt Judy's subject
idea is idiotic (as usual).

--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
--H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

> Alan Baker wrote:
>> In article <13bl47n...@corp.supernews.com>, Aunt Judy (AKA
>> Pride of Diarrhea, AKA "Saddam") <http://tinyurl.com/65nqz>

*Your* best option would be to just hang up the keys, put your caltrops
to constructive use on your unsafe beater as jackstands, collect all
those loose marbles you've got rolling around on the floor, and most of
the non-issues you've ever whined about in here will solve themselves
overnight.

Failing that, here are two simple suggestions you can try:

- Don't tailgate tall vehicles, ever.
- Wait until you can actually see whether the light is green instead of
just assuming it is, like Alan just told you.

--
~/Garth
"I am patient with stupidity
but not with those who are proud of it." - Edith Sitwell
(Ventis secundis, tene cursum.)

Not follow a semi so close that you can't see the traffic lights.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

Nope, you may enter on yellow and leave on red. What you're not allowed
to do is be in the intersection when it turns red and not have an exit
path (i.e. "don't block the box.")

No, we're acting like it's your fault you can't drive in a legal manner.

Seeing overhead traffic signals over tall vehicles in front of you is a
problem, yes. Proceeding into an intersection when you can't see the
signal is YOUR problem, as the rest of us don't seem to be doing that.

wait until you can see the damn signal. You in a hurry or something?
*snork*

Then you didn't read it very well, because it only says that in one
state as far as I know.

BTW I would like to point out for the edification of all that gpstroll
just posted something factually correct. Now my world is all weird.

That's plainly false by the cite I already gave you. There is
absolutely *no* legal liability in most states (LA being the one
exception I have found) to be clear of the intersection at the time
the signal turns red. You must only be able to clear it and not be
stopped. It is illegal, for instance, to even *enter* an intersection
under a *green* signal, under most statutes I've seen, if there is not
room for your vehicle to exit at the other side.

But no, you're wrong, it is not illegal in most states to still be
traversing the box at the time the light turns red. I have been in
traffic court watching people pleading their cases, during which this
distinction is plainly made and the police must argue that entry into
the intersection was made after the red, not simply that the car was
already in the intersection and moving when it turned red. I have
heard officers testify to this distinction so that their tickets can
be upheld and not dismissed.

> ... say the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate when you can run a
> red light...

Um, I already met the burden. And it is *not* running a red light if
you've already entered the intersection. I posted for you the exact
language from the CVC, and that's pretty much the boilerplate for most
states except LA. And it is decidedly *not* running a red light to
have crossed the stop bar prior to the red. Read the statute I posted
one more time... the legal liability comes into play if you fail to stop
*behind* that point when the light goes red. Think. If you have
already passed the stop bar, you cannot be held liable for not
stopping at it later.

> ... except to turn right after stopping (or possibly left onto a

My claim *is* common sense and *yours* violates it. How do you explain
the large intersections where one can enter on green and still not be
through it when the yellow phase goes to red?

A few states (OR is one, IIRC) add to the boilerplate to add a
provision to the yellow signal definition stating that you must stop
on yellow of you can safely do so, a judgment call, but even then, the
red definition is the same as in CA and most other states but LA.

Now, in the LA state statute, to further show that you are mistaken,
the definition of red *does* include a legal liability to be out of
the intersection at the time the signal goes red. Since it is
explicitly stated there, but is not in any other state I've checked,
it is plain in its meaning.

Paul, you need to bone up on your own state's law before talking about
any other state's law. Here's the anti-gridlock law for Oregon:

811.290 Obstructing cross traffic; penalty. (1) A person commits
the offense of obstructing cross traffic if the person is operating a
vehicle and the person enters an intersection or a marked crosswalk when
there is not sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or
crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle without obstructing the passage of
other vehicles or pedestrians.

(2) The offense described in this section applies whether or not
a traffic control device indicates to proceed.

It merely says that a driver must be able to clear the intersection
before actually entering the intersection. It does not say anything
about the indication of the signal on exit. The intent, if not the
wording, is similar throughout the country except in LA where a driver
must be out of the intersection when the signal turns red.

OR is one of the states that has the stop-if-safe-to-do-so yellow as
stated here:

811.260 Appropriate driver responses to traffic control devices.
This section establishes appropriate driver responses to specific
traffic control devices for purposes of ORS 811.265. Authority to place
traffic control devices is established under ORS 810.210. Except when
acting under the direction of a police officer that contradicts this
section, a driver is in violation of ORS 811.265 if the driver makes a
response to traffic control devices that is not permitted under the
following:

...

(3) Steady circular yellow signal. A driver facing a steady
circular yellow signal light is thereby warned that the related right of
way is being terminated and that a red or flashing red light will be
shown immediately. A driver facing the light shall stop at a clearly
marked stop line, but if none, shall stop before entering the marked
crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if there is no marked
crosswalk, then before entering the intersection. If a driver cannot
stop in safety, the driver may drive cautiously through the intersection.

...

(5) Steady circular red signal. A driver facing a steady circular
red signal light alone shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if
none, before entering the marked crosswalk on the near side of the
intersection, or if there is no marked crosswalk, then before entering
the intersection. The driver shall remain stopped until a green light is
shown except when the driver is permitted to make a turn under ORS
811.360 (RTOR).

You don't see many 'run yellow' tickets because it's basically a
judgment call and, as such, easy to get out of. And, again, no mention
of the indication on exit, only entry.

--
--Andy
Beaverton, OR

No. Just don't enter the intersection until you know what the signal
indication is.

--
--Andy

On a tangent, IL law only requires those with the green light to yield
to vehicles *LAWFULLY* within the intersection.

The cop just says the driver entered on red. lying solves these legal
problems for the minions of government.

OR has a more restrictive version of that too (i.e. a driver shall yield
the ROW to vehicles already in the intersection, not just lawfully
there). I didn't quote that part because it didn't seem relevant to the
previous discussion.

--
--Andy

Correct.

You're the one who's wrong. If it were illegal to be in the intersection
when the light turns red, then the law would amount to requiring you to be
able to predict the future, which is requiring the impossible, which is
unconstitutional on its face.

And yellow does not mean stop if you can. The yellow is part of your turn
and is there so you can judge whether you have time to MAKE the light (and
if you can, you're supposed to go).

That makes complete sense too. Can you imagine trying to explain to
the officer that you went ahead when the light turned green and
smashed straight into a car blocking the intersection because he was
*unlawfully* there?

lawfully needs to be there because otherwise the MFFY drivers will just go
when ever they want using the legal requirement that others have to stop
to avoid a collision as their defense.

Imagine how you would feel if you see a green signal up ahead and someone
from the cross traffic just pulls out and you hit them and are found at
fault because they entered the intersection before you did, even though
they had the red and ran it?

So, you are willing to run a red light, risk getting hit, injured, or
killed, while risking someone else getting injured or killed, all the
while using the excuse "I couldn't see over the truck in front of
me".

Yeah, that'll work in court (assuming you aren't killed).

LMAO.

Keep up the fantastic traffic safety practices, retard. Darwin will be
visiting you RSN.

--

We're all here
because we're not all there.

Fortunately for those of us who know how to drive, the problem you've
mentioned isn't a problem.

Of course, that merely shows we're capable of thinking, and you are
not. But then again your posts already prove that. lmao.

This affects intelligent people HOW?

Don't pull so far forward.

>situation where I'm behind a truck and therefore can't see the signal
>happens far too often.

When blocked behind traffic, you need to see the signal why?

Not possible. To see the signals from a comfortable driving position,
I'd need to be at least two or three car lengths back from the stop
line at a typical intersection in this area. Streets tend to be
narrow, and signals mounted high.

I don't *need* to, but I would like to be able to so as to be able to
proceed through the intersection as soon as possible. Light cycles
are short and traffic heavy, so the wait for the vehicle in front of
me to clear the intersection so I can verify the light is actually
green might cause several vehicles behind me to miss the light.

nate

What happens if find yourself stuck in a "yellow trap" or "lagging
left trap?"

LMAO. Nothing says "RETARDMOBILE" like a beater with bumpers on the
sides, a periscope on the roof, burned out instrument cluster
lighting, and sand paper on the tars.

Fortunately for American society, retards such as yourself die off at
the rate of 110 per day, clearing the path for the new Americans.

LMAO. Perhaps that's why the idiot wants to put bumpers on the sides
of it's car?

I am sure you could get no higher. Stop the maddness.

and, please. DON"T DRIVE - you are a danger to everyone.

Buahahahaha. Everyone else manages to drive ok. What's wrong with
you?

YES - you are supposed to think,

Considering your inability to distinguish the difference between the
terms "time" and "chance", you're not in a position to judge the
reading comprehension of others.

Nice try though, loser.

Since when have "legal" and "safe" been synonymous?

Though it's been a bit since I've looked at my state's driver's
manual, I know I read somewhere not to enter intersections unless you
were positive you could make it through the intersection before the
light turned red. Perhaps, though, that was something I read in some
defensive driving material I was reading at the time, and not the
state's driver's manual.

I'm thinking that's a bit of a stretch.

Hey, give him props for actually abusing someone who was *wrong* for
once. It's not like it happens that often.

Ok, so when you've got the red light, why do you have to be below the
light? Seems to me you could stay back for a bit to wait for the light
to change, then proceed forward cautiously to provide the opportunity
to check for errant cross traffic (a survival requirement in South
Carolina), then proceed normally as you're exiting the intersection.

However you still have the obstacle in front of you. You can not
proceed through the intersection until said obstacle has moved, which
it shouldn't do until the light changes.

If it's an issue of following the vehicle through the intersection, as
opposed to waiting behind one at an intersection, then I would
consider the possibility that you're following the vehicle too
closely.

If I'm far back enough that I can actually see the signal without moving
from my normal driving position *at all* I would also be far enough back
that other drivers would be confused by my behavior and change lanes in
front of me, and then stop in front of me but behind the stop line.
Granted, this is exacerbated by the inability to adjust the seat
vertically as much as I'd like in the Impala, but I have the same issue
in the Porsche, which has both a low seating position and a decently
steeply sloped windshield. The Studebaker, with a short vertical
windshield, practically needs one of those old school "signal eye" prisms.

I'm not a particularly big guy; I'm about 5'11" and AFAIK the average
male height is about 5'9" so I'm not that far outside the norm.

True, but I can't see the signal and therefore can't proceed *at all*
into the intersection until the truck has nearly cleared the intersection.

No, the issue is that as I stated above, I cannot proceed *at all* other
than to pull up to the stop line until the vehicle in front has all but
cleared the intersection, because the top of a large but not uncommonly
large truck will obscure the typical traffic signal.

True confession time: I actually did get pulled over once a long time
ago for "running a red light." I was the second vehicle in line in a
left turn lane. The first vehicle in line was a semi with a typical box
trailer. I followed the semi through the intersection at a normal,
respectful distance although I never did see the signal at all -
thinking that no light would be timed so short that only one vehicle
could proceed through on green. Obviously, since it was a left turn
lane, I could see to my left, and there was no question that I could
clear the intersection in one smooth motion. But I still got pulled
over, as a police officer coming from a different direction stated that
the light was red before I entered the intersection.

Ever since then, I have not entered an intersection unless I could
clearly see the signal. This has caused quite a few drivers behind me
to become irate at me, and the whole problem could be solved by placing
signals beside the road, instead of overhead.

The whole issue is probably confusing to drivers from other areas where
things are set up more logically. I know that in many places signals
*are* duplicated at the side of the road and readers from those areas
are probably wondering what the hell I'm talking about.

Getting off topic, another thing that I miss from living in Michigan is
those little signs placed about half a city block before an intersection
saying things like "Woodward Ave. XXX feet" allowing you to anticipate
making turns, instead of having to slow at every intersection to read
the little 6" high street signs on a post on the corner. It's an idea
that makes too much sense, and yet it is nowhere near universal.

If any of those remain, they should be immediately eliminated.

I could scream at the DPW all I want, but I would still be stuck at
them.

Bonus: There are three of these in Taunton, Mass. Not one of these
intersections has a sign warning drivers that oncoming traffic has a
delayed green. So if you're not from the area, and are passing
through...

I nearly had a driver of van rear-end me and then go into a rage because I
stopped when the light went red. A large truck was in front of me and I
saw the light change so I stopped.

In some places - like some jurisdictions in NY - you have to be *out* of
the intersection by the time the light turns red.

Ummm, so you know when to go?

(Or would you just blindly follow the car in front of you, and hope they
didn't decide to run the light?)

I'm not going to flat out say you're wrong, but I'm highly skeptical.
Louisiana is the only place I'm aware of that has a law like that, and
it's always seemed ludicrous to me. How is one supposed to know how
long the yellow interval is going to be until the light actually turns red?

lol...Perhaps Aunt Judy has traction troubles due to having loose
marbles underneath the bald "tars."

A confidently put wrong answer is still wrong. Your claim isn't even
true in Louisiana (where if you enter on green but it turns red while
you are in the intersection, you're fine).
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Or make sure the semi blocks the cop's view of your car as well.

My bad.

Sorry gpstard!

I can understand about the other drivers; most would be confused.

I'm 5'11", and I believe you're right on all counts.

Agreed, but it's my opinion that you shouldn't enter the intersection
to begin with until the truck has completely cleared it to begin with.
Doing so runs the risk of causing an accident at the worst, and
potentially screwing up the traffic flow at the least. A car sitting
in the middle of an intersection because it can't get passed a truck
that's stuck in traffic isn't going to improve things for anyone.

It sounds to me that this is a fairly driving habit you have. There is
no way in hell that I'm going to follow a semi through an intersection
without being damned sure I can clear the path of perpendicular
traffic. People do that around here, even with decently visible signal
lights, and it causes some major problems at our busier intersections.

My belief is that the place I am most likely to become involved in an
accident is at an intersection. I'm sorry to say, but I don't think
you're giving intersections the proper respect they deserve. Not only
do you need to know the state of the signal light, but you also need
to know the state of all traffic, pedestrian and vehicular,
approaching or waiting at the intersection. There's far more than
legality at sake here.

I know I'm not exactly the world traveler, but in the places I've
been, I've not seen the likes. Traffic signals seem to be pretty
uniform, coast to coast, from my observations.

Although recently in my area they've taken to putting up "extra"
signal lights at the intersections that have proven to be the most
deadly due to visual obstructions. Perhaps that's why some of those
areas have extra lights; they've got a head start on us! :-)

That does sound nice.

I think the best thing I've seen was in some areas of Florida. The
street signs were about twice the size of the ones I've seen
elsewhere, and internally lighted at night. Visibility was such that
you could see them from a great distance, which is good for tourists.
:-)

Aside from the fact that the MFFY driver has already broken at least one
law, and probably more, to be in the intersection in the first place, if
you see cross traffic in the intersection and you can safely stop or
maneuver around him, you have an obligation to do so.

If the laws of physics and current traffic conditions dictate that you
will run into him, generally you will not be cited for this whether the
word 'lawfully' is there or not.

--
--Andy

1 - green - you may only enter the intersection if it is safe to do
so. If you cannot see the signal, how do you know if it is safe to
enter the intersection? If I am behind a truck then I position myself
to see one of the signals since every intersection is equipped with
2-3 signal heads for a thru direction. Turn arrows that are not
duplicated can be difficult to see.
2- yellow - you may enter intersection on a yellow, but if you cannot
enter the intersection before the red, then you stop.
3 - red - wait until green light.

If you need to make a left turn on a green ball, then you follow the
procedure:

1 - enter the intersection on a green light (you can still enter on a
yellow).
2 - wait in the intersection until there is a gap in oncoming traffic
or until the oncoming traffic STOPS for the red light. By law, one
vehicle is allowed in the intersection to make a left. This one
vehicle can make a left on red because intersecting traffic with a
green movement is not allowed to proceed until the intersection
clears.
3 - make your left turn.

All red phase - all signals have an all red phase to allow vehicles in
the intersection to clear before giving a green to a conflicting
movement.

Yeah; there would be less congestion, and less accidents. What a
wonderful world it would be!

>You don't think what you're proposing would screw up traffic flow?
>Every green light would effectively become a stop sign!

How does some retard stuck behind a tractor trailer that couldn't
make it completely through the intersection improve flow for cross
traffic?

>That's fine for trucks and buses, but with smaller vehicles it will
>suffice to simply look ahead and see whether you and the vehicles in
>front of you all have room to clear the intersection. If the road
>beyond the intersection is wide open, then it's reasonable to proceed
>on through even though the guy ahead of you hasn't fully cleared the
>intersection yet. If cars didn't pipeline like this, throughput at
>intersections would drop considerably.

Smaller vehicles, yes, but the subject was regarding larger vehicles
like semis.

Makes perfect sense.

Unfortunately, though, a lot of retards don't understand this,
particularly in regards to the "one car may proceed" (and these are
the ones I hope the RLC's tear apart at the seams) nor do they
understand the basic premise of safely crossing an intersection.
Again, in this case, RLCs are a good thing.

You gave no cite. Cite something.

> But no, you're wrong, it is not illegal in most states to still be
> traversing the box at the time the light turns red.

That's not the case in most states. What state are you talking
about? Throughout Oregon, Washington, BC, and Alberta, trying to do
what you are suggesting would trigger red light cameras.

> > ... say the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate when you can run a
> > red light...
>
> Um, I already met the burden.

If you cite something, you will.

> > ... except to turn right after stopping (or possibly left onto a
> > one-way in Oregon and Washington or from a one-way to a one way
> > everywhere), given that your claim violates common sense and defensive
> > driving practices.
>
> My claim *is* common sense and *yours* violates it. How do you explain
> the large intersections where one can enter on green and still not be
> through it when the yellow phase goes to red?

You're following too close for the conditions. Yellow lights are
timed so you can clear them at normal traffic speeds.

> A few states (OR is one, IIRC) add to the boilerplate to add a
> provision to the yellow signal definition stating that you must stop
> on yellow of you can safely do so, a judgment call, but even then, the
> red definition is the same as in CA and most other states but LA.

Cite source.

But he's abusing someone who is right. Oregon prohibits entering an
intersection unless you can vacate it before red under ORS 811, as
does Washington, BC and Alberta under their laws. The idea of it
being legal to be in the intersection when your lane has the red is
entirely foreign to at least in Cascadia and Louisiana, and so far,
nobody's provided citation to the contrary.

I've watched people trigger the RLCs. In Oregon and BC (where I've
seen them in action first hand) have a four-way red period that
entering or leaving the intersection will trigger the camera.

> Yellow does not mean stop if you can in most states (although in some
> states it does -- apparently state traffic codes are not as
> standardized as you mistakenly thought).
>
> Here, for example, are the pertinent sections of the California
> Vehicle Code:
>
> 21452. (a) A driver facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow
> signal is, by that signal, warned that the related green movement is
> ending or that a red indication will be shown immediately
> thereafter.
>
> No obligation to stop is stated there. Now, for the definition of red
> signal, the next section:

Not that California is the model example of anything, they elected
Reagan and Arnold based on acting ability alone, and their traffic
code is largely unenforced anyway.

> 21453. (a) A driver facing a steady circular red signal alone shall
> stop at a marked limit line, but if none, before entering the
> crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then
> before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an
> indication to proceed is shown, except as provided in subdivision
> (b).
>
> See? It is not illegal to have crossed the stop bar or intersection
> threshold already when the light turns red.

In California. They don't count.