Opinion It’s Time to Ban “Right Turn on Red”

  • 🔧 Issue with uploading attachments resolved.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Link (Archive)

It’s Time to Ban “Right Turn on Red”​

It’s an obsolete relic of the 1970s oil crisis. It’s dangerous to pedestrians. And, if you drive a car in the United States, you likely do it every day. It’s time to get rid of right-turn-on-red.

If you roll up to a red light in a car in Europe, you have to wait for the light to turn green before taking a right—unless the posted signage says otherwise. In Great Britain, where drivers use the left side of the road, left turns on red are not permitted. But in the United States, drivers are generally permitted to turn right at a red light, if there’s a big enough gap in the traffic for them to squeeze into. In fact, you’re likely to get honked at if you don’t do it.

That freedom sounds like a good way to keep traffic moving. Still, sometimes drivers fail to yield to pedestrians who have the right of way in the intersection. The data on right-turn-on-red crashes might be scarce, but the existingstudies suggest that these types of collisions—while rare—frequently involve a pedestrian or cyclist. Cars, instead of hitting other cars, often hit humans. Now, there’s a growing movementfor cities to do away with the traffic law altogether.

Last week, the Washington, DC, city council voted to ban right-turn-on-red (RTOR) at most city intersections (and to allow cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs). If Mayor Muriel Bowser signs on and the bill receives Congressional approval, DC will become the second US city after New York not to allow RTOR. DC, which has struggled to curb traffic fatalities, hopes that ending RTOR will make its streets safer for cyclists, pedestrians, and wheelchair users.

So, why do US cities allow RTOR in the first place? Blame the oil crisis.

A provision of the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act said that, in order for states to receive federal assistance for mandated conservation programs, they had to enact “a traffic law or regulation which, to the maximum extent practicable consistent with safety, permits the operator of a motor vehicle to turn such vehicle right at a red stop light after stopping.” The reasoning was that RTOR would lower emissions by decreasing the amount of time that drivers spent idling at red lights.

Most states quickly fell in line. Still, some municipalities had to be forced. According to a 1978 Washington Post report, Arkansas Sen. Dale Bumpers, who pushed for the gas-saving measure, asked Congress to “withhold $400,500 in federal energy funds” from Washington, DC, until the city adopted the policy. At a hearing, Bumpers had “voiced irritation” about having to stop during his commute from Bethesda, Maryland, into DC. Rather than enduring a budget cut that would have required the firing of 25 DC Transportation Department employees, the city permitted RTOR. By 1980, RTOR was the law of the land nationally, except in New York City.

But transportation engineer Bill Schultheisstells me that RTOR isn’t as efficient as 1970s lawmakers would have you believe. “The savings in emissions and travel times has always been wildly overstated because it never assessed the reality that most of these drivers are immediately stopped at a signal on the cross street or stuck in traffic in urban areas,” he said in an email. “The total trip of the user was never part of the assessment.”

Take into account the growing number of hybrid and electric cars, and RTOR makes even less sense. Schultheiss says that electric cars are actually likely to increase the number of RTOR crashes “because their acceleration rates are dramatically quicker than gas powered vehicles.”

Several local news segments about the DC RTOR legislation amplified the voices of people with no expertise in traffic safety who complained that the bill would increase traffic.

“That is a reasonable first impression,” Schultheiss says, “but people don’t think about how RTOR works in reality.” In situations where “cross streets have lots of traffic gaps and long traffic signal cycle lengths” and it’s easy to turn on red, the problem is “improper signal timing on the corridor.” In that case, a better way to speed up traffic would be to shorten the lengths of traffic signal cycles on the cross streets.

In one local news segment where a reporter asked people on the street their thoughts on the end of RTOR, a man in a wheelchair said that he became disabled—and his brother and sister were killed—when a car ran a red light. The video then cuts to a shot of the reporter breezily whizzing down the sidewalk on a scooter, followed by an interview with a man bemoaning the fines that the city plans to impose on motorists who violate the RTOR rule.
623B07C6-BC72-47B4-9E90-EFD983D7D8AC.jpeg
Critics of the DC bill have pointed out the lack of data showing the dangers of RTOR, but many people who don’t use cars know instinctively how dangerous turning vehicles can be. “Our current safety studies fail to capture the reality of the constant near misses and confrontations that result between these motorists and pedestrians which can be observed daily just by observing a typical busy intersection with RTOR,” Schultheiss says.

Ending RTOR is a minor enough inconvenience for drivers that it’s unlikely to convince many of them to opt for other forms of transportation, but it is “a baby step in creating an urban environment that is more supportive of walking, bicycling and transit,” Schultheiss says. “The only path forward to reducing auto-dependence and the resulting traffic congestion is for our society to decide to shift our subsidy model from sprawl and highways to transit and housing.”
 
Eat shit and play in traffic, faggots. Congestion at most simple intersections would become a godawful nightmare without RTOR because by design of America's highways more people tend to turn right than left anyway. This piece oozes of the type of sheltered egotistical nannyfaggotry that could come from a europhile, someone who worships a place where they barely drive compared to the US anyway. That or an /r/fuckcars retard.
 
Wait until the author finds out that you can make left turns on red in some states if you're turning on to a one-way street.

Also, I have lived in countries that don't have right on red, and it fucking sucks. Just causes more traffic congestion.
 
Guzzle a gallon of antifreeze, Mother Jones. I have a finite amount of time on this earth. I have already wasted a large chunk of it waiting at lights. Do NOT fucking tell me that pedestrians cannot be bothered to look both ways before crossing the street.
 
Right turn on red is a perfectly logical driving maneuver because it runs with the flow of traffic.

Are these the same people who think that adding lanes to relieve traffic congestion is nonsense?
 
I get finding clueless idiots who California Stop their way through the right turn lane obnoxious, but this is the most mincing faggotry ever.
There's a point where people need to recognize power differentials and play into that instead of crying to daddy gov't every time they feel weak. I should have the right of way to cross the street whenever it's green. That isn't going to stop me from checking over my left shoulder and making sure some yobbo on his cell phone isn't about to hit me. And yobbos are well known for following the law, so it's not like making it illegal would change things.
 
Right turn on red? That's so weird. Why not use arrows?
1666207677505.png
They're very convenient.

Oh well I guess it's just one of those weird foreign things like daylight savings and not starting your academic year at the start of the year.
 
When I visited my parents a few years back I was mad that a few streets had no right turn on red signs added. It added a few minutes to the drive to get coffee. Turning on red is as American as Fahrenheit
 
Right turn on red? That's so weird. Why not use arrows?
View attachment 3750437
They're very convenient.

Oh well I guess it's just one of those weird foreign things like daylight savings and not starting your academic year at the start of the year.
We have those too, but the understanding that you can turn right on a red light is pervasive enough most cities didn't feel the need to specify when a right turn was ok outside of a few really busy intersections.
 
One thing I get to witness as a resident of California are idiots walk in the middle of the fucking road. Not all of them are intoxicated or high, just fucking stupid, and don't think twice about stepping out into traffic. Anytime I find myself walking, I'm extra fucking cautious cause my weak fleshy body is sharing a pathway with a 1 ton steel can; and that fight only goes one way. I'm so cautious I risked getting ticketed for riding on the sidewalk and not the bike lane (which is in the road). You're responsible for your safety and I'm willing to bet the actual RTOR accidents are so few and far between they're not even recorded as that, just an idiot being an idiot.
 
Critics of the DC bill have pointed out the lack of data showing the dangers of RTOR, but many people who don’t use cars know instinctively how dangerous turning vehicles can be.
We live in an insane aslyum and even the patient that took over has left the building
 
If me making a right on red removes another douchebag cyclist from the gene pool then it is a good thing.

Seriously if you're walking look both ways. If you're cycling yeild to vehicles, don't just try and zip by because you need to get to the cock gargling competition 5 seconds faster.
 
The article starts by reminding the readers of an oil crisis which brings the real purpose of this screed into clarity; environmentalists want to make driving more difficult, time consuming and dangerous in order to justify taking away your car entirely.
 
The article starts by reminding the readers of an oil crisis which brings the real purpose of this screed into clarity; environmentalists want to make driving more difficult, time consuming and dangerous in order to justify taking away your car entirely.
Well the author's last name is "Weinberg". Make of that what you will.
 
The data on right-turn-on-red crashes might be scarce, but the existingstudies suggest that these types of collisions—while rare—frequently involve a pedestrian or cyclist. Cars, instead of hitting other cars, often hit humans.

And this is a problem why? Get out of the fucking road you skin suit peddle faggots.
 
Back
Top Bottom