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

  • 🔎 If you see an alert for analytics.usips.org, this is a self-hosted system I am running as a test. It is GDPR compliant and collects no invasive information.
  • 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.”
 
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.
These so-called environmentalists should take the bus in a no-go zone. They might change their song after that.
 
I'm just gonna say it now, anyone who has genuine malice towards cyclists/pedestrians is a fat lazy selfish fuck. This is what our cities where turned into, a concrete shithole that requires are a car and none of you people have the intellectual depth enough to understand this. I get that banning right turns is an inconvenience but none of you "people" understand this issue.

1200x0 (1).jpg
 
Right turn on red would work better in a world where half the population is not almost too stupid to live.

I almost got into a nasty accident a few weeks ago because some dumbass saw that the bus behind me was approaching slowly, but didn't see my fucking car.
 
Yes. This is a common urbanist/anti-car talking point.
https://kiwifarms.net/threads/not-j...anists-new-urbanism-car-free-anti-car.127069/ for more funtimes, and yes, they're often as smart as they sound.

Maybe banning right turn on red would help, maybe it wouldn't. Maybe pedestrians and cyclists don't pay attention to anything anyway (elsewhere you can find cyclists detailing why they should be able to run red lights and stop signs because otherwise they have to "slow down too much and would be in the intersection longer").
 
I'm just gonna say it now, anyone who has genuine malice towards cyclists/pedestrians is a fat lazy selfish fuck. This is what our cities where turned into, a concrete shithole that requires are a car and none of you people have the intellectual depth enough to understand this. I get that banning right turns is an inconvenience but none of you "people" understand this issue.

View attachment 3750701
I understand I'm looking at a highway with too few lanes.
 
I'm just gonna say it now, anyone who has genuine malice towards cyclists/pedestrians is a fat lazy selfish fuck. This is what our cities where turned into, a concrete shithole that requires are a car and none of you people have the intellectual depth enough to understand this. I get that banning right turns is an inconvenience but none of you "people" understand this issue.

Shut the fuck up new-fag bug person, you're out of your element.

You should probably go back to reddit nigger.
 
I'll never forget the day I was at a red light, in a combined straight/right turn lane. Car pulls up behind me and after maybe 2 seconds of waiting, starts laying on the horn, which quickly graduated to yelling, then SCREAMING and fingers out the window. The whole reason for this tantrum? He was apparently trying to impress upon me that I was too stupid to realize that right on red was a thing at lights and I was holding him up.

Until the light changed, and I went straight across the intersection, like I was planning on doing the whole time.

As in I didn't have my signal on or wheels turned in any way that would suggest I was trying to make a right hand turn.

And as I went straight across, the other guy was STILL YELLING AT ME as he turned right and chirped his tires, speeding off to his next yelling appointment no doubt.

The lesson? Most bad drivers out there are so selfish and unobservant that no change of the rules could ever make them better drivers.

I did everything right and it STILL wasn't good enough.
 
I'll never forget the day I was at a red light, in a combined straight/right turn lane. Car pulls up behind me and after maybe 2 seconds of waiting, starts laying on the horn, which quickly graduated to yelling, then SCREAMING and fingers out the window. The whole reason for this tantrum? He was apparently trying to impress upon me that I was too stupid to realize that right on red was a thing at lights and I was holding him up.

Until the light changed, and I went straight across the intersection, like I was planning on doing the whole time.

As in I didn't have my signal on or wheels turned in any way that would suggest I was trying to make a right hand turn.

And as I went straight across, the other guy was STILL YELLING AT ME as he turned right and chirped his tires, speeding off to his next yelling appointment no doubt.

The lesson? Most bad drivers out there are so selfish and unobservant that no change of the rules could ever make them better drivers.

I did everything right and it STILL wasn't good enough.

I'd only be pissed if the other lane was straight / straight left as well... then it's like "dude why didn't you go in the other lane so people over here could keep moving"

In general I dislike the straight / right-turn at a stoplight for just that reason.
 
This is stupid 90% of the time rtor are no problem. But I can't fucking stand those assholes who rush out in front of you to turn right on a red when you're driving straight through when they really don't have the space to turn and you have to slam on your brakes.
Friend my car is old enough it could drink if it was a person. I also have a grill guard up front and one of those 3-ball hitches locked to the back. It doesn't really matter how fast I'm going, if I T-bone just about anything I am getting the hilariously over estimated KBB value of my old car. "Yield" is a very Americanized frame but in the nautical world and many other places you have Stand-On and Give -Way vehicles in interactions. Giving-way as the stand-on is actually an incorrect action. Learn to instill this kind of attitude in your driving style and the fools that try this will be terrified at minimum. I've had a car basically U-turn into a ditch instead of getting in front of my not-stopping car.
 
I used to always joke that 'turning right on red is your god-given right as an American' to passengers in my truck. Now it seems once again our basic rights are under attack. The plant of freedom once again needs watering with the blood of tyrants, lads. Grab your muskets and 1776 will commence again on the pavement so that every man and woman of every race and creed may have a more convenient driving experience!
 
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.
What color is the arrow going to be for "stop, wait for an opening, and then turn"? Because that's what right-turn-on-red is in the US.

Yellow? That just indicates to be on the lookout for retards.
Green? No one's gonna slow down for that.
 
Just ban cyclists already. They don’t understand how to share the road and should have their road privileges revoked.
 
Or, pedestrians and cyclists could be smart and not comport themselves like cunts whose personal responsibility ends once they begin walking or cycling. I do a lot of walking myself, having no car, and I see plenty of people who deserve to get fucking pancaked. Total lack of awareness or vigilance.
 
Or, pedestrians and cyclists could be smart and not comport themselves like cunts whose personal responsibility ends once they begin walking or cycling. I do a lot of walking myself, having no car, and I see plenty of people who deserve to get fucking pancaked. Total lack of awareness or vigilance.
A lot of the problems cyclists and pedestrians face would be solved if they obeyed the traffic laws and were ticketed for violating them.

Dashing into traffic because you can't be bothered to wait at a cross walk? Ticket.

Run a red light on your little child's toy (bicycle)? Ticket.

As it is, most of them think of such laws as irrelevant to them and grow used to the idea that cars are supposed to dodge them like a reverse game of Frogger.
 
Back
Top Bottom