this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
388 points (95.3% liked)

News

22890 readers
3768 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sophee Langerman was on her way to a bicycle safety rally in Chicago's Lakeview neighborhood in June when a car turning right rolled through a red light and slammed into her bike, which she was walking off the curb and into the crosswalk.

The car was moving slowly enough that Langerman escaped serious injury, but the bicycle required extensive repairs. To Langerman, it's another argument for ending a practice that almost all U.S. cities have embraced for decades: the legal prerogative for a driver to turn right after stopping at a red light.

A dramatic rise in accidents killing or injuring pedestrians and bicyclists has led to a myriad of policy and infrastructure changes, but moves to ban right on red have drawn some of the most intense sentiments on both sides.

Washington, D.C.'s City Council last year approved a right-on-red ban that takes effect in 2025. New Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson's transition plan called for "restricting right turns on red," but his administration hasn't provided specifics. The college town of Ann Arbor, Michigan, now prohibits right turns at red lights in the downtown area.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 129 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (13 children)

I live in one of these cities (Denver) and in my city’s case this push is part of a ton of other provisions including a push to set a maximum speed limit citywide of 25 mph.

About 80% of my trips out of the house are walking or on a bike, but it seems clear to me that policies like this don’t improve safety. It’s just lazy policy making. For example, if you set a 25 mph speed limit on a road designed to support 45 mph traffic, most drivers will still drive 45+ mph and you instead get a wild mismatch of driving speeds. This just slows traffic with an arguably negative benefit to safety. Similarly, if you ban turn on red in the city many drivers will still turn on red, but now whether or not a car will turn on red becomes unpredictable.

What our cities need is more dedicated bike and pedestrian infrastructure that is separated altogether from the roads, as well as greatly improved public transit.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

Proper mass transit. Then pedestrian and bike paths are more useful.

After that, cars can go fuck themselves.

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In NYC, right on red is illegal and I'd venture a guess that >98% of drivers obey this. Obviously each city will need to handle it differently, but they can't make it illegal and then call it a day. Enforcement and change infrastructure to match the new rules of the road are necessary. In the case of lowering speed limits, traffic calming measures should be put in place with the reduction in speed limit, so that going 45mph in a 25mph zone is difficult.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Enforcement is the big issue. I'll be taking pedestrian safety to my city task force next month and addressing a number of systemic issues, the biggest one of which there is zero pedestrian safety enforcement.any states and cities have absolutely great pedestrian safety laws, they are just not enforced at all. The article has some nice data points I can mention.

In Oregon, any interestion, marled or unmarked is a crosswalk and drivers must stop. Of course they don't and get aggressive or just drive past you when you try to cross in 30+ roads. If we enforced pedestrian safety for existing laws with 10% of the effort we put into enforcement of other crimes the culture could change.

[–] omgarm@feddit.nl 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

When you add cycle paths turnijg right on red needs to be gone. If the cars can't turn it is usually time for cyclists to cross.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Disagree. I spent all of my 20s living the no car lifestyle and cycling 100-200 miles a week on city streets. I have had countless negative interactions with cars but not a single one had anything to do with right turns on red.

I just don’t see any meaningful safety improvement from it but significant downsides in terms of traffic flow.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There are countries where right turn on red is prohibited and it makes no problems with traffic flow. Also, change is possible, people are able to get used to new rules.

[–] justgohomealready@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

In my country, besides right on red being illegal (having never been legal), traffic lights themselves are seen as a thing of the past and most of them were replaced with roundabouts decades ago.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Sounds civilized.

[–] StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I find this really hard to believe. Probably once a day I have to deal with some dipshit not looking for bikes coming down the bike lane before turning right.

Maybe you biked in the car lane, which is fine, but that doesn't mean those of us in the bike lane don't have to deal with this constant danger.

[–] Raisinette@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Weird I had a car in my 20s and still had multiple right turn on red incidents as a pedestrian. Crazy how our narrow perspectives aren't the full picture.

[–] Salad_Fries@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I have… Was on a poorly designed bike lane where the straight bike lane & right turn lane merged at the intersections. I stopped at the red light waiting for the light to turn green (as your supposed to do).

A car pulled in behind me and immediately started honking and putting his head out the window to berate me for blocking his right turn on red. I was actually terrified & was one of the interactions that made me reconsider using my bike as transportation.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Sorry that happened to you. I have had similar experiences, I have had people literally hit me with their cars because they’re angry I’m taking the lane, bad things thrown at me from moving vehicles.

However, I don’t see experiences like yours as being caused by the right turn law so much as the constant fact that people on cars sharing roads with bikes are assholes.

I will say, as a cyclist the polite thing to do is to position your bike to let turn-on-red people past you whenever possible. I don’t think it justifies this guys behavior and don’t know what this intersection looks like but it’s worth bringing up.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

My first bad interaction as a cyclist was from a right turn on red.

My bike got crushed, and I was told it was my fault since I was on the sidewalk (The alternative would be to share the actual lane with cars in the highway, with no room for the bike. There was no bike lane.). 20yo me was devastated to lose my only means of transportation, I didn't have the ability to get a new bike, so I had to walk instead, this was annoying/frustrating enough to stick with me...

You see how anecdotes aren't necessarily ways to determine this? Everyone will have different ones.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I mean, that’s a large part of why it’s illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk and every major bicycle safety advocacy group says to take to the road. It’s pretty well understood that riding on the sidewalk is incredibly dangerous because it’s very difficult to see a fast moving bike when it’s off the road.

If it wasn’t a turn on red it would have been someone turning right into a driveway eventually.

The alternative would be to share the actual lane with cars in the highway, with no room for the bike. There was no bike lane.

Yes this is exactly what you should be doing as a cyclist if you want to be safe and seen. If there isn’t a bike lane you take the entire lane like a car. I have ridden many thousands of miles like this. Even when there is a bike lane it’s often the safest option if the bike lane is in poor condition.

The reason I advocate so hard for dedicated infrastructure is because I want to see more people biking and many people have a hard time feeling comfortable riding in the street. I get that. But in this case it’s the fault of the cyclist for failing to follow the rules of the road.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 7 points 10 months ago

I live in Seattle. We implemented the 25mph rule and it does seem to actually be helping. This is after a lot of attempts at improving pedestrian safety failed to have any effect. It's irritating because it seems like it takes forever to drive anywhere in this city, and there are definitely a lot of corners cut in infrastructure that could improve safety—including very simple things like adding more marked crosswalks and stop signs at uncontrolled intersections—so I consider it a mixed bag overall.

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago (9 children)

I agree for the most part. It’s better to design streets so that drivers feel uncomfortable at higher speeds. Street narrowing, bollards, trees, smaller set backs can all slow cars down.

That said, as a counterpoint, despite similar street design, the speed limit in most of Canada is 50kmh (30 mph) and many urban residential streets are down to 30km (18.6 mph). Some people speed, but driving 45 mph (72 km/h!) down most city streets is pretty rare. Pedestrian and cycling accidents involving cars in Canada are close to half the rate of the US. Which is to say, I don’t think the Denver mayor’s proposal is crazy. It works in Canada, but it will take time for the culture to change.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I live in Denver too and couldn’t agree more.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] suprchrgd@sh.itjust.works 28 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I'm totally down for this. Right turn on red is optional, but people behind me seem to think it's required and lay on their horns if I stop for more than a second. Like come on, I need a moment to make sure someone isn't trying to cross!

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] NBJack@reddthat.com 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sure, and it has nothing to do with the big ass vehicles being churned out due to loopholes in US law.

https://www.distilled.earth/p/the-loophole-that-made-cars-in-america

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Just freaken yesterday I was walking with my kids and there was a sports utility bullshit parked ready to come out of the garage and as we passed I noted that not one of my kids is tall enough to be seen by the driver if they decide to move forward.

A sports utility truck is a truck not a car. Require a CDL to operate or better yet just buy a regular car.

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago

"What's really behind this movement is part of the agenda to make driving as miserable and as difficult as possible so people don't drive so much," Beeber said.

This is an unbelievably idiotic statement, as if cars haven't been, and don't continue to be nearly the sole consideration for transportation in almost all American cities.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I don't agree with this. It has nothing to do with red lights. Drivers will cut out straight in front of me with green lights as well. The problem is proper infrastructure. Make a city where there are so many cyclists that cars can't miss them. This is why places like NYC have such low incidents at crosswalks.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Or better yet, give cyclists sperated spaces from cars and trucks to ride. Even if it's just letting them ride on sidewalks. (Although not applicable in this case)

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 4 points 10 months ago

I always thought pedestrian crossings should be further back from the intersection. With them being a part of the intersection itself you have to deal with traffic and pedestrians changing positions at the same time vs just traffic or just pedestrians crossing the street.

[–] min_fapper@iusearchlinux.fyi 9 points 10 months ago

That, and also because NYC has already banned right on red.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 19 points 10 months ago

"What's really behind this movement is part of the agenda to make driving as miserable and as difficult as possible so people don't drive so much," Beeber said.

Shit. He figured my plan out.

But seriously people driving less would be a win. Cars are awful.

[–] Fridgeratr@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean, it's pretty easy to not hit someone while turning right on red if you look where you're going...

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In a lot of cities, it's extremely difficult to see past the corner because of parked cars. We could cut down on street parking, but people scream if you even consider restricting their parking options.

[–] RazorsLedge@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Especially when those parked vehicles are trucks or SUVs or some other unsafe large vehicle.

[–] sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I mean I have a hate boner for giant cars as much the average person, but even a reasonably-sized, economy sedan can block my view of the sidewalk/any cars that might be coming around the corner. I would say it's a 50% chance in my city that, in order to safely turn right on red, I'd need to inch about halfway into the lane I'm turning into, which already has the potential of causing an accident.

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

The spike, which included all accidents — not just those involving right turns on red, was attributed in part to an increase in larger vehicles such as SUVs and pickup trucks on the road ... due to larger blind spots and the deadlier force associated with heavier models.

There it is, this is just one reason why 'no right turns' will be a useless half measure, politicians trying to make it look like they're doing something about the problem because the real solution would be too politically risky.

[–] CriticalMiss@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

When I visited the US I was shocked that’s actually allowed. Seemed like a very easy way to kill someone

[–] ours@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

It's the "cars above all" mentality.

That said my city is doing this for bicycles which is way more reasonable.

[–] octoperson@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago

I couldn't work out how you were supposed to negotiate it as a pedestrian, and assumed there must be some knack that locals learn. Guess the knack is just, don't be a pedestrian lol.

[–] molotov@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

My own anecdotal evidence, walking several blocks and crossing a busy intersection everyday.

I take attempts to not get hit by looking at the driver and checking to see if they are paying attention. Often a driver will inch forward until they can time turning between cars coming from the opposite side of the intersection or will turn immediately when the light changes. I often have people who wait, but mostly people will just drive past me while I stand waiting to cross.

Car size doesn't seem to make any difference in how aware the driver is or if they are following driver safety, at least when I'm attempting to keep myself from being hit.

[–] Enoblk@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

It less serious than this but on my drive home there is this spot with 4 car lengths between stop lights and people with trailers keep taking it as free right to get into the middle of 3 northbound lanes blocking off the far right lane for turning right at the next light

load more comments
view more: next ›