About time for "turn left on red" 5317Nice idea, but as you suggest, you're hoping for too much Who even comes to a stop even at a stop sign? (OK, there's the "Californian" rolling-stop :-), but in Washington State, they're...
Darwin strikes againClaim: Anti-seat belt law advocate is end in automobile accident. Status: True. Origins: Despite the...
I love the crazy way cross roads without lights work in the US (or at least in Washington). The rule is, the first person to arrive at the crossing has right of way.
Fine when the crossing is fairly quiet. However when you arrive at the crossing with a line of half a dozen cars, with a similar number at the other three entrances, by the time you get to the line you have no idea who arrived first.
The end result is lots of trying to catch the eyes of the other three drivers and trying to guess who is going to have the guts to move first.
Quite why they don't give some sort of more sensible priority rules in these cases I don't know.
On the subject of the original "turn on left" debate, I have found it very unsettling as a pedestrian in the US at junctions with this rule. I guess you might get used to it after a while.
I prefer filter lanes though. To add to the confusion, quite a few junctions have "yield on red" signs to tell the drivers not to turn right on red. These signs are often not very visible to the pedestrian, meaning you end up guessing whether there are going to be cars appearing from unexpected places. -- Replace the fish with my first name to reply
