Making u-turns at controlled intersections is illegal in Calgary. I had the ticket to prove it (you’d think that since I made my u-turn RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE POLICE CAR he would have bought my explanation that I thought it was legal, but no.)
BTW, I have just scoured both the Driver Training handbook as well as the CVC(vehicle code), and neither cover this situation specifically, nor do the right of way laws specify anything about making a left turning vehicle hang his ass in the intersection at the whim of the right turning vehicle.
If anyone else can point me in the way of code that does, supply a link and I’ll read it over.
Sam
I any state I have lived in, the car with a green light has priority over the car with the red light. If I have a green light, and wish to make a legal U-turn, I have priority over the car on the intersecting street that currently has a red light. Right-on-red is only legal if the road that the car is turning into is clear.
Unfortunately, the person turning right on red generally ONLY looks left when preparing to turn. This means that not only are they not likely to see the car ahead of them that is attempting to make a U-turn, but they are also not likely to see the pedestrian (who also has a green light) stepping out into the street to cross legally.
In other words, traffic schools should emphasize more that drivers should look in ALL directions before turning right on red.
I guess I’m slow on the uptake. Will you kindly point out to me where in the OP it refers to a 4-way intersection controlled by a light?
Thanks.
Actually, I was commenting on your blanket statement:
I gave examples where the right-turner has the right-of-way. So it does matter what kind of right turn it is.
In addition, I interpreted your example (“I turn left at an intersection with a light every morning. There are many right-turners at this intersection. Every damned morning I GET CUT OFF BY A RIGHT-TURNER.”) as being a case where you’re turning left at a light, but not one that has a specific left-turn setting. Assuming that’s the case, then both you and the right-turner have a green at the same time, and the right-turner has the ROW.
If you’ve got the green and he doesn’t, then you’ve got the ROW, obviously.
All of which probably has no bearing on the OP, although I should say that my interpretation of the OP matched trandallt’s.
You’re right about one thing. It’s not that hard. If you’re stuck in the intersection, it’s because you’ve entered the intersection without properly yielding to oncoming traffic. That’s your problem, not the right turners.
From your position in the left turn lane, you can see all traffic coming towards you. Some of it is going straight past you, and some of it may be turning right. Your position is that you yield to the people going straight, but have the right of way over people who are turning? Ridiculous.
What if it was a single lane, and the people turning right were in the same lane as the people going straight? You’re saying the right-turner has to wait until all the left turners complete their turns before turning himself. Meanwhile people who would be going straight (people who the left turners would normally yield to) would back up behind the right turner.
From the California Driver’s Handbook here:
So is it your position that the person turning right is not oncoming traffic? Or are you just going to admit you’re wrong?
No, the person making the right is entering the intersection without yielding. That makes it his problem. The rules of the road are generally based on safety and it’s safer to let the u-turner complete his trickier maneuvre.
from the OP:
So the cars are waiting to turn right, they do not have the right of way to enter the street. The car already in the intersection signalling a u-turn, is on the street that has the right of way. What does your driver’s manual tell you there?
Sorry CarnalK, but you misunderstood me. I was harping on GaWd’s situation, not the OP. We’ve moved away from the OP a bit and were talking about left turns, not u-turns.
I forget that in California, our streets are much wider than in other parts of the US. In the case I cited, and in many cases, lanes are wide enough to accomodate a right-turning vehicle outside of the lane. It is legal for these cars to pull right and turn, so no, they are not oncoming traffic.
I’m right(except for the fact that day-to-day driving in california always involves vehicles occupying the intersection*), so why admit that I’m wrong?
Sam
*-which admittedly nullifies my argument except for the fact that unless a vehicle is gridlocking, you will never ever receive a ticket for pulling into the intersection to turn left.
You’ve got to be kidding me. At what point do they cease becoming oncoming traffic? When they turn on their blinker? When they actually enter the turn lane? If they’re not oncoming traffic, then how could they possibly interfere with your turn? The cite I provided plainly states that a person turning left at a green light must yield. In fact the entry for a green arrow further illuminates this. A green left arrow would indicate your turn is protected, and oncoming traffic (which includes people in a right turn lane) has a red. When turning left with a green light but not a green arrow, you’ve got to yield. You are wrong. And stubborn.
Let’s take it from the other point of view if the above is too complex for you. You’re turning right. You have a green light. Break out your little handbook and read that it says green means go, and that people turning left on green have some stipulations that they must yield for. It says nothing about people turning right on green yielding to people turning left.
You’re wrong. So very, very wrong.
Those of you stating how simple this is, it obviously isn’t that simple. Some of you have cited traffic laws that are directly opposite of the traffic laws where I live. Another resident of my city has stated that she thinks the right-of-way laws are the opposite of the way I think they are (and I assume we both took driver training and have valid licences.) This thread has gone two pages now. It is anything but simple and clear, in my opinion. Which is kind of interesting, because I had been assuming that everyone was driving by the same rules I was, which obviously isn’t the case. I will attempt to adjust my assumptions to increase my safety while driving.
I am going to attempt to be as classy as possible and yield my position(heh!)
I am apparently wrong and those of you who have flamed my ass have corrected me.
Fuck yourselves anyways(there is a limit to my classiness)!
Sam
So, wait, you’ve got some kind of right-hand-turn exit lane at all your lights that allows traffic to sort of bypass the light and merge onto the cross street? And that’s the rule, rather than the exception? Dang, I’ve only seen a handful of those anywhere.
That’ll teach me not to preview right before posting.
Allrighty then, fucking myself I am.
Actually, yes. If you are on a street that is wide enough to accomodate a car to pull right and make a right turn, it is legal to pull onto the cross road and turn right.
But I’m still wrong, and I still admit it.
Sam
You’re in the wrong place in the intersection. We’re not talking of people making a regular left turn on a green ball where they have to yield to all oncoming traffic. Of COURSE oncoming right tuners have ROW if they’re coming toward the left turner and are actually part of oncoming traffic.
We’re talking about the right turners on perpendicular cross street wanting to turn ONTO the lanes of the oncoming traffic. Not ALONG the oncoming traffic route. Does that make sense?
So say that the lane that the left turner is in, is going south, oncoming traffic is going north, the right turner we’re talking about is actually facing with the nose of his car headed east, but is planning to turn right and go north, he’s actually PAST the point in the intersection where oncoming traffic would be turning right. The left turner is headed south, but upon completing his U turn, he’ll be heading back north. He DOES have to yield to all traffic with a green ball, but NOT to the one perpendicular to him, that has a red ball. (I hope I got all my directions correct).
Does that make better sense?
And of course in the case YOU were speaking of, yes, the oncoming right turner would have right of way, on a green BALL, if the left turner only has a green ball, and not a designated turn arrow.
Sheesh, disregard my post above, I must have misunderstood Gawd, I thought he was still talking of making a U turn.
Nevermind…(sheepish smile)
You know what would solve all of this? More jughandles. I hate making U-turns without them, mainly because of the confusion about right of way.
I don’t really know for sure that they originated here, but I like to think of jughandle intersections as one of New Jersey’s gifts to civilization.
Hmmm… after a little Googling, perhaps they did.
If that were true, then cars wouldn’t have horns. The correct use of the horn is to alert other motorists of your presence when they don’t see you. It’s not a waste of time at all - it’s preventing an accident. The alternative to using your horn is to be stuck in the middle of the intersection while you are still trying to complete the U-turn, and impeding the flow of traffic coming the other way and creating a dangerous situation. That wastes much more time.
I suspect you’re thinking about people who use their horn in anger, which isn’t productive. But sometimes it is correct and necessary to use the horn.
What do you do when you need to turn around? Make 3 right turns and 1 left turn? Or 3 left turns and one right turn?