That is not passive-aggressive as I understand the term. Passive-aggressive is a term used to describe certain types of interpersonal behaviour. A rather vague term, true, but **Muldoonthief **does not seem to be suggesting any kind of personal interaction.
Here’s an article that indicates that it varies from state to state.
And a direct cite: New Hampshire’s driver’s manual (pdf). Page 26: “You cannot turn left on a red arrow. You can turn right on a red arrow after
stopping if you follow the EXCEPTION rule under RED LIGHTS.”
I had the flip side to this happen to me today.
It was 4:50 pm, and I had to get our taxes to the post office by 5. Luckily I wasn’t too far away.
So I pull up to a light behind some people in the car with their right blinker on. NO sign saying anything about right on red - perfectly legal.
What do these people do? Sit through the entire light until the main light turns green. They could have turned right for 3/4 of the cycle, but instead they sat there.
What made it worse is that I couldn’t get out from behind them before the next light, where again, they did the same exact thing.
I made it to the post office with like 4 minutes to spare, thankfully. Last time I let my wife do the taxes; she postponed it twice and did it at the last minute. Grr…
WTF? There’s being cautious, and there’s being a gigantic pussy, and this falls squarely into the second category.
Well, that is one of the most ridiculous things i’ve ever heard, because that rule effectively makes the installation of a red arrow (as opposed to a regular red light) completely pointless.
The idea of a red arrow is, in my experience, precisely to differentiate the rules from those applying to a red light. You can turn right after stopping on a red light, but the presence of the arrow is designed specifically to ensure that you won’t turn right on red. Why bother having a red arrow if it doesn’t actually serve any purpose that distinguished it from a regular red light?
shrug I don’t makes the rules, I just follows 'em.
I had a similar situation happen yesterday. I just barely missed the green light and was the first car turning right. I came to a complete stop, where I planned to slowly roll forward and dart out when the coast was clear. But I had barely stopped at the RED LIGHT before the jackass in the truck behind me started whaling on his horn. I gave him the finger and took off, knowing that he wouldn’t be able to catch up to me because there wasn’t enough time for him to go through the light too. If the light wasn’t an interminable light (like how Nancy called one a “punishment light” on Weeds), I might have stayed. Plus it was a super sketchy neighborhood.
I had a guy the before behind me, who was taking a left like me at a non-light intersection, go AROUND me. I hate other drivers.
I agree to a point that turning right on red is optional, but if it is safe and legal for you to go, you should go. Obstructing traffic is also illegal.
I worked Ft Myers area as a state trooper and can tell you with experience that it is alot more easier to notice people turning right on posted no right turns on red at night. The officer has to be able to testify that they or a witness that is subpena’d was able to see the infraction. And take it from me, its alot easier at night and that is why more tickets are written then.
Giving advise should only be done if you really believe in what you are saying, and that is usually taken from good sound morals. I’m not saying its immoral but you know the difference between right and wrong. How many people read these posts and are going to take your advise and end up paying a 200 dollar ticket.
Fortunately there’s no law against being a “gigantic pussy.” Take it as an object lesson to do less procrastinating next time around.
How is it possibly obstructing traffic to sit stopped at a red light? I don’t think that term means what you think that it means.
It’s actually a textbook example of passive aggression. Passive aggression is not at all vague, though it has been misused more often in recent years as a catch-all phrase for anti-social behavior. I guess this will eventually lead to a new definition, but I’d like to think we’re not there yet.
For example, there is no such thing as a passive aggressive note. The act of writing a shitty note is, um, active. Not passive. Passive aggression is self defining. It means not acting in an attempt to provoke the other party. Which is exactly the behavior that **muldoonthief ** described. Hence, textbook example.
I don’t normally get pedantic about the “proper” definition of words or phrases, but when someone calls another out about their completely appropriate use of a phrase, I make an exception. The fact that a word or phrase can be misused to the extent that it creates an accepted alternative definition does not make the original definition wrong. Sorry, Ximenean, you couldn’t be more wrong.
To the OP, you were absolutely within your rights to not break a traffic law for the benefit of another driver. Preventing another driver from breaking traffic laws out of some sanctimonious judgement rather than staying within the law yourself is something else, but that’s another thread.
In the same way that it is obstructing traffic to sit stopped at a stop sign.
Exactly. If, as I said, it is legal and safe to go, you should. If there is traffic behind you who can also make a safe, legal right turn on a red light, why should you obstruct them?
Different situation. The requirements of a stop sign are not the same as the requirements of a red light.
Can you let us know when your next court date is, because I’d love to hear a judge’s reaction to this one.
Someone asserted that earlier in this thread but didn’t provide a source. Do you have a cite which shows that there is an actual difference?
The requirements of a stop sign are stop, then proceed when it is safe. The requirements of a right turn on a red light are stop, then proceed when it is safe (if there is no legal impediment to turning right on a red light). I’m not really seeing a difference.
The difference is that turning right on red is an option, not a requirement, it is permitted by law, not demanded by it. There is no rule that I’ve ever seen in any driving manual (I’ve been licensed in three states, prepared to take the test in a fourth, I’ll stipulate that maybe things are different elsewhere) that says if you wish to turn right at a signaled (rather than stop signed) intersection that you must do so as soon as the way is clear regardless of the current color of the signal for your lane of traffic.
The honker should be sentenced to a year in New York City, the only place in the freakin’ country where right on red is the exception rather than the rule.
Aggressive drivers are scary. Seems like every week some a-hole passes me on the city roads like I’m sitting still. I usually drive maybe 3 to 5 mph over.
We had an idiot killed doing 70 mph on a city street three days ago. Hit a barrier. No seatbelt. Sort of glad this dude is off the road permanently.
At red lights people come right up on your bumper racing their engine. Insane stuff.
It would be only passive aggressive if the person were not turning in order to annoy the person behind. It is perfectly possible that the person at the light would do exactly the same thing if no one were behind him or her. Some people are overly cautious. Around here there are tons of people who feel they need to drive about 10 car lengths from the car in front of them in traffic moving at 10 mph. Being behind them is annoying, and I think they are jerks, but I don’t think they do it to annoy anyone else.