Typical 4-way intersection with stoplights. 2 lanes north, 2 lanes south, 2 lanes east, 2 lanes west.
Left hand turn lanes and left hand turn arrows all directions. Right hand turns must be done from right lane either on green or after stopping on red.
Question: Does a southbound car making a left hand turn on a green arrow to go east have right-of-way to both eastbound lanes when entering from the intersection, or are they supposed to enter only the lefthand eastbound lane?
Reason being, I’m stopped in the righthand northbound lane and want to take a right while those cars are making their turn. Most of them stick to the left lane but once in a while one swings over to the right lane. Am I in the wrong if one of them nails me while I make my turn? Do they have right of way to both lanes?
From what I remember in drivers ed 9 years ago (so I don’t have a cite), you’re supposed to take the inside-most lane. Swinging wide into the outside lane would constitute changing lanes in an intersection, which is not legal. In New Mexico, at least. People do it all the time, though, and turning right on red requires you to yield to oncomming traffic. Both parties would most likely be at fault in the event of an accident.
This is a situation which bugs the hell out of me. It seems that most people have no idea that they’re supposed to stay in the lane closest to them. Basically, when entering traffic, always merge into the lane closes to you because it makes you PREDICTABLE, which really is the single most important thing for traffic safety. I don’t know if this is an actual, on-the-books law, but it sure as hell is common sense and a decent thing to do, anyway.
This is the same situation at an intersection on my homebound commute. Because people turning left swing into the right-hand lane, it causes a long backup of people coming from the other direction who wish to turn right. Both sets of turning drivers could be accommodated at the same time if the left-turners kept to the left lane, but almost every single left-turner swings wide into the right lane.
We have a lot of intersections that have curving trails of very short dashes to lead motorists through turns. Driving on the right, we are supposed to keep the line of the lane we are in on our left as we turn. These lines are also used in a few places to guide mortorists going straight through unclear intersections.
In places with double turn lanes, there are two such lines. The turn lane closest to the centre of the road is connected to the lane of the departure ropad also closed to the centre. The second turn lane is connected to the second lane of the departure road.
So I’d say tou have to exit in the same lane that you entered the intersection in.
California permits the left-turner to enter either lane: Illustration from Driver’s Handbook demonstrating such. Right turners must remain the near lane, unless they’re entering a one-way street (see the figure further down the page).
Of course, if there are more than one lane turning, then further restrictions will apply. There’s a figure showing that, too.
You don’t say if you have a red light, but I’m assuming you do if the other driver has a green arrow. If the traffic engineers in your state are giving green arrows to more than one direction at the same time, then they are idiots, and I don’t know what to tell you.
So assuming you have a red light and the other driver has a green light, the other driver has the right of way, period. You NEVER have the right of way on a red light. If you are making a legally permitted right turn on a red light, it is contingent on you and you alone to be absolutely sure there is nothing to impede your turn. If you’re not absolutely sure, you should remain stopped. If you get into an accident, the fault would be yours.
Green light always has right of way over red light.
In my state, you are permitted to complete a turn in any lane so long as it is safe to do so. I’m not sure if that’s true in every state; you’d have to consult your vehicle code.
On preview, I see that brad_d already posted the relevant rule for California, which is my state.
He said the s/b car turning left e/b had a green arrow.
If you were to get into an accident, hopefully you have an independent witness that could state you had the green arrow, otherwise it might get a little sticky. If it turns into your word against somebody else, it usually comes down to the person turning left should have yielded the right-of-way. When I get a crash where both people are swearing on their bibles that they had the green light/arrow, I won’t issue any tickets and I’ll let the insurance companies battle it out. Most traffic crashes are civil matters.
And yes, you should turn into the leftmost lane, if for nothing else than to save yourself some headaches. Even though the guy turning right-on-red is in the wrong, getting your car fixed sucks.
In general, IIRC, the UTC does not require left-hand turns be made into any specific lane, unless more than one lane is turning left. California’s handbook illustrates this, and it’s pretty standard (having said that, someone will be along shortly from a state that establishes otherwise ).
As a person stopped by a red light, you may not begin your right-hand turn unless the intersection is free of traffic that is going to be impeded by your turn. I NEVER make that right-hand turn when the opposite direction has the green arrow. It’s a dumb move.
I agree with LowBrass and n. Also, consider the fact that a southbound to eastbound left turning large truck would not be expected to turn into only the left hand exit lane, nor should anyone else. The green arrow cannot be (legally) displayed unless all other moves are prohibited.
I wonder if that’s the case for Ontario. There are several intersections here where it’s a common, daily occurrence that given a green arrow for the left turn, people in the oncoming right turn lane turn right on the red. We all seem to get along and stay in the correct lanes. Hell, even without the arrow and both opposing greens, it seems to work well – the left turn into the close lane, and the other side right turn into their close lane. No honking, shouting, nasty finger symbols – it all just works. I’ve gotten quite used to it and it’s the one part of Canadian society that I’d love to take with me back to Michigan. I’ve tried looking it up in the past, but couldn’t find any references one way or the other.
I’ll admit, though, that sometimes it’s a bummer. In order to get to the closest Tim’s I’ve got to make such a left turn and then an immediate right into the corner lot.
Depends on where you live. The Missouri Drivers Guide says “… If the road onto which you are turning is a four lane road, you may enter it in the right lane if the right lane is free of traffic”.
The illustration (or rather, the law it demonstrates) seems kinda silly to me, because if both cars want to turn left into their respective outside lane, at the same time, they would hit each other. If they both chose the inside lane, no harm, no foul.
I agree. While I used to get angry at other drivers, I came to realize that other people will do stupid things (and maybe even myself on occasion) and there isn’t much I can do about it. I can try to assert my “rights” to save a few seconds, but I figure the feeling of self-righteousness will wear off long before the pain of taking my car to the shop.
While perhaps these drivers should pull into the left lane, they obviously don’t. Knowing this, it would be stupid to make the right rather than just waiting for their left turn arrow to expire. By the same token, if I was making the left, I would not count on someone waiting to make the right not to pull out.
Under which circumstance, one would have to wait for the other, precisely as would be the case if only one lane was headed in each direction. :rolleyes:
I have to disagree with this. First, the question was about what the other driver should do - the one turning right on red. And if you are the one turning right at a red light, it would be wise to assume that cars coming the other way might complete their turn in the outer lane.
Second, while caution is always in order, I don’t agree with, as a matter of policy, advising drivers to yield to anyone when they have a green arrow. A green arrow is supposed to mean you yield to nobody. Whether you have enough evidence, after the fact, to determine who is telling the truth doesn’t change what actually happened.
You could “save yourself some headaches” by never turning right on a red light, too. Are you advising people to do that as well?
And let me add another reason why it’s not a good idea to assume nobody will be coming into your lane when you’re turning right at a red light - and this came up in another thread awhile back: If you are going north and turning right onto the eastbound street, it is possible that a car heading west could be making a u-turn, and will end up in your lane. It’s usually impossible to complete a u-turn in the inside lane. The best advice is to act under the assumption that a car could appear in the outside lane at any time, and be ready for it.
In all the intersections I’ve been through, there is enough room for both drivers to turn left this way safely.
The reason it makes sense to turn left into the rightmost lane is that this often occurs when there is a freeway entrance ramp on the right not very far down the street. Turning into the leftmost lane would require a very quick lane change (possibly into the next car turning left) while turning into the right lane minimizes this.
That being said, in the Bay Area at least not that many people get the fact that you do not have the right of way when turning right on red - at least as indicated by the people who act as if stopping before the turn is optional.
In fact there are certain intersections near me, often near shopping centers, where half the cars in the leftmost left turn lane are making U turns, so this is very good advice indeed.
).