See this diagram: (jpg or pdf). You are in the blue car.
Let’s say you come up to an intersection comprised of two, four-lane roads. You want to make a right. Your light is red.
You look to your left to see if any traffic is coming. There is only one car in the right lane (Car D in the diagram), and it’s far enough away that you can safely make the turn. But… there are three cars in the left lane going through the intersection (Car A, Car B, and Car C in the diagram).
Do you make the turn?
The danger, of course, is if Car A, Car B, or Car C decides to switch to the right lane in the middle of the intersection while you’re making the turn.
I have been in this situation many times. Sometimes I will make the turn, and pray one of those cars doesn’t switch lanes in the middle of the intersection. Other times I wait until both lanes are clear.
I’ve certainly done it before, but there are so many drivers who don’t realize that they should not change lanes in an intersection that I agree it is safer to wait.
If you turn and there’s an accident, it will be your fault. You and others could be hurt.
The benefit of turning is a few seconds gained. The possible downside is injury, death, and a great deal of time lost, possibly a court date. An accident is going to cost you money. Your insurance premiums will probably be raised.
Turning right on red is optional, not required, at least in my state. I would wait. I drive defensively and always expect the other driver to act like a jackass.
This is the key. The probability of an accident is small, but you are bound by law to yield right of way before turning on red and that is likely to be considered a more egregious violation than changing lanes in an intersection. Also car A could make a lane change before entering the intersection and still reach you before you complete your turn.
We are not allowed to turn right on red, but if we were, I wouldn’t hesitate to turn here. Would you guys still wait to turn if there was no traffic light? There are roads I would never be able to turn onto if I had to wait until the whole road is clear. I guess it depends on the driving culture and what the other drivers are used to.
That’s a good point. I would be much more likely to take the slightly increased risk to make this turn in Sydney, where I might otherwise wait 10 minutes or more to get a clear road, as opposed to Canberra, where I only need to wait 30 seconds. I drive in both places fairly frequently and adjust accordingly.
In the pictured scenario in the US I would wait, because soon enough either a clear road will appear or the traffic light will turn green.
I don’t know where you would sit at a red light for 10 minutes even in Sydney.
I do regularly make a legal turn on a red light on my way to work in circumstances just like in the picture. It is surprising how much clear road you need to not cause the oncoming traffic to have to brake. I think that Car D is just at the point where I would not turn unless he was going slowly.
I say go. if you are too timid you will end up being one of those drivers who just waits for the light to change to make a right turn, and then has to wait for all the pedestrians who are crossing.
I’d make the turn. Where I am it’s illegal to change lanes while you’re in an intersection, and the default approach is to assume the other drivers will be obeying the law in the absence of clear evidence otherwise. Also, the three cars in the left lane have an unobstructed view of me and my intention to turn right is pretty clear given my position in the lane. If an accident occurred in this scenario I can reasonably expect I would not be found at fault, so basically the only risk in the scenario is of something outside of reason and I’d be overly cautious to assume it.
I have to make a turn like that pretty much each day, after I leave my apartment.
And, since I then typically need to move left to make a u-turn, I will typically defer if there is room in the right lane, but several vehicles in the middle or left ones. This has gotten at least one goober behind me to decide to test his horn during such moments.
Actually, you can’t reasonably expect that. As CookingWithGas pointed out, by law you have to yield the right of way. Not terribly long ago I saw a defendant on Judge Judy claim an accident under similar circumstances wasn’t his fault because the plaintiff changed lanes. The judge “calmly” explained that the plaintiff absolutely had the right of way and the accident was entirely his (the defendant’s) fault. IIRC, the phrase “you’re an idiot” as used.
These cars should not be changing lanes in the middle of an intersection. That’s what traffic laws are for. However, I’d probably err on the side of caution just in case, because many people are idiots.
Car B and Car A are traveling way too close to the car in front of them. In that situation, I would wait. I would expect either Car A or Car B (perhaps both) to change lanes without signaling to get around slo-pokeie Car C (only going 35? What is this, a funeral?). If Cars A and B were following at a proper distance, I would probably go ahead and make the turn, since I wouldn’t expect Car C to change lanes without signaling and even if he started to, he would see me with enough time to stay in his lane. Of course, if Car C was on his phone, I’d wait for the light.
I would wait. In the DC area, it is never ever safe to assume that someone will signal before changing lanes (or at any other time),or won’t change lanes at an illegal time such as while going through an intersection especially if they wanted to pass a slowpoke. Which is likely here because nobody drives 35mph, which would be another reason not to turn because cars B and C will probably try to pass car A, or car A might drift into you because anyone going 35 in the left lane on such roads around here is not keeping pace with traffic and is thus probably either distracted or stupid.
