Adam Carolla is my savior!

[Toecutter]

Anyone who hasn't caught his morning radio show should at least give it a listen, available on the web, if not in your local area.

Anyway, one of his favorite rants is about left-turn arrow signals. He openly advocates the sensible running of red ones, and claims he will pay for your ticket if you get caught (within reason, after checking for cops, and you have to appear and fight the ticket first.)

Anyway, the new system has been quite liberating. Almost as good as lane-sharing, but there's a huge caveat that he hasn't considered. I actually got in on the phone this morning to pick that bone, and lay out my plan for the illegal immigration issue (today's hot topic, not to be discussed here except by request in PM area) but they hung up on me while I was on hold, before I got to the screener. Damned technical difficulties! :angry:

The problem is, very obvious to me, that us bikers certainly don't need more people turning left unexpectedly. They can't drive as it is, so why should they be encouraged to do more unpredictable stuff?

Bring it on....here or you can leave comments on Adam's website linked above.

 

[hotrod502]

Anyway, one of his favorite rants is about left-turn arrow signals. He openly advocates the sensible running of red ones, and claims he will pay for your ticket if you get caught (within reason, after checking for cops, and you have to appear and fight the ticket first.)

I don't have a problem with the idea as long as the cagers can be sensible when doing this. Since I have driven everything from semi's to motorcycles, I tend to be a bit more aware of what is going on around me ( stay away madmike2 <_< ). The only problem would be the ones that are not paying attention and that would be 90%. Just my 1/2 cent.

 

[SockMonkey]

"...and lay out my plan for the illegal immigration issue..."

Thread hijack and quote du jour: "Calling an illegal alien an undocumented immigrant is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmacist." I have no idea who said that, but I think it's quite apropos (and funny as hell!)

 

[madmike2]

Anyway, one of his favorite rants is about left-turn arrow signals. He openly advocates the sensible running of red ones, and claims he will pay for your ticket if you get caught (within reason, after checking for cops, and you have to appear and fight the ticket first.)
....<major snippage>....

The problem is, very obvious to me, that us bikers certainly don't need more people turning left unexpectedly. They can't drive as it is, so why should they be encouraged to do more unpredictable stuff?

hotrod502 wrote:

I don't have a problem with the idea as long as the cagers can be sensible when doing this.

Therein lies the major issue: What is the definition of "sensible"? The gray area rather than a codified law to enforce leads, ufairly, to the officer having to make everyone's decision for them.

Wouldn't it be better to teach everyone to notify their local road department that a turn arrow needs to have its sensitivity adjusted? In the past (from a motorcyclist's point of view) turned left on a red arrow after waiting through a complete signal cycle and realizing the sensor didn't identify my bike in the turn lane. THAT I would argue with an officer or in court.

hot rod concluded:

The only problem would be the ones that are not paying attention and that would be 90%.

Ya think! I've seen them pass inthe Right Turn Only lane and cut back into traffic. I've watched cagers use the shared lef turn/merge lane for passing. On the highways, single occupancy vehicles (and NOT hybrids) abuse the HOV lanes. All of the above is done with a certain impunity, a disdain for the traffic laws (and principles of traffic flow) and certainly a display of personal morality that is self-centered and denial of respect for others who are suffering the same circumstance (A traffic jam isn't joyful for anyone).

These are the general populace whom some would grant the opportunity or priviledge to turn left on a red arrow. Sorry, I agree with hotrod....NO WAY!!

 

[double_entendre]

<SNIP>
hotrod502 wrote:

I don't have a problem with the idea as long as the cagers can be sensible when doing this.

Therein lies the major issue: What is the definition of "sensible"? The gray area rather than a codified law to enforce leads, ufairly, to the officer having to make everyone's decision for them.

<SNIP>

Ohhhhh jeeezus. Red left turn arrows in general piss me off. They just put one up here in HB at Warner & Edwards (Jill prolly knows the intersection). Previously there was a left turn arrow that went to a green light. It didn't go to a red arrow, but rather it'd just go to a plain "turn when safe/yield to oncoming traffic" green light. I do hope that's clear. *g* Now it's a left turn on green arrow only signal.

Anyway, my speculation is that they went to a totally controlled left turn arrow when there were too many wrecks. Never saw any, but presumably they happened. And it pisses me off. In essence what they're doing is, rather than taking the idiots off the road, they're making the roads more *****-proof. Of the two, the former is more achievable than the latter. IMNSHO

I actually plan my routes in my hometown to avoid intersections with left turn arrows so that I don't have to sit. If there's no traffic coming and I'm sitting at a red arrow it pisses me off.

Hope I got the attributions right.

Rancho "Whaddya mean being pissed off is bad for my blood pressure?" Bob

 

[Fred W]

Anyone who hasn't caught his morning radio show should at least give it a listen, available on the web, if not in your local area.
Anyway, one of his favorite rants is about left-turn arrow signals. He openly advocates the sensible running of red ones, and claims he will pay for your ticket if you get caught (within reason, after checking for cops, and you have to appear and fight the ticket first.)

Anyway, the new system has been quite liberating. Almost as good as lane-sharing, but there's a huge caveat that he hasn't considered. I actually got in on the phone this morning to pick that bone, and lay out my plan for the illegal immigration issue (today's hot topic, not to be discussed here except by request in PM area) but they hung up on me while I was on hold, before I got to the screener. Damned technical difficulties! :angry:

The problem is, very obvious to me, that us bikers certainly don't need more people turning left unexpectedly. They can't drive as it is, so why should they be encouraged to do more unpredictable stuff?

Bring it on....here or you can leave comments on Adam's website linked above.

I don't understand the need for a cage to run a red left turn arrow regardless of other traffic conditions. I mean, what's the point? Are these people just that important that they can't waste a minute or two of their precious lives by sitting at a light? I mean, they are probably listening to the radio or music or something and the car is heated (or air conditioned) so it's not like it's an unbearably miserable couple of minutes, right?

Cycles running the same lights due to not being sensed is a completely different issue. When a cage is waiting for the turn signal it will be sensed and the light will eventually change. If it doesn't then the cager is in the same position as the motorcycle and should proceed with extreme caution. But it should be the exception, not the "rule".

Having cages routinely run these lights when they "don't see any oncoming traffic" is a recipe for more flattened bikers. They won't see the oncoming biker (they don't now) and will of course proceed to pull squarely in front of them. And the bikers won't be expecting it as much as if there were no traffic lights at all since they are at a light controlled intersection with a green light telling them it's safe for them to go.

---------

This issue just exemplifies one of my personal pet peeves: People today are in too much of a hurry for their own good. Especially on the road. Too fast for traffic or road conditions. Constantly running red lights. Cutting people off. All kinds of aggressive driving.

If you asked someone if they would be willing to substantially increase the risk to their own and passenger's lives so that they can arrive wherever it is they're going 5 minutes earlier they would say "of course not". But that is exactly what they do. Every day.

It's funny that so many people are in such an extreme rush to get to work in the morning. Huh? Take your ******* time. It'll still be there when you arrive a few minutes later. And then in 8 hours they are chomping at the bit to get home. "Hey!! Get outta my way you ********. I'm on my way home and I want to be there now."

Then once they do get home they are looking for something to do to waste time. Leisure time, we call it. Like watching the ***** box. Oh yeah, I'd take chances with my life so I could watch a few extra minutes of that new sitcom.

Arrrrggh...

 

[germany]

Gunny to everything Fred said.

I have enough to worry about with cagers making legal left turns in front of me at various junctures of the road. I don't need to worry about some ******** taking me out because some equally fucktarded radio jockey said its cool to run red lights.

I would love to get the ***** drivers off of the road but, the only way to do that is to kill them. How many accidents do you read about where the driver who caused it was driving without a license or on a suspended license? Too many that's how many.

 

[Knifemaker]

"I don't understand the need for a cage to run a red left turn arrow regardless of other traffic conditions. I mean, what's the point? Are these people just that important that they can't waste a minute or two of their precious lives by sitting at a light? I mean, they are probably listening to the radio or music or something and the car is heated (or air conditioned) so it's not like it's an unbearably miserable couple of minutes, right?

Cycles running the same lights due to not being sensed is a completely different issue. When a cage is waiting for the turn signal it will be sensed and the light will eventually change. If it doesn't then the cager is in the same position as the motorcycle and should proceed with extreme caution. But it should be the exception, not the "rule".

Having cages routinely run these lights when they "don't see any oncoming traffic" is a recipe for more flattened bikers. They won't see the oncoming biker (they don't now) and will of course proceed to pull squarely in front of them. And the bikers won't be expecting it as much as if there were no traffic lights at all since they are at a light controlled intersection with a green light telling them it's safe for them to go."

We have "right turn on Red" here, but it is amazing how many drivers don't seem to know that YOU HAVE TO STOP FIRST....before you turn. Asking folks to purposely run red lights seems completely stupid and hopefully Adam will get a lawsuit thrown at him when his little comment gets someone hurt.

I see folks drive to work everyday weaving and speeding through traffic, shooting by me like they are being chased. Oddly, miles ahead off the highway I see them again, next to me waiting for the light to change.

I really don't care how fast you drive, just as long as you stop for red lights, and slow down a bit for green ones............

KM

 

[wfooshee]

There are only a couple of red turn arrows here, and people routinely run them, probably not even aware that it means, "You can't turn left, you dolt!"

The places where they exist here have limited sight lines like a hill crest, or the median is wide enough that a left turn would actually take 10 or 15 seconds, too long to judge oncoming traffic. They also exist at some intersections (but not all) where the speed limit approaching the light is 55. Oncoming traffic in a 55 zone is just too fast to judge for most people.

Red arrow means no go, and the places they're used here, they belong. There's no reason to argue against them. If the light was green (not green arrow, but plain green, meaning left turn OK but yield) I would not be comfortable maiking the left, I don't know enough about what's coming.

As for the right on red, too many people use it as an excuse to run the light just as it turns. I've had to re-think my entry into the intersection many times to keep from getting hit by a late right turn. And half those folks who are in such a hurry to get in front of you will then run at least 5 less than you want to, but that's a rant, not a contribution. I agree with don't encourage anything that lessens the importance of a red light.

 

[Bounce]

I don't understand the need for a cage to run a red left turn arrow regardless of other traffic conditions. I mean, what's the point? Are these people just that important that they can't waste a minute or two of their precious lives by sitting at a light? I mean, they are probably listening to the radio or music or something and the car is heated (or air conditioned) so it's not like it's an unbearably miserable couple of minutes, right?

just more of the holliwierd mindset of self-importance. they've spent so much time listening to their managers, pr reps, and entourage that they start believing that they are somehow special and that the laws are for people "below" their stature. the pisser is that they use their bully pulpit to push for more and more laws to apply to "the rabble" (as long as they don't have to comply with them).

 

[k7lvo]

I don't understand the need for a cage to run a red left turn arrow regardless of other traffic conditions. I mean, what's the point? Are these people just that important that they can't waste a minute or two of their precious lives by sitting at a light? I mean, they are probably listening to the radio or music or something and the car is heated (or air conditioned) so it's not like it's an unbearably miserable couple of minutes, right?

I certainly can't argue with your point that most people have an over-inflated idea of their self-importance (we used to call that "selfish") and a lack of driving skill/knowledge. However, having to set at a red light when there is no traffic to yield to, whether a bike or a cage, only wastes fuel and adds to the crowding on the roads. Now, for a safe way to accomplish that...

 

[Bounce]

suck it up and learn a little patience.

how many times do we hear drivers claim "i didn't see" (fill in the blank) when they turn in front of other traffic. now consider that you are promoting handing them a blank check to turn against traffic controls based on what they (don't) see.

 

[Toecutter]

I don't understand the need for a cage to run a red left turn arrow regardless of other traffic conditions. I mean, what's the point? Are these people just that important that they can't waste a minute or two of their precious lives by sitting at a light? I mean, they are probably listening to the radio or music or something and the car is heated (or air conditioned) so it's not like it's an unbearably miserable couple of minutes, right?

just more of the holliwierd mindset of self-importance. they've spent so much time listening to their managers, pr reps, and entourage that they start believing that they are somehow special and that the laws are for people "below" their stature. the pisser is that they use their bully pulpit to push for more and more laws to apply to "the rabble" (as long as they don't have to comply with them).

Naw, mostly, at least for me, it's about lights that didn't used to have red arrows and now they do. If they turned to "yield to oncoming traffic" status after the arrow period, then that would be cool. What really torques me, is the arrow turns green, then people lollygag and leave gaps in the flow, or just generally mosey along, then the arrow turns red and I get to wait a whole 'nother cycle to make it on my way. I think it's more about trying to *****-proof the roads, rather than lifting up the intellegence level. "I didn't see him" shouldn't be an excuse for vehicular manslaughter.

Don't even get me started with all those who don't seem to know that you can turn right against a red, or wander over enough when stopping at the light to block the right turn lane, or do less than the speed limit in the #1 lane. :angry03:

If I couldn't share lanes, I'd sell the bike and get a Subaru. Adam's still my hero, 'cause we both hate stupid. I don't agree with him on everything, but most everything.

I move with purpose, whether walking, shopping, or traveling. When I stop to smell the roses, I get out of other people's way.

 

[Fred W]

I don't understand the need for a cage to run a red left turn arrow regardless of other traffic conditions. I mean, what's the point? Are these people just that important that they can't waste a minute or two of their precious lives by sitting at a light? I mean, they are probably listening to the radio or music or something and the car is heated (or air conditioned) so it's not like it's an unbearably miserable couple of minutes, right?

I certainly can't argue with your point that most people have an over-inflated idea of their self-importance (we used to call that "selfish") and a lack of driving skill/knowledge. However, having to set at a red light when there is no traffic to yield to, whether a bike or a cage, only wastes fuel and adds to the crowding on the roads. Now, for a safe way to accomplish that...

The solution to the problem you are describing is not that the red left turn arrow needs to be run. It needs to be removed.

The only intersections that should have red left turn arrows are those that have limited visibility from the turning lane, or for some other reason it is difficult to judge if oncoming traffic is present or at what speed.

Otherwise, left turn arrows should be green and then turn off. When the arrow is off and the main light is green the left turn becomes a yield to oncoming traffic as if it was never arrowed. At least that is how the majority of intersections are arrowed here (if at all). Sometimes they do put up a "left turn on green arrow only" sign for the reasons stated above for red arrows.