Philosophy of traffic

In our FUSN group the question arose of whether left turn on red was ever permitted. It is, usually, when from a one-way street onto a one-way street. You can look at the Wikipedia (yay!) article titled "Right turn on red". I was intrigued by one of the later paragraphs in the article at the time I am writing this, though I imagine it may disappear because it is not very encyclopedia-ish:

"A very curious question involving legal moves under a red light signal is why it is illegal to go straight under a red light if the vehicle involved is traveling straight on the through road of a 3-way (T-shaped) intersection. ... The theory behind the legality of turning right on red or turning left on red from a one-way street onto a one-way street is obvious. It prohibits a vehicle from crossing a lane of traffic, but allows a vehicle to enter a moving lane of traffic if there are no obstacles. That theory is consistent with allowing a vehicle traveling on the through road at a 3-way (T-shaped) intersection to travel straight under a red light if it is safe to do so. In such a circumstance, the vehicle can turn no further right than going straight."

I have thought this for some time.

One legal point that intrigues me is whether turning right on red is required when it is clearly safe to do so. Drivers behind you will express their opinion, but that is a different matter. Presumably one could get a ticket for blatantly and habitually failing to go forward at a green light, but my intuition is that this is not true of turning right on red.

The social institution of right turn on red does have some undesirable effects. At some intersections, there is very rarely any traffic to wait for, and drivers who take a route repeatedly will come to count on it. They perhaps come to less than a full stop at the intersection, and then if they are surprised to see some traffic, tend to proceed anyway because they are emotionally committed to it. I interpret the law (or at least the ethics) to be that if another driver has to slow down at all, the right turn on red was not appropriate. In this it differs from a stop sign. We all know that in heavy traffic, you can't actually wait until the intersection is totally clear before turning right, because that will never happen. With right turn on red, you do know the intersection will clear because those red lights eventually turn green, however briefly.

At one important level, I believe that there is no harm in treating all red lights as stop signs, regardless of what lane you are in or what direction you are going to turn. If you really can verify that you aren't going to interfere with other traffic, it is safe, isn't it? I know that I have sometimes spent interminable minutes at a red light of some grand intersection late at night when there is not another car in sight.

At other levels it isn't a good idea. Some laws are routinely broken. Highway speed limits are a dramatic example. There are other cases where custom weakens and erodes compliance. Some of you may be familiar with the off ramp of the Weston Newton exit from the Pike. Two lanes approach the right-straight part of the intersection (a third lane for going left-straight is beyond a divider). My recollection is that in the late 1980s, everyone stopped and treated it as a true red light and did not interpret going ahead as a right turn. But over the years the situation has evolved to the point where almost all drivers not only turn right after "stopping" from the right of those two lanes but also from the left -- which I believe is not legal anywhere. I find it annoying at times when I'm in the westbound Washington Street traffic, though I have to admit that mostly it is a safe maneuver. But if proceeding in any direction from a red light became common I think it would be unsafe because it can require quite a bit of skill. Those drivers who are less skilled would feel "peer pressure" to go in situations they really cannot determine to be safe. Admittedly, negotiating traffic around Boston in many areas during peak times requires even more skill though composed entirely of fully legal maneuvers. Less confident drivers often avoid those situations, and treating all red lights as stop signs would expand the situations they would have to avoid and increase the danger when they didn't. I was intrigued to hear that the laws against drivers in the 16 to 18 year range carrying other teens are secretly a relief to some teen drivers, who really don't feel up to that sort of stress and pressure. I suspect one reason right turn on red is permitted is that it doesn't require much skill to determine whether it is safe to proceed.

Some of you may be familiar with the Newton Corner intersection where Washington Street crosses the Pike to the north, at which point going straight would lead to Galen Street. The same logic from the West Newton exit could lead to drivers in the leftmost lane stopping and then proceeding to the left, and stopping once again at the next light before heading onto the Pike westbound. I'm glad it hasn't happened (it hasn't happened, has it?).

I have sometimes pondered that there are three separate reasons to avoid questionable maneuvers in driving. It is (1) unsafe, (2) rude, or (3) specifically illegal. It is remarkable to what extent those three criteria vary independently.