Breaking Red Traffic Light

Hooch

OldmanMondeo wrote: »

Quite wrong. Get off the until you learn the rule of the road..... Amber means stop.

Lucas Obnoxious Wool wrote: »

I said as far as I'm concerned. I dont think in 7 years if driving I ever stopped for an amber light, why would I stop the traffic going the other way still has a red light. I was living in London last year You should try stopping for or not moving off on an amber light there, you would be attacked instantly

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Quite wrong yourself! amber means stop only if its safe to do so. maybe you should reread the rules of the road?;)

KTRIC wrote: »

You're preaching to someone about the rules of the road that you don't know yourself.

Amber = slow down, prepare to stop / proceed with caution.

oldmanmondeo is spot on. Read not only the rules of the road people but irish road traffic act please.

Amber means stop at the stop line or light. STOP.
Red means DO NO PROCEED
Green means PROCEED WITH CAUTION

However with amber, if you are already on or over the stop line you may proceed if it is unsafe to stop your mpv.

Try this
http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-driving/traffic-lights-and-signals/traffic-lights.html

Hooch

McSpud wrote: »

Any one seen a serious accident caused by going through red light?

Hope you dont take offense, its not intended, what a childish statement.

Fatal serious enough for you. More than once, sorry to say.

stealthyspeeder

A few people on here are saying amber means stop.

You are all leaving out the important condition on this which is only if its safe to do so.

So if you are going at the speed limit, the light turns amber as you are 10 metres from the lights with a truck tailgating you, amber does NOT mean stop! (it would be unsafe)

So as I said Amber = stop ONLY IIF ITS SAFE TO DO SO.
(its clearly quoted on this thread in the Rules of the Road 2x FFS!)

cyclopath2001

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

So as I said Amber = stop ONLY IIF ITS SAFE TO DO SO. (its clearly quoted on this thread in the Rules of the Road 2x FFS!)

It would seem that there's a lot of unsafe driving going on then. At any junction, regardless of a green light, one should always be cautious. But from what I've seen many drivers who could stop quite safely on amber, do not. The excuse of 'truck tailgating me' is an invention. It's no wonder, so many cyclists don't accept criticism from drivers.

For example, I was at a traffic light junction today (in Clontarf), there's separate signal for straight-only and for right-only. The signal is showing green for straight-only and red for right-only, there's a pedestrian crossing active. FOUR cars drove through and turned right.

It's right next to a Garda station too.

Alun

Alun wrote: »

I'd love to know how a Garda (or indeed anyone come to that) in a car, presumably some distance behind you, could even begin to imagine he could accurately determine the distance your car was from the lights at the very moment the light went amber. But then, I guess we'll now get posts claiming that they're "specially trained" or something, presumably with special Ninja powers that are immune from laws of physics like parallax errors

Alun, you don't need to know the exact distance a car is from the amber light to work out if it is safe for the car to stop or not. You just know, just like you know yourself whether it's worth flooring it or hitting the brakes.

I stopped at about five cars for going through an amber light today. Gave them warnings about the fine and points. It's not worth the gamble going through. Not all Gardai will be as lenient as me.

Topper Harley

The whole 'amber, what does it mean?' debate was started by one person claiming that, to him an amber light means go. Most people know this is wrong and the rest seems to be an arguement over wording, when you probably all know when you are driving a bit of common sense will guide you as to whether or not it is safe for you to stop at an amber light. The people to worry about, are those who just don't care.


On the red light issue though, I accidentally broke one on a roundabout a few months ago. I was on the M1 southbound and took the Swords/Skerries exit and as I came to the top of the ramp the lights went green for me to proceed onto the roundabout. As I got round to the second set of lights I kept going at a red light as the lights looked as though they were pointed towards the cars entering the roundabout. These cars were still stopped as they're green light had only just gone green. It all made sense to me at the time (their light is red and they're stopped) but as I went through they began to move and a lot of horns/light flashing took place. It was an honest mistake on my part and luckily didn't result in an accident but to this day I still think the lights should be turned slightly. Does anyone else know of the lights I'm talking about and have the same feeling.

Hooch

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

A few people on here are saying amber means stop.

You are all leaving out the important condition on this which is only if its safe to do so.

So if you are going at the speed limit, the light turns amber as you are 10 metres from the lights with a truck tailgating you, amber does NOT mean stop! (it would be unsafe)

So as I said Amber = stop ONLY IIF ITS SAFE TO DO SO.
(its clearly quoted on this thread in the Rules of the Road 2x FFS!)

You are miss leading people, here is the link again read it and the first line of amber lights
http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-driving/traffic-lights-and-signals/traffic-lights.html.

Im only going to post this for the last time. As a member of AGS and Traffic Corps, an amber line means stop. That is the legal term for it...STOP. One of the defenses for this offense is if it is not safe to stop in time. At this stage you must be on the stop line to use this defense, if your before it and continue your not only crashing an amber light but you are driving without due care and attention if you dont stop, Section 51(a) RTA 1961-06. You must be able to stop your vehicle.

This is the law, forget what you heard or seen on a website.
Also be aware that rules of the road is a government publication as an aid to driving and is in no way criminal law, it may be used in civil law for RTCs. THe rules of the road is a guide, its not gospel, the Road Traffic Act 1961, as amended is what persons should refer to.

Feel free to ask questions,
NGA:)

stealthyspeeder

nice guy always wrote: »

You are miss leading people, here is the link again read it and the first line of amber lights
http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-driving/traffic-lights-and-signals/traffic-lights.html.

Im not misleading people. how about you read the second line about amber lights.

If you travelling at speed,(under the limit) it may be unsafe to brake hard and aggressively to stop before the line, in this case it is permissable to pass the line. its not just the rules its common sense as well

You may may work for the traffic corps but you are the one misleading pepole if you are saying that amber = stop, regardless of whether its safe do so or not

Omcd

Pedro K wrote: »

Sometimes bad road planning causes situations with traffic lights.

For example

There is a set of traffic lights very near to my home.
The junction is a cross junction, with one road being significantly busier than the other, particularly at peak hours. (all roads are two way traffic)

----| |----
----| |----


Say this is the junction. (Shoddy diagram I know)
The road going left-right is going in and out of the two adjacent estates, whereas the road going up-down is a much busier road.
There are filter lights on this junction, however, the filter lights are on the minor roads, leading onto the major one, and there are no filter lights for turning from the main road into the estate roads.

As a result, in peak traffic, going on the main road going, the cars split into two lanes, one going right, and the rest going left or straight through. However, because there is such a high volume of oncoming traffic, it is near impossible to get your right turn in on green. Most cars have to wait until the light goes amber (and in some cases red) so the oncoming traffic then slows and stops and then a handful of cars come through!

I don't know personally of any accidents caused by it, but I have seen the aftermath of accidents at the scene before and can only assume it was due to somebody breaking the red.

Anybody else know of anything similar?

AFAIK you can proceed to turn right on a junction after the lights have gone amber/red if you were beyond the stop line (ie on the junction) when the lights turned, and obviously it is safe to do so. However in this case, unless it was the only way to make the turn beacuse of traffic volumes, I would generally stay where I was unless to do so would cause an obstruction, as proceeding on red under such circumstances just doesnt feel right. Maybe it isn't right ?

There are some stupidly designed light phases. I know one where to turn right at a crossroads junction, sometimes (only sometimes) the lights will go green for you, but the lights for the oncoming traffic will stay red for several seconds allowing traffic to right turn BUT you dont get a filter arrow, so you dont know if the lights the other side (oncoming)are red allowing you your right turn opportunity or whether the oncoming traffic is just slow off the mark, and the junction is bit wide to be playing chicken with traffic you dont know is about to move or not. Then, sometimes after you proceed out onto the junction, and wait for a safe gap in the oncoming traffic, three or four cars cross from the other side, and your light will go red after several seconds . You could assume then, if your brain is on autopilot, that the light for oncoming traffic is red and because you are in the middle of the junction you are about to get swamped by cars coming from either side so you could hastily proceed to take the right turn, BUT, SOMETIMES, the oncoming light is actually still green and you could miss seeing the oncoming car speeding up to them because of a traffic island with loads of railings, and wallop ! Or, sometimes the lights behave normally, ie green for oncoming at same time as your green, and turn arrow at end of sequence, sometimes no turn arrow but oncoming light is red, so you dont really know what they are going to do anytime you approach them. 20 years ago, because of so many serious accidents, the lights had big led noticeboards over them to warn right turning traffic of oncoming traffic when they went red one way but not the other, then the sequence the changed to something more normal and the warning boards were removed, but in the last few years the dangerous sequence has been reintroduced with even more unpredictability but the warning boards have never been put back on.

On the stop at amber thing, would green meaning proceed with caution mean amongst other things that you should reduce your speed reasonably approaching a green light in case it turns to amber before you get there. However, I cant see NGA's explanation as being any different to what I would assume to be the legal interpretation of a red light unless one is actually stationary on the stop line, and even then if you are stationary on the stop line and the light turns amber then surely you should stay where you are, so then whats the point of having the amber as well as the red ?

68coupe

Can I ask a question here? I was gonna start a thread, but after seeing the amber light debate here, this looks like the right place.
I was recently driving towards a pedestrian crossing when the amber lights flashed and went red as someone was crossing. No probs so far. I was at the front at my side of the road and a squad car was at the front of the other side. Now, a lady and her child crossed, that was it, no-one else.......after 20/30seconds or so the amber light started flashing.

I have always assumed and taken it that this meant to proceed with caution if the coast is clear..but the squad car never budged. There was absolutley no-one left around that could have been potentially crossing? To be honest, I didn't know whether or not I should go, giving that there was a trail behind me, but I waited for the squad car. It didn't move an inch until the light went green.

Was this correct? Has there been a change in rules recently? I have always gone when the amber light starts flashing again, and the coast is clear? And every other car I've seen has done the same. I've never seen what the squad car did, happen before?

Just wondering......

Big Nasty

I ain't got no proof but that was always my asumption and experience too Mr. Mustang!

Mr. Presentable

Saab Ed wrote: »

As my posts are not exactly known for their political correctness Im not gonna hold back on this one.

I hate cyclists full stop. Most dont understand road rules and the ones that do dont care anyway and just do what they want , up a path here, through a red light there. My personal favorite is when they all dress up as Lucozade bottles and in their alter egos pretend to be Stephen Roache.....10 abreast in the middle of the fu**ing road. I find a very close drive by whilst on the horn for long periods adjusts this attitude quick pronto. Really hate cyclists.

You say you hate them, but it reads like you like them

68coupe

nipplenuts wrote: »

You say you hate them, but it reads like you like them

I laughed my ass off.........that was well spotted. I'm not getting into the bike/car debate, but i can appreciate a good joke...

Fairdues

I've seen the same thing in Cork. For some, red is very definitely the new amber.

leeroybrown

68coupe wrote: »

Was this correct? Has there been a change in rules recently? I have always gone when the amber light starts flashing again, and the coast is clear? And every other car I've seen has done the same. I've never seen what the squad car did, happen before?

Nothing has changed. The motorist can proceed if safe to do so but pedestrians still have the right of way until the the lights turn green.

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

You may may work for the traffic corps but you are the one misleading pepole if you are saying that amber = stop, regardless of whether its safe do so or not

Unfortunately, the poster isn't. The Rules of the Road are only a set of guidelines and if it were to come to court the Road Traffic Act is what applies and it's very clear on the matter.

As you do point out though the normal sensible interpretation normally used in the real world is that you may proceed if it would actually be dangerous to stop.

stealthyspeeder

leeroybrown wrote: »

Unfortunately, the poster isn't. The Rules of the Road are only a set of guidelines and if it were to come to court the Road Traffic Act is what applies and it's very clear on the matter.

Why yes it is very clear on the matter! and guess what it says?.......


(2) A driver facing a traffic light lamp which shows an amber light while no other traffic light lamp (immediately above or below) shows any light, shall not proceed beyond the stop line at that light (or, if there is no such stop line, beyond the light) save when the vehicle is so close to the stop line when the amber light shows that the vehicle cannot safely be halted before crossing the stop line.

taken from
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1964/en/si/0294.html#zzsi294y1964a13

So as I said before, Amber = stop if its safe to do so, anyone who says differently is just plain wrong! (appears even the trafic corps can get it wrong too!)

Hooch

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Why yes it is very clear on the matter! and guess what it says?.......


(2) A driver facing a traffic light lamp which shows an amber light while no other traffic light lamp (immediately above or below) shows any light, shall not proceed beyond the stop line at that light (or, if there is no such stop line, beyond the light) save when the vehicle is so close to the stop line when the amber light shows that the vehicle cannot safely be halted before crossing the stop line.

taken from
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1964/en/si/0294.html#zzsi294y1964a13

So as I said before, Amber = stop if its safe to do so, anyone who says differently is just plain wrong! (appears even the trafic corps can get it wrong too!)

Tell you what i'll keep convicting people on this, as is my job and maybe one day, just maybe, you'll run that light and meet a nice collegue, who might be good enough to issue you an fcps. Enojy it.

AugustusMaximus

Loads of cyclists constantly go through red lights yet it seems like a far lesser crime for them to do it in comparison to motorists. No idea why, especially considering a car crashing into a cyclists is far more likely to result in death or serious injury over a two car collision.

cyclopath2001

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

So as I said before, Amber = stop if its safe to do so,

It's very obvious that most pople don't stop on amber.

Why is it mostly 'not safe' to do so?

Are people not driving safely?

podcastireland

and what part of your post isn't horse ****.

I cycle and drive (as many cyclists do). I don't break red lights or engage in any other activities that may endanger my safety.

I also cycle at weekends 'dressed as a lucozade bottle' as you put it, and have had many encounters with drivers like you who decide that having been held up for 20 or 30 seconds that driving very close to me will 'teach me a lesson'.

I have never seen cyclists cycling 10 abreast ! But remember two abreast is not illegal according to current legislation - perhaps you don't understand the rules of the road as well as you think you do!

Just bear in mind that should you hit the cyclist whose attitude you are trying to adjust they will come off a lot worse than you - so perhaps a little consideration for other road users safety would be in order.

Mr. Presentable

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Why yes it is very clear on the matter! and guess what it says?.......


(2) A driver facing a traffic light lamp which shows an amber light while no other traffic light lamp (immediately above or below) shows any light, shall not proceed beyond the stop line at that light (or, if there is no such stop line, beyond the light) save when the vehicle is so close to the stop line when the amber light shows that the vehicle cannot safely be halted before crossing the stop line.

taken from
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1964/en/si/0294.html#zzsi294y1964a13

So as I said before, Amber = stop if its safe to do so, anyone who says differently is just plain wrong! (appears even the trafic corps can get it wrong too!)

Amber = Stop, unless it is unsafe to do so.
A subtle but important difference.

markpb

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

(2) A driver facing a traffic light lamp which shows an amber light while no other traffic light lamp (immediately above or below) shows any light, shall not proceed beyond the stop line at that light (or, if there is no such stop line, beyond the light) save when the vehicle is so close to the stop line when the amber light shows that the vehicle cannot safely be halted before crossing the stop line.

The word shows means when the amber light comes on for the first time. If you are crossing the white line when the amber light comes on, you can continue. Behind that you should be able to see the light changing and come to a safe stop. If you can't stop, you were crossing a junction at speed which is against the law - green light means proceed with caution, not proceed at full whack.

Pedro K

Omcd wrote: »

AFAIK you can proceed to turn right on a junction after the lights have gone amber/red if you were beyond the stop line (ie on the junction) when the lights turned, and obviously it is safe to do so. However in this case, unless it was the only way to make the turn beacuse of traffic volumes, I would generally stay where I was unless to do so would cause an obstruction, as proceeding on red under such circumstances just doesnt feel right. Maybe it isn't right ?

Ah ye, once you've crossed the line you're deemed to have passed the traffic lights, and as such you have to complete your manouvere. If you didn't move you'd have the traffic coming at you from one of the side roads then.

I'm not saying it's right to break a red in this particular circumstance. Just saying it is always done and nearly necessary to maintain a steady flow of traffic. If it wasn't there would be about one car through per light cycle.

nipplenuts wrote: »

Amber = Stop, unless it is unsafe to do so.
A subtle but important difference.

So to re-iterate

Pedro K wrote:

Amber = Stop, unless it is not safe to do so.

OldmanMondeo

Lad's either way an Amber light means STOP, even if it says in the ROTR or Statue book, unless it's safe to do so. When aproaching Traffic lights, you should always prepare to stop. How many times have you seen kids run across the road once they see the green man? how many times have you seen a cyclist / motorist running a light? Of course you won't stop if a truck is going to run up the arse of you and if a Guard does stop anyone for it, more than likely it will be the truck driver for dangerous driving and not you for running a red light.

The problem is most people see an amber as an excuse to continue through a junction / crossing, when in fact they should stop. Thinking that they will get away with running the junction by saving it would have been unsafe to stop. You are meant to drive to suit the conditions not the other way around.

stealthyspeeder

nice guy always wrote: »

Tell you what i'll keep convicting people on this, as is my job and maybe one day, just maybe, you'll run that light and meet a nice collegue, who might be good enough to issue you an fcps. Enojy it.

You do that, You'll only find me breaking the amber if it was unsafe to stop, if you issue me an FCPS for this, it will be contested, I will win in court, your ignorance of the road traffic act (with regard to traffic lights, will be exposed and I will make a complaint. Enjoy it.

nipplenuts wrote: »

Amber = Stop, unless it is unsafe to do so.
A subtle but important difference.

Double negative - means the exact same thing, If its safe to stop you stop, if its not, you dont.

markpb wrote: »

The word shows means when the amber light comes on for the first time. If you are crossing the white line when the amber light comes on, you can continue. Behind that you should be able to see the light changing and come to a safe stop. If you can't stop, you were crossing a junction at speed which is against the law - green light means proceed with caution, not proceed at full whack.

If you are 5 metres from the light, travelling at 29km/ph in a 30 zone, with a car the advised 2 seconds behind you and the amber light comes on. It would be unsafe to stop for this light. I could do it in my car with its massive brakes but the a van (for example) behind me would crash into the back of me. If the van was not behind me, I would stop.

So yet again, amber = stop unless its not safe to do so.

markpb

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

If you are 5 metres from the light, travelling at 29km/ph in a 30 zone, with a car the advised 2 seconds behind you and the amber light comes on. It would be unsafe to stop for this light. I could do it in my car with its massive brakes but the a van (for example) behind me would crash into the back of me. If the van was not behind me, I would stop.

Which clichè should I roll out.... lets go with "the speed limit is a limit, not a target". Just because the limit is 30kph does not mean you should be doing that speed through a junction. Green means proceed with caution, it does not mean proceed with abandon. If you're not slowing down and preparing to stop suddenly, you're not driving safely.

In any event, this is not a situation that happens regularly. What actually happens in cities, is the traffic slows down and then three or four cars proceed through an amber (or red) light long after the amber has first shown. This has nothing to do with stopping safely and everything to do with ignoring the lights. It is selfish drivers like this who cause traffic authorities to schedule stupidly long all-stop phases in between light sequences - they count on several people still being in the junction after the lights have gone red.

OldmanMondeo

markpb wrote: »

Which clichè should I roll out.... lets go with "the speed limit is a limit, not a target". Just because the limit is 30kph does not mean you should be doing that speed through a junction. Green means proceed with caution, it does not mean proceed with abandon. If you're not slowing down and preparing to stop suddenly, you're not driving safely.

Think his name sums it up....;)

stealthyspeeder

markpb wrote: »

Which clichè should I roll out.... lets go with "the speed limit is a limit, not a target". Just because the limit is 30kph does not mean you should be doing that speed through a junction. Green means proceed with caution, it does not mean proceed with abandon. If you're not slowing down and preparing to stop suddenly, you're not driving safely.

If you think driving at 29 in a 30 approaching the lights is driving with "abandon" then I think our abilities to control a car are very different in relation to what you can do safely and what I can do safely. I dont think we will be able to find common any ground on which to evaluate when it is safe or unsafe to break an amber light.

Alun

OK, so I'm 10 metres away from the stop line. How fast should I be going to be able to stop in time should the amber light come on? What if I'm 5 metres away, 4 metres, 3 metrres, 2 metres, 1 metre away? Do you see where I'm going with this?

In other words, to say everyone should always be travelling at a speed such that they can always safely come to a complete stop the very microsecond the amber light comes on is patent nonsense and defies the laws of mathematics and physics. If you follow this to it's logical conclusion, this means they'd be travelling at close to 0 km/h when they're almost at the line, and in addition effectively renders the whole amber light phase pointless.

In practice it's not just about not being to stop if it's safe to do so (or unsafe not to do so for the nitpickers), it's about actually being able to stop at all, or being able to stop in a controlled manner. And unless you have a magic car with brakes that can stop you effortlessly from any speed in 0 metres stopping distance, I'm afraid that wil result in people crossing amber lights.

Maybe a bit less nitpicking with the syntax of the RotR and the relevant statutes, and a little more common sense would be in order here. I'm not saying that what happens here regularly with traffic streaming through junctions long after the light has gone red should be condoned, of course not, but just because that happens it's not really on to start targetting people who cross an amber light fractions of a second after it goes on.

BrianD3

If anyone is having difficulty understanding the pupose of an amber light and the obligations of road users when it comes to stopping at amber lights I'd suggest they go back and read this post:

Alun wrote:

Not really ... I mean, mathematically speaking if you're never, ever going to drive through an amber light under any circumstances, the only safe way to approach any traffic light is for you to reduce your speed asymptotically to zero as you approach the light, regardless of it's current status. In other words, the closer you get to the light, the slower you'd have to go to be able to stop in time if it changed to amber, until you were so close you'd be going at walking pace and then a complete stop. Not really a viable solution, I think you'll agree.

That's why the amber light phase is there .. to allow you to drive through if you're so close that it would be dangerous, or more relevantly virtually impossible for you to stop in time. If it was actually illegal to drive through an amber light under any circumstances, then their whole raison d'etre would have to be called into question.

In conjunction with this post

stealthyspeeder wrote:

Why yes it is very clear on the matter! and guess what it says?.......


(2) A driver facing a traffic light lamp which shows an amber light while no other traffic light lamp (immediately above or below) shows any light, shall not proceed beyond the stop line at that light (or, if there is no such stop line, beyond the light) save when the vehicle is so close to the stop line when the amber light shows that the vehicle cannot safely be halted before crossing the stop line.

taken from
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1964/...zsi294y1964a13

McSpud

nice guy always wrote: »

Hope you dont take offense, its not intended, what a childish statement.

Fatal serious enough for you. More than once, sorry to say.

Fair comment. I didn't mean it like that. Just noticing oin recent years so many people so blatant about breaking the red light without any thought of cponsequences.

Hooch

McSpud wrote: »

Fair comment. I didn't mean it like that. Just noticing oin recent years so many people so blatant about breaking the red light without any thought of cponsequences.

Agreed, but thats what you get when you have the mentality that some posters have out on the road mate.:rolleyes:

Seth Brundle

nice guy always wrote: »

Agreed, but thats what you get when you have the mentality that some posters have out on the road mate.:rolleyes:

Hooch

kbannon wrote: »

Ok back on topic so.

Breaking red lights is bad.....very very very BAD:p

stealthyspeeder

nice guy always wrote: »

Ok back on topic so.

Breaking red lights is bad.....very very very BAD:p

Except if the Emergency services need let through!! :D lol!

Hooch

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Except if the Emergency services need let through!! :D lol!

Ya its important to get back to the station before 2.....the supt wont give any overtime if were late:p:D

highdef

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It would seem that there's a lot of unsafe driving going on then. At any junction, regardless of a green light, one should always be cautious. But from what I've seen many drivers who could stop quite safely on amber, do not. The excuse of 'truck tailgating me' is an invention. It's no wonder, so many cyclists don't accept criticism from drivers.

For example, I was at a traffic light junction today (in Clontarf), there's separate signal for straight-only and for right-only. The signal is showing green for straight-only and red for right-only, there's a pedestrian crossing active. FOUR cars drove through and turned right.

It's right next to a Garda station too.

I know this junction well, cyclopath. The amount of cars that break the light turning from Clontarf Road to Alfie byrne is unreal. I have had cars overtake me at this traffic light before. I once had a car behind me who started flashing his lights, gesturing and honking his horn at me. Light was red so it was reasonable to think that there must be a problem with my car. I get out of my car, approach the driver behind and before I get close, he's shouting out the window ordering me to fcuking move and there's nothing coming the other way. I tell him the light is red and ask if he is colour blind or is unaware that red means STOP but this seems to anger him further and he calls me all sorts of names under the sun. I call him a stupid blind ignorant selfish gobsh!te and walk calmy back to my car and my filter light changes to green after another 15 or 20 seconds and I was on my again. I wonder if he'd have behaved the same if there had been a guard about!

The entrance into Northwood, Santry from ballymun Road outbound is also notorious for red light breaking.

cyclopath2001

nice guy always wrote: »

Breaking red lights is bad.....very very very BAD

And breaking amber lights is just bad.

alun wrote:

In other words, to say everyone should always be travelling at a speed such that they can always safely come to a complete stop the very microsecond the amber light comes on is patent nonsense and defies the laws of mathematics and physics. If you follow this to it's logical conclusion, this means they'd be travelling at close to 0 km/h when they're almost at the line, and in addition effectively renders the whole amber light phase pointless.

You're exagerrating the situation. If one car is so close to the stop line, he can't stop without it being unsafe, it's usually understandable, but the three or four following? Give me a break.

Alun

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're exaggerating the situation.

No I'm not .. I was replying to one of the posts by one of our supposedly resident AGS members (if that's indeed who they really are) that the only circumstances under which he would excuse a car passing an amber light was if he was ON the line at the point at which the light changed. I was just pointing out that this was patent nonsense, and using a mathematical argument to make my point.

If one car is so close to the stop line, he can't stop without it being unsafe, it's usually understandable, but the three or four following? Give me a break.

Where did I (or anyone else) ever say this wasn't acceptable? If you're driving behind the vehicle in front observing the stopping distance, then you should be able to stop for the lights as well, even if he crosses the amber light.

Dave147

I was going to my girlfriends house one night and was running a small bit late, was at traffic lights and waiting for them to change, so I see the corresponding lights go amber, then red and I start to move, and wouldn't you know it - with no pedestrians around the green man flashes! Obviously someone had pressed it and crossed anyway, very annoying

Sure wouldn't you know a paddy wagon was just coming around the corner (if anybody is from Cork they might know the lights, its the intersection between Noonans rd and Gillabbey street in Cork) of course I committed myself and gone through so the blue lights came on. I stopped down the road and apologised and the guard checked everything, all of which was in order. He said I'd get an 80 euro fine (no problem , I deserve it) and 0 points, thank god. Well over a month ago and heard nothing since.

1. Do you think he's left me off perhaps due to the misfortune of a non existent pedestrian?

2. Are there points for breaking a red light?

*sorry if post was horrible to read, blame the iPhone

cyclopath2001

Alun wrote: »

Where did I (or anyone else) ever say this wasn't acceptable?

I was referring, not to what is said here, but to what actually happens on the road, every day, at every traffic light junction, where so many drivers fail (with no good reason) to stop on amber.

Topper Harley

Dave147 wrote: »

1. Do you think he's left me off perhaps due to the misfortune of a non existent pedestrian?

2. Are there points for breaking a red light?

1. Unfortunately sometimes it takes a good few weeks for the ticket to arrive and if the Garda said you'd get an €80 fine it's likely that you will. But live in hope.

2. Sometimes Guards get it wrong. I was told to expect points for driving in a bus lane but it turned out it was just an €80 fine.

http://www.penaltypoints.ie/the_full_list_of_offences.php

Failure to obey traffic lights: 2 points.:(

I hope I've made a mistake here but it looks like there is. However, the Guard may have taken your circumstances, as you explained, into consideration and might have done you for something different. (Such as Failure to obey traffic direction given by Gardaí - which isn't what happened but comes with no penalty points.)

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/accidents-gardai-and-penalties/penalty-points-fixed-charge-offences/index.html

Good luck.

Topper Harley

highdef wrote: »

I wonder if he'd have behaved the same if there had been a guard about!

I doubt it very much. I've witnessed first hand people shouting and getting very aggressive only to cower and apologise when the person they're shouting at shows them a Garda badge. "I'm sorry, I'm not usually like this. I just got a bit wound up..." etc etc.

gnxx

Just to cheer you up a bit, about three years ago, I was at that very junction waiting for the lights to change.

I pulled forward on the green light .. and two cars went through the red light ... one of the feckers gave me a hand gesture and beeped the horn.

There was a garda behind me on a motorbike that took off after them He had pulled both over just before Christchurch.

McSpud wrote: »

I feel this has been getting gradually worse over the years in Dublin. I find it very noticable it I go through on amber & then see 3-4 cars follow me through. Everyone might be on the edge of amber/red from time to time but some drivers seem to see red as the new amber i.e. accelerate when see red.

Coming out of a side lane onto Clanbrassil street (by FastFit) yesterday & I usually delay for a second or two as cars always breaking that light. I paused yesterday only for bicycle to wander through just as I moved. If I hadn't paused he would have been over my bonnet. Chances are I would be blamed due to no fault of my own.

Any one seen a serious accident caused by going through red light?