When driving, do I have to proceed at a green light?

I love Sean nos

Just a hypothetical. I'm in my car and stopped at a red light. It could be any red light, but for now let's assume that it's a crossroads.

The light goes green, but I don't move off. Has an offence been committed?

To clarify, I'm not impaired and I'm paying attention. I'm not doing anything else. I know that the light has changed, I'm just not reacting to it.

Del2005

A green light is a signal to proceed with caution, so if you don't proceed you aren't obaying the signal. What will happen to you is a different matter depending on if it's a Garda behind or a highly strung motorist.

Why wouldn't you want to proceed on green?

hullaballoo

Obstruction of traffic, so yes, an offence.

I love Sean nos

Del2005 wrote: »

A green light is a signal to proceed with caution, so if you don't proceed you aren't obaying the signal. What will happen to you is a different matter depending on if it's a Garda behind or a highly strung motorist.

Why wouldn't you want to proceed on green?

But perhaps I'm not proceeding because I'm being cautious.

coylemj

If there was no other traffic at the junction, there is no obligation to proceed, you can sit there all day if you please. The green light says that you may proceed if the way is clear, it does not place an obligation on you to move. Unless you are blocking other traffic and causing an obstruction in which case you would be guilty of an offence (S.98 RTA) with or without traffic lights.

I love Sean nos

hullaballoo wrote: »

Obstruction of traffic, so yes, an offence.

Prohibition of obstruction of traffic.

98.—(1) A person shall not do any act (whether of commission or omission) which causes or is likely to cause traffic through any public place to be obstructed.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) Where a person is charged with an offence under this section, it shall be a good defence to the charge for him to show that there was lawful authority for the act complained of or that it was due to unavoidable accident.

Does this mean that congestion is illegal?

Victor

Given how ususual the behaviour would be, there may be a driving without due care and attention type offence involved.

coylemj wrote: »

If there was no other traffic at the junction, there is no obligation to proceed, you can sit there all day if you please. The green light says that you may proceed if the way is clear, it does not place an obligation on you to move. Unless you are blocking other traffic and causing an obstruction in which case you would be guilty of an offence (S.98 RTA) with or without traffic lights.

Even if delaying other vehicles, I think such a charge would be difficult, unless delaying extends to preventing.

If it goes to preventing, there might also be public order type issues.

I love Sean nos

Victor wrote: »

There may be a driving without due care and attention type offence involved.

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving. I'm paying full attention to my surrounding, I'm just not overtly acting.

flazio

If it's a case that if the way you want to go is blocked (Example, long queue at the next lights has backed up as far as the lights you're at) then you are absolutely within your rights to hold position. In fact if you get stuck obstructing the route when another side goes green you could be in even more trouble.

Victor

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving. I'm paying full attention to my surrounding, I'm just not overtly acting.

You do realise that, without good excuse, this will make you look like you're on drugs? Or having a 'moment'?

I love Sean nos

coylemj wrote: »

If there was no other traffic at the junction, there is no obligation to proceed, you can sit there all day if you please. The green light says that you may proceed if the way is clear, it does not place an obligation on you to move. Unless you are blocking other traffic and causing an obstruction in which case you would be guilty of an offence (S.98 RTA) with or without traffic lights.

So if someone stalls an engine, they're committing an offence? Is there a time limit for the obstruction?

wil

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving. I'm paying full attention to my surrounding, I'm just not overtly acting.

Then a Garda would likely have good reason to suspect you are under the influence and proceed accordingly.

alan partridge aha

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Just a hypothetical. I'm in my car and stopped at a red light. It could be any red light, but for now let's assume that it's a crossroads.

The light goes green, but I don't move off. Has an offence been committed?

To clarify, I'm not impaired and I'm paying attention. I'm not doing anything else. I know that the light has changed, I'm just not reacting to it.

Are you drunk???

allthedoyles

You do not have to proceed , but if there is traffic behind you , then you must give them hand signals immediately the lights turn green .( i mean circular motion with your right hand out the window )

I love Sean nos

Victor wrote: »

You do realise that, without good excuse, this will make you look like you're on drugs? Or having a 'moment'?

Well, they have roadside tests for alcohol and drugs now. Happy to take one or both. They will show clear in this scenario, as stated in the OP.

'Having a moment' is less defined. Is it illegal?

wil

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving. I'm paying full attention to my surrounding, I'm just not overtly acting.

You may also be liable for parking offences

I love Sean nos

alan partridge aha wrote: »

Are you drunk???

Now? No.

In the hypothetical scenario described? No.

Victor

I love Sean nos wrote: »

'Having a moment' is less defined. Is it illegal?

Having a moment isn't illegal. Any associated behaviours may be. It would suggest being unfit to drive.

coylemj

Victor wrote: »

Given how ususual the behaviour would be, there may be a driving without due care and attention type offence involved.

You can't be guilty of careless driving while sitting in a stationary car.

OP is asking a simple question - do you have to drive off when the light goes green. I say that if there is is nobody else about, the answer is 'no'.

Victor wrote: »

Having a moment isn't illegal. Any associated behaviours may be. It would suggest being unfit to drive.

Now we've drifted from road traffic legislation into psychoanalysis?

joebloggs32

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Just a hypothetical. I'm in my car and stopped at a red light. It could be any red light, but for now let's assume that it's a crossroads.

The light goes green, but I don't move off. Has an offence been committed?

To clarify, I'm not impaired and I'm paying attention. I'm not doing anything else. I know that the light has changed, I'm just not reacting to it.

The zoo must have been at the other side of the cross roads!

Victor

coylemj wrote: »

You can't be guilty of careless driving while sitting in a stationary car.

Try that excuse on the M50 at rush hour.

Are Am Eye

Driving includes "managing or controlling" - s3 interpr

Samuel T. Cogley

I love Sean nos wrote: »

So if someone stalls an engine, they're committing an offence? Is there a time limit for the obstruction?

One needs to looks at basic principles here - there is a mens rea requirement for criminal offences. This (IMHO) if often overlooked by people expecting precise definitions in criminal law.

I expect you'll like Fagan v MPC OP, have a google.

SVJKarate

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving.

No, stopping your car without due cause (or failing to advance it without good cause) is not being careful, because your duty of care is to make progress on the road. If you have stopped the car while in a driving lane you must have reasonable cause for doing so, otherwise it is an obstruction to other traffic.

SVJKarate

coylemj wrote: »

You can't be guilty of careless driving while sitting in a stationary car.

You can be charged under the Road Traffic Act though, which I think is what Op was asking?

Sleeper12

I love Sean nos wrote:

But perhaps I'm not proceeding because I'm being cautious.

Just sitting there being cautious on a clear road won't wash.
Gardai will think that it's as likely that you are deliberately trying to annoy the driver behind you.

Fieldsman

Sean Nos are you one those Sean Nos drivers who when the lights turn green you wait there expecting they'll turn greener

Senna

Yes you can get charged with driving without due care and attention. It cover all road scen

I love Sean nos

joebloggs32 wrote: »

The zoo must have been at the other side of the cross roads!

Oh aha. Aha ha ha. I see what you did there. Unfortunately your reading comprehension is even less potent than your humour. It's a hypothetical situation, as described in the very 1st sentence.

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Just a hypothetical.

Those 3 months of holidays must addle the mind. :rolleyes:

tedpan

What Mod deletion/B]is the point of this thread. Is it a wind up??

I love Sean nos

tedpan wrote: »

What is the point of this thread. Is it a wind up??

No, it's a question regarding a hypothetical legal scenario posted in the Legal Discussion forum.

Are Am Eye

I was going to make this post this morning.
But I decided to wait till now.
Because. Ha.

joebloggs32

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Oh aha. Aha ha ha. I see what you did there. Unfortunately your reading comprehension is even less potent than your humour. It's a hypothetical situation, as described in the very 1st sentence.



Those 3 months of holidays must addle the mind. :rolleyes:

Yes, plenty of time to bring my kids to the zoo and many other places that will give them great joy.

As a matter of interest, seeing as this thread was just a "hypothetical" question, what exactly did you get penalty points for yesterday?

I love Sean nos

joebloggs32 wrote: »

what exactly did you get penalty points for yesterday?

From that thread:

I love Sean nos wrote: »

speeding fine.

Reading just isn't your thing obviously. :rolleyes:

joebloggs32

I love Sean nos wrote: »

From that thread:



Reading just isn't your thing obviously. :rolleyes:

That other thread is TLDR.

Indricotherium

I love Sean nos wrote: »

No, it's a question regarding a hypothetical legal scenario posted in the Legal Discussion forum.

The answer to th OP is an obvious yes.


RTA 1961 $98 :

98.—(1) A person shall not do any act (whether of commission or omission) which causes or is likely to cause traffic through any public place to be obstructed.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

AlekSmart

Fieldsman wrote: »

Sean Nos are you one those Sean Nos drivers who when the lights turn green you wait there expecting they'll turn greener

A species oft to be found at the Junction of Leeson St and Appian Way outbound.

The junction is controlled by set of signals with combinations of Green Straight Ahead Arrow or Full Green or Right Turn Green Arrow.

The usual phasing is that Outbound Traffic wishing to turn right,into Appian Way,will remain stopped at the Full Green....even when NO conflicting City Bound Traffic is present,whilst they await the Green Right Turn Arrow which always comes after the Full Green reverts to Amber and finally Red (:eek: except,when it does'nt :eek:!!)

When the Green Right Turn Arrow fails to illuminate,the requirement to display Caution evaporates in a puff of crimson smoke,and the Ultra-Cautious suddenly get all mens rea-ish,as they now ignore the FULL RED LIGHT, in the haste to carve a path through Traffic Now turning right,on a Green Light from Appian Way,...although,occasionally an Ultra-Cautious driver may find themselves on Appian Way turing right also....which can be a Godsend for the outbound Ultra Cautious driver....if yiz get my drift ???

An hour or so spent observing the ultra-cautious shenannigans,from a fold-up chair or shooting-stick,is time very well spent ....

Occasionally,when lost in observational intent,I wonder if the late Thom McGinty (The Diceman) has returned to us,reincarnated as a driver...an Ultra Cautious driver.....He would have been great at that

kravmaga

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving. I'm paying full attention to my surrounding, I'm just not overtly acting.

I would say a green light is proceed with caution as per the road traffic act

Are you having a meltdown then or what or maybe under the influence of an intoxicant perhaps??

Then that would be an offence.

Whats the point of your post in the first instance, what are you looking for here

Homer

Mod. Offensive remark deleted. Be nice here, pls

Samuel T. Cogley

To be fair. OP has asked a legal question to start a legal discussion. It's on motoring so as per usual people you never otherwise see pitch up - don't get me wrong happy to see more people turn up for a discussion - and we start meandering around things. The nature of the forum requires true hypothetical so it's not entirely unexpected when someone has actually read the charter and actually submits one.

Mod
Well said
Agreed, nuac

Grolschevik

Hmm. It could be interesting to expand the hypothetical to explore the blocking of progress/traffic etc by a sit-down protest...

Peregrinus

Grolschevik wrote: »

Hmm. It could be interesting to expand the hypothetical to explore the blocking of progress/traffic etc by a sit-down protest...

Don't know how much interest it will generate, TBH. I don;'t know that there's a lot to discuss. That's clearly an offence - specifically, it's the offence cited by Indricotherium in post #35.

Protests of this kind are an act of civil disobedience, and the protesters are generally aware of this, and aware of the risk of arrest and charge. Indeed, they may welcome being arrested, since it will tend to attract more attention to the protest, and so to the grievance over which they are protesting .

I love Sean nos

joebloggs32 wrote: »

That other thread is TLDR.

You managed obviously to pick up some of it, but the detail escaped you, with the end result being nothing of consequence. :rolleyes:

GM228

Another thing to consider is illegal parking, by not moving the vehicle you could be considered parked OP and depending on the location (especially within 5 metres of a crossroad) that charge may by far be the easiest for a Guard to bring.

I love Sean nos

GM228 wrote: »

Another thing to consider is illegal parking, by not moving the vehicle you could be considered parked OP and depending on the location (especially within 5 metres of a crossroad) that charge may by far be the easiest for a Guard to bring.

That was mentioned earlier in the thread. What conditions have to be satisfied for a stationary vehicle to be considered parked?

GM228

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That was mentioned earlier in the thread. What conditions have to be satisfied for a stationary vehicle to be considered parked?

Simply that you keep the vehicle stationary.

Tombo2001

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm being extremely careful. So careful that I'm not moving. I'm paying full attention to my surrounding, I'm just not overtly acting.

If you are being that careful, why did you get into the car in the first place.....these are very hypothetical scenarios - I cant imagine a real life situation that matches it.

GM228

Tombo2001 wrote: »

If you are being that careful, why did you get into the car in the first place.....these are very hypothetical scenarios - I cant imagine a real life situation that matches it.

You'd be surprised what happens on our roads.

Victor

Of course 'is it safe to proceed?' would be a legitimate consideration.

GM228 wrote: »

Simply that you keep the vehicle stationary.

You would have to not be in traffic.

Parking more that 450mm(?) from edge of road is an offence.

GM228

Victor wrote: »

You would have to not be in traffic.

Of course, but with a green light, nothing in front of you and it's safe to proceed traffic isn't an issue.

Victor wrote: »

Parking more that 450mm(?) from edge of road is an offence.

No distance based offence from edge of road.

I love Sean nos

I've been asked several times if I have been drinking in this scenario, so here's a summary of relative statements in this thread.

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To clarify, I'm not impaired

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Well, they have roadside tests for alcohol and drugs now. Happy to take one or both. They will show clear in this scenario, as stated in the OP.

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Now? No.

In the hypothetical scenario described? No.

Hopefully this question can now be considered answered.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

If you are being that careful, why did you get into the car in the first place.....these are very hypothetical scenarios - I cant imagine a real life situation that matches it.

I'm surprised to be asked this question by you. It's a hypothetical, but what prompted me to ask the question was my experience with Kilshane Cross. I've been using Kilshane Cross for approximately 10 years now and from all 4 directions. It has always been a junction that requires caution due to the amount of amber gambling and significant blatant red light jumping at quite high speed. However, I've had cause recently to approach from the N2 northbound/Coldwinters direction recently and after I'm shown the green right turn arrow, I have to stay behind the line due to the amount of traffic still turning right at pace from the Blanchardstown direction. I'd normally be off the line on green like a greyhound out of a trap, but if I even moved forward on green in those first few seconds, I'd likely have a tipper truck stuck through my left front quarter.

That's what has prompted my question.