Breaking Red Lights

magpie

Breaking red lights is bad. Its illegal and causes accidents. Let's put an end to it. Your suggestions please.

Johnmb

Put an end to it by using common sense with them and having those on roads that are not busy outside of peak time flash amber instead of red.

Dan_B

The problem with traffic lights in this country is that there are just to many of them. The sequences on them are usually poor as well which just adds to motorists frustration. I don't condone breaking red lights or amber gambling but I do understand why people do it.

magpie

By contrast, see some of the opinions here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=228458

MrPudding

magpie wrote:

By contrast, see some of the opinions here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=228458

What do you mean by "by contrast?"

No one here is really saying anything different to those in the other post. No one here is suggesting that drivers need an "extra" reminder that running red lights is bad.

Most of the opinions that you disagree with in the other post relate to the fact that most people with normal IQ see to be aware that you are supposed to stop at a red light and if someone insists on running red lights it is not because they do not realise they are supposed to stop, it is simply that they choose not to stop.

You have stated that you think extra signage should be used. I, like most other people, believe that if you do not realise you are supposed to stop at a red light you should not be given extra special please stop signs, you should be fined and taken off the road.

I really don't see how you can't understand this.

MrP

AMurphy

magpie wrote:

Breaking red lights is bad. Its illegal and causes accidents. Let's put an end to it. Your suggestions please.

Breaking/running them at speed icertainly is bad carma.

However, the lights themselves could do with some improvement.

Lights that do not respond to the traffic demands are a PITB. ie you are sitting on a light at nonpeak time, nothi in the cross direction fro miles and you sit and sit and your beard needs trimming, and you wait....... well till you break it. You are about 2 miles away when you see it change in yor rear mirror.
Time and synch lights in a manner that makes sense for the time of day and traffic pattern.
turn them to 4 way stops signs when not strictly needed for traffic flow.

I'm not sure of the current timing situation, but I found the Yellow in ROI to be too short, even if you are dong the speed limit.
Again, I'm not sure of the current situation, but there appeared to be no Red overlap. ie, the lights are red in all directions for a second or so, just so as to clear the runners before letting the cross traffic go. On the lights I checked, the Red & Green were simultaneously switched in the cross directions.

I found the light diameters too small for the traffic conditions and often difficult to see. ie the brake lights on a tricked out Civic are larger and brighter.

If you are at the light, do not assume that the cross traffic will stop, unless it is already stopped.

Make it legal to turn into the cross traffic on red, be it right or left, depending on which way the cross traffic is headed. ie treat the Red as a STOP sign.

Interesting light I have come across here.
The lights are linked to a speed radar system. If you hold the limit, they will remain green or run a normal cycle. If you over-speed they will go red in response to your speeding.

mike65

I broke a red at 80 kph last Thursday!!!! It was on the road between Abbeyfeale and Listowel, they were temporay on a straight where the hazard was about the width of a lane (JCB digging out trench on left hand side) and the length of a house. Why the f*&k they had lights there for beats me.

Mike.

AMurphy

While I don't consider those items the main topic of discussion, I have seen the KCC screw up traffic completely with some.
One wet day in August, peak tourist season, they decide to rip up the main street of Milltown, (Little village between Killorglin and Tralee).
So they set up their lights at opposite ends of the village, so it is impossible to see one end from the other. ripped up the street, then dissappeared into the caravan for the day, leaving he lights unattended. As well, the lights )or the lights programmer) lacked even the crudest of planning.
Morning time there was a line of traffic for 5 miles to the west and nothing bu the odd cow coming from the East.
Evening time the same line backed up at the East side and the same cow coming the opposite way......

Have you ever felt like taking some abandoned shovels and putting them to good use..... cracking skulls.

it must be a KCC plot.

magpie

By 'in contrast' I mean here are a bunch of reactionary militants who can't understand the difference between taking preventive measures at specific junctions and condoning light breaking at all others.

You've also demonstrated the contrast nicely by the bombastic, ranting, aggressive and accusatory tone than normally accompanies your posts. I just thought it would be nice to get the views of motorists on this, which, in contrast to the public transport lobby seem quite reasonable, at least in their delivery.

No one here is really saying anything different to those in the other post. No one here is suggesting that drivers need an "extra" reminder that running red lights is bad.

Of course they're not. This is a different topic, hence different thread. Perhaps if we were discussing luas junctions they would be, but we're not. Let me explain it to you in simple terms:

OTHER POST: About luas crashing into cars, and possible solutions. e.g. extra sigsn/cameras at specific junctions
THIS POST: About how to stop people breaking lights in general, e.g. changing mentality, changing light settings, attaining godhead and universal peace

If you really can't see the difference ask someone else to explain it to you.

Microcosm/Macrocosm. Big Picture/Little Picture. Specific/General. This is really Sesame Street stuff we're dealing with.

edmund_f

my suggestion?

use the 'turn left (right) on red' as they use in the states,

i would love to see them try to introduce the 4 way stop here, suppose that is why the roundabouts are so popular, at least if you run a roundabout there is a better chance of the person travelling at a slower speed when they crash into you.

seems that the national safety council are doing a good job, lets not reduce the number of accidents, just reduce the severity of them....

BrianD

Johnmb wrote:

Put an end to it by using common sense with them and having those on roads that are not busy outside of peak time flash amber instead of red.

Would make little or no difference to the problem.

Johnmb

BrianD wrote:

Would make little or no difference to the problem.

Yes it would, it would mean that red lights would not have to be jumped due to the stupidity of them. The majority of red lights that I have seen been jumped are the ones that shouldn't be there, and they are the only ones that I ignore. Once the peak time rush has ended, there are many lights that no longer serve a purpose, the technology exists and is very cheap to have those lights simply switch to flashing amber and act like a yield sign, which is all that is needed for many of those junctions outside of rush hour. They should also place more feeder lights on junctions. There are many junctions around where a left turn feeder light should be applied, as it is safe for cars to turn left, but instead they have to wait until it is safe for right turning cars to proceed before they can move.

mackerski

edmund_f wrote:

use the 'turn left (right) on red' as they use in the states,

Can't. Not without changing the way pedestrian lights operate here.

Dermot

MrPudding

magpie wrote:

By 'in contrast' I mean here are a bunch of reactionary militants who can't understand the difference between taking preventive measures at specific junctions and condoning light breaking at all others.

If by reactionary militant you mean someone that believes a person in charge of a vehicle on public roads should already know that they are supposed to stop at a red light without additional signage informing them that they may be prosecuted for running said light, then yes. Guilty.

magpie wrote:

You've also demonstrated the contrast nicely by the bombastic, ranting, aggressive and accusatory tone than normally accompanies your posts. I just thought it would be nice to get the views of motorists on this, which, in contrast to the public transport lobby seem quite reasonable, at least in their delivery.

Well, I find some of you posts do irritate me slightly and this may effect the tone of my responses. But then you are not exactly innocent of this yourself.

magpie wrote:

Of course they're not. This is a different topic, hence different thread. Perhaps if we were discussing luas junctions they would be, but we're not. Let me explain it to you in simple terms:

OTHER POST: About luas crashing into cars, and possible solutions. e.g. extra sigsn/cameras at specific junctions

THIS POST: About how to stop people breaking lights in general, e.g. changing mentality, changing light settings, attaining godhead and universal peace

If you really can't see the difference ask someone else to explain it to you.

Can you not see that while the topics may be different the root cause is the same. Running red lights. I don’t need anyone to explain it to me. I red light runners were prosecuted for running the lights they would be less likely to do it. How many of us have seen the police watch people running lights and not do anything? When there only seems to be an upside to running a red light, less time waiting, people will continue to do it. We need to introduce some pain.

magpie wrote:

Microcosm/Macrocosm. Big Picture/Little Picture. Specific/General. This is really Sesame Street stuff we're dealing with.

You see here we are. You complain that I can be aggressive in my post. How am I supposed to react to this. My first reaction to it is offence. You post appears to be insulting me personally. To me you appear to be a complete prick, this may not be the case but when you post like this I can’t help but get this feeling.

Apparently the left on red would not work in Ireland due to the number of pedestrian crossings we have. In the states, apparently, there are a lot less so it not so much of an issue. I always thought that an expansion of the left with caution might work better in our situation. In this case the light would only be red for the duration of time where the pedestrian has a green light to cross. Once this time is up the signal changes to the flashing amber for vehicular traffic.

But, at the end of the day, even if we introduced this and no lights at off peak and all the other good and not so good ideas it will always come down to the same thing. At some point there will be red lights and some people will feel they have an right and a need to drive through them. I firmly believe that they will still do it. Whether they risk hitting a pedestrian, a cyclist, another vehicle or even a tram. I think that until drivers start to see other drivers being fined, getting penalty points and being banned from driving there will be no improvement in adhering to this particular law.

Magpie makes a distinction between normal lights and lights at a Luas junction. He believes that additional signage should be placed at these junctions to warn driver that they have to stop at red lights or they will be prosecuted. I believe that someone that needs an extra sign to remind them to stop at a red light should not even be on the road. I think it would be wrong to single out particular junctions, we need to get drivers to believe that running any red light is wrong and you will have a good chance of being prosecuted.

I have no problem with identifying particular junctions where you feel that running lights is a particular problem. I say out cameras there, don’t stick up loads of signs though. Catch the pricks running the lights, fine them and if they persist ban them. Simple. If they are off the road they will not break any red lights. Job done.

MrP

Pataman

my 2c worth. Why cant we have a system as in UK. Amber warning of red light to change to green, therefore people not as lightly to break red lights as the crossing traffic is ready to go.

MrPudding

We can't have that exactly because people break the red lights. The powers that be feel there woul dbe too many accidents.

MrP

mackerski

Pataman wrote:

my 2c worth. Why cant we have a system as in UK. Amber warning of red light to change to green, therefore people not as lightly to break red lights as the crossing traffic is ready to go.

The same reason we can't have European-style, triangular warning signs or the red-with-white-stripe no-entry sign. The Brits do it that way...

Dermot

mike65

Traffic lights and the attendant pedestrian lights are designed (as much as possible) to circumvent the lowest common denominator drivers/foot soldiers out there which is why it takes so fupping long to change over the pedestrian crossing lights to red and the traffic lights to green.

If we were well trained and disciplined everything could happen faster.

Mike.

edmund_f

minor point mike ..

what about all the older people,i.e. 60-70 plus who do actually take the full time to cross the road?. As far as i know these timings are done pretty scientificaly.. all you need to do is reduce the time of the peds lights, add a person with a walking stick + boy racer (not car modifer) and you will end up with another statistic.

(and to all)

Personally think this country has a lot more serious problems to sort before we can pride ourselves on breaking red lights being the most serious road violation out there. Personally i would vote for some level of actual driving training?

(going to go and hide now)

mike65

edmund_f wrote:

minor point mike ..

what about all the older people,i.e. 60-70 plus who do actually take the full time to cross the road?. As far as i know these timings are done pretty scientificaly.. all you need to do is reduce the time of the peds lights, add a person with a walking stick + boy racer (not car modifer) and you will end up with another statistic.

Old ppl should be bussed to the shopping centre where they can potter about all bloody day, drinking cups of tea and bumping into ppl they thought had died a year or two back.

Oops, I seem to have hit the Interceptor button. Luckily it was set to only Mach 1

Mike.

edmund_f

yes, why did the old person cross the road?

Our man in Havana

edmund_f wrote:

yes, why did the old person cross the road?

Is that a retorical question?

AMurphy

Pataman wrote:

my 2c worth. Why cant we have a system as in UK. Amber warning of red light to change to green, therefore people not as lightly to break red lights as the crossing traffic is ready to go.

WEll, if it is interpreted as in China, the RED/AMBER does not mean "get ready to go" but "GO", so the traffic is already moving BEFORE the cross craffic has cleared or stopped.

Pataman

MrPudding wrote:

We can't have that exactly because people break the red lights. The powers that be feel there woul dbe too many accidents.

MrP

Isnt that the idea, to get rid of light jumpers. If it was announced that from x date, like the kmh changeover, all lights would be changed to the same as the UK system, people would stop breaking them. How could they be sure if it was a new style or unchanged style of light. I am fairly sure people would change overnight.

MrPudding

Pataman wrote:

Isnt that the idea, to get rid of light jumpers. If it was announced that from x date, like the kmh changeover, all lights would be changed to the same as the UK system, people would stop breaking them. How could they be sure if it was a new style or unchanged style of light. I am fairly sure people would change overnight.

Believe me, I agree with you. I think a good t-boning would be great to stop people running red lights. Unfortunately the powers that be do not agree. The DCC guy in charge of traffic was on the right hook and someone put the idea forward. He agreed that it would speed up traffic flow, this was why it was suggested. He also said that it would never happen because of the number of accidents that would happen as a result.

This annoys me, this is something that would actually speed up traffic flow and possibly make a lot of peoples lives a tiny tiny bit better. But, because of assholes that think their time is more valuable than everyone elses they cannot introduce the measure.

MrP

magpie

But, because of assholes that think their time is more valuable than everyone elses they cannot introduce the measure.

Or possibly they don't take the darwinist approach that you are set on as they have considered the possibility that innocent people as well as the 'guilty' might get killed during the learning phase of 't-boning' as you put it?

Surely ther must be a way of solving this that does not involve a learning phase of pile-ups and/or fine in the post. Perhaps some kind of preventive measure? A way of warning people to impove their light discipline? If only there was a way to do that....

edmund_f

magpie wrote:

If only there was a way to do that....

sure it will be added to the list of point offences soon enough, will be another nice handy cash earner for the cops..

MrPudding

magpie wrote:

If only there was a way to do that....

I actually agree with you here I think you have a point! The question is how would we do it? Tough one. I think I have it. We could introduce a system of rules that govern how we should behave on the road. We could call them “rules of how to behave on the road”, no too long. How about just “rules of the road.” Stopping at red light could be one of these rules. Then we could have people that teach other people to drive. They could teach these rule of the road and other driving skills. We could call them driving instructors. We could then test people on this knowledge and their skills.

Actually I thought it would be difficult but it is quite simple. We just develop rules of the road and require that everyone on the road read them. This way there will be no excuse for not knowing you are supposed to stop at a red light and there will be no need for spending extra money giving people signs to tell them they need to stop at red lights! They will already know this or else they should not be on the roads. Simple.

MrP

Danno

If I had my way, Id get a hurl and smash every fugging traffic light in this c*untry.

Reason: Abbeyleix most evenings.

Solution: Bypass the fugging place. Like with all the money we pay through the nose on Car Tax, Motor Insurance, PAYE, VAT, PRSI...

The govt is loaded and won't get up off their arses and do something. Usless shower dem fcuks

magpie

I actually agree with you here I think you have a point! The question is how would we do it? Tough one. I think I have it. We could introduce a system of rules that govern how we should behave on the road. We could call them “rules of how to behave on the road”, no too long. How about just “rules of the road.” Stopping at red light could be one of these rules. Then we could have people that teach other people to drive. They could teach these rule of the road and other driving skills. We could call them driving instructors. We could then test people on this knowledge and their skills.

Actually I thought it would be difficult but it is quite simple. We just develop rules of the road and require that everyone on the road read them. This way there will be no excuse for not knowing you are supposed to stop at a red light and there will be no need for spending extra money giving people signs to tell them they need to stop at red lights! They will already know this or else they should not be on the roads. Simple.

Chicken/Egg

MrPudding

magpie wrote:

Chicken/Egg

You see this is the bit that get me. Are you actually trying to argue that some people do not know that they are supposed to stop at red lights?

MrP