This road law is often ignored

Firestone Discussion
,
1

In the county, I see little to no drivers yield when turning right on a red light.

This is the safe way to do it:

1. Come to a complete stop at the red light.
2. Look left, then right, and left again. (By moving your camera)
3. Wait for any motorists that have a green light to pass you. Once the motorist(s) pass you or if there is no motorists that have priority, you can proceed to turn right. Same thing for pedestrians using the cross walks.

Now, this is the same concept of yielding. Though, you are not yielding as in pulling over for emergency vehicles that are en-route to an emergency. (That law isn’t followed by motorists either.)

In this case, you are yielding for motorists that have priority over you on the road.

You may look at the title of this post and state that there is no law for this.

Which is why this legislation should be official law: A Bill to Redefine 'Running a Red Light'

In the bill to redefine running a red light, it states:

“Drivers shall be mandated to stop at any red light for a minimum of three seconds before turning right onto the new road. Any individual using a vehicle that drives through an intersection, road, street, turns right on red without stopping, etc, when a red light appears on a traffic light shall be charged with Running a Red Light.”

Most recently, there was a bunch of drama involving Sheriff Straphos for this very reason.

It should be a hefty fine for failing to yield at a stop light or failure to come to a complete stop at a stop light. And the reason being because this will cause accidents, and fingers will be pointed.

So this bill should become official law or a new bill should be proposed if this one has failed.

You would think that we wouldn’t need a bill for this because it is common sense. But we all know not all motorists have common sense.

~ CertifiedLaw

1 Like
2

So your solution to a law that isn’t properly enforced is just just make it more of a law, great thinking bud I’m sure that will work.

2 Likes
3

We all know the road laws.

You think we’re gonna follow that shit?

LMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

1 Like
4

If the bill to redefine running a red light would pass, then that’d be a good official law reference to this situation. But as we discuss about a problem waiting to happen on the road, that jeopardizes the safety of motorists, it should be made more aware to the public.

I don’t have a solution to making every driver have regards to the safety of other motorists.

What’s your solution?

1 Like
5

My solutions to problems usually involve death, so we’ll avoid that. But when I jump into a full server at least a 1/3 of it is just idiots doing donuts in the middle of intersections, that’s why the cops can’t bother with people who do a California Stop (that and the mass shooting, hostages situations, and fights that occur every minute), adding a hrasher penalty doesn’t stop noobs from joining the game, or elite reckless drivers who think they’re criminals. And honestly, it’s pretty rare I see someone cause an actual collision by doing a California Stop.

2 Likes
6

Well, we both know cops can’t be everywhere 24/7. We got that part. It’s not just about law enforcement enforcing this law, but that motorists are aware of it and know what to do when turning right on a red light, or as you call it, a California stop. Though, you say it is rare for collisions to happen because of a California stop, but what if a collision does happen?

Both would motorists would point fingers and the next thing you know they’re suing each other.

I mean, look at the situation that involved Sheriff Straphos recently.

1 Like
7

The cours don’t accept any cases over rp collisions, and the DoJ won’t prosecute for them e.e

1 Like
8

Considering the scenario of a motorist that’s about to turn right on red does not yield to a citizen crossing on the crosswalk. The citizen gets ran over and the motorist keeps driving. Then the lawsuit is hit and run.

  • The motorist could’ve intentionally hit the citizen
  • The motorist could’ve have been distracted and not have seen the pedestrian

So regardless if the courts take this lawsuit or not, there should be some public clarification on who has priority on the road. And that would mean having legislation that clarifies this law.

And I was in FSP, SCSO, DHS, etc. so I know there are some individuals that try to follow the law. So having straightforward reference would be nice for them.

Danny, as you would see it, it’s like the offense of speeding. There is a law against speeding. But cops can’t be everywhere to enforce it. Because of those mass shootings, hostage situations, and fights that occur every minute.

But because there’s a rule of no speeding, and the result is you will receive a citation if you do speed. 1/3 of individuals will not speed. And I believe it will be the same thing with the California stop.

1 Like
9

The only people who don’t speed are the people who have cars incapable of going over the speed limit. I go 10 miles over almost always, as do most. Hell, going 60 in 50 going to FSP a cop was able to pass me.

1 Like
10

Seems as though it’s okay to speed when you put it like that. But back to the point, I was trying to get you to see that when there is an official law that says you cannot do such. Those that want to follow the law will understand they cannot do such, or you will be arrested/cited.

Yeah, very few people want to follow official law, I know that.

1 Like
11

I don’t think you understand the most important philosophy within jurisprudence: the only way law works is if the vast majority of the population obeys it, that’s why people usually don’t care if you’re speeding unless you’re going like 15+ mph over (irl). If the majority of people aren’t willing to obey a law, it’s unenforceable.

1 Like
12

Well, knowing it’s unenforceable, it’d be a free for all. But I see what you’re saying, yes, if the majority of people won’t obey the law, it cannot be enforced/controlled. At that point, there would be no need for laws. But laws are meant to keep people safe. And the safety of motorists and pedestrians is what I seek. But it’s not as big of a deal as a mass shooting or a hostage situation is. But if you look at the incident involving Straphos you will see how big of a deal that was. The law can at least be informative.

1 Like
13

Just abolish traffic laws and the county will be fine… :roll_eyes:

1 Like
14

Might as well.

1 Like
15

Jaywalking is most commonly ignored.

16

One day there were like 4 people injured across RW due to jaywalking

17

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.