Who's at fault here? Driving discussion (1 Viewer)

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

mr roboto said:

I hit a guy who did this. I was coming up to a red light and was slowing down. Light turned gree when I was doing like 25 mph and about 500 ft from the light. The turn lanes in my scenario turn to red so no turn on simple green.

A guy ran the red arrow and turned in front of me. I was plenty of distance away so he completed his turn about 1 second before I got into the intersection. As I got into the intersection (going prob 25) the guy BEHIND the truck that blew the red arrow (and had completely turned in front of me) went for it. I never saw him flying up the turn lane and nailed his front right bumper (he was at a 45 when I hit him and was ####### flying). Totaled my Escape. He was driving a Silverado.

Cops didn't declare fault. They couldn't understand why I was traveling into the intersection at that speed if I saw the previous cars turning illegally. But I hadn't been stopped at the red. I was traveling with speed when the light turned green and I timed my entry based on the one turner.

Click to expand...

sbonomo said:

mr roboto said:

I hit a guy who did this. I was coming up to a red light and was slowing down. Light turned gree when I was doing like 25 mph and about 500 ft from the light. The turn lanes in my scenario turn to red so no turn on simple green.

A guy ran the red arrow and turned in front of me. I was plenty of distance away so he completed his turn about 1 second before I got into the intersection. As I got into the intersection (going prob 25) the guy BEHIND the truck that blew the red arrow (and had completely turned in front of me) went for it. I never saw him flying up the turn lane and nailed his front right bumper (he was at a 45 when I hit him and was ####### flying). Totaled my Escape. He was driving a Silverado.

Cops didn't declare fault. They couldn't understand why I was traveling into the intersection at that speed if I saw the previous cars turning illegally. But I hadn't been stopped at the red. I was traveling with speed when the light turned green and I timed my entry based on the one turner.

Click to expand...

so you hit the intersection 25 right when or very shortly after the light changed. Sound like this is a no fault to me as well. What happens if you miss time this, would you be on your brakes avoiding the car turning left. Yes it is a Richard move going after the arrow. Hitting a car turning when you should have been proceeding cautiously is also a Richard move...unless the guy you hit was way behind the car in front of home sounds like you got what you deserved for driving so aggressively.

Click to expand...

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Cjw_55106 said:

So what you are essentially saying is, the northbound car hit the turning car on purpose. If that is the case, I find it hard to believe they are not at fault regardless of right of way.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light (been green for at least 5 seconds) and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

Reegus said:

So u guys are telling me I can just start turning whenever I want and the northbound car would be at fault. I'm going to start doing this.

Click to expand...

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

belljr said:

my #### move when I had my truck was as soon as I got green I would go but would stop in the intersection just near the turning car

Click to expand...

Walking Boot said:

Yankee23Fan said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light (been green for at least 5 seconds) and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

The northbound car. If one of the turning cars is already in the midst of the turn and in the intersection they have the right of way at that point. But it depends on a lot of specific facts you didn't give. If the northbound car hit the turning car in the passenger door, fault is with the northbound car. If they hit head on, it's going to be interesting. IF the turning car hit the northbound car in the driver side door the turning car is going to be at fault. And yes the insurance companies will have a field day with this.

Click to expand...

Yeah. A lot of variables left out.

Obviously, the car turning left can't just stay in the middle of the intersection if he's already entered it. He's got to clear it eventually.

If the northbound car hit any part of the side of the turning car, northbound car is "more" at fault because he had the easier option to avoid the collision... waiting until traffic was clear.

Reegus said:

So u guys are telling me I can just start turning whenever I want and the northbound car would be at fault. I'm going to start doing this.

Click to expand...

"Green" doesn't mean floor it as soon as the light comes on. Your path has to be clear first.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

Who's at fault here? Driving discussion

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

that's the visual here and the north driver clearly had the last chance to avoid the collision. His fault.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident.

Click to expand...

mr roboto said:

I hit a guy who did this. I was coming up to a red light and was slowing down. Light turned gree when I was doing like 25 mph and about 500 ft from the light. The turn lanes in my scenario turn to red so no turn on simple green.

A guy ran the red arrow and turned in front of me. I was plenty of distance away so he completed his turn about 1 second before I got into the intersection. As I got into the intersection (going prob 25) the guy BEHIND the truck that blew the red arrow (and had completely turned in front of me) went for it. I never saw him flying up the turn lane and nailed his front right bumper (he was at a 45 when I hit him and was ####### flying). Totaled my Escape. He was driving a Silverado.

Cops didn't declare fault. They couldn't understand why I was traveling into the intersection at that speed if I saw the previous cars turning illegally. But I hadn't been stopped at the red. I was traveling with speed when the light turned green and I timed my entry based on the one turner.

Click to expand...

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

that's the visual here and the north driver clearly had the last chance to avoid the collision. His fault.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident.

Click to expand...

Sure it is. That's the purpose of those laws that result in tickets. If you fail to follow them, you may cause an accident.

The driver violating the traffic laws is the cause of the accident. Had he not made an illegal left turn, then the accident does not occur. A driver obeying the traffic signals and not blocking traffic behind him would not be an intervening action breaking the chain of causation.

Otherwise, why wouldn't drivers who are right behind other drivers going through intersections just continue to go on red lights and when they need to yield? If you ride the ### of the driver in front of you, the drivers with the right of way will always have a car blocking their path and have the "last chance" to avoid an accident.

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

that's the visual here and the north driver clearly had the last chance to avoid the collision. His fault.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident.

Click to expand...

Sure it is. That's the purpose of those laws that result in tickets. If you fail to follow them, you may cause an accident.

The driver violating the traffic laws is the cause of the accident. Had he not made an illegal left turn, then the accident does not occur. A driver obeying the traffic signals and not blocking traffic behind him would not be an intervening action breaking the chain of causation.

Otherwise, why wouldn't drivers who are right behind other drivers going through intersections just continue to go on red lights and when they need to yield? If you ride the ### of the driver in front of you, the drivers with the right of way will always have a car blocking their path and have the "last chance" to avoid an accident.

Click to expand...

They do around here. It's a pain in the ### but I have yet to see one of these drivers get hit by another car who punches it as soon as they see green.

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

that's the visual here and the north driver clearly had the last chance to avoid the collision. His fault.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident.

Click to expand...

Sure it is. That's the purpose of those laws that result in tickets. If you fail to follow them, you may cause an accident.

The driver violating the traffic laws is the cause of the accident. Had he not made an illegal left turn, then the accident does not occur. A driver obeying the traffic signals and not blocking traffic behind him would not be an intervening action breaking the chain of causation.

Otherwise, why wouldn't drivers who are right behind other drivers going through intersections just continue to go on red lights and when they need to yield? If you ride the ### of the driver in front of you, the drivers with the right of way will always have a car blocking their path and have the "last chance" to avoid an accident.

Click to expand...

They do around here. It's a pain in the ### but I have yet to see one of these drivers get hit by another car who punches it as soon as they see green.

Click to expand...

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

that's the visual here and the north driver clearly had the last chance to avoid the collision. His fault.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident.

Click to expand...

Sure it is. That's the purpose of those laws that result in tickets. If you fail to follow them, you may cause an accident.

The driver violating the traffic laws is the cause of the accident. Had he not made an illegal left turn, then the accident does not occur. A driver obeying the traffic signals and not blocking traffic behind him would not be an intervening action breaking the chain of causation.

Otherwise, why wouldn't drivers who are right behind other drivers going through intersections just continue to go on red lights and when they need to yield? If you ride the ### of the driver in front of you, the drivers with the right of way will always have a car blocking their path and have the "last chance" to avoid an accident.

Click to expand...

They do around here. It's a pain in the ### but I have yet to see one of these drivers get hit by another car who punches it as soon as they see green.

Click to expand...

Just because they do it doesn't make it legal.

Click to expand...

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident

Click to expand...

Fat Nick said:

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

They are. If this ever happened to me, the only thing I would tell the officer is that I had a green light, and they turned right into my path whenI had the right-of-way. Period. That's it. The other guy can say whatever he wants about how fast I took off. He can't really deny the fact that he ran through the light because the officer could plainly see the order of sequence for the lights.

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident

Click to expand...

but an act being illegal doesn't make it the cause of the accident.

FWIW, I voted both are at fault. One should have yielded, the other should have not driven into the other car.

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

Fat Nick said:

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

They are. If this ever happened to me, the only thing I would tell the officer is that I had a green light, and they turned right into my path whenI had the right-of-way. Period. That's it. The other guy can say whatever he wants about how fast I took off. He can't really deny the fact that he ran through the light because the officer could plainly see the order of sequence for the lights.

Click to expand...

the cop isn't there, are the other witnesses going to give statements? Are you sure everyone will support your story when you're the only one who hit a car.

Click to expand...

Fat Nick said:

FUBAR said:

Fat Nick said:

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

They are. If this ever happened to me, the only thing I would tell the officer is that I had a green light, and they turned right into my path whenI had the right-of-way. Period. That's it. The other guy can say whatever he wants about how fast I took off. He can't really deny the fact that he ran through the light because the officer could plainly see the order of sequence for the lights.

Click to expand...

the cop isn't there, are the other witnesses going to give statements? Are you sure everyone will support your story when you're the only one who hit a car.

Click to expand...

How could anyone but the first car at the light hit a car?

Cops rarely witness accidents. Many accidents are not witnessed. I get what you're saying, but if you were a cop coming up on a scene where a car turning left was hit by a car going straight, who would you think would be at fault? Honestly. How many times does a car turning get hit by a car coming straight where it's the car going straight, with the right-of-way's fault?

Click to expand...

mr roboto said:

I hit a guy who did this. I was coming up to a red light and was slowing down. Light turned gree when I was doing like 25 mph and about 500 ft from the light. The turn lanes in my scenario turn to red so no turn on simple green.

A guy ran the red arrow and turned in front of me. I was plenty of distance away so he completed his turn about 1 second before I got into the intersection. As I got into the intersection (going prob 25) the guy BEHIND the truck that blew the red arrow (and had completely turned in front of me) went for it. I never saw him flying up the turn lane and nailed his front right bumper (he was at a 45 when I hit him and was ####### flying). Totaled my Escape. He was driving a Silverado.

Cops didn't declare fault. They couldn't understand why I was traveling into the intersection at that speed if I saw the previous cars turning illegally. But I hadn't been stopped at the red. I was traveling with speed when the light turned green and I timed my entry based on the one turner.

Click to expand...

Apple Jack said:

Cjw_55106 said:

So what you are essentially saying is, the northbound car hit the turning car on purpose. If that is the case, I find it hard to believe they are not at fault regardless of right of way.

Click to expand...

It's up to the car turning at that point to yield. He disregarded his obligation to yield and just went hoping that nobody would hit him. They're both #######s, but the turner should be at fault legally.

Click to expand...

Ignoramus said:

Apple Jack said:

Cjw_55106 said:

So what you are essentially saying is, the northbound car hit the turning car on purpose. If that is the case, I find it hard to believe they are not at fault regardless of right of way.

Click to expand...

It's up to the car turning at that point to yield. He disregarded his obligation to yield and just went hoping that nobody would hit him. They're both #######s, but the turner should be at fault legally.

Click to expand...

You can't just hit the turning car intentionally.What if he had started to make the turn when the light was green but his car stalled in the intersection? When the light turns are you allowed to plow into him because you have the green light?

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

GDogg said:

FUBAR said:

gianmarco said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Even if north driver is at a stop, sees the turning car, and intentionally plows into him just because he has the right of way?

Click to expand...

that's the visual here and the north driver clearly had the last chance to avoid the collision. His fault.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident.

Click to expand...

Sure it is. That's the purpose of those laws that result in tickets. If you fail to follow them, you may cause an accident.

The driver violating the traffic laws is the cause of the accident. Had he not made an illegal left turn, then the accident does not occur. A driver obeying the traffic signals and not blocking traffic behind him would not be an intervening action breaking the chain of causation.

Otherwise, why wouldn't drivers who are right behind other drivers going through intersections just continue to go on red lights and when they need to yield? If you ride the ### of the driver in front of you, the drivers with the right of way will always have a car blocking their path and have the "last chance" to avoid an accident.

Click to expand...

They do around here. It's a pain in the ### but I have yet to see one of these drivers get hit by another car who punches it as soon as they see green.

Click to expand...

Just because they do it doesn't make it legal.

Click to expand...

never said otherwise.

Doesn't excuse the dip#### turning when he should yield, but that's worthy of a ticket, not the cause of the accident

Click to expand...

but an act being illegal doesn't make it the cause of the accident.

FWIW, I voted both are at fault. One should have yielded, the other should have not driven into the other car.

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

Fat Nick said:

FUBAR said:

Fat Nick said:

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

They are. If this ever happened to me, the only thing I would tell the officer is that I had a green light, and they turned right into my path whenI had the right-of-way. Period. That's it. The other guy can say whatever he wants about how fast I took off. He can't really deny the fact that he ran through the light because the officer could plainly see the order of sequence for the lights.

Click to expand...

the cop isn't there, are the other witnesses going to give statements? Are you sure everyone will support your story when you're the only one who hit a car.

Click to expand...

How could anyone but the first car at the light hit a car?

Cops rarely witness accidents. Many accidents are not witnessed. I get what you're saying, but if you were a cop coming up on a scene where a car turning left was hit by a car going straight, who would you think would be at fault? Honestly. How many times does a car turning get hit by a car coming straight where it's the car going straight, with the right-of-way's fault?

Click to expand...

There are two lanes headed north.

Maybe there were only cars in that one northern lane but it sounds like there is more traffic, presumably there were cars in both lanes, only one of which went and hit the other car.

As for the cop - who would I think is at fault? Probably exactly what happened to our robot friend.

mr roboto said:

I hit a guy who did this. I was coming up to a red light and was slowing down. Light turned gree when I was doing like 25 mph and about 500 ft from the light. The turn lanes in my scenario turn to red so no turn on simple green.

A guy ran the red arrow and turned in front of me. I was plenty of distance away so he completed his turn about 1 second before I got into the intersection. As I got into the intersection (going prob 25) the guy BEHIND the truck that blew the red arrow (and had completely turned in front of me) went for it. I never saw him flying up the turn lane and nailed his front right bumper (he was at a 45 when I hit him and was ####### flying). Totaled my Escape. He was driving a Silverado.

Cops didn't declare fault. They couldn't understand why I was traveling into the intersection at that speed if I saw the previous cars turning illegally. But I hadn't been stopped at the red. I was traveling with speed when the light turned green and I timed my entry based on the one turner.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Homer J Simpson said:

gmbacm said:

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road. There are 2 lanes on each side for opposing traffic and there are 2 left turning lanes for each direction (effectively 4 lanes in each direction). The road runs north and south. There's a traffic light that has a green turn signal for the 2 left turn lanes. Once the green arrow is gone, it's a green light so that you can still turn but must yield to oncoming traffic.

Because the left turn arrow is relatively short, it's customary for the south bound traffic to continue to turn once it's gone from a green arrow to just a green light, usually an additional 4-5 cars while the north bound traffic has a green light. Because they are already stopped while waiting for the light to turn green, aside from some honking, the north bound cars have to wait until the additional train of cars turning left ends.

If one of those northbound cars just decided to go when it was green and hits one of the left turning vehicles, whose fault would it be? The northbound car has a green light and should be able to go but clearly sees there are turning vehicles. The southbound left turning vehicle should not have tried to continue to go as they should be yielding to oncoming traffic when they no longer have a green arrow.

Let's hear it.

Click to expand...

north has right of way. car turning left is at fault.

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

Click to expand...

FUBAR said:

Ignoramus said:

Apple Jack said:

Cjw_55106 said:

So what you are essentially saying is, the northbound car hit the turning car on purpose. If that is the case, I find it hard to believe they are not at fault regardless of right of way.

Click to expand...

It's up to the car turning at that point to yield. He disregarded his obligation to yield and just went hoping that nobody would hit him. They're both #######s, but the turner should be at fault legally.

Click to expand...

You can't just hit the turning car intentionally.What if he had started to make the turn when the light was green but his car stalled in the intersection? When the light turns are you allowed to plow into him because you have the green light?

Click to expand...

apparently if there was an elderly man crossing on the "Don't Walk" sign, it's okay to run him over.

but not the dog. always save the dog.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

Fat Nick said:

Bottom line is that, and I'll say it just to be clear, assuming you didn't intentionally hit him (gianmarco's hypothetical "playing chicken" scenario), it's likely going to be his fault because he was the one who had to yield.

Click to expand...

AhrnCityPahnder said:

gianmarco said:

Fat Nick said:

I honestly don't know how you can pin this on a car with the right-of-way unless he's just flat out hitting someone on purpose...not sure if that's the intent here or not. If it is, my apologies, but that's kind of irrational. There is an expectation that when the light turns green, you get to go. I agree with GDogg that if you don't have that expectation, the left-turning traffic would just keep going on and on and on.

I have an intersection like this on my way home, and every time, the cars turning left just keep going until the guy going straight mans up and goes. You basically have to play chicken with them to get them to stop because the traffic turning left usually sits for a while and gets impatient. I've basically come nose-to-nose with someone trying to turn several times. I won't hit them, but I try my darndest to make them think I would, while blaring my horn and flashing my lights, becuase they thought they could beat me across. Tailing the car in front of you as the arrow goes from yellow to just yield/green is one thing, entering the intersection to make a turn well after the green arrow is done and just assuming that you can get through b/c somebody won't hit you is another. Major doosh move.

Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation. Now, let's say, while playing chicken, you actually hit their car (even if accidental). Who is at fault?

Click to expand...

I once had a traffic cop tell me that regardless of right of way and following motoring laws, if you have the ability to prevent a collision and you don't, you can be ticketed. No idea how accurate that is, but if true applies to the chicken player.

Click to expand...

gianmarco said:

Here's the scenario:

It's a 6 lane road... (effectively 4 lanes in each direction)...

Click to expand...