Scenario 1:
This is a light controlled intersection and both the red and blue car have a green light. Red car is turning right. Blue car is turning left. Which lane/s are legal for the red car to turn into?
Scenario 2:
This is the same light controlled intersection except now you're turning left. Which lane/s are legal for you to turn into?
Scenario 3:
You're at a two-way stop. Cross-traffic doesn't have to stop. Blue arrived first and wants to turn left. You arrive after and want to go straight. Who has right-of-way to go first?
1. Red car should take lane 1 but likely allowed to take either lane…blue needs to yield to red
2….turning left of always yield and go for the left lane if right is taken
3….same as 2 way stop sign? I say straight has right of way snd car turning left needs to yield to other stuff
4. Main rule….don’t run into anything or cause anyone else to
1. Lane 1. And fuck blue car if they go before I’ve completed turn even though red legally shouldn’t take it.
2 I would say neither since you are in the far right lane. But assuming you can legally turn there for some reason, Lane 1. You drift into Lane 2 and you will cause an accident.
3. Red car. Straight always has right of way in 2-way stop when another is turning. In fact, they would need to yield to as many cars as were lined up to go straight.
1. Both are legal, 2 is simply poor driving.
2. Same as above.
3. Red
I’m the blue car in scenario one almost daily and I’ve always just yielded to the red car(s). Trying to turn into lane two while they’re turning into lane one (or even two as well) is asking for trouble IMO.
posted by Laley23This is basically situation 1 except you're now the blue car. I can see why it's potentially confusing because this type of intersection is typically marked with dedicated turn lanes for both the red and blue cars, but that isn't always the case. The best example I can think of is out in the middle of nowhere when you have a county road intersecting a state route/highway.2 I would say neither since you are in the far right lane. But assuming you can legally turn there for some reason, Lane 1. You drift into Lane 2 and you will cause an accident.
My thoughts:
Situation 1: Under all circumstances, if red has a green light they're entitled to turn right and choose whatever lane they want. The oncoming traffic that wishes to turn into the same lanes need to yield to you until you've made your lane choice.
Situation 2: This is bascially the same as above. As long as red yields to oncoming traffic, they can also turn into whichever lane they choose.
Situation 3: I have no idea. I wing this one whenever it comes up. I normally wave whomever else is waiting on.
For situation 3, red has the right-of-way, but almost no one understands that. I typically do a Monty and wave the turning car just to be safe.
I'll post an interesting intersection near our house (later today when I get a chance) that we either walk thru or drive thru almost daily. It's a real doozy and most people have no idea what they're doing in it.
I forget where I was at (Pittsburgh/Baltimore/DC/Nashville 🤷🏻♂️) this past year but went to one of the big outlet malls and driving about it was insane. I didn’t know where I was going and just on a loop around the mall but the incoming traffic to the loop always had the right away and never a stop sign…..I got honked and yelled at 2x. I was being super cautious as I was unfamiliar but my lord others were uber aggressive and pissy…again my end goal was not to hit anyone.
Scenario 3 -- whoever arrived at the intersection first should go first; it doesn't matter if that car is turning.
posted by QuakerOatsScenario 3 -- whoever arrived at the intersection first should go first; it doesn't matter if that car is turning.
What if red car is opting to turn right instead of going straight? Does that mean he must sit there and wait for blue to make his move before he goes?
As a pedestrian, I've almost been hit a handful of times crossing the crosswalk on the right side (we come from the top of the map).
Starting clockwise from the top (I'll speak in directions as if you were in your car, not looking down at the map on a screen):
You can either go straight from the right lane, or turn left to either Murray or Madisonville from the left lane.
From Murray you can turn right, left, or go straight-straight, or left-straight.
From Madisonville you can turn right, left, or go straight-straight, or right-straight.
This is the same coming from the west side of the map as well.
From Plainville you can turn right, right, straight, left, or left.
We often have people fly up to the stop sign on the east Madisonville side looking at their phones, not paying attention, and then immediately going without looking for pedestrians in the intersection. This happened to use twice in the last few weeks. Both times I let the person know how little I appreciated their lack of concern for others. Luckily we're used to this so we can anticipate the shitty drivers and aren't usually in any real danger.
Driving thru the intersection can also be annoying when it's busy, because people can't process that much information with there are more than 4 cars at the intersection.
That looks like a complete mess.
posted by QuakerOatsScenario 3 -- whoever arrived at the intersection first should go first; it doesn't matter if that car is turning.
That’s all well and good. But if there is an accident, turning car is at fault and will be ticketed.
posted by MontyBrunswickMy thoughts:
Situation 1: Under all circumstances, if red has a green light they're entitled to turn right and choose whatever lane they want. The oncoming traffic that wishes to turn into the same lanes need to yield to you until you've made your lane choice.
Situation 2: This is bascially the same as above. As long as red yields to oncoming traffic, they can also turn into whichever lane they choose.
Situation 3: I have no idea. I wing this one whenever it comes up. I normally wave whomever else is waiting on.
That didn't sound right.
Just do whatever and if it’s a problem then follow each other to a parking lot and fight like men.
posted by Verbal KintThat didn't sound right.
i actually had consulted the ORC (including this specific one) before i made my post. as far as I know, none of the scenarios I presented are specifically addressed in there.
per the ORC linked, it sounds like the answer is in the first line:
(1) Approach for a right turn and a right turn shall be made as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway.
However, it appears that this language is to set the guidance as to which lane to approach/originate the turn from. It doesn't define the destination of your turn, just tells you that you must line up a right-hand turn from the lane closest to the curb unless otherwise marked.
the rest of the ORC is just setting the guidance for left-hand turn lane usage on both one/two-way streets and sets the framework for municipalities to modify the above behavior with appropriate signage/markings/etc.
this person on reddit interpreted it the same way i did.
they also made an interesting point that seemed to illustrate my line of thinking on it:
It's basically the same as where a one-lane road expands to a two-lane road. You're not changing lanes when you get to the dotted line. You do have to select one of the two lanes, but you are not obligated to choose one over the other. You have the right-of-way to both until you are established in one.
posted by Verbal KintThat didn't sound right.
Well yeah, I just let that go. It’s definitely against the law to turn into the lane you aren’t turning from.
Who gives a shit. Just drive and don’t hit anyone.
….#youv’ebeenMontyBrunswicked
posted by BRFWho gives a shit. Just drive and don’t hit anyone.
this was already outlined in the very first reply (Ironman92)
please pay attention
thanks
