"Ride on Red" Law (Penn: insurance, purchase, tax)

[werdna35]

New law eliminates need to wait for an unresponsive red light to turn green | PennLive.com

So I had been watching for this law for sometime before it came in to effect. What are your thoughts on this? Personally, I think it is a great idea, but there is A LOT of gray area involved in this. Who is to say what defines a "malfunctioning" or inoperable light signal? What constitutes an appropriate amount of time before going? I mean, theoretically, I could be sitting at a red light on my way way to work waiting to turn left but because I didn't reach the light in time, I didn't get the green arrow. Well no one is coming in the opposing direction, I can just go? What does this mean for the traffic cameras (although this is kind of a moot question since PA could never get the use of these light approved, so they just sit there not serving any purpose but to cost tax dollars to purchase and install them).

Thoughts on this?

[Nov3]

the law says the motorist should treat the signal like a stop sign where they stop and then proceed with caution, Bloom said.

that pretty much is how it has been written in the drivers hand book.

Being that I am from an area where folks love to zoom on yellow and rarely abide by safety first, I see more accidents and less "caution" at intersections.

I can just see it now when folks get t-boned. PA insurance is going to love this, gives them another reason to jackup rates....New driver law = new rates

[2nd trick op]

I've been driving for a little over fifty years; have seen (and appreciate) a lot of the refinements that have been built into traffic signals over that time. But I also the have to admit a perception that the time waiting for a clear (green) signal seems to be increasing when you're in one of the secondary approaches -- and have to suspect that a more-complicated programming structure is more likely to leave a person "in the lurch".

Unfortunately, it's also true that there exist a substantial portion of the driving public who will always exploit every measure of a liberalization of our traffic laws -- and any time spent behind a wheel will convince you of that. When a new project promises a "temporary inconvenience for a permanent improvement" -- it's just not going to sell well if that "inconvenience" throws a continuing monkey wrench into an already tightly-structured workday schedule.

No easy solutions -- I understand that; but most of us can see beyond the sugar-coating of an intensifying issue.

[thecoalman]

I can only recall this happening once where the light malfunctioned, it was left turn arrow. After about 3 iterations the car if front finally decided to "break the law"... thankfully.

I didn't get the green arrow. Well no one is coming in the opposing direction, I can just go?

Good question, usually you have the green arrow first. I know there are lights you can get green arrow before it turns red if no one is coming in opposite direction.

[jtab4994]

This has happened to three times. Once, I was the first car in line and I decided to "just go" after waiting a really long time. Another time, at the same light, I was the 5th car and I got creative going in the right-turn lane and then making a U-turn. The other time a car finally came along in the left-turn lane which triggered the light green for my right-turn lane.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

This has happened to three times. Once, I was the first car in line and I decided to "just go" after waiting a really long time. Another time, at the same light, I was the 5th car and I got creative going in the right-turn lane and then making a U-turn. The other time a car finally came along in the left-turn lane which triggered the light green for my right-turn lane.

I think there is one major problem with this new law: Emergency vehicles that can control the light. Some ambulances, police and fire companies can control the lights as they approach. What happens when any motorist is listening to the radio and does not see or hear the approaching emergency vehicle? I know that you are not supposed to go unless the highway is clear. But sometimes motorist play follow the leader and after the vehicle in front of them goes; they follow. That could lead to a dangerous situation for our emergency crews and I wonder if any of them are concerned?

[werdna35]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

I can only recall this happening once where the light malfunctioned, it was left turn arrow. After about 3 iterations the car if front finally decided to "break the law"... thankfully.

The original purpose of this law was in relation to motorcycles and the fact that they are often stranded at multiple light cycles because they are not heavy enough to trigger the switch in the roadway. I guess the legislation determined that they cannot selectively loosen the regulation, so they rewrote it to include all vehicles.

[jtab4994]

Originally Posted by fisheye

I think there is one major problem with this new law: Emergency vehicles that can control the light. Some ambulances, police and fire companies can control the lights as they approach. What happens when any motorist is listening to the radio and does not see or hear the approaching emergency vehicle? I know that you are not supposed to go unless the highway is clear. But sometimes motorist play follow the leader and after the vehicle in front of them goes; they follow. That could lead to a dangerous situation for our emergency crews and I wonder if any of them are concerned?

Sure, but if you are about to proceed on a red light, after sitting there for a while with no traffic coming in either direction, then you should be alert enough to know if an ambulance or fire truck is approaching and is close enough to activate the blinking white light.


The brain-dead motorist sitting there spacing out with the radio blasting probably doesn't know about this law anyway.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

Sure, but if you are about to proceed on a red light, after sitting there for a while with no traffic coming in either direction, then you should be alert enough to know if an ambulance or fire truck is approaching and is close enough to activate the blinking white light.


The brain-dead motorist sitting there spacing out with the radio blasting probably doesn't know about this law anyway.

The reason that I said that is because I had just witnessed several cars playing follow the leader onto a major secondary road from my local Walmart. The traffic on the major secondary also had a red light that was not turning and I would have thought that they had the right-of-way over Walmart customers. I just think we are asking for trouble.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by werdna35

The original purpose of this law was in relation to motorcycles and the fact that they are often stranded at multiple light cycles because they are not heavy enough to trigger the switch in the roadway. I guess the legislation determined that they cannot selectively loosen the regulation, so they rewrote it to include all vehicles.

I understand it's issue for motorcycles but I've had it happen to me in a car.