PA ”Ride on Red“ Law to go into effect Sunday

[RobbieL2415]

Thoughts?
http://fox43.com/2016/09/19/ride-on-red-law-goes-into-effect-across-pennsylvania/

[SP Cook]

Sounds like a good way to get a lot of people killed.

I don't know about PA, but the type of stop light where you have to be detected to turn the light green is pretty rare in WV.  What is frustrating here is the DOH changed the policy a few years ago about late nights.  Previously it was an option to put stop lights on "flash" in the wee hours.  One side would flash yellow which = yield sign and the other red which = a stop sign.  Now the lights have to be on the same cycle 24/7/365, which means you often have to stop for a whole cycle when there is absolutely no one coming.  I would like to be able to legally run such lights, but nah, this whole thing scares me.

[briantroutman]

If this law was even necessary (which I doubt), the publicization of it is being handled terribly. With a headline "Ride on Red Law Goes Into Effect" , this will eventually be misinterpreted to the point that you'll hear slack jawed yokels bandying about misinformation like:  "Did ya hear...ya don't even hafta slow down at red lights anymore if no one's comin?"

The red light is one of the few traffic control devices people seem to have any respect for, and even that is eroding with people's careless attitudes toward right on red.

But this law isn't needed to begin with. If some biker rides up to a red light on a low-traffic road with no one around, waits around for a few minutes (assuming he even waits that long) and the light doesn't change, what's he going to do? He's going to take one glance over his shoulder to see if there's a cop around, then he'll motor on his way. And I sincerely doubt that, had a police officer been there and watched this occur, that he'd cite a motorcyclist (or bicyclist or car driver) who had legitimately been waiting for minutes with no response from the traffic signal.

[Rothman]

No more stopping at red lights when no one's coming or there?  Sounds good to me, although a bit of a culture change.  Makes you wonder what'll happen when Pennsylvanians travel to other states and try it, though.

[briantroutman]

No more stopping at red lights when no one's coming or there?  Sounds good to me...

I'm curious...did you actually read the article or just the headline?

The law was created for a specific scenario: so that motorcyclists–whose bikes aren't substantial enough to trip the sensors on some traffic signals–would have a legal way to proceed if a traffic signal is unresponsive.

But this is exactly the kind of misinterpretation that I predicted just minutes ago.

[jeffandnicole]

Does it work at the toll plazas too??? :-)

[Rothman]

No more stopping at red lights when no one's coming or there?  Sounds good to me...

I'm curious...did you actually read the article or just the headline?

The law was created for a specific scenario: so that motorcyclists–whose bikes aren't substantial enough to trip the sensors on some traffic signals–would have a legal way to proceed if a traffic signal is unresponsive.

But this is exactly the kind of misinterpretation that I predicted just minutes ago.

I'm also curious...did you actually read the article?  It says the law was extends to all vehicles.

When you attempt to be condescending, be sure that you have your ducks in row, or you otherwise look like a schmuck.

[jemacedo9]

No more stopping at red lights when no one's coming or there?  Sounds good to me...

I'm curious...did you actually read the article or just the headline?

The law was created for a specific scenario: so that motorcyclists–whose bikes aren't substantial enough to trip the sensors on some traffic signals–would have a legal way to proceed if a traffic signal is unresponsive.

But this is exactly the kind of misinterpretation that I predicted just minutes ago.

Actually, the article said "Bloom originally designed the bill for motorcycles. However, it was eventually expanded to include all vehicles."

But I agree...this leaves a lot open to interpretation - "common sense" - which seems to be less and less common these days.

[wphiii]

"Some" red lights, the article says. Which ones, exactly? Who determines if a signal is being "unresponsive" or not? Seems like there's way too much ambiguity here.

[briantroutman]

[I'm also curious...did you actually read the article?  It says the law was extends to all vehicles.

When you attempt to be condescending, be sure that you have your ducks in row, or you otherwise look like a schmuck.

Yes, I did read the article–which stated that the law was drafted for motorcyclists but was later extended to other vehicles.

And I wasn't trying to be condescending. You're the one who said:

No more stopping at red lights when no one's coming or there?

...which isn't what the law says. So I was legitimately trying to find out whether you had read the article or not.

[Avalanchez71]

Tennessee passed this law years ago and I haven't heard of an issue.  I haven't come accross one. 

[SectorZ]

"Some" red lights, the article says. Which ones, exactly? Who determines if a signal is being "unresponsive" or not? Seems like there's way too much ambiguity here.

I presume there will be loads of "no ride on red" signs like "no turn on red" where needed?

A lot of states have this for motorcyclists and bicyclists. I think a better solution would be getting traffic signals to work better. In Massachusetts, all the time new signals are going up with sensors, and you still sit around waiting for nothing for 30-60 seconds.

[Rothman]

"Some" red lights, the article says. Which ones, exactly? Who determines if a signal is being "unresponsive" or not? Seems like there's way too much ambiguity here.

I presume there will be loads of "no ride on red" signs like "no turn on red" where needed?

Eesh.  There's a thought.  Yet another bank of signage needs that'd need to be funded.

[jeffandnicole]

"Some" red lights, the article says. Which ones, exactly? Who determines if a signal is being "unresponsive" or not? Seems like there's way too much ambiguity here.

I presume there will be loads of "no ride on red" signs like "no turn on red" where needed?

A lot of states have this for motorcyclists and bicyclists. I think a better solution would be getting traffic signals to work better. In Massachusetts, all the time new signals are going up with sensors, and you still sit around waiting for nothing for 30-60 seconds.

That's not a malfunction.  That's by design.

[kalvado]

I got caught in such lockup a couple of times, and more than once ended up running red to resolve the issue.
I wonder if I would be able to resolve this in court if ticketed... (if I get caught.. And common sense includes making sure there are no cops nearby)
But - that was really single digit number of situations within past decade . Probably easier to handle on case-by-case basis in court. Although if  I were a bike rider and faces these daily, my opinion could be a bit different.

[SectorZ]

"Some" red lights, the article says. Which ones, exactly? Who determines if a signal is being "unresponsive" or not? Seems like there's way too much ambiguity here.

I presume there will be loads of "no ride on red" signs like "no turn on red" where needed?

A lot of states have this for motorcyclists and bicyclists. I think a better solution would be getting traffic signals to work better. In Massachusetts, all the time new signals are going up with sensors, and you still sit around waiting for nothing for 30-60 seconds.

That's not a malfunction.  That's by design.

That was my point, I know it's not a malfunction, and that's the problem. These jams caused by isolated (not synced with other nearby signals) having all this tech to detect traffic and yet still it just operates in a timed system, is complete idiocy.

[vdeane]

I think that's the other answer to the issues that led to the PA law: set the light so that it ALWAYS goes green, even if no vehicle is detected, in case a vehicle was missed.

[kalvado]

I think that's the other answer to the issues that led to the PA law: set the light so that it ALWAYS goes green, even if no vehicle is detected, in case a vehicle was missed.

I think you may write to NYSDOT to see what they think about it...
I am willing to give my 2 cents worth of a story, including location and conditions, which lead to a unsafe condition due to cycle skipping

[hbelkins]

Sounds like a good way to get a lot of people killed.

I don't know about PA, but the type of stop light where you have to be detected to turn the light green is pretty rare in WV.  What is frustrating here is the DOH changed the policy a few years ago about late nights.  Previously it was an option to put stop lights on "flash" in the wee hours.  One side would flash yellow which = yield sign and the other red which = a stop sign.  Now the lights have to be on the same cycle 24/7/365, which means you often have to stop for a whole cycle when there is absolutely no one coming.  I would like to be able to legally run such lights, but nah, this whole thing scares me.

My recent experience in West Virginia tells me that lights are slow to change, when you're the only vehicle at the signal and you have to sit at a red light for a timed cycle. It was frustrating that the sensors didn't detect me and change the signal when no other traffic was near.

[Rothman]

I think that's the other answer to the issues that led to the PA law: set the light so that it ALWAYS goes green, even if no vehicle is detected, in case a vehicle was missed.

A certain scene from Gremlins comes to mind...(around 1:20 in the clip montage)...

[jeffandnicole]

"Some" red lights, the article says. Which ones, exactly? Who determines if a signal is being "unresponsive" or not? Seems like there's way too much ambiguity here.

I presume there will be loads of "no ride on red" signs like "no turn on red" where needed?

A lot of states have this for motorcyclists and bicyclists. I think a better solution would be getting traffic signals to work better. In Massachusetts, all the time new signals are going up with sensors, and you still sit around waiting for nothing for 30-60 seconds.

That's not a malfunction.  That's by design.

That was my point, I know it's not a malfunction, and that's the problem. These jams caused by isolated (not synced with other nearby signals) having all this tech to detect traffic and yet still it just operates in a timed system, is complete idiocy.

Is there a Walk/Don't Walk signal present here?

[jemacedo9]

I think I can count on one hand the number of times in 20 years where I've been at a signal that seemed malfunctioning.  As a car driver.  I know for sure that this is an issue for motorcyclists/bicyclists. I wish this law was restricted to those forms.  Or...list how long is long enough to wait.  3 minutes?  2 minutes?

[UCFKnights]

I think I can count on one hand the number of times in 20 years where I've been at a signal that seemed malfunctioning.  As a car driver.  I know for sure that this is an issue for motorcyclists/bicyclists. I wish this law was restricted to those forms.  Or...list how long is long enough to wait.  3 minutes?  2 minutes?

It seems very unfair to have different laws for motorcyclists/bicyles. If its safe for them to do manuvers on red, it should be save for everyone. And I agree with the law, there is plenty of time it is safe to make a left or go straight on red, not just turn right. There's a light near me at a T intersection that when I approach it, I always seem to just miss the light, and as I'm coming from a minor road, its set for a 3 minute minimum green on the main road. I'm sure at night, I've already wasted more then an hour sitting at that red light with no cars in sight in any direction... going in those circumstances endangers no one at all after a brief stop to make sure no one else is coming.

[roadman]

In my 37+ years of driving, I have gotten stuck at a red light with a failed loop exactly once.  As it was a two lane left turn, the solution was simple.  I got out and asked the driver in the car waiting behind me to pull into the adjacent lane.  As soon as he did that, the other loop picked up the call and the light changed to green.

[sdmichael]

It seems very unfair to have different laws for motorcyclists/bicyles. If its safe for them to do manuvers on red, it should be save for everyone. And I agree with the law, there is plenty of time it is safe to make a left or go straight on red, not just turn right. There's a light near me at a T intersection that when I approach it, I always seem to just miss the light, and as I'm coming from a minor road, its set for a 3 minute minimum green on the main road. I'm sure at night, I've already wasted more then an hour sitting at that red light with no cars in sight in any direction... going in those circumstances endangers no one at all after a brief stop to make sure no one else is coming.

It would seem more unfair for motorcyclists and bicyclists to have to wait for a car to show up if the signal is not detecting them. Yes, laws should be the same for both, but in many cases there are exceptions to that. It isn't a matter of a light with a long cycle, it is a matter of a light not detecting the vehicle waiting and is therefore malfunctioning.