people that do an emergency stop when the lights change are dangerous and wrong

[magrate]

I drive for about two hours everyday for my new job. Have to go through over 20 sets of lights. So many people think that as soon as the lights change you must stop. Aibu to expect people to still go though a second after they go red?

No. The problem is not that they stop suddenly at red. Its that they should have stopped sooner. As should the person behind them.

No. The problem is doing emergency stops when they should of carried on.

But your not jumping a red light if you've already cleared the line when it was green. Its just because the lights are far away that you still see the red as its high speed road.

magrate can you google earth a photo of this junction? perhaps ask council to look again at it if it is as you describe
only time i have ever seen a traffic light a very long way from the white line was on a kind of 'one lane traffic only' blind corner

YABU you should only go through the start of amber if you think the person behind you is going to hit you. A police officer would

not look on this kindly

Do sane, normal and careful drivers not slow down when they approach traffic lights even when they are green on roads with 70 mph speed limits? Surely it's the only safe thing to do?

In Israel traffic lights start to flash while on green first, then go amber, then go red. It's just as illegal to go through on amber as it is red. It's a great system.

OP, why do you keep talking about reaching the lights after clearing the line? You seem to think that when it comes to traffic lights, you need to reach the actual physical light for rules to apply. Do you not realise that the lights apply to THE LINE of the junction? The location of the actual light itself is completely irrelevant. I'm very confused by the way you post about lines and lights.

Surely there is no junction where the lights are so far away from the line that they are green when you cross the line but have got to red by the time you reach the lights if you are going at "high speed"??

Well these lights are far away, as there is two sets. One before the junction and one after. People keep emergency stopping on the secondary lights after they've passed the first. Google earth doesn't have any lights on it, wish it had of stayed like that would have probably been safer as its one a road and the rest are minor.

You can fuck off if you people should go through a red light risking hitting me or my children because they haven't bothered to approach properly. Fucking idiot.

So sick of drivers just like you in London.

I have just driven into my local town and back, and I was watching the drivers around me. Coming out of town, along a section of road where the right hand lane is right turn only, and the left hand lane is straight on, I saw a car duck out of the left hand lane, into the right turn only lane (right into the path of another car, which thankfully had enough time to stop), then whizzed across a red light - that had been red for a moment or so, at least, then carried on up the road, looking for a gap to move back into the left hand lane, because they were going straight on, but couldn't be arsed to wait a few minutes for the lights to change again.

I saw several drivers go through red or amber lights. Clearly too many people agree with magrate that you should go through red lights.

I do think her terminology is at fault, though. The way she is talking about it, she clearly thinks that 'going through a red light' means actually passing the red traffic light, when surely it means stopping at the stop line, when the red or amber lights show?

So - a driver who passes the stop line when the lights are green, but the lights are red by the time they actually pass the light itself, did not go through a red light. Going through a red light means going over the stop line when the light is at red - which is very different.

If I turn left at the lights, when it is green for me to go, I will pass the red traffic light that is stopping the traffic coming from my right - but I haven't contravened that red light, because the green light on my turning allowed me to enter that road, passing that traffic light.

Sorry, that wash but aggressive. It's just that it happens every day virtually and it gets really annoying.

• a bit aggressive. Stupid typo.

I'm trying to understand this junction but must roundabouts (for example) have a set of lights at the line one further ahead. I have never seen anyone pass on a green at the first set, then stop because the second set change.

If the junction is so confusing then the agencies who deal with it should be made aware that it is causing confusion.

I know of a junction like this. It makes no difference! They are separate lights, the first set being green has nothing to do with the second set. You should slow down approaching traffic lights, if you've just been through one, you should certainly be going slow enough at the second to stop if it's red without slamming on!

The OP is entirely U because there is no excuse or justification whatever for crossing the line at red.

The amber lights are always timed according to the speed limit on that road, so that vehicles have long enough to stop at the line before they turn red.

And if you run into the back of the vehicle in front it is always your fault for driving too close.

You must live near me, OP. I am constantly gobsmacked by the number of morons who speed up as they see an amber light and then go right through a red light two or three at a time. I think they got their licences out of a Christmas cracker. Not sure what your excuse is.

There is a junction near me (pic attached, hope it works) that very occasionally due to weight of traffic will leave a driver 'stranded' by the second (ie where the blue car behind the bus is) lights, as they went through when it was green but because traffic was crawling, the 'second' lights had changed to red before they'd made it over the junction - is that the situation you're talking about? You do get the odd divvy who'll stop dead there and block the cars turning right out of the side road, but as they're usually crawling along for that to happen, it's hardly an emergency stop. Also, it's a box junction, so you shouldn't be entering it when there's no room to proceed on the other side anyway.

Despite your protests you seem to think it's fine to jump the lights. People like you are a menace.

The lights on our local roundabout mean that if you go through on red - even if it has just changed - you'll go straight into the side of the vehicle joining from the next entry road. As soon as one set turns to red the set controlling traffic joining the roundabout are turning red and amber and drivers are quick off the mark as it only allows about 4 vehicles to go through.

I do think her terminology is at fault, though. The way she is talking about it, she clearly thinks that 'going through a red light' means actually passing the red traffic light, when surely it means stopping at the stop line, when the red or amber lights show?

So - a driver who passes the stop line when the lights are green, but the lights are red by the time they actually pass the light itself, did not go through a red light. Going through a red light means going over the stop line when the light is at red - which is very different.

Yes thanks that's it, ive said a few times my op was badly written.

If anyone you know is wanting motivation to walk instead of drive - this is the thread you send them to!

'The fine for jumping a red light is only 100? Gosh I shouldn't of felt so guilty about doing this recently at a broken temp traffic light that was stuck'

• yeah apart from the small matter of possibly killing someone, but hey £100 is practically a bargain...

We've got some traffic lights near me that sound a bit like the OP is trying to describe.

It's an approach to a roundabout. The stop line and 1 set of traffic lights are set quite far back from the round about. There's also another set of lights in the middle of the round about. So you go through the first light and over the stop line when it's on green, but sometimes the lights change and the lights on the roundabout are showing red or amber.

The lights are set so there's loads of time for the cars to complete their manoeuvre and get onto the round about, before the lights for the people already on the round about change to green, but no end of people see the second set of lights change and slam their brakes on.

We live in a touristy area so lots of people who don't know the area/that junction very well, added to locals who do know it causes it a bit of a nightmare.

There's no need for the second set of lights on the roundabout, it just causes confusion

The lights were broken, constantly showing red. I waited 6 mins before slowly preceding cautiously and felt very guilty. Saying I could of killed someone is stupid.

I don't know what the guidance is, if the traffic lights are broken. And it is my understanding that they will always fail to red (or to no lights at all) - because that is the safest failure mode - if they failed to amber or green, people would go through them, thinking it was safe to do so.

But if a set of traffic lights do fail, it must be possible to go through them, otherwise you would either have to turn around in the road (which could be risky) or just sit there until they were mended!

I have had to make my way across a set of lights that were broken on a number of occasions, and did what the OP did - crawled as slowly as possible, being as careful as possible.

I do remember hearing about some research that showed that some junctions were actually safer when traffic lights were taken away, because everyone approached them with caution, and was vigilant about what other drivers were doing. I can't put my finger on the exact reference right now, though.

are you just trying to wind people up