On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:27:21 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 13/08/2015 22:27, NEMO wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 20:38:30 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 13/08/2015 12:57, Edmund J. Burke wrote:
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33773868
et al.

As a driver, this seems perfectly reasonable to me

Although it's being billed as being revolutionary, in the USA it's been
a fairly common feature for decades at many junctions (for all traffic).

Not everywhere in the States.

One obvious exception is in New York City (though it's OK elsewhere in
New York State).

The NYC exception arises out of the grid-pattern of the streets.

Actually, it doesn't. Most US cities have a grid pattern. It's
because NYC, unlike other cities, has pedestrians.

I agree that NYC, almost alone of USA cities, has European levels of
pedestrian traffic (SF is another), but the tight pattern of "the Grid",
coupled with the exceptional pedestrian traffic is what requires the "no
right turn on red" rule. Every crossroad is subject to high ped traffic
(not the case in SF and hardly likely elsewhere other than - perhaps -
Boston, which I have no visited).

Pedestrians, by the way, are generally and admirably compliant with the
traffic signals at crossroads with avenues, though less so half-way
along the east-west street routes.

I wonder why the 'no turn on red' rule applies not only in Manhattan
but in all five boroughs of NYC. The outer boroughs have much lower
pedestiran levels and much less of a grid system.

On 14/08/2015 15:21, NEMO wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:27:21 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 13/08/2015 22:27, NEMO wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 20:38:30 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 13/08/2015 12:57, Edmund J. Burke wrote:
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33773868
et al.

As a driver, this seems perfectly reasonable to me

Although it's being billed as being revolutionary, in the USA it's been
a fairly common feature for decades at many junctions (for all traffic).

Not everywhere in the States.

One obvious exception is in New York City (though it's OK elsewhere in
New York State).

The NYC exception arises out of the grid-pattern of the streets.

Actually, it doesn't. Most US cities have a grid pattern. It's
because NYC, unlike other cities, has pedestrians.

I agree that NYC, almost alone of USA cities, has European levels of
pedestrian traffic (SF is another), but the tight pattern of "the Grid",
coupled with the exceptional pedestrian traffic is what requires the "no
right turn on red" rule. Every crossroad is subject to high ped traffic
(not the case in SF and hardly likely elsewhere other than - perhaps -
Boston, which I have no visited).

Pedestrians, by the way, are generally and admirably compliant with the
traffic signals at crossroads with avenues, though less so half-way
along the east-west street routes.

I wonder why the 'no turn on red' rule applies not only in Manhattan
but in all five boroughs of NYC. The outer boroughs have much lower
pedestiran levels and much less of a grid system.

At a guess, because the City doesn't want drivers to be confused as to
which locations allow RTOR.

JNugent posted for all of us...


I wonder why the 'no turn on red' rule applies not only in Manhattan
but in all five boroughs of NYC. The outer boroughs have much lower
pedestiran levels and much less of a grid system.

At a guess, because the City doesn't want drivers to be confused as to
which locations allow RTOR.

I presume that cyclists have to obey the vehicle code. In PA that is true
but seldom cited. Stop signs, lanes, traffic lights all mean nothing-they
yield because they don't want to get wiped out but actually stopping; not
gonna happen.

--
Tekkie *Please post a follow-up*

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 16:04:18 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

JNugent posted for all of us...


I wonder why the 'no turn on red' rule applies not only in Manhattan
but in all five boroughs of NYC. The outer boroughs have much lower
pedestiran levels and much less of a grid system.

At a guess, because the City doesn't want drivers to be confused as to
which locations allow RTOR.

I presume that cyclists have to obey the vehicle code. In PA that is true
but seldom cited. Stop signs, lanes, traffic lights all mean nothing-they
yield because they don't want to get wiped out but actually stopping; not
gonna happen.

The law basically treats cyclists as honorary pedestrians instead of
vehicles (which they are): a diversity-enhancing protected species.

"NEMO" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 16:04:18 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

JNugent posted for all of us...


I wonder why the 'no turn on red' rule applies not only in Manhattan
but in all five boroughs of NYC. The outer boroughs have much lower
pedestiran levels and much less of a grid system.

At a guess, because the City doesn't want drivers to be confused as to
which locations allow RTOR.

I presume that cyclists have to obey the vehicle code. In PA that is true
but seldom cited. Stop signs, lanes, traffic lights all mean nothing-they
yield because they don't want to get wiped out but actually stopping; not
gonna happen.

The law basically treats cyclists as honorary pedestrians instead of
vehicles (which they are): a diversity-enhancing protected species.

Oh shaddup, ****-for-brains!
LOL

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 07:01:30 -0700, "Colon Edmud Jackass Burchese of
Ladyboise, Idaho" wrote:

"NEMO" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 16:04:18 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

JNugent posted for all of us...


I wonder why the 'no turn on red' rule applies not only in Manhattan
but in all five boroughs of NYC. The outer boroughs have much lower
pedestiran levels and much less of a grid system.

At a guess, because the City doesn't want drivers to be confused as to
which locations allow RTOR.

I presume that cyclists have to obey the vehicle code. In PA that is true
but seldom cited. Stop signs, lanes, traffic lights all mean nothing-they
yield because they don't want to get wiped out but actually stopping; not
gonna happen.

The law basically treats cyclists as honorary pedestrians instead of
vehicles (which they are): a diversity-enhancing protected species.

Oh shaddup, ****-for-brains!
LOL

Oh, blow it out yer fat Yankee ass, KKKoloon! LOLOK