Who gets the ticket?

poopshovel wrote:

once the northbound vehicle has made it across the southbound lanes, he is now westbound and you must yield to him

That makes sense. GOT IT!!!

Apparently, I used too many words in my earlier post.

poopshovel wrote:

once the northbound vehicle has made it across the southbound lanes, he is now westbound and you must yield to him

That makes sense. GOT IT!!!

Looking at the map, that has to be the situation.

Streetwiseguy wrote: If there is a yield sign at the end of your lane, you get the ticket, I'd say. If you were proceeding straight through the intersection, the left turner would have to yield.

This.

As a DE instructor I am telling you that you MUST give way if you have the yield. That car turning left in front of you is, as stated by others, now part of the new traffic flow. The yield sign is there to remind you, the right turning driver, to check for traffic which is coming from the left--regardless of whether it was always on the road or just turned onto it. We have a similar corner here that I drive with high school students. Unfortunately most folks disregard the proper flow of traffic, ignore the signs, or just plain don't pay attention.

GOT_IT

OK, so let's go with similar what ifs....

1. I'm turning right on red onto the cross street. No yield sign. Oncoming car turning left has a green arrow. My assumption is that his green arrow gives him the right of way.

2. I'm turning right onto the cross street. Oncoming car turning left. We both have green, but no arrows and no yield signs. My assumption is that my right turn has right of way over his left turn.

This is good.

My first thought is that Righty would not get the ticket. I'm thinking that Righty has a dedicated lane and driving it it maintains it.

Lefty has to turn into Righty's lane and needs to yield to lane ownership.

That is what I think. Oh, and I am usually wrong.

In reply to Datsun1500:

I agree. I also learned in Maryland, so maybe other places do it differently, but this answer makes sense to me.

Gasoline wrote: This is good. My first thought is that Righty would not get the ticket. I'm thinking that Righty has a dedicated lane and driving it it maintains it. Lefty has to turn into Righty's lane and needs to yield to lane ownership. That is what I think. Oh, and I am usually wrong.

in this case you are... as others have said, lefty after making their turn is now through traffic .. and righty has a yield sign .... yield sign is always under the obligation to avoid the oncoming traffic, yield sign is nothing more than a stop sign that you don't HAVE to stop for

wbjones wrote:

Gasoline wrote: This is good. My first thought is that Righty would not get the ticket. I'm thinking that Righty has a dedicated lane and driving it it maintains it. Lefty has to turn into Righty's lane and needs to yield to lane ownership. That is what I think. Oh, and I am usually wrong.

in this case you are... as others have said, lefty after making their turn is now through traffic .. and righty has a yield sign .... yield sign is always under the obligation to avoid the oncoming traffic, yield sign is nothing more than a stop sign that you don't HAVE to stop for

This

I think the only way to find out for sure is to just nail someone at the intersection and see what happens. You've got insurance, right?

dculberson wrote: I think the only way to find out for sure is to just nail someone at the intersection and see what happens. You've got insurance, right?

It would really make my day. Bonus if they approach my car in an angry manner, at which point I beat them to berkeleying death with a 5 pound mini-sledge.

The "just effing hit them" scenario has played out in my head so many times. I've had a couple close calls, but every time the other person has been totally not paying attention and would really have hit me, my reflexes get the better of me. The only times I've called someone on it they've been bluffing and pulled back at the last second. Probably for the best.

Note to self: When making my right turn, run over yield sign first.

I'm looking all over the Web to find an answer to this because there are two of these in my daily commutes, and there is no consensus among drivers on how to handle. A coworker just got side-swiped because of it. Here are my thoughts:

1) I always assumed that the yield sign was primarily a reminder. People approaching a right turn on red in a turning lane might be forgetful and assume that they can just keep moving since they have their own lane. The yield sign is a reminder that you can only turn right on red if no one is coming, including someone turning left on a green arrow.

2) If the person turning left has the right of way, then this is confusing. In order for drivers approaching the intersection to know what to do, the driver turning left has to know that there is yield sign on the other side of the intersection facing away from them (otherwise they have no right to turn), and the driver turning right has to know whether or not there is traffic behind him over his left shoulder going straight in order to know whether or not the left-turner is going to turn. So both drivers have to be aware of things they can't even see, or else neither knows what to do or who can go. It would make more sense to base it off of what you see in front of you - whether the light in front of you is red, green, or arrow. This would mean the right-turner has the right of way, and the yield sign is a reminder for them to yield on red.

3) However, I agree that the safety issue would give the right of way to the left-turner. They are the one in an intersection broadside to oncoming traffic, or just past an intersection, whereas the right turner is just at the end of a special turn lane or pulling into a merge/turn.

The biggest problem I see is when we are talking about an intersection with heavy traffic, though. In low traffic it's fine to just assume that whoever is going is going and the other needs to yield and not force a problem. But what happens when there is a steady stream of cars?

What happens a lot for me is that both lights are green ball, and a long line of cars are turning right and going straight, while a left turner waits. The left turner finally sees a break in straight oncoming traffic and people behind him honk, and he guns it to turn. The stream of cars turning right have no idea that there is a break in straight traffic, and are assuming that they have the green light and are all free to proceed while the left turners wait.

Or, perhaps one of the right-turners approaches the yield and wonders if he's supposed to wait or not. He slows to a stop, but there is still straight-moving traffic over his shoulder and so the left-turner across from him doesn't move. People start honking at the right-turner to go, and just as he starts into the lane, there is a break in the straight-moving traffic behind him and the left-turner accelerates quickly to turn. The right-turner is now mostly out in the lane and another car has pushed in behind him. He wants to stop or back up but can't. And the left-turner is in a busy intersection with oncoming traffic trying to get in the same spot. I see this happen at least once a week.

The busy intersection I'm talking about was even redesigned because of this, making it even worse. They built two red-brick islands, one that more clearly separates the right-turn lane from the intersection, and then another sticking out from the corner where you turn right, forcing the right-turners to turn into the farthest of two lanes. Basically forcing the issue into danger instead of allowing left and right turners to each have a lane to turn into. They also made the yield sign bigger. I assume that was supposed to be a clue that the left turners have the right of way even without an arrow, but that still isn't clear and now the traffic and accidents are worse.

Anyone know a clear answer on this? I wish I could just accept that the answer is the left-turners, but then that means that no matter what the light says, if there is someone in the left turn lane, the right turners can only queue up 50 cars back and wait while no one turns. That isn't going to happen. It ends up being a battle of will and horsepower. Not safe. It seems the best answer in any situation like this is to have a red arrow for turners, either a red right turn arrow (or separate light for that lane) or a red left turn arrow, whichever would better serve traffic flow. Two drivers, both with green lights and both with yield signs, trying to force their way into a single lane, just doesn't make sense to me at all.

EDIT: I checked with the coworker and she was in this same situation but turning left with a green arrow, so that didn't help clear anything up for me. Obviously not her fault. I think a lot of people, including police officers, assume that this is the situation people are asking about, because that's how wrecks usually occur: someone turning right just assumed they could turn even on red, and didn't think about left-turning traffic across from them. I think the assumption is supposed to be that a left-turner can never take the right of way without an arrow, though; certainly not because they think they know what a sign on the other side of the intersection might say.

best answer I can come up with .. is a yield sign is just that ... now for how the left turning driver reacts/thinks .. I can't make any guesses ... but the yield sign trumps anything else ( remember it's really a stop sign ... that you don't have to stop for )... a sign that says merging traffic is/could be a whole different thing ... but a yield sign isn't open for interpretation