dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3166
share rss forum feed


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to LazMan

Re: [Rant] Traffic laws people seem to not know, or ignore

Blue isn't being phased out for snow plows. You missed the most important part, subsection 31.

quote:
Flashing blue light on snow-removal equipment
(31) No person shall, while operating a road service vehicle on a highway, plow, salt or de-ice the highway or apply chemicals or abrasives to the highway for snow or ice control unless the road service vehicle is equipped with a lamp producing intermittent flashes of blue light visible for a distance of 150 metres from all directions. 1996, c. 33, s. 11.
In other words, it's illegal to clear snow without a flashing blue light. Using just amber would be a violation of the HTA.

Many US states are switching from amber to blue for snow removal. Reason being is that blue is much easier to see during a snow storm when the entire world is bathed in a yellow/orange bath from the reflection of HPS street lamps. Blue cuts through that when amber cannot.

This is also why the fire department vehicles in St. Cats have flashing blue lights - it is illegal to do any sort of snow removal without a flashing blue light on the vehicle, regardless of what the vehicle is. As for St. Cats and snow, meh, they've had issues getting to fire hydrants in the past. I can see why they'd want a few trucks equipped with plows, especially if the city gets walloped by a northeast wind off Lake Ontario.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

- A green arrow means you CANNOT TURN. You must wait for the green CIRCLE to turn. Turning on a green arrow is the same as running a red light, damn it.

There was an intersection like this in St. Catharines, and the activation of the green arrow was accompanied by a no turn sign with a specific time of day when it was prohibited. Outside of those times, you'd get a green ball.

The kicker would come during 'switch' time. For reasons unknown, when the system switched from green arrow to green ball, the light would go from the green arrow directly to red with no amber in between. It would then sit there for 2-3 seconds, then switch to the green ball, all the while cross traffic remained red and oncoming traffic would remain green. My work schedule and route home usually resulted in me passing through that intersection at switch time. The first time it scared the crap out of me and I, along with everyone else, suddenly slammed on their brakes. The next time I knew to ignore it, but others slammed on their brakes. It was stupid, no doubt a violation of the OTM, and no longer exists since they've widened the road to include a dedicated left turn lane that allows for left turns at all times throughout the day.

KKaWing

join:2007-06-14
reply to xsbell

said by xsbell:

My biggest peeve though is people not adjusting, or using their side mirrors properly! I also can't believe that they still teach people to look over their shoulder before making a lane change.

Shoulder checking is still necessary even when you have your mirrors adjusted properly *if* you are on a stretch of road with 3 lanes going in the same direction. The mirrors will still have a slight blind spot 2 lanes over. If you decide to merge from an outer lane to the middle while another car is merging from the opposite outer lane, there is still a chance of collision since both parties are focused rearward on the mirrors. One of the cars will get fish-tailed... if neither party catches a glimpse of each other. A quick shoulder check still provides the clearest picture of the situation laterally two lanes over.

said by Viper677:

Oh, I got one.

You dont have to leave a freaking 5 sec gap from the vehicle in front of you when you are driving at 30km/hr in a traffic jam. Close in the gap so people can get to where they need to be faster.

Use your freaking common sense and leave a 2 sec gap when you are going 120km/hr on a freeway.

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=Suugn-p5C1M


If someone jams up a gap as soon as it appears then break, you are perpetuating the shockwave shown in that video. While a 5 second gap maybe unnecessary, leaving enough space so you don't have to jab the throttle then break hard (rinse & repeat...) actually helps traffic flow, just a little bit. *It also saves on brakes and perhaps fuel from the constant accelerating, unless you are one of those hybrid drivers with them fancy regenerating brakes.

Robrr

join:2008-04-19
Guelph, ON

said by KKaWing:

said by xsbell:

My biggest peeve though is people not adjusting, or using their side mirrors properly! I also can't believe that they still teach people to look over their shoulder before making a lane change.

Shoulder checking is still necessary even when you have your mirrors adjusted properly *if* you are on a stretch of road with 3 lanes going in the same direction. The mirrors will still have a slight blind spot 2 lanes over. If you decide to merge from an outer lane to the middle while another car is merging from the opposite outer lane, there is still a chance of collision since both parties are focused rearward on the mirrors. One of the cars will get fish-tailed... if neither party catches a glimpse of each other. A quick shoulder check still provides the clearest picture of the situation laterally two lanes over.

Hate to inform you of this but shoulder checking is required anytime you change lane no matter how well adjusted your mirrors are. Your a fool to think that your ok to make a lane change without looking.

KKaWing

join:2007-06-14

Where did I say it was unnecessary? I'm saying it IS necessary. I'm pointing out one situation where even if you have properly adjusted mirrors you will still get yourself in trouble. Sidenote, another is in city streets where people can pull out of places you don't expect... again the 2 lanes over thing...


bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

- You cannot turn right or left on a red light in Montreal. Most offenders are from out of province, but now that Quebec allows right-on-red-except-in-montreal, you see some off-island people do this too.

The sad thing is that there are big, BIG signs saying that when you cross onto the island.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

There's some merit to prohibiting right turn on reds in Toronto as well, but I doubt the city would ever enact something like that.



Serbtastic
You Know How Many People I Have Buried?
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Stoney Creek, ON
reply to Kardinal

I would like to see drivers pay more attention to posted signs. At the top of the ramp from the north service road getting onto Guelph Line in Burlington is a CLEARLY posted sign indicating no right turn on red. Many times when I get caught at that red light and I'm first in line to turn right the jackass behind me blows his horn to tell me to make the turn (against the posted sign).



Kardinal
Dei Gratia Regina
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-04
N of 49th
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Sympatico

said by Serbtastic:

I would like to see drivers pay more attention to posted signs. At the top of the ramp from the north service road getting onto Guelph Line in Burlington is a CLEARLY posted sign indicating no right turn on red. Many times when I get caught at that red light and I'm first in line to turn right the jackass behind me blows his horn to tell me to make the turn (against the posted sign).

There are a number of those around Ottawa, one of which is a place where a right on red is risking a T-boning by a bus doing 50km/h that you can't see coming as it's a blind corner. It's amazing how many people either don't see a sign right beside the traffic signal or just ignore it because their sense of entitlement makes them think it doesn't apply to them.

But this is my favorite:




Now, a compass with show north is to the left, and south is to the right, but the bus lane in the right means you can't turn right at the top of the hill so if you want to go south, you take the lane on the left and go up and turn right so that you are facing south at the lights. There are people who don't see this sign, go up the hill, and then cut in front of buses to turn right all the time. There are "no right turn" signs at the intersection, but I guess that doesn't apply to some.
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars


- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix


digitalfutur
Sees More Than Shown
Premium
join:2000-07-15
BurlingtonON
kudos:2
reply to WhaleOilBee

The drive ahead lane merger guy is annoying but unless you see them doing it, merging traffic has right of way, whether from an on ramp or a lane closure due to construction or other reasons.

The reason why merging traffic has right of way is self-evident, especially on a highway.
--
Logic requires one to deal with decisions that one's ego will not permit.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke.



TLS2000
Crazy Canuck
Premium
join:2004-02-24
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed

Merging traffic does NOT have that right of way. They are given the merging lane so that they can match the speed of the roadway AND find a sufficient gap to merge into. If they were to cut you off and you rear ended them as a result, they'd be at fault (provided anyone bothered to hang around as a witness).

That said, purposely making it so that a person can't merge is also illegal. I believe it's called failure to share the road.
--
Tom


Viper677
Certified Home Inspector

join:2012-03-22
Toronto
reply to Kardinal

said by Kardinal:

said by Viper677:

Oh, I got one.

You dont have to leave a freaking 5 sec gap from the vehicle in front of you when you are driving at 30km/hr in a traffic jam. Close in the gap so people can get to where they need to be faster.

5 second gap at 30km/h would be 8.3m/s, so you'll be 51m closer to your destination but travelling at the same speed as you would have been 51m further back. So possibly getting there 5 seconds faster.

In a traffic jam, I'd prefer people don't dart back and forth between lanes, trying to get a few car lengths ahead, and causing traffic to slow down a bit more every time they cut in front of someone and they have to slow down even further to make the space for them.

Dont take 5 sec gap @ 30km/hr literary, these were just random #s used to make a point and yes, it does slow down the traffic flow.

If the vehicle in front of me (on a street traffic) is keeping longer than normal distance from the vehicle in front of it then it will take me longer to make a right turn that is coming up in the next few meters (again just an example).

The point is, keep less distance between cars at low speeds and keep larger distance at higher speeds.

P.S I see that every day in Markham (Woodbine Ave) Area during rush hours and no I did not say that most of these drivers are Asians. For me to say that would be being profiling, I dont do that.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to TLS2000

said by TLS2000:

Merging traffic does NOT have that right of way. They are given the merging lane so that they can match the speed of the roadway AND find a sufficient gap to merge into. If they were to cut you off and you rear ended them as a result, they'd be at fault (provided anyone bothered to hang around as a witness).

Wrong. Merging into traffic is considered a shared responsibility. You'd be both be half at fault.

The correct thing to do when someone is merging onto the highway is move over. If you can't move over you're to slow down.


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable

said by Gone:

The correct thing to do when someone is merging onto the highway is move over. If you can't move over you're to slow down.

Only if it's safe to do so. If it's not safe to do so, there's no half faults, the person that didn't move couldn't and they're fine. It's the responsibility of the person who's merging or entering a road with a yield sign to yield to the right of way of oncoming traffic.

It's nice if people move for you, sure...


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

said by urbanriot:

Only if it's safe to do so. If it's not safe to do so, there's no half faults, the person that didn't move couldn't and they're fine. It's the responsibility of the person who's merging or entering a road with a yield sign to yield to the right of way of oncoming traffic.
It's nice if people move for you, sure...

If you can't move over, you're to slow down to create a gap large enough to allow the other person to merge in. If you don't leave them a gap and they get to the end of the acceleration lane and run into you frantically trying to get in the fault is 50/50, as it's unlawful to stop on an acceleration lane and you had just as much responsibility to let them in as they had to do so without hitting you.

Like I said, it's a shared responsibility. The onus is just as much on you to let the person onto the highway as it is for the person getting onto the highway to do so in a safe manner. If you can't move over but don't slow down, you're just as much at fault if an accident happens as the person who runs into you.

Now of course, if someone blows across the solid white lines at the beginning of the acceleration lane to cut in and cracks into you, that's a completely different story.

And I'll just add, if you don't move over or don't slow down to let someone merge onto the highway, you're a douchebag driver who should be shot.


nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to Kardinal

Not to completely derail the topic, but, for my Quebec friends here, do you guys have "Flashing green" lights in your province?

I'm guessing with the horizontal traffic lights and the 2 red lights at a stop light, maybe not....

I ran into this pet peeve yesterday while out and about...there used to be signs that indicated that a flashing green means you can go and the other way it stopped, but the Quebec plated motorist at the front didn't quite get the idea until he was persuaded via honk that it was ok to turn left and the other side wasn't going to move...

I understand each province has its own laws and whatnot....maybe they should abolish the flashing green...I know in BC, or at least vancouver it means a pedestrian is crossing?...I saw it out there many moons ago and it confused the hell out of me...

I know they're turning those areas into green arrow turns eventually over time...but there are still a LOT out there in Northern Ontario...just wondered if it was the same across the board...



BryceS

join:2007-09-17
Vanier, ON
Reviews:
·ELECTRONICBOX
reply to Kardinal

said by Kardinal:

said by Viper677:

Oh, I got one.

You dont have to leave a freaking 5 sec gap from the vehicle in front of you when you are driving at 30km/hr in a traffic jam. Close in the gap so people can get to where they need to be faster.

5 second gap at 30km/h would be 8.3m/s, so you'll be 51m closer to your destination but travelling at the same speed as you would have been 51m further back. So possibly getting there 5 seconds faster.

In a traffic jam, I'd prefer people don't dart back and forth between lanes, trying to get a few car lengths ahead, and causing traffic to slow down a bit more every time they cut in front of someone and they have to slow down even further to make the space for them.

I drive a manual.

A gap will be made, so that I don't give myself gout.

Not as large as that but usually one and half car lengths.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to nitzguy

said by nitzguy:

maybe they should abolish the flashing green

They have. They're no longer allowed under the OTM and need to be replaced with a green arrow (either solid or flashing) when the lights are replaced.


BryceS

join:2007-09-17
Vanier, ON
reply to Kardinal

Do any of your cities turn off your lights around 2-3am and turn them into four way stops until 6am like my town?



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

said by BryceS:

Do any of your cities turn off your lights around 2-3am and turn them into four way stops until 6am like my town?

Niagara threw around the idea in the 90s, they ultimately decided against it.

Stuff like that is very popular on the US side of the border. There are some that flash all day except for a short period around rush hour in the evening.


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

If you can't move over, you're to slow down to create a gap large enough to allow the other person to merge in. If you don't leave them a gap and they get to the end of the acceleration lane and run into you frantically trying to get in the fault is 50/50, as it's unlawful to stop on an acceleration lane and you had just as much responsibility to let them in as they had to do so without hitting you.

Well, yes, it's a nice thing to do and it's a societal responsibility that you should do nice things, but you don't need to legally do it if you can't do it. You don't need to slow down to let people in, if the lane beside you is blocked. Just as those people don't need traffic to courteously disrupt itself so they can get in.

At the end of the day, if you're inhibited from doing nice things, you're not legally obligated to do so.

I change lanes for merging traffic because I'm a nice guy but if my lanes are blocked, I don't slow down to let people in because that's disruptive and it's not a law.


BryceS

join:2007-09-17
Vanier, ON
Reviews:
·ELECTRONICBOX

said by urbanriot:

said by Gone:

If you can't move over, you're to slow down to create a gap large enough to allow the other person to merge in. If you don't leave them a gap and they get to the end of the acceleration lane and run into you frantically trying to get in the fault is 50/50, as it's unlawful to stop on an acceleration lane and you had just as much responsibility to let them in as they had to do so without hitting you.

Well, yes, it's a nice thing to do and it's a societal responsibility that you should do nice things, but you don't need to legally do it if you can't do it. You don't need to slow down to let people in, if the lane beside you is blocked. Just as those people don't need traffic to courteously disrupt itself so they can get in.

At the end of the day, if you're inhibited from doing nice things, you're not legally obligated to do so.

I change lanes for merging traffic because I'm a nice guy but if my lanes are blocked, I don't slow down to let people in because that's disruptive and it's not a law.

You shouldn't have to slow down as they should be at highway speed 2-3 seconds after the apex of the on ramp curve anyways.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to urbanriot

said by urbanriot:

Well, yes, it's a nice thing to do and it's a societal responsibility that you should do nice things, but you don't need to legally do it if you can't do it. You don't need to slow down to let people in, if the lane beside you is blocked. Just as those people don't need traffic to courteously disrupt itself so they can get in.

Actually, you do, and if you don't and you get hit the insurance company will just ding you both with shared fault.

I'm obviously not going to convince you otherwise though, so whatever. You'll find out if not moving over or slowing down causes an accident, though.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to BryceS

said by BryceS:

You shouldn't have to slow down as they should be at highway speed 2-3 seconds after the apex of the on ramp curve anyways.

It's a much bigger issue when a highway is running near capacity where everyone is still moving at 110-120 but there isn't much headway between cars.

The whole "it's his problem, not mine" attitude is why the MTO has had to install huge bloody "Merge Ahead - Leave Gaps" signs at various onramps across the Niagara Region.


urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

said by urbanriot:

Well, yes, it's a nice thing to do and it's a societal responsibility that you should do nice things, but you don't need to legally do it if you can't do it. You don't need to slow down to let people in, if the lane beside you is blocked. Just as those people don't need traffic to courteously disrupt itself so they can get in.

Actually, you do, and if you don't and you get hit the insurance company will just ding you both with shared fault.

I'm obviously not going to convince you otherwise though, so whatever. You'll find out if not moving over or slowing down causes an accident, though.

Well, that and it's not the law.

highwire2007

join:2008-05-17
Nepean, ON
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

The whole "it's his problem, not mine" attitude is why the MTO has had to install huge bloody "Merge Ahead - Leave Gaps" signs at various onramps across the Niagara Region.

Man, southern Ontario gets all the good stuff. We don't get signs like that here. Some of the exit signs here were taken out by snowplows this past winter, and they still haven't been fixed.

There was a thread (before the DSLR crash) where I complained about how lame the 417 is here in Ottawa. With the very short on-ramps and heavy traffic, those signs would be very useful here (e.g., westbound on-ramp at Parkdale).


BryceS

join:2007-09-17
Vanier, ON
Reviews:
·ELECTRONICBOX
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

said by BryceS:

You shouldn't have to slow down as they should be at highway speed 2-3 seconds after the apex of the on ramp curve anyways.

It's a much bigger issue when a highway is running near capacity where everyone is still moving at 110-120 but there isn't much headway between cars.

The whole "it's his problem, not mine" attitude is why the MTO has had to install huge bloody "Merge Ahead - Leave Gaps" signs at various onramps across the Niagara Region.

I left highway speed instead of actual speed for a reason.

If it is empty they should be at 80/90/100/110 depending on the highway.

If it busy then match the speed of the flow of traffic to ensure a smooth transition in that doesn't make anyone slam on their brakes.

I'm not just a hick in the old country. I do about 4,000km in Toronto proper out of the 50,000km a year I put on my TDI. (Soon to be a GLI'd out TDI )


nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

said by nitzguy:

maybe they should abolish the flashing green

They have. They're no longer allowed under the OTM and need to be replaced with a green arrow (either solid or flashing) when the lights are replaced.

Noted for future reference .

Nothing like that happens in Sudbury...in regards to the turning off the lights....although I can attest to what Gone says, I don't think its a NY state thing, the Upper Penninsula in Michigan does that at I think all of their traffic lights...or the large majority of them anyways....


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to urbanriot

said by urbanriot:

Well, that and it's not the law.

There's also no law saying that you can't cut someone off. It doesn't mean that that you aren't fucked if you do and cause an accident.

Just the same, you're fucked if you don't move over/slow down to allow someone to merge into the highway and cause an accident in the process. There's also nothing stopping them from charging you with careless, either.

It's a shared responsibility. Neither the driver already on the highway nor the person entering the highway has the right-of-way over the other. Always has been that way and always will be.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to BryceS

said by BryceS:

If it busy then match the speed of the flow of traffic to ensure a smooth transition in that doesn't make anyone slam on their brakes.

In a perfect world this would make sense, but when the highway is congested with no more than a car length between vehicles and you've got assholes who think they have the right of way and refuse to slow down to let the poor bastard with the end of an acceleration lane barrelling down on him merge in, you end up with a nasty situation. This is why it's a shared responsibility. The only time it isn't shared are situations where there is a stop or yield sign at the end of a ramp (e.g. Pine Street ramp in Thorold has a stop sign, and there are ones on the 420 with yield signs). In those cases, drivers already on the highway have the right-of-way and you need to wait.

And geez, I'm not saying you need to slam on the brakes. Just take your food off the goddamn accelerator for a few seconds to leave a big enough gap for a car to fit in.