DC - "No Right Turn On Red" - Why????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to know how many millions of pounds of carbon will be released into the atmosphere each year because engines idling unnecessarily at red lights.

I guess we can blame the Council and the bike mafia for global warming now.

"Unnecessarily" why? There's nothing unnecessary about safer streets.

"Traffic calming" doesnt actually make the streets any safer. The number of people killed by speeding drivers in Washington DC is more or less the same every single year (around 10) for the past 25 years. Traffic calming does force drivers to sit in traffic longer which increases greenhouse gas emissions.

The number of people in DC killed by speeding drivers in past dozen years, per the government:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

Not this shit again . . .

For the umpteenth time, unless you believe that crashes always have a single cause - or don’t care because you believe your point matters more than truth - these numbers (whoever compiled them) are absolutely meaningless.

No one ever said anything about crashes having a single cause. They are the official number of traffic deaths each year in Washington D.C. in which speeding was the "predominant" cause according to the DC government. Here's the numbers again:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

If all the "traffic calming" measures the city has implemented over the years (and there are many!) have actually reduced deaths, please point out which year they began to reduce deaths.

In your previous post, you presented these numbers as the “number of people in DC killed by speeding drivers in past dozen years”.

Now you are claiming that they represent something different, which by the way is absolutely meaningless.

You are person who lies about data in order to make the streets of DC less safe. It’s hard to imagine of a more vile use of time. Please get lost and stay lost.

Those are the official numbers. I'm just asking when you think traffic calming began reducing traffic deaths. It's a simple and fair question. Your tortured, mealy mouthed excuses demonstrate to everyone reading this that you have no clue if traffic calming has accomplished, aside from aggravating drivers and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Here's the numbers again for everyone to see.

The official number of traffic deaths each year in Washington D.C. in which speeding was the "predominant" cause according to the DC government:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

lol

and lol some more

Sweetie, you're just the foil here. The real audience is all the people reading this. If they were a jury, they would think you're an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've just noticed all the "new" (to me) signs for No Turn On Red. Why? It seems more dangerous for pedestrians crossing the street as cars that have been obeying the law (sitting there with no traffic coming, now try to turn while pedestrians/bikes are crossing. When are the cars supposed to go, especially on pedestrian heavy crosswalks? Sigh...I need to start going to the council meetings.

Because drivers tend to look left and if no one is coming, go ahead and make a right turn, right into a pedestrian. It is dangerous as eff.

Sounds like an old wive's tale. You got any evidence that drivers actually tend to do that?

Apparently you never walk anywhere, because if you did, you would have seen it with your own eyes.

You also never drive anywhere, because if you did, you would be aware that you yourself do it, all the time.

-literally an old wive

[Anonymous]

I've definitely almost been hit by someone doing a right on red while crossing with the crosswalk.

I've also experienced that, as a driver, there are some people who thinks right on red has right of way over a left turn on a green light, even a left turn with a green arrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've just noticed all the "new" (to me) signs for No Turn On Red. Why? It seems more dangerous for pedestrians crossing the street as cars that have been obeying the law (sitting there with no traffic coming, now try to turn while pedestrians/bikes are crossing. When are the cars supposed to go, especially on pedestrian heavy crosswalks? Sigh...I need to start going to the council meetings.

Because drivers tend to look left and if no one is coming, go ahead and make a right turn, right into a pedestrian. It is dangerous as eff.

Sounds like an old wive's tale. You got any evidence that drivers actually tend to do that?

Apparently you never walk anywhere, because if you did, you would have seen it with your own eyes.

You also never drive anywhere, because if you did, you would be aware that you yourself do it, all the time.

-literally an old wive

Translation: This is completely apocryphal.

[Anonymous]

To all of those supporting no right on red, I hope you also will be calling for all pedestrians to stay on the curb as soon as the walk signal turns flashing orange. Under the law, if you are in the intersection, you may finish crossing, but if you haven’t started, you need to wait until the next walk cycle. Too many walkers start after the light begins to flash, which reduces the time for cars to turn. If everyone wants safer intersections, everyone has to do their part.

[Anonymous]

There would be way fewer accidents in DC if pedestrians did not act like they had a death wish. People seem to step off the curb without even looking around them to see what else is going on. Walkers in suburbs do not generally act like this. Definitely it’s not how I taught my kids to cross a street.

Until there are changes in pedestrian practices you won’t see a meaningful drop in those death stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to know how many millions of pounds of carbon will be released into the atmosphere each year because engines idling unnecessarily at red lights.

I guess we can blame the Council and the bike mafia for global warming now.

"Unnecessarily" why? There's nothing unnecessary about safer streets.

"Traffic calming" doesnt actually make the streets any safer. The number of people killed by speeding drivers in Washington DC is more or less the same every single year (around 10) for the past 25 years. Traffic calming does force drivers to sit in traffic longer which increases greenhouse gas emissions.

The number of people in DC killed by speeding drivers in past dozen years, per the government:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

Not this shit again . . .

For the umpteenth time, unless you believe that crashes always have a single cause - or don’t care because you believe your point matters more than truth - these numbers (whoever compiled them) are absolutely meaningless.

No one ever said anything about crashes having a single cause. They are the official number of traffic deaths each year in Washington D.C. in which speeding was the "predominant" cause according to the DC government. Here's the numbers again:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

If all the "traffic calming" measures the city has implemented over the years (and there are many!) have actually reduced deaths, please point out which year they began to reduce deaths.

In your previous post, you presented these numbers as the “number of people in DC killed by speeding drivers in past dozen years”.

Now you are claiming that they represent something different, which by the way is absolutely meaningless.

You are person who lies about data in order to make the streets of DC less safe. It’s hard to imagine of a more vile use of time. Please get lost and stay lost.

Those are the official numbers. I'm just asking when you think traffic calming began reducing traffic deaths. It's a simple and fair question. Your tortured, mealy mouthed excuses demonstrate to everyone reading this that you have no clue if traffic calming has accomplished, aside from aggravating drivers and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Here's the numbers again for everyone to see.

The official number of traffic deaths each year in Washington D.C. in which speeding was the "predominant" cause according to the DC government:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

You are the epitome of everything that is wrong with this era in American democracy.

After combing the internet incessantly for a patina of information to confirm your biases, you found a few numbers in an MPD publication that you seem to think help you out.

You have taken to posting these numbers on every single thread that is peripherally related to traffic safety and pretending to be an expert. Seemingly there are some gullible folk out there who share your biases and eagerly buy in to your nonsense.

The problem is that you understand absolutely nothing about crash investigations, statistics, causal inference, road traffic, or other topics relevant to the discussion.

Many others have pointed out to you the fatal flaws in your thesis and you just ignore them and carry on with your nonsense in defiance.

It’s pathetic and disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There would be way fewer accidents in DC if pedestrians did not act like they had a death wish. People seem to step off the curb without even looking around them to see what else is going on. Walkers in suburbs do not generally act like this. Definitely it’s not how I taught my kids to cross a street.

Until there are changes in pedestrian practices you won’t see a meaningful drop in those death stats.

Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled since 2009. That increase is not because of pedestrian behavior. Its because of changes in the vehicle mix and driver behavior.

[Anonymous]

"Right turn on red" was always designed for suburbs and rural roads. The law started in the 70s to attempt to conserve fuel during a shortage, and it failed to serve that purpose anyway.

It has always been the case that you were not allowed to turn on red when pedestrians are present; you must yield to pedestrians. No one follows that part of the law in city driving, and if they did, no one would be turning on red much anyway because pedestrians are almost always present, so it is easier just to outlaw it and eliminate the constant mistakes people make.

The current municipal regulation has so many exceptions and restrictions on turning on red, it is generally outlawed anyway (if you can understand and are following the law).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alexandria recently added a bunch of "no right on red" signs at almost every intersection from Old Town to Del Ray. It's bonkers. I say this as a pedestrian over half the time.

Good drivers were mindful before the signs. Signs don't stop bad drivers.

The signs do absolutely nothing regarding safety.

Maybe drivers in Alexandria are special, but in my experience not in Alexandria, there are plenty of drivers who obey the no right on red signs. Not all, but a lot more than if there's no sign.

I agree that there are also plenty of drivers who ignore signs, which is why it takes more than just no right on red signs to make a crossing safe. But the no right on red signs do help.

How does no right on red make crossing safe? The whole point of right on red is that pedestrians are not supposed to be crossing the cross street when that light is green.

That is incorrect. The 'whole point' of turning right on red was to save fuel, which it didn't.

Also, the "whole point" of turning on red was never that pedestrians should not be crossing, because you actually are not allowed to turn on red if pedestrians are present, you must always yield to pedestrians if turning on red. Also, you may not block a crosswalk, which you are doing if you are turning on red when pedestrians are present. A pedestrian on a corner may be crossing in front of you or where you are turning -- you don't get to assume which that may be. You yield.

So, these common misconceptions, are actually driver error and violations of the regulations, and because these misconceptions and errors are so very common and passed form ignorant parents to the new driving teens, it is best to make the law crystal clear for everyone by banning it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd love to know how many millions of pounds of carbon will be released into the atmosphere each year because engines idling unnecessarily at red lights.

I guess we can blame the Council and the bike mafia for global warming now.

"Unnecessarily" why? There's nothing unnecessary about safer streets.

"Traffic calming" doesnt actually make the streets any safer. The number of people killed by speeding drivers in Washington DC is more or less the same every single year (around 10) for the past 25 years. Traffic calming does force drivers to sit in traffic longer which increases greenhouse gas emissions.

The number of people in DC killed by speeding drivers in past dozen years, per the government:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

Not this shit again . . .

For the umpteenth time, unless you believe that crashes always have a single cause - or don’t care because you believe your point matters more than truth - these numbers (whoever compiled them) are absolutely meaningless.

No one ever said anything about crashes having a single cause. They are the official number of traffic deaths each year in Washington D.C. in which speeding was the "predominant" cause according to the DC government. Here's the numbers again:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

If all the "traffic calming" measures the city has implemented over the years (and there are many!) have actually reduced deaths, please point out which year they began to reduce deaths.

In your previous post, you presented these numbers as the “number of people in DC killed by speeding drivers in past dozen years”.

Now you are claiming that they represent something different, which by the way is absolutely meaningless.

You are person who lies about data in order to make the streets of DC less safe. It’s hard to imagine of a more vile use of time. Please get lost and stay lost.

Those are the official numbers. I'm just asking when you think traffic calming began reducing traffic deaths. It's a simple and fair question. Your tortured, mealy mouthed excuses demonstrate to everyone reading this that you have no clue if traffic calming has accomplished, aside from aggravating drivers and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Here's the numbers again for everyone to see.

The official number of traffic deaths each year in Washington D.C. in which speeding was the "predominant" cause according to the DC government:

2022 -- 9
2021 -- 12
2020 -- 15
2019 -- 10
2018 -- 9
2017 -- 12
2016 -- 8
2015 -- 11
2014 -- 12
2013 -- 11
2012 -- 5
2011 -- 15
2010 -- 8

You are the epitome of everything that is wrong with this era in American democracy.

After combing the internet incessantly for a patina of information to confirm your biases, you found a few numbers in an MPD publication that you seem to think help you out.

You have taken to posting these numbers on every single thread that is peripherally related to traffic safety and pretending to be an expert. Seemingly there are some gullible folk out there who share your biases and eagerly buy in to your nonsense.

The problem is that you understand absolutely nothing about crash investigations, statistics, causal inference, road traffic, or other topics relevant to the discussion.

Many others have pointed out to you the fatal flaws in your thesis and you just ignore them and carry on with your nonsense in defiance.

It’s pathetic and disgusting.

It's pathetic and disgusting to ask what all the traffic calming measures the city has undertaken over the years have accomplished? To be fair, it's hard to see how they've made any difference in the number of people killed each year by speeding drivers. There's not really any clear pattern in the numbers. If anything, the numbers are remarkably stable. They don't really vary each year in a statistically significant way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There would be way fewer accidents in DC if pedestrians did not act like they had a death wish. People seem to step off the curb without even looking around them to see what else is going on. Walkers in suburbs do not generally act like this. Definitely it’s not how I taught my kids to cross a street.

Until there are changes in pedestrian practices you won’t see a meaningful drop in those death stats.

Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled since 2009. That increase is not because of pedestrian behavior. Its because of changes in the vehicle mix and driver behavior.

And they've stayed the same since 2007. Funny how easy it is to cherrypick data. Pedestrian deaths have stayed in range for a long time.

But what is really funny is that pedestrian deaths increased 40% since traffic "calming" was instituted in earnest. Congestion makes things worse not better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There would be way fewer accidents in DC if pedestrians did not act like they had a death wish. People seem to step off the curb without even looking around them to see what else is going on. Walkers in suburbs do not generally act like this. Definitely it’s not how I taught my kids to cross a street.

Until there are changes in pedestrian practices you won’t see a meaningful drop in those death stats.

Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled since 2009. That increase is not because of pedestrian behavior. Its because of changes in the vehicle mix and driver behavior.

And they've stayed the same since 2007. Funny how easy it is to cherrypick data. Pedestrian deaths have stayed in range for a long time.

But what is really funny is that pedestrian deaths increased 40% since traffic "calming" was instituted in earnest. Congestion makes things worse not better.

In 2022, about one-third of all traffic deaths in DC was blamed on the pedestrian, per the police department. There was 12 deaths attributed to "pedestrian error" which was twice as many as the year before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There would be way fewer accidents in DC if pedestrians did not act like they had a death wish. People seem to step off the curb without even looking around them to see what else is going on. Walkers in suburbs do not generally act like this. Definitely it’s not how I taught my kids to cross a street.

Until there are changes in pedestrian practices you won’t see a meaningful drop in those death stats.

Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled since 2009. That increase is not because of pedestrian behavior. Its because of changes in the vehicle mix and driver behavior.

And they've stayed the same since 2007. Funny how easy it is to cherrypick data. Pedestrian deaths have stayed in range for a long time.

But what is really funny is that pedestrian deaths increased 40% since traffic "calming" was instituted in earnest. Congestion makes things worse not better.

The numbers are up nationally during the 2007-2023 period as well. Going from roughly 4,700 to 7,500. Those increases can't be attributed to anything DC specific. Most likely DC trends are part of the larger national trends. Those trends being larger/taller vehicles, more aggressive driving and distracting screens everywhere. The lower speed limits, prohibitions of right on red and other changes are attempts to get back to the same harm budget of a decade ago. If that leads to slower traffic, drivers can really only blame themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There would be way fewer accidents in DC if pedestrians did not act like they had a death wish. People seem to step off the curb without even looking around them to see what else is going on. Walkers in suburbs do not generally act like this. Definitely it’s not how I taught my kids to cross a street.

Until there are changes in pedestrian practices you won’t see a meaningful drop in those death stats.

Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled since 2009. That increase is not because of pedestrian behavior. Its because of changes in the vehicle mix and driver behavior.

And they've stayed the same since 2007. Funny how easy it is to cherrypick data. Pedestrian deaths have stayed in range for a long time.

But what is really funny is that pedestrian deaths increased 40% since traffic "calming" was instituted in earnest. Congestion makes things worse not better.

The numbers are up nationally during the 2007-2023 period as well. Going from roughly 4,700 to 7,500. Those increases can't be attributed to anything DC specific. Most likely DC trends are part of the larger national trends. Those trends being larger/taller vehicles, more aggressive driving and distracting screens everywhere. The lower speed limits, prohibitions of right on red and other changes are attempts to get back to the same harm budget of a decade ago. If that leads to slower traffic, drivers can really only blame themselves.

If that leads to slower traffic, drivers can be grateful, because it's safer for drivers and passengers too.