Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.

 Prev 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next

## bazzer

3152 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 177

Trusted

 Reply # 390761 12-Oct-2010 09:20 NickiB: Bung: If you read the accompanying text the writer of that blog drew the diagram to illustrate the point I made, that the left turning car gives way to the right turning car and the car going straight through waits. The discussion then covered whether or not many roads were wide enough for the following car to be able to proceed without waiting.Just wrote a damn reply and GZ lost it when I hit post >(I skimmed the words and thought they had it right. in fact they are wrong, the order is blue, yellow, red. However my main point was to show a diagram (should have detached it and posted it, was lazy) that had three cars in it, unlike the simplistic road code diagrams. If they actually covered this properly we might get a final answer!The legislation isn't much more help either:(2) A driver changing lanes or about to change lanes, or turning or about to turn, must give way to any vehicle not changing lanes, or not making a turn.(2A) A driver turning or about to turn to his or her left must give way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction and lawfully turning or about to turn to its right. However, I would interpret this as: the left turning car must give way to traffic turning right lawfully. A right turning car who is turning into straight through (ie oncoming) traffic is making the turn unlawfully. Therefore the left turner does not have to give way to them (although would in practice, if the right turner gunned it, to try and avoid the carnage in the second diagram in the previous link).That's my final word (promise!). Unless we can get someone with some authority on this, we may have to agree to disagree until the law is changed. But there's no straight through traffic, because the car at the front of the queue is turning left!  The straight car only "covers" you if it's actually coming through, not if you're blocking it.  Are you seriously saying that if there's a car coming straight though behind you that can't get past, you think the left turning car still has right of way?  And you've been driving like this your whole life and never had an accident?!  How long have you been driving for?I think that blog you linked to had the thought process dead on:Blue car – “Righty-oh then, I’d better give way to the red chap. Unless of course the yellow fellow behind me is planning on slipping past my rear, in which case I could in fact turn left.”Red car – “Shut bro, I’ve got the right of way here, but I dunno what this dude in the yellow Mutsubushi is planning to do.”Yellow car – “If this little prick in front just nudges ahead three more inches I’m gonna floor it and screw anyone who gets in the way.”So in your case, you're blue and you say "The yellow guy behind me gives me the right of way"?  It seems like everything else you read is wrong and only you have it right.  Can this be so?  Wow, I really need to find out the 100% confirmed correct rules here because that sounds ridiculous.  Don't we have some police officers here?

## Teeps

430 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

 Reply # 390779 12-Oct-2010 09:51 All this discussion and confusion to who really has right of way just proves it's the right thing to change this rule. Road rules should be plain and clear to reduce the chance of accidents, having rules that are open to interpretation are wrong as you have all proved you have different opinions on how this rule is used. There is a reason no other country in the world has this rule and this discussion is proving why it's not used elsewhere and why it is thankfully being changed here.

## bazzer

3152 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 177

Trusted

 Reply # 390793 12-Oct-2010 10:18 Teeps: All this discussion and confusion to who really has right of way just proves it's the right thing to change this rule. Road rules should be plain and clear to reduce the chance of accidents, having rules that are open to interpretation are wrong as you have all proved you have different opinions on how this rule is used. There is a reason no other country in the world has this rule and this discussion is proving why it's not used elsewhere and why it is thankfully being changed here.On the other hand, we have someone who, in my opinion, doesn't know how to properly apply the existing rule and she's never had a crash.  It must have something going for it.Now I just need to wait and find out that the way I've been applying the rule for the last 15 years or more is wrong and learn the right way just in time for the law change!

## Teeps

430 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

 Reply # 390798 12-Oct-2010 10:35 bazzer: On the other hand, we have someone who, in my opinion, doesn't know how to properly apply the existing rule and she's never had a crash.? It must have something going for it.Now I just need to wait and find out that the way I've been applying the rule for the last 15 years or more is wrong and learn the right way just in time for the law change! At least NickiB realises (unlike too many) that there are other cars on the road and you need to look behind you and consider what the traffic behind you is doung as well as the vehicles waiting to cross in front of you.

## NickiB

147 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

 Reply # 390806 12-Oct-2010 10:47 I'm applying the rule as I was taught by two different driving instructors! And here, the AA back me up:"The most obvious deficiency with the existing rule occurs when two cars travelling in opposite directions reach a T-intersection at the same time. In theory, the car turning right across the oncoming stream of traffic has precedence over the car turning left with the traffic behind it. But the car turning right may have to first give way to oncoming traffic following behind the turning vehicle." nOOb alert

## Teeps

430 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

 Reply # 390807 12-Oct-2010 10:49 Let's consider this situation if a motorbike is following the car turning left. The motorcycle would be perfectly within it's right to pass the car turning left as it could do so without crossing the central line thus taking away the discussion on whether a vehicle is 'barging past' etc. The car turning left would (hopefully) have looked behind and seen the motorcyclist and thus realised that they 'may' pass as this is their legal right to do so. What should happen in this situation? The vehicle turning right may have seen the motorbike, it may have not, this is one BIG disaster in the making as all may go ahead or all may stop. As a motorcyclist myself I always ride defensively with the knowledge that most caged drivers just don't know you're there and will knock you off your bike without even seeing you, clearer road rules for all the blinkered drivers out there who only think of their own progress down a road will at least give the rest of us a chance of not having to second guess what way other road users may want to interpret the law.

## bazzer

3152 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 177

Trusted

 Reply # 390815 12-Oct-2010 10:58 NickiB: I'm applying the rule as I was taught by two different driving instructors! And here, the AA back me up:"The most obvious deficiency with the existing rule occurs when two cars travelling in opposite directions reach a T-intersection at the same time. In theory, the car turning right across the oncoming stream of traffic has precedence over the car turning left with the traffic behind it. But the car turning right may have to first give way to oncoming traffic following behind the turning vehicle."Or to give it different emphasis:"But the car turning right may have to first give way to oncoming traffic following behind the turning vehicle."I understood your view to be that the right turning car always has to give way.  In that case, I believe you were either taught wrong or misinterpreted the rule.  In what situation would the right hand car not have to give way, in your opinion?

## Teeps

430 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

 Reply # 390852 12-Oct-2010 11:51 bazzer: NickiB: I'm applying the rule as I was taught by two different driving instructors! And here, the AA?back me up:"The most obvious deficiency with the existing rule occurs when two cars travelling in opposite directions reach a T-intersection at the same time. In theory, the car turning right across the oncoming stream of traffic has precedence over the car turning left with the traffic behind it. But the car turning right may have to first give way to oncoming traffic following behind the turning vehicle."Or to give it different emphasis:"But the car turning right may have to first give way to oncoming traffic following behind the turning vehicle."I understood your view to be that the right turning car always has to give way.? In that case, I believe you were either taught wrong or misinterpreted the rule.? In what situation would the right hand car not have to give way, in your opinion?I think you may have misunderstood what NickiB was saying then, I don't think there was ever an 'always' said, hence the problem with the existing rules

## NickiB

147 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

 Reply # 390876 12-Oct-2010 12:37 bazzer: Or to give it different emphasis:"But the car turning right may have to first give way to oncoming traffic following behind the turning vehicle."I understood your view to be that the right turning car always has to give way.  In that case, I believe you were either taught wrong or misinterpreted the rule.  In what situation would the right hand car not have to give way, in your opinion?The legislation states the 'always': A driver changing lanes or about to change lanes, or turning or about to turn, must give way to any vehicle not changing lanes, or not making a turn.Therefore:The right turning car must give way to any (or all) oncoming traffic. If there is no oncoming traffic, then they have right of way over left turning traffic.What the AA is saying is that as a left turning car, you have to be aware that there may be oncoming traffic in existance which the right turner has to give way to first (not that they may have to give way to some oncoming traffic and not other oncoming traffic), in which case you are free to make your left turn. nOOb alert

## bazzer

3152 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 177

Trusted

 Reply # 390884 12-Oct-2010 12:45 Teeps: I think you may have misunderstood what NickiB was saying then, I don't think there was ever an 'always' said, hence the problem with the existing rulesIn which case I wholeheartedly apologise to NickiB for questioning her driving skills :)  It was #387697,  #387744 and #390616 that initiated my confusion.NickiB seems to be suggesting that the car turning left in the example has the right of way if there is a car behind going straight through.  Bung pointed out that in the example, there's no room for the car going straight to get past without crossing the centre line (i.e. it is stuck behind the left turning car).  NickiB counters with her assertion it's not an issue because the left turning car should go since it is "covered" by the straight through car.I interpreted this as saying it didn't matter if the straight through car could get through or not, the very fact that the straight car is there at all behind the left turning car gives the left turning car the right of way.  If this is not NickiB's interpretation of the rule then as I say, I'm very sorry.  If it is her view, then is it wrong?  I have always assumed that turning left I only have the right of way when a car is actually coming straight through past me (either in another lane or in the portion of lane that I've left vacant).

## bazzer

3152 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 177

Trusted

 Reply # 390887 12-Oct-2010 12:48 NickiB: The right turning car must give way to any (or all) oncoming traffic. If there is no oncoming traffic, then they have right of way over left turning traffic.I don't believe that right turning traffic has to give way to traffic going straight through that is stuck behind left turning traffic.  That's absurd.  How far back in the queue do you go?  If the queue is left, left, left, left, straight then you think the right turning traffic should give way?P.S. I am willing (and even eager) to be corrected.  Have I been driving wrong all these years or have I still misunderstood you?P.P.S. I just want to clarify.  I agree in principle that turning gives way to straight.  The point I disagree with, I suppose, is that a car going straight stuck behind a left turning car (unable to get past without crossing the centre line) counts as "oncoming traffic".Edit: Edited to try and clarify my thoughts...

## Teeps

430 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

 Reply # 390921 12-Oct-2010 13:10 bazzer: P.P.S. I just want to clarify.? I agree in principle that turning gives way to straight.? The point I disagree with, I suppose,?is that a car going straight stuck behind a left turning car (unable to get past without crossing the centre line) counts as "oncoming traffic".Edit:?Edited to try and?clarify my thoughts...I totally agree with this and think I will go back and read NickiB's earlier comments myself as it looks like I may have misunderstood what was being said.

## Evolbob

69 posts

Master Geek

 Reply # 391139 13-Oct-2010 00:50 bazzer: NickiB: The right turning car must give way to any (or all) oncoming traffic. If there is no oncoming traffic, then they have right of way over left turning traffic.I don't believe that right turning traffic has to give way to traffic going straight through that is stuck behind left turning traffic.  That's absurd.  How far back in the queue do you go?  If the queue is left, left, left, left, straight then you think the right turning traffic should give way?...No it is not absurd and I can prove it. The rule is the right turning car can only go if ONE car is turning left, otherwise it must GIVE WAY to all other traffic.  If the current rule is changed then it can NOT turn until the way is clear - which is more absurd as you support it?When turning left I usually check behind or notice the right turning car is giving way to me, it matters not what the cars behind me are doing, or whether they can pass or trapped until I go, I have the right of way.  Of course this is just theory, and in practice if the right turning person sees a queue behind me, he'll try to go or I'll let her go first - because consideration and courtesy is the number one road rule we should all obey. It was the main reason this rule came into being in the first place, so the right turning car had a chance to go if only 1 car was turning left.  It did help reduce the long queues of right turning traffic.As this new rule isn't taking effect until after the elections next year, I'd suggest vote lobbying as the way to go, as this is one time a political change will save lives.  Save a life, don't vote National, it could be yours.

## bazzer

3152 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 177

Trusted

 Reply # 391206 13-Oct-2010 10:03 Evolbob: No it is not absurd and I can prove it. The rule is the right turning car can only go if ONE car is turning left, otherwise it must GIVE WAY to all other traffic.  If the current rule is changed then it can NOT turn until the way is clear - which is more absurd as you support it?When turning left I usually check behind or notice the right turning car is giving way to me, it matters not what the cars behind me are doing, or whether they can pass or trapped until I go, I have the right of way.  Of course this is just theory, and in practice if the right turning person sees a queue behind me, he'll try to go or I'll let her go first - because consideration and courtesy is the number one road rule we should all obey. It was the main reason this rule came into being in the first place, so the right turning car had a chance to go if only 1 car was turning left.  It did help reduce the long queues of right turning traffic.As this new rule isn't taking effect until after the elections next year, I'd suggest vote lobbying as the way to go, as this is one time a political change will save lives.  Save a life, don't vote National, it could be yours.I didn't make any comment on whether the new rule would be better or not, but other than the fact I generally don't like change, I've come around to the idea actually.So, this is the rule?  If the only car is a left turning car, then the right turning car has right of way?  If there's more than one car in the queue (regardless of whether they're turning left or going straight) then the left turning car at the front has right of way?  I can't believe I've been driving incorrectly all these years, I feel like an idiot, lucky to be alive, probably!

## freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
53384 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6573

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Subscriber

 Reply # 391208 13-Oct-2010 10:05 No, this is not the rule. The rule is clear: a left turning car must giveaway to a right turning car. The left turn car stops and waits. Traffic behind it stops. Everyone is safe. If the rule was the other way then how could people be safe? If some are driving around with a distorted understanding rule, then they should not have a driver licence.
 Prev 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next

Twitter & Pushbullet »
Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:

Follow us to receive updates on your mobile device or browser via Pushbullet:

Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.

©2002-2015 Geekzone®