Misreperesention of relative stopping distances of cars and trucks in Ny Driver's Manual

Please take heed!

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> >You waited 2 full seconds to see if the person ahead of you was going to
>> >stop?
>>
>> No, I kept going at my existing rate of speed hoping they wouldn't be
>> an idiot since they would not have been in violation of the law if
>> they continued on through the intersection.
>
> A light changing to amber means that it is about to turn red. You waited
> two full
> seconds. The driver ahead, according to your story, also had time to make
> that
> decision and come to a full stop. That is what she was supposed to do, and
> since
> you were behind him, that is exactly what you should have anticipated. It
> might be
> a different matter if you were at the head of the line, but your big error
> was not
> in anticipating that you could make it through the light, but that your
> decision
> was based on what the vehicle ahead of you would do. As it turned out, she
> stopped.
<<snip>>

Top wrote:
> Olaf Gustafson wrote:
> > Dave Smith wrote:

> > > You waited 2 full seconds to see if the person ahead of you was
> > > going to stop?
> >
> > No, I kept going at my existing rate of speed hoping they wouldn't
> > be an idiot since they would not have been in violation of the law
> > if they continued on through the intersection.
>
> You would be better off to plan for the worst. If the worst happens
> you're ready and not waiting hoping someone else will do what you
> want them to do.

Specifically, with traffic lights, don't commit yourself to crossing
the line until the guy in front has cleared it.

In the UK, we are *permitted* to cross amber lights when not doing so
is likely to cause an accident, but it is *NEVER* wise to assume that
the fellow in front *will* do so.

A former colleague stopped for amber lights *and got hit from behind*
on two or three occasions in a fairly short period. Each time, fault
lay with the guy who hit him. That said, I made sure I told him that
(judging by his descriptions) *I* would *quite legally* have crossed
the amber light each time to avoid getting hit.

Some time back, I was approaching a particular set of lights with
someone else uncomfortably close behind when they turned amber. I
knew full well that I *could* stop before reaching the line, but
judged it safer to continue. I was not at all surprised when the
chap followed me through.

A few days later, I was, as far as I could tell, the same distance
from the same lights and at the same speed, but with a clear road
behind me, when they turned amber. I stopped smoothly before the
line without getting anywhere near triggering the ABS.

Both decisions on my part were legal and correct.

Top wrote:
> Olaf Gustafson wrote:
> > Dave Smith wrote:

> > > You waited 2 full seconds to see if the person ahead of you was
> > > going to stop?
> >
> > No, I kept going at my existing rate of speed hoping they wouldn't
> > be an idiot since they would not have been in violation of the law
> > if they continued on through the intersection.
>
> You would be better off to plan for the worst. If the worst happens
> you're ready and not waiting hoping someone else will do what you
> want them to do.

Specifically, with traffic lights, don't commit yourself to crossing
the line until the guy in front has cleared it.

In the UK, we are *permitted* to cross amber lights when not doing so
is likely to cause an accident, but it is *NEVER* wise to assume that
the fellow in front *will* do so.

A former colleague stopped for amber lights *and got hit from behind*
on two or three occasions in a fairly short period. Each time, fault
lay with the guy who hit him. That said, I made sure I told him that
(judging by his descriptions) *I* would *quite legally* have crossed
the amber light each time to avoid getting hit.

Some time back, I was approaching a particular set of lights with
someone else uncomfortably close behind when they turned amber. I
knew full well that I *could* stop before reaching the line, but
judged it safer to continue. I was not at all surprised when the
chap followed me through.

A few days later, I was, as far as I could tell, the same distance
from the same lights and at the same speed, but with a clear road
behind me, when they turned amber. I stopped smoothly before the
line without getting anywhere near triggering the ABS.

Both decisions on my part were legal and correct.

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 12:09:15 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>
>
>> If my reaction time had been as bad as hers though, I wouldn't have
>> hit the brakes until after the force of the impact had already stopped
>> me.
>
>But your reaction time has already been proved to be faulty. Part of reaction time
>is the recognition of a light change and the time it takes to consider the traffic
>situation, make your decision and to act. You apparently misjudged the situation.
>For some reason you decided that you should wait and see what she was gong to do.
>According to you, that was two seconds,


Yeah, and I didn't have a stop watch, so who knows...I do know that my
reaction time was cat-like enough that I could have chosen to stop
long before she hit her brakes - several times in fact.

> and two seconds is a hell of a long time to
>hold back when you are traveling down the road at speed.

Which was already reduced due to traffic.

>
>I would suggest that this should be a valuable learning experience for you,

Yeah, sure.......I'll be sure and make a note of it.

>and
>that the next time you see a light change you should quickly consider your need to
>slow down and stop and not base your decision on the driver ahead opting to run the
>light.

They wouldn't have been running the light though - neither would I
have been.

>Instead, you should be assuming that the driver ahead is going to stop.

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 12:09:15 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>
>
>> If my reaction time had been as bad as hers though, I wouldn't have
>> hit the brakes until after the force of the impact had already stopped
>> me.
>
>But your reaction time has already been proved to be faulty. Part of reaction time
>is the recognition of a light change and the time it takes to consider the traffic
>situation, make your decision and to act. You apparently misjudged the situation.
>For some reason you decided that you should wait and see what she was gong to do.
>According to you, that was two seconds,


Yeah, and I didn't have a stop watch, so who knows...I do know that my
reaction time was cat-like enough that I could have chosen to stop
long before she hit her brakes - several times in fact.

> and two seconds is a hell of a long time to
>hold back when you are traveling down the road at speed.

Which was already reduced due to traffic.

>
>I would suggest that this should be a valuable learning experience for you,

Yeah, sure.......I'll be sure and make a note of it.

>and
>that the next time you see a light change you should quickly consider your need to
>slow down and stop and not base your decision on the driver ahead opting to run the
>light.

They wouldn't have been running the light though - neither would I
have been.

>Instead, you should be assuming that the driver ahead is going to stop.

Dave Smith wrote:
> Robert Briggs wrote:

> > In the UK, we are *permitted* to cross amber lights when not doing so
> > is likely to cause an accident, but it is *NEVER* wise to assume that
> > the fellow in front *will* do so.
>
> I would be interested in seeing how that law is worded. here in Ontario
> the law says " Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing a
> circular amber indication and facing the indication shall stop his or her
> vehicle if he or she can do so safely, otherwise he or she may proceed
> with caution" .

The wording in the UK's Highway Code is somewhat different, but the
meaning is similar:

"AMBER means 'Stop' at the stopline. You may go on only if
the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or
are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident"

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs01.shtml

> > Some time back, I was approaching a particular set of lights with
> > someone else uncomfortably close behind when they turned amber. I
> > knew full well that I *could* stop before reaching the line, but
> > judged it safer to continue. I was not at all surprised when the
> > chap followed me through.
>
> It happened to me the other day. I was approaching the intersection when
> the light changed. I could have stopped, but I didn't. I made it through
> before the light changed. It's a good thing I did, because the driver
> behind me blew the red.

Very often it's more than just one who follows through: maybe one will
(illegally) catch the late amber and others will blatantly run the red.

When I have known full well that I had the braking performance to stop
smoothly, I've certainly had four following through on many occasions:
it's a pity the fifth has not (so far, at least) proved to be a cop.

Dave Smith wrote:
> Robert Briggs wrote:

> > In the UK, we are *permitted* to cross amber lights when not doing so
> > is likely to cause an accident, but it is *NEVER* wise to assume that
> > the fellow in front *will* do so.
>
> I would be interested in seeing how that law is worded. here in Ontario
> the law says " Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing a
> circular amber indication and facing the indication shall stop his or her
> vehicle if he or she can do so safely, otherwise he or she may proceed
> with caution" .

The wording in the UK's Highway Code is somewhat different, but the
meaning is similar:

"AMBER means 'Stop' at the stopline. You may go on only if
the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or
are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident"

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs01.shtml

> > Some time back, I was approaching a particular set of lights with
> > someone else uncomfortably close behind when they turned amber. I
> > knew full well that I *could* stop before reaching the line, but
> > judged it safer to continue. I was not at all surprised when the
> > chap followed me through.
>
> It happened to me the other day. I was approaching the intersection when
> the light changed. I could have stopped, but I didn't. I made it through
> before the light changed. It's a good thing I did, because the driver
> behind me blew the red.

Very often it's more than just one who follows through: maybe one will
(illegally) catch the late amber and others will blatantly run the red.

When I have known full well that I had the braking performance to stop
smoothly, I've certainly had four following through on many occasions:
it's a pity the fifth has not (so far, at least) proved to be a cop.

In article >,
Robert Briggs > wrote:
>Top wrote:
>>
>> You would be better off to plan for the worst. If the worst happens
>> you're ready and not waiting hoping someone else will do what you
>> want them to do.
>
>Specifically, with traffic lights, don't commit yourself to crossing
>the line until the guy in front has cleared it.

There are people, unfortunately not rare, who will cross the line and
THEN stop.

In article >,
Robert Briggs > wrote:
>Top wrote:
>>
>> You would be better off to plan for the worst. If the worst happens
>> you're ready and not waiting hoping someone else will do what you
>> want them to do.
>
>Specifically, with traffic lights, don't commit yourself to crossing
>the line until the guy in front has cleared it.

There are people, unfortunately not rare, who will cross the line and
THEN stop.

In article >,
Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>I would be interested in seeing how that law is worded. here in Ontario
>the law says " Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing a
>circular amber indication and facing the indication shall stop his or her
>vehicle if he or she can do so safely, otherwise he or she may proceed
>with caution" . It means a bit of a judgment call, because you have to
>consider the safety of stopping fast versus the violation involved if the
>light turns red before you enter the intersection. If it is red, you have
>to stop. If it turns red before you get into the intersection, you must
>have made a bad choice before you got to it.

Or the light is mistimed.