This is besides the point (obviously people should never be deported for traffic infraction), but right turn on red (RTOR) which is mainly a thing in North America (US, Canada, Mexico) is idiotic. (1) it barely save any car driver time on the road, (2) contrary to popular beliefs, in modern car it doesn’t save any fuel, (3) sometimes the signs are confusing, e.g. “no right turn on red except…” - which is a double negative (4) it increases risk of collision when people who are doing RTOR fail to insufficiently yield to oncoming traffic, and (5) it increases risk of collision against cyclist who are always on right side of the road.
(5) is especially jarring if a car wants to make RTOR while the cyclist wants to go straight and waiting on the traffic light to turn green. The cyclist counts as a vehicle occupying the turning lane, so a car technically is not allowed to make RTOR when a cyclist is present, but most times the cyclist just get honked at and have to yield, either go backwards or go onto the sidewalk to accommodate a car making RTOR. Alternatively, if you are a cyclist and don’t want to deal with intersection that allow RTOR, then you can make a vehicular lane change onto the middle lane and cycle in the middle of the road but obviously this is also dangerous. Study have shown that adoption of RTOR increases the risk of cyclist crashes by up to 100% (e.g., twice as likely). Zador, Paul (1984). “Right-turn-on-red laws and motor vehicle crashes: A review of the literature”. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 16 (4): 241–245. doi:10.1016/0001-4575(84)90019-8.
This is besides the point (obviously people should never be deported for traffic infraction), but right turn on red (RTOR) which is mainly a thing in North America (US, Canada, Mexico) is idiotic. (1) it barely save any car driver time on the road, (2) contrary to popular beliefs, in modern car it doesn’t save any fuel, (3) sometimes the signs are confusing, e.g. “no right turn on red except…” - which is a double negative (4) it increases risk of collision when people who are doing RTOR fail to insufficiently yield to oncoming traffic, and (5) it increases risk of collision against cyclist who are always on right side of the road.
(5) is especially jarring if a car wants to make RTOR while the cyclist wants to go straight and waiting on the traffic light to turn green. The cyclist counts as a vehicle occupying the turning lane, so a car technically is not allowed to make RTOR when a cyclist is present, but most times the cyclist just get honked at and have to yield, either go backwards or go onto the sidewalk to accommodate a car making RTOR. Alternatively, if you are a cyclist and don’t want to deal with intersection that allow RTOR, then you can make a vehicular lane change onto the middle lane and cycle in the middle of the road but obviously this is also dangerous. Study have shown that adoption of RTOR increases the risk of cyclist crashes by up to 100% (e.g., twice as likely). Zador, Paul (1984). “Right-turn-on-red laws and motor vehicle crashes: A review of the literature”. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 16 (4): 241–245. doi:10.1016/0001-4575(84)90019-8.
Critical support for comrade trump’s war on cars