There is a discussion on Hacker News, but feel free to comment here as well.
Having lived in Germany for over 5 years I would say I for sure don’t miss right on red. It always confused me that it was a thing most places but then some intersections had a sign you better have seen to know it’s not okay to do it at that particular intersection.
Right on red seemed to be introduced to help save gas during a crisis. Again, living in Europe most modern cars have idle shut offs. So when you come to a complete stop at say an intersection while idling at a red light your engine automatically shuts off until you take your foot off the break, thus saving fuel.
Safer for everyone involved, less confusing, more consistent and it still meets the requirement of the original intention of right on red.
Seems pretty intersection dependent. For most of the intersections I travel through there are never pedestrians. What does removing right on red accomplish in those places?
This is dumb. Yes you should have right on red.
Isn’t that part of the job of the lights in the first place, to give everyone their own “timeslot” they can cross safely with?
I’m from the UK, we don’t have anything like this, I’m not 100% sure I know exactly how it works, but it seems pretty dangerous to me.
I can imagine a busy 6 lane intersection with filled lanes and crossing Peds going in all directions, you’re just asking for an accident
The walk signal puts it on drivers IMO, as a driver that is sick of driving. It’s the same idea as how it is not recommended to wave people on and just follow the road rules as closely as possible so you don’t wave them into danger by giving them an erroneous sense of safety, only the walk signal is doing it. I walk, bike, and drive so I am pretty aware of what could unexpectedly be dangerous, and it’s everything and a lot of it. The entirety of north America needs infrastructure overhaul and reform. This just isn’t working.