U.S.Is it time to get rid of right-on-red?

Is it time to get rid of right-on-red?

A law of the road in the United States of America is that drivers must proceed through red lights while making right turns. On a regular basis, you will receive a honk if you do not speed through the area quickly enough.

However, the popular habit of driving is finally coming under investigation, and the government is considering imposing restrictions on it because it is too risky.

Back in the day, the right-on-red movement was primarily restricted to the state of California and a few other western states. It is well known that Woody Allen made the statement in the film “Annie Hall” that he would never live in Los Angeles since the city’s “only cultural advantage is that you can make a right turn on a red light.”

It was in response to the Arab oil embargo against the United States and the rationing of oil that the right-on-red movement began to expand across the country in the 1970s. In an effort to save money on gas, the states implemented it with the expectation that it would minimize the amount of time spent idling at red lights.

thirteen states had legalized the use of RTOR
Right-on-red was a gas-savings tool during the 1970s oil crisis.

Through the inclusion of a clause in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Congress accelerated the process by which states adopted right-on-red laws. Right-on-red vehicles were permitted “to the maximum extent practicable consistent with safety,” which was a condition that was attached to the eligibility of states for federal energy aid.

An examination of the legislative history of the practice in Connecticut reveals that by 1972, thirteen states had legalized the use of RTOR. By the time the decade came to a close, almost every state in the territory had adopted it. (This is not New York City, and the fact that there is a heterogeneous collection of municipalities that either permit or prohibit it simply adds to the confusion that exists behind the wheel.)

Dangerous roads in Major Cities

Recent years have seen a number of large cities, including Atlanta, Denver, Indianapolis, Washington, DC, Raleigh, North Carolina, and others, propose or adopt laws to prohibit it in some areas of their bustling downtowns or throughout the entire city. In light of the fact that pedestrian fatalities have reached their highest level in over four decades, they feel that it will protect those who are walking and biking.

According to Eric Dumbaugh, a professor in the school of urban and regional planning at Florida Atlantic University who specializes in the study of traffic safety, right turns on red launch extra initiatives aimed toward the intersection. Because of this, vehicles collide with pedestrians who believe it is safe to cross the street at a green signal, and trucks collide with bicyclists because they are unable to observe cyclists making a right turn and rear-end collisions.

Is it time to get rid of right-on-red?
Denver and other cities are considering banning right-on-red.

Over the course of five years, around 57% of car accidents that involved pedestrians occurred as a result of drivers failing to yield to walkers at all junctions, according to the findings of a report that was commissioned by the city of Indianapolis, which had a record number of pedestrian fatalities in 2122.

Crash incidents involving a turn on red account for fewer than one percent of all injuries that occur in San Francisco, but twenty percent of all accidents involving pedestrians or bicycles.

“Our proposed ban on turning at red lights aims to prioritize the well-being of pedestrians at intersections,” Atlanta City Councilman Jason Dozier, who introduced a ban in portions of the city, said last week on X while proposing the plan. Dozier was the one who introduced the ban.

According to the most recent data from the Governors Highway Safety Association, motorists were responsible for the deaths of at least 7,500 pedestrians across the country in the year 2022. Since 1981, this is the highest number ever recorded. The data on pedestrian fatalities in certain states includes bikers, whereas the data in other states does not include them.

There are a number of factors that contribute to this phenomenon, including increased speeds of driving, inattentive driving, a deficiency in road infrastructure that is friendly to pedestrians, and the increased weight and height of trucks and SUVs.

The number of studies that have been conducted on a national scale in recent years addressing the effect that right-on-red turns have on the safety of pedestrians has been quite limited.

time to make downtowns more safer for pedestrians
U.S. Cities looking to make downtowns safer for pedestrians and bikers.

According to research done using crash data that was submitted by the police in six states that had RTOR legislation in place between the years 1974 and 1977, as well as data from three states that had not changed their rules, it was discovered that the number of accidents increased by more than twenty percent in states that permitted RTOR.

The research, which was carried out in 1982, discovered that after the implementation of RTOR, there was a greater increase in the number of pedestrian accidents that occurred in urban areas, for pedestrians who were children, and for pedestrians who were elderly.

According to Dumbaugh, a ban on right-on-red is not a “panacea for pedestrian safety problems,” but it could be helpful in preventing incidents involving both pedestrians and cars at junctions that are very congested.

He explained that it was a component of an all-encompassing safety approach. An example of something that the United States does but the majority of other countries do not is the practice of making right turns on red.

On the other hand, these attempts are met with a great deal of opposition from certain drivers, driver advocacy groups, and lawmakers who say that restrictions will make roads more hazardous for drivers and cities more hazardous for everyone. Right-on-red is a traffic signal that helps improve both speed and ease of travel. In addition, lowering speed limits will reduce the number of casualties, but this idea has been abandoned because it is not in the best interest of society as a whole.

The anti-ROTR idea in Atlanta is being met with opposition from a number of city politicians who are concerned that it will cause congestion during large events that take place in the city and will also be detrimental to hotels. When people are on vacation, they do not want to go to cities that have severe traffic jams. Other legislators in Atlanta are concerned that it will lead to a rise in the number of traffic stops, as well as an increase in the number of tickets issued to drivers of African descent and other minority groups. The likelihood of a police officer stopping and pulling over a black driver has been determined to be higher, according to studies.

An Indiana state senator who is a Republican proposed a bill that would retrospectively nullify the right-on-red restriction that was implemented in Indianapolis. He referred to the rule as “stupid” and said it was part of a “war on cars.”

On the other hand, proponents argue that right-on-red restrictions are an essential component of a larger movement to emphasize pedestrian safety above automobile safety and to make cities more convenient for pedestrians and cyclists to navigate. The legislators who have advocated for these improvements have stated that they are a step toward making downtown areas safer and more accessible.


Nathan Enzo
Nathan Enzo
A professional writer since 2014 with a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism and Mass Communication, Nathan Enzo ran the creative writing department for the major News Channels until 2018. He then worked as a Senior content writer with LiveNewsof.com, including national newspapers, magazines, and online work. He specializes in media studies and social communications.


Related Articles