red lights...

[joko]

today i was driving through the town centre and i just as i was going through traffic lights they turned red... it was only seconds but they were on red when i went through... i would normally have stopped - obviously - but on this occasion, i did not expect them to change so quickly and because i had a car full of heavy large musical instruments i decided it would be unsafe to stop suddenly....

i dont know if the light flashed but can anyone tell me - do they flash instantly? or is there a few second delay?
and also is there any leeway if i explain the fact that the car was full and i considered it would be more dangerous to stop - they would be able to see insde the car on any photos....or is it pretty much indefensible?

and before anyone starts...i am fully aware of the law and of the fact that i should have expected the light changes etc etc and i shoudl have stopped etc etc - so please no lectures etc...

thanks

[alavahalf]

...and driving with unsecure load .....I think they'll throw the key away..!

[ChuckFickens]

What happened to amber?

[Buenchico]

Since you state that you know the law you shouldn't need reminding that it's an offence to go through an amber light unless it's unsafe to stop. The excuse of 'unsafe to stop' is only valid for amber lights, not red ones.

Telling the authorities that you were travelling with an insecure load (which could have shot forward under sudden braking) would effectively be admitting to an additional offence, so it would seem unwise to do so!

Anyway, if you didn't see a light flash you're probably safe. The majority of traffic lights aren't fitted with cameras. (The boxes you often see on top of traffic lights are radar detectors, sensing approaching traffic, not cameras). If a camera is fitted you should see a bright double-flash if you cross the white line even a tiny fraction of a second after the lights have gone red. (Even though the flash is behind you it's usually bright enough to light up the inside of your car via your mirrors).

Chris

[R1Geezer]

you are probably ok, but some don't flash. Anyway, amber means "stop" that's the leeway.

[4getmenot]

they dont just turn red, there is an amber light first warning you

[Panic Button]

Good God!

R1 Geezer telling someone to stick within road laws!

[R1Geezer]

Panic why do you find that unusual? I have no points, car and bike, clean as you like. I also have advanced training in both. Not sure where that comes from. Could it possible be that I don't always concur with popular driving myths?

[sddsddean]

When I used to drive in Austria, they had what I thought was a great idea. Before the light goes to amber, green flashes 4 times, so there is absolutely no excuse for going over amber/red.

[joko]

well obviously the amber flashed first - thank you so much for telling me that...

as i stated i was concerned about the stuff in the car - and hoped id get through while still on amber...obviously by the time it went it was too late to stop...in hindsight the load probably wouldnt have shot forward due to the head rests and they were quite well stacked...but still, with only moments to decide...

thanks all

[Panic Button]

You don't agree with the Highway Code by your own admission R1

[R1Geezer]

I don't agree with most of the bible either! Does that make me lucifer?

Most of the highway code is good and correct, some parts are not. Most of it is not law anyway. The highway code is for the guidance of wise men and the obediance of fools. Several parts are bad some are just plain dangerous.

[Panic Button]

Rubbish

[R1Geezer]

Why is it rubbish panic, gone beyond what you can comprhend have we? Don't tell me you think every word of the highway code is law, sensible and right? I know it can be embarrasing when you find out you've been misled for a long time, start from now, I'll go easy.

[Panic Button]

Shall we start with which lane you should drive on, when on a quiet motorway?

[Buenchico]

I think that the Highway Code makes a great deal of sense and provides good guidance in relation to using the road.

However R1Geezer is correct in pointing out that not everything in it is a statement of law. Further, the Highway Code and the theory section of the driving test do seem contrary to what most road users would regard as common sense. For example, if an approaching car is dazzling you with its headlights on full beam your only response is meant to be to slow down. What you should NOT do (according to the 'theory' of driving) is to flash your headlights to advise the other driver that he's forgotten to dip his lights. (Following the theory, he'll continue to dazzle dozens of other drivers - who will all slow down - because nobody is permitted to inform him of his error).

[ABerrant]

Care to expound on the dangerous aspects of the Highway Code?

The Highway Code exists because a law was passed to ensure that all road users should understand that the safety of everybody (and not just themselves) is paramount. The Rules contained within the Code can be broadly split into those which spell out what is the Law and those which are guidelines to direct the safest courses of action. These guidelines are the standard by which all driving is measured. When drivers choose to ignore the guidelines, i.e. do not care for the possible consequences of their actions (do not care = careless), this can be used as evidence of careless driving. Pleading ignorance of the guidelines is not acceptable as a defence of careless driving in a court of law.

The danger exists when some drivers set themselves apart from the rules that other drivers follow. If everyone follows the rules the roads become safer.

[Panic Button]

Chris, that criticism of the highway code is pretty mild, considering R1Geezer thinks some of it is plain dangerous.

I would take issue with whether the highway code says you should not flash your lights at someone forgetting to dip their lights. It says you should only use a flash to advise someone you are there, but it could be argued that that is what you are doing.

Bear in mind that R1Geezer drives in the middle lane of motorways. Despite his advanced driver training he thinks it dangerous to pull into the lef hand lane. He will however do so, in order to overtake someone on their left hand side!

[ABerrant]

Road safety is paramount... how is the action of dazzling the person who is dazzling you an improvement to overall safety when compared to the action of slowing down? The default position of the Highway Code is to Give Way but the truth is that many drivers value their own convenience over the safety of others, or even themselves.

http://www.decisiondr...lashingheadlights.htm

[R1Geezer]

well I guess I'm going to get the sheep going again but the safest place to drive on a quiet motorway is the middle lane.

[R1Geezer]

I have never ever said that pulling into the left to overtake someone on the middle is ok, show me where I have said that panic. If you are in the left hand lane and you are are catching up to a driver in the middle then you do not have to go long way round, a common myth, that's all I've ever said. On an empty motorway if you are doing at least 80 the safest place is in the middle, slower go over to the left. On a busy Motorway it is downright dangerous to weave in and out of the trucks in lane one, just one example where the HC is advising dangerous measures.