Fines for running AMBER lights.

[hannem]

Originally Posted by blackers10

i prefer the light style in i think its sweden or somthing... the light has a timer that tells you how long till it goes red or green so EVERYONE knows when its going to change next in big digital numbers

I thought that the first style of lights in Australia were something like a big dial that slowly rotated giving equal time to each road. Not sure exactly of the details but I am led to believe something like this.

Problem was that when approaching the signal you could see how much time you had before you had to stop and encouraged people to fang it to get through in time.

[blackers10]

comes back to the lack of dicipline/courtesy australia has compared to places like italy and germany where people actually change lanes to let you past because your doing 220kmh compared to their 200kmh etc

[Dauphin]

Originally Posted by blackers10

i prefer the light style in i think its sweden or somthing... the light has a timer that tells you how long till it goes red or green so EVERYONE knows when its going to change next in big digital numbers

They have lights like that in Vietnam and it's quite entertaining to see hundreds of scooters all lined up waiting for the numbers. They start rolling when it gets to the last few seconds counting down to green and there's always people who run the red light and almost always get run into, but that's pretty normal over there.

[prydey]

if you brake hard and get hit from behind then there is a good chance that it wasn't safe to do so.

on the other hand if the following car was travelling at a safe distance from the car in front it probably wouldn't hit the car jumping on the anchors in front.

however, we don't live in a perfect world. another area of learning to drive that is often forgotten is the rule to check your mirror before braking.

if you've got a loaded b double behind you (even a safe distance behind) and you decide that you can stop in the 10m available after you notice the amber light, there's a good chance you'll still go through the interesection at a fair rate of knots, albeit connected to the front of the semi. unfortunately most people point the finger at the guy hitting you up the rear (be it car or truck) but its just not that clear cut sometimes.

unless its very blatant, most decent cops will cut you a bit of slack. these days most red light camera's also have speed camera's in them so if you speed up to beat the red you still end up with a present in the mail.

[hannem]

Originally Posted by prydey

unless its very blatant, most decent cops will cut you a bit of slack. these days most red light camera's also have speed camera's in them so if you speed up to beat the red you still end up with a present in the mail.

Or get done for running a red light AND speeding, DOH!!

[Mr Brooksy]

Originally Posted by superpursuit83

Ya got it all wrong Doc..

GREEN = Slow down and upset the truck behind
AMBER = Floor it
RED = CHANGE LANES!

No No No!

Its:

GREEN = go through, and get ahead of the guy beside you.
AMBER = go through and smile at the poor bloke trying to turn right, even when he's been waiting for 2 cycles of lights.
RED = GO THROUGH, why stop? With fuel prices these days who can afford to waste fuel on sitting at lights and accelerating away? Im sure they think they are saving the environment or something!

I think the best form of traffic control is (after testing everyone on knowledge, and driving skills every 5 years, and tighter scrutiny for the driving instructors) having lights count down on a LED board next to the traffic lights! I saw them in China and they are a great idea! I know they are expensive, but put cameras on each set of lights and (judgeing by the IDIOTS running REDS nowdays) they'd pay themselves off in... oh, maybe 1 month! Ok so Im exaggerating a little on the cost side of things...

[mad cow]

dont worry about being fined for running an orange light, it is actually possible to be fined for running a green light as well, a mate of mine was booked for this as he cruised thru a green light and was involved in a rather large accident, apparently even though the light is green the driver is still obligated to scan the intersection and make sure that it is safe to enter the intersection. it all comes down to being aware on the roads at all times. afterall a traffic light is only a machine and could malfunction at any time, thy should alway be approached with caution especially as no one else ever seems to.

[deanp100]

I recently got off one of these. I was booked for going through an amber and the cop thought i could have stopped safely. I thought otherwise. I copped the fine at thetime but immediately wrote a letter to the traffic superintendant stating my case, including the legislation, stopping distances, speeds and equivalent distances travelled to try to prove I would not have been anywhere near the intersection when the opposite traffic got the green, and hence was quite safe. I think the most significant point I made was that I was so confident of the decision I made to proceed through the amber that I was willing to do it in front of a police car. The Superintendant agreed and wrote off the ticket.

[Darkr]

Yeah, my mother got fined for this not long ago!

I thought it was common knowledge too.

[JC]

I went through to ambers in a row the other night; one was right outside a cop shop. They turned amber as I was upon them, though one is alarge intersection so the light was red as I crossed the other side and all 3 of my kids (5 yo twins and 3yo) let me know that I went through orange and that I should have stopped or the police will get me. Nice to know they think they know the road rules at that young age. Suffice to say that I stopped at the next amber.

[LTDHO]

This has been law for a very long time. I don't see the big deal.

[superpursuit83]

Originally Posted by Mr Brooksy

No No No!

Its:

GREEN = go through, and get ahead of the guy beside you.
AMBER = go through and smile at the poor bloke trying to turn right, even when he's been waiting for 2 cycles of lights.
RED = GO THROUGH, why stop? With fuel prices these days who can afford to waste fuel on sitting at lights and accelerating away? Im sure they think they are saving the environment or something!

I think the best form of traffic control is (after testing everyone on knowledge, and driving skills every 5 years, and tighter scrutiny for the driving instructors) having lights count down on a LED board next to the traffic lights! I saw them in China and they are a great idea! I know they are expensive, but put cameras on each set of lights and (judgeing by the IDIOTS running REDS nowdays) they'd pay themselves off in... oh, maybe 1 month! Ok so Im exaggerating a little on the cost side of things...

Ok, different rules in WA

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by prydey

however, we don't live in a perfect world. another area of learning to drive that is often forgotten is the rule to check your mirror before braking.

if you've got a loaded b double behind you (even a safe distance behind) and you decide that you can stop in the 10m available after you notice the amber light, there's a good chance you'll still go through the interesection at a fair rate of knots, albeit connected to the front of the semi. unfortunately most people point the finger at the guy hitting you up the rear (be it car or truck) but its just not that clear cut sometimes.

unless its very blatant, most decent cops will cut you a bit of slack. these days most red light camera's also have speed camera's in them so if you speed up to beat the red you still end up with a present in the mail.

Garbage!

If one vehicle hits another vehicle because it has stopped suddenly, it is the rear vehicle fault, purely because they were too close.

Here is how it works, a safe distance behind is one that allows you to notice the brake lights, react and apply the brakes until you either stop or steer around without hitting any vehicle, pedestrians or structures. Anything less than that standard, you are not at a safe distance and it is your fault. As a motorist I have every right to travel within the speed limit, stand on the brakes to avoid other cars, bikes, pedestrians etc (a hazard that the car may not see and I do not have to prove was there (as it may be a kid that ran off and can't be found) and not have to check my rear vision mirror for that B double that is travelling too close. Even if a traffic light is just amber, have the right to stop if I think it is not safe to keep going without getting hit up the back. I also have that right if it is a green light, because it still may not be safe.

I have also not seen anywhere in either NSW, WA or QLD road laws that states you have to check your rear view mirror before braking. It may be sensible, I do (but then I check the mirror every 30 secs), but it is not required by law.

Anyway, why are we discussing this, this has been law for the 20yrs I have had a license. Those that can honestly say they did not know do some study on the road laws for all of our sake.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Garbage!

If one vehicle hits another vehicle because it has stopped suddenly, it is the rear vehicle fault, purely because they were too close.

Here is how it works, a safe distance behind is one that allows you to notice the brake lights, react and apply the brakes until you either stop or steer around without hitting any vehicle, pedestrians or structures. Anything less than that standard, you are not at a safe distance and it is your fault. As a motorist I have every right to travel within the speed limit, stand on the brakes to avoid other cars, bikes, pedestrians etc (a hazard that the car may not see and I do not have to prove was there (as it may be a kid that ran off and can't be found) and not have to check my rear vision mirror for that B double that is travelling too close. Even if a traffic light is just amber, have the right to stop if I think it is not safe to keep going without getting hit up the back. I also have that right if it is a green light, because it still may not be safe.

I have also not seen anywhere in either NSW, WA or QLD road laws that states you have to check your rear view mirror before braking. It may be sensible, I do (but then I check the mirror every 30 secs), but it is not required by law.

Anyway, why are we discussing this, this has been law for the 20yrs I have had a license. Those that can honestly say they did not know do some study on the road laws for all of our sake.

all i'm saying is its not that clear cut. a large percentage of the time, the guy hitting someone up the rear is at fault but there are occasions where its not.

hopefully you have never cut in front of a semi, who is leaving himself enough room to safely pull up in the event of an emergencey. any idea how long it takes these things to stop. the gap they leave for safe braking constantly gets filled by other road users in a hurry to get where they need to be.

as for checking mirrors before braking, maybe you should chat to a few driving instructors.

[Buddy 1]

I Always go through on Amber as it is Not a Stop Light :P

The Rule used to say an Amber light meant slow down & prepare to stop unless it
was not safe to do so.

Myself I think Vehicles slamming on the Brakes at the first sign of an Amber light is more Dangerous as Many Drivers including myself see it as only the light that comes before you have to stop (Red).

So you do not expect some fool to stop as soon as they see Amber.

Add to this the fact these days they are making Intersections where it can take 5 minutes for a full light cycle before you can move which only Adds to the fact you do not want to stop unless it is Red.

Just my 2 Cents worth

[ILLaViTaR]

There's also another rule this incompetent drivers need to learn.

KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING.

I would've thought keep left signs every 20 meters would've been enough.

[ILLaViTaR]

Originally Posted by Buddy 1

I Always go through on Amber as it is Not a Stop Light :P

The Rule used to say an Amber light meant slow down & prepare to stop unless it
was not safe to do so.

Myself I think Vehicles slamming on the Brakes at the first sign of an Amber light is more Dangerous as Many Drivers including myself see it as only the light that comes before you have to stop (Red).

So you do not expect some fool to stop as soon as they see Amber.

Add to this the fact these days they are making Intersections where it can take 5 minutes for a full light cycle before you can move which only Adds to the fact you do not want to stop unless it is Red.

Just my 2 Cents worth

Amber lights give a good while and in almost all cases it is safe to stop.

I don't agree to the fine for running them, but saying it's always unsafe is stupid logic, they give a very good span of time to stop.
If you think otherwise you have poor hazard perception and should hand in your license.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by Buddy 1

I Always go through on Amber as it is Not a Stop Light :P

The Rule used to say an Amber light meant slow down & prepare to stop unless it
was not safe to do so.

Myself I think Vehicles slamming on the Brakes at the first sign of an Amber light is more Dangerous as Many Drivers including myself see it as only the light that comes before you have to stop (Red).

So you do not expect some fool to stop as soon as they see Amber.

Add to this the fact these days they are making Intersections where it can take 5 minutes for a full light cycle before you can move which only Adds to the fact you do not want to stop unless it is Red.

Just my 2 Cents worth

That would be completely your error, and the time factor wont seem important when they need to cut someone from a wreck. Thats the driver attitude mentioned earlier (maybe it was another thread). Amber is, and always will be, stop if it is safe to do so. Not the light before red, FLOOR IT!!! This creates a drama when you expect the car in front to drive to your 'arbitrary interpretation' of the 'smart thing' to do.

I approach any green in anticipation it will likely change to amber any time, that way if a vehicle in front slams on the anchors the instant an amber appears it doesnt matter, maintain a safe braking distance and theres no drama.

For most intersections there should only be one vehicle in a lane that needs to shoot the amber anyway. How close are cars following the front car if 2 need to run it?

[Buddy 1]

Ok let me make a few points here,

1: 95% of Drivers will drive through on Amber & not stop until they see Red.

2: Consider the above & the few Drivers who Stop as soon as they see Amber are in fact the ones who may cause an accident.

3: Why stop on Amber anyway as while you are facing Amber others who you could smash into (who would come across your path) are facing Red.

4:There is a delay from when your Light turns Red until the others Turn Green so if you stop on Red you will always be safe (not taking into account late Red light Runners).

5: All vehicles will bunch up & get close at Intersections so is almost impossible to maintain a large Gap from the vehicle in front.

So just because it is a Law or a perception of a Law (to stop on Amber) does it really mean it is safer to do so in most cases???

As Mentioned most Drivers are like Myself in regards to this & because of that it all works to keep a safe flow of vehicles until you come across A N A L Andy who stops as soon as he see Amber.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Buddy 1

3: Why stop on Amber anyway as while you are facing Amber others who you could smash into (who would come across your path) are facing Red.

umm, not true!! many intersections don't have 'right turn' arrows. the traffic turns right when it is safe to do so but are allowed to enter the intersection on green and wait for a gap.

this is how quite a few accidents happen as people don't stop when they should and people go when they shouldn't.

[Buddy 1]

Originally Posted by prydey

umm, not true!! many intersections don't have 'right turn' arrows. the traffic turns right when it is safe to do so but are allowed to enter the intersection on green and wait for a gap.

this is how quite a few accidents happen as people don't stop when they should and people go when they shouldn't.

Not around here they dont lol

However yes I have seen these rather Confusing & Dangerous Intersections which should be removed for safety reasons.

Though in the end I still do not see an issue if you go through on Amber while keeping your eyes open.

This is a case of a Bad Intersection causing Danger & not because of driving on Amber.

[FGII-XR6]

it is the one thing in a crash that is always clear cut, there is no grey area here hit a car from behind and you are automatically in the wrong no exceptions

Originally Posted by prydey

all i'm saying is its not that clear cut. a large percentage of the time, the guy hitting someone up the rear is at fault but there are occasions where its not.

hopefully you have never cut in front of a semi, who is leaving himself enough room to safely pull up in the event of an emergencey. any idea how long it takes these things to stop. the gap they leave for safe braking constantly gets filled by other road users in a hurry to get where they need to be.

as for checking mirrors before braking, maybe you should chat to a few driving instructors.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

it is the one thing in a crash that is always clear cut, there is no grey area here hit a car from behind and you are automatically in the wrong no exceptions

Absolutely, they are exceptional circumstances that the fault will be put on the front vehicle and this would only happen once in a blue moon. The only one I can think of is if a car changes lanes in front of another and then slams on the brakes without giving the rear car a chance to adjust distance. Wet roads, oil, unexpected stop etc are not reasons, the car behind was too close. Before anyone argues with this statement, ring your local police and ask their opinion, I know what they will say

1: 95% of Drivers will drive through on Amber & not stop until they see Red.

You have a warped perception of what is normal, I drive professionally every day at work and I have to disagree, most slow down and stop if it safe to do so. A considerable number do not granted, but they are often the ones I am assisting from their wrecked cars.

2: Consider the above & the few Drivers who Stop as soon as they see Amber are in fact the ones who may cause an accident.

Wrong, the car that is following too close or thinks they can predict that the other car is going to break the law is causing the accident. Everyone has the right to drive with respect to the road laws without being bullied by others that have no desire to drive lawfully.

3: Why stop on Amber anyway as while you are facing Amber others who you could smash into (who would come across your path) are facing Red.

Because it allows the intersection to clear safely, before the other direction begins to proceed on the green safely. I guess you line up through intersections in heavy traffic too.

4:There is a delay from when your Light turns Red until the others Turn Green so if you stop on Red you will always be safe (not taking into account late Red light Runners).

Yes there is, it is there to deal with morons that run the amber and don't clear the intersection before it is red. If we didn't have people that ran late amber lights, we would not need this.

5: All vehicles will bunch up & get close at Intersections so is almost impossible to maintain a large Gap from the vehicle in front.

Any bunching up that does not allow a safe stopping distance is unsafe driving; nothing more needs to be said on this.

So just because it is a Law or a perception of a Law (to stop on Amber) does it really mean it is safer to do so in most cases???

Yes it does because smarter people than you wrote these laws that were designed to allow maximum safety at intersections. By your statements it seems you are suggesting we just have green and red light, amber not needed because you pay no attention to it. We had better double the number of emergency vehicles because it will be carnage out there if we do.

As Mentioned most Drivers are like Myself in regards to this & because of that it all works to keep a safe flow of vehicles until you come across A N A L Andy who stops as soon as he see Amber.

Refer to my previous point above, most drivers are not like you, thankfully because I would be very busy at work if they were.

The Rule used to say an Amber light meant slow down & prepare to stop unless it

It still does, study time for you!

hopefully you have never cut in front of a semi, who is leaving himself enough room to safely pull up in the event of an emergencey. any idea how long it takes these things to stop. the gap they leave for safe braking constantly gets filled by other road users in a hurry to get where they need to be.

I never mentioned cutting off a semi and then braking hard, I was referring to a truck that chooses to follow too close. Try reading what is written rather than modifying it to something else. No I do not cut trucks off and brake, that would be suicide. Yes I do know how long it takes for them to stop; after all I do have a HR license.

Again, why are we discussing this, it is the law, always have and always will. Why do we have certain people here that always think they can add their own interpretation to the law and expect others to agree?

It is very simple, it is the law, abide by it and stop if it is safe to do so, if not proceed with caution. I will give you a hint though, if you have to accelerate to get through, it was safe to stop. If you can't understand this do us all a favour and hand in your license and go back to the push bike until you grow up. If you think that your own interpretations or beliefs on what is safe on which laws to abide by count, don't ride the push bike either.

Before anyone accuses me of being a keyboard warrior hiding behind the security of the computer, here is who I am. My name is Lynton and I am 37 years old with 20 years driving experience and a crash history of 2, last was 15 years ago. I am an Advanced Care Paramedic and as such I have an obligation under my work Code of Conduct to be an advocate of the promotion of public health and safety, an obligation I take very seriously. If anyone has a problem with who I am or what I am about, let me know.

Cheers

Lynton

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by maccamom

You should have challenged the fine, paying it is an admission of liability. At the end of the day the Police must prove beyond all reasonable doubt that is was unsafe to stop in the circumstances.

I have had a conversation with a police member a couple of years back after being told I was going to be fined. I explained the facts that he needed to prove, in a non smart ar%%, fashion, and that I disagreed with his opinion. Certain fine changed to warning which has no basis anyway.

Don't be intimidated, fair enough if you give it the boot where there was clear time to stop you are in trouble, mine was definitely not safe and was in wet weather.

Are you for real, or did you make this up after watching LA Law? If this is true you got lucky! Cops don't need to proove anything when issuing a traffic fine. Traffic offences are not like criminal or civil proceedings were a proof of guilt is required. The offence being witnessed by the cop is the proof.

Sounds like you just got a dumb cop.

[wulos]

Guys - lets calm things down a biut eh...
I am sure that when we did our road rules we were all aware of what the rules stated, and whilst this one has indeed been around for many many years(certainly as long as I can remember) when I started driving the nearest traffic light intersection to where I lived was over 40odd km away.
I think that this thread has been a good refresher for want of a better term, on the fact that amongst our fellow road users there are many that 'perceive' things differently to ourselves. This isnt a case of who is right and who is wrong(though obviously the rules are set in clear black and white), but moreso a case that others may believe them to read differently to yourself, and thus drive accordingly. The sooner we as drivers recognize this the sooner we can save ourselves even more grief on the road. Being the safest driver on the road, knowing every rule inside & out simply isn't enough if the thousands of drivers around you aren't driving to the same ideals.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Buddy 1

Ok let me make a few points here,

1: 95% of Drivers will drive through on Amber & not stop until they see Red.

2: Consider the above & the few Drivers who Stop as soon as they see Amber are in fact the ones who may cause an accident.

As Mentioned most Drivers are like Myself in regards to this & because of that it all works to keep a safe flow of vehicles until you come across A N A L Andy who stops as soon as he see Amber.

Wow.

If the car infront of you felt that they were able to come to a complete stop before the intersection on an amber light then surely if you were following that driver, you would have been able to react in exactly the same way and come to a complete stop safely?

Should there be two amber lights? 1st one means, yeah.. go ahead champ, just floor it and the 2nd means, yeah, it's still only an amber, what are you waiting for.. floor it.

I guess I'm an Andy. If I see an amber I can safely stop at, I'll stop. I can't think of a single instance so far in my life (which is probably a good thing) that I felt the need to punch a light because I was in that much of a hurry to be somewhere important.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

it is the one thing in a crash that is always clear cut, there is no grey area here hit a car from behind and you are automatically in the wrong no exceptions

1) The car if front is reversing.
2) The car in front is unregistered.
3) You were stationary and were hit from behind pushing you into the car in front.
4) The car in front is pulling out of a park/driveway.
5) The car in front is entering a LAR illegally

Need any more??????

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by flappist

2) The car in front is unregistered.

You may want to check that. As a comparison, even if you park illegally the car that hits you is generally in the wrong. An exception would be leaving a car in the middle of the road at night, or other instances where it is clear you would not have been able to see it while driving in a safe manner, therefore unable to avoid it. In fact, hitting an illegally parked car could lead to being charged with driving without due care and attention (or similar).

Theres no get out of jail free card, fault will be assessed as if the vehicle was registered, as it should. Unregistered or the example re: illegally parked is a separate offence and handled between police and that driver, as it should be.

[4Vman]

One thing everyone needs to remember, the onus is on drivers to drive in a manner that would allow them time, distance or space to avoid an incident safely, regardless of what the object is..

[prydey]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

It is very simple, it is the law, abide by it and stop if it is safe to do so,

the term 'if it is safe to do so' , i feel does not only refer to you. if i have someone up my clacker and a light goes amber that i could probably stop at with reasonably heavy braking, there's a good chance his bonnet would end up in my boot. yes, obviously he would've been driving illegally eg. tailgating and not allowing himself safe travelling distance but thats something i can't control, therefore the 'safe' thing for me to do would be to continue on through.

having someone's bonnet in my boot but also knowing that i was in the right by stopping does not get my car fixed.


also, i was not inferring that you 'cut off' a semi, but rather see the big gap in front of it and decide to change lanes esp if the lane you are in is travelling slower. this may not be your driving style, but it does happen and then one time it happens leading up to an intersection which suddenly goes orange and the driver that has changed lanes decides its safe to stop, even though he just used up an extra 6 metres of the semi's space.

i realise trucks were never mentioned at the start of the thread but it is one of many occasions where it is critical to know whats behind you as well as in front of you, before hitting the brakes.

and as flappist has pointed out with a few of many examples, rear enders are never 100% clear cut.