Who makes a left turn on red?

Useless sign near PATH station in Hoboken, NJ

Down at the intersection of Hudson Place and River Street by the PATH Station there’s a sign for eastbound traffic that reads: “No Turn on Red.”

What I don’t understand is why this is even necessary. Usually, a right turn on red is allowed in most cases (unless specified). I’ve never heard of a left turn on red anywhere. Are today’s drivers so idiotic that they would even attempt this if there was no specific signage instructing them not to?

Probably just another way to pad the sign manufacturers contract or something. What next, signs like “running over pedestrians is prohibited?”

Leave a Reply

31 Comments on "Who makes a left turn on red?"


Member
JOEJOEJOE
3 years 4 months ago

But it turns on to a one way street, right? So it makes sense.

Member
3 years 4 months ago

Actually it is allowed in some states if it is 1 way turning left onto another one way. That said, NJ is not one of those states so the sign is redundant. This allowed in NY except in NYC, just like the right on red.

Member
3 years 4 months ago

And in case you were wondering, the only states that a left on red is not allowed when it’s a oneway onto a oneway are: Connecticut, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin and Washington DC.

Member
3 years 4 months ago

In New Jersey, there is no law that prohibits you from making a left turn (after a complete stop) on red onto another one-way street where one-way traffic is also heading to your left (unless there is a posted sign that prohibits it). In the U.S., the following states and territories ban left turns on red: South Dakota,Connecticut, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, the District of Columbia, Guam, and NYC. driversedguru.com/driving-articles/...as/can-you-make-a-left-turn-on-red/ And here is the federal law that permits it: 42 U.S.C. 6322 (c)5 “to the maximum extent practicable consistent with safety, permits the operator of a motor vehicle… Read more »

Member
3 years 4 months ago

Not sure who’s crappy website it right, but I am just going to play it safe and not turn left on red in NJ…. All states permit drivers to turn right on a red signal after a complete stop if the intersection is not designated otherwise by posted signs. New York City now is the only major jurisdiction that prohibits the turn. According to the Federal Highway Administration, fewer accidents occur when drivers turn right on a red light than when they turn right on a green light. The statute also saves each driver an average of 14 seconds at… Read more »

Member
Craig-D
3 years 4 months ago

I’m a lawyer, so let me settle this. Turning left on red is illegal in NJ. Here’s why: The law (NJSA 39:4-115) specifically allows for a right on red unless otherwise posted. The statute dealing with left turns (N.J.S.A. 39:4-123) is silent on left turns on red. In fact, there is no NJ statute mentioning a left on red. If the legislature intended for left turns on red lights to be permitted, it would have specifically stated as such like it did for right turns on red lights. So if it’s illegal, why is the sign there then? One, not… Read more »

Member
3 years 4 months ago

Why thank you for your informative and helpful post![quote comment=”217124″]I’m a lawyer, so let me settle this. Turning left on red is illegal in NJ. Here’s why:The law (NJSA 39:4-115) specifically allows for a right on red unless otherwise posted. The statute dealing with left turns (N.J.S.A. 39:4-123) is silent on left turns on red. In fact, there is no NJ statute mentioning a left on red. If the legislature intended for left turns on red lights to be permitted, it would have specifically stated as such like it did for right turns on red lights.So if it’s illegal, why… Read more »

Member
3 years 1 month ago

An action is only illegal if a person has violated a published and enacted law. If the law is silent or missing on a specific act, the person is not violating an existing law, so there cannot be a violation. Positive law either grants a privilege or takes away one. On certain streets, there might be a legal sign that say RIGHT TURN ONLY, which is covered by positive law. However, if no sign is present on 2 intersecting 1-way streets and the direction is left, then the driver is violating no law, since there is no positive law published.[quote… Read more »

Member
Craig-D
3 years 1 month ago

An interesting take on the law Midnight Racer. I’ll tell you what: Why don’t you test out your legal theory and start making regular left turns on red in NJ (preferably with a police cruiser nearby) and tell that how it works out for you. Good luck with that.[quote comment=”218540″]An action is only illegal if a person has violated a published and enacted law. If the law is silent or missing on a specific act, the person is not violating an existing law, so there cannot be a violation.Positive law either grants a privilege or takes away one. On certain… Read more »

Member
3 years 1 month ago

Craig, the reason I ever responded to this thread is due to the claim, from you, that the law is silent on left turns on red. Now your last post previous to this says the law actually really is NOT silent, as I actually said in my previous post. As I said, if the law is silent on a thing, a violation cannot occur. Here, it is not silent. Moving on… I did read it again, and it clearly speaks on left or right turns on red with the following excerpt: NJSA 39:4-115) …”only upon the “go” signal unless otherwise… Read more »

Member
HobKM
3 years 4 months ago

There is no oncoming traffic from the left or front that would lead to an accident. Why would you not make a left on red? The sign makes complete sense.

Member
Mrs. L
3 years 4 months ago

The streets would be paved in blood if drivers turned left on red.[quote comment=”217082″]There is no oncoming traffic from the left or front that would lead to an accident. Why would you not make a left on red? The sign makes complete sense.[/quote]

Member
HobKM
3 years 4 months ago

Quite a generalization and irrelevant as to whether the sign makes sense. From a drivers perspective, common sense reveals that this left on red is safer than a conventional right on red. Why? Because you are crossing no opposing lanes as you enter the one way street from a one way street, AND you have no approaching traffic entering the intersection from the right side which could lead to a potential rear end accident. This second condition is not true for the normal right on right and thus less safe, and yet states deem drivers competent enough to execute this… Read more »

Member
mooshu
3 years 4 months ago

Actually, from a pedestrian’s perspective, if you maneuver across Hoboken streets often enough, you do so with the realization that Mrs. L’s comment is anything but a “generalization” and “irrelevant”. [quote comment=”217106″]Quite a generalization and irrelevant as to whether the sign makes sense.From a drivers perspective, common sense reveals that this left on red is safer than a conventional right on red. Why? Because you are crossing no opposing lanes as you enter the one way street from a one way street, AND you have no approaching traffic entering the intersection from the right side which could lead to a… Read more »

Member
HobKM
3 years 4 months ago

Excellent addition mooshu, bravo. The article and comments pertain to a specific intersection and specific sign, not “streets” as you say. Furthermore, the sign is for drivers, not a “pedestrian perspective”. So if we are straying off topic to comment on pedestrian safety in all of Hoboken general, then I’m willing to bet turning RIGHT causes just as many accidents as left. In fact, I”m willing to go out on a limb and say that driving blindfolded is hazardous to pedestrians as well; all of which is irrelevant as to whether or not the sign makes sense at the specific… Read more »

Member
mooshu
3 years 4 months ago

Love you, too, dear.[quote comment=”217125″]Excellent addition mooshu, bravo. The article and comments pertain to a specific intersection and specific sign, not “streets” as you say. Furthermore, the sign is for drivers, not a “pedestrian perspective”. So if we are straying off topic to comment on pedestrian safety in all of Hoboken general, then I’m willing to bet turning RIGHT causes just as many accidents as left. In fact, I”m willing to go out on a limb and say that driving blindfolded is hazardous to pedestrians as well; all of which is irrelevant as to whether or not the sign makes… Read more »

Member
westcoastbound
3 years 4 months ago

HobKM, don’t bother with mooshu. It’s giving her unfounded credit to say she isn’t the brightest bulb on the porch. She writes a lot with very little substance and a whole lot of ill-informed bravado. My advice: don’t respond. No one takes her seriously anyway.[quote comment=”217125″]Excellent addition mooshu, bravo. The article and comments pertain to a specific intersection and specific sign, not “streets” as you say. Furthermore, the sign is for drivers, not a “pedestrian perspective”. So if we are straying off topic to comment on pedestrian safety in all of Hoboken general, then I’m willing to bet turning RIGHT… Read more »

wpDiscuz