•
The green light plus green arrow mean it is safe to turn left, yet the sign says to yield. This must create a dangerous intersection.
The warning is there to remind people that the green arrow isn't always lit when the green circle is and normal rules of yielding when turning left apply. Green arrow still gives right of way
This must create a dangerous intersection.
So am I to understand nobody here understands how this works? You yield when the arrow isn't lit. If the arrow is green, you don't have to yield.
My drivers manual didnt go into double traffic lights with arrows and location specific rules. It just said they would be red, yellow, and green.
So my basic confusion is: I can turn left on a green light when there is also an arrow I'm waiting for? I dont have to wait for the arrow. Wait I havent seen this because it would just be solved with a specific turning lane where I live.
•
That's because where you live likes to make people wait and sit at left turn lanes when there's 0 oncoming traffic. This is the perfect intersection, and I missed them from Arizona. You can turn if it's safe, but if it's busy and there's no safe time, you'll eventually get a protected left.
You know how to turn at an unprotected left, right? That's in the drivers manual. You know how to turn at a protected left as well. This is just both at the same intersection. It's really not that complicated
I personally find this confusing. The sign reads “Left turn yield on green”, which implies that you yield when the arrow is lit. A sign that says “right lane stop on red” means stop when the light is red, not when it isn’t.
You're ignoring the giant green circle on the sign, which means you yield on green solid, not green arrow. Green arrows give you right of way. If you're in the US and drive, please learn the road signs
Not arguing about what the actual traffic laws are. I am arguing that this is objectively confusing design. "Left turn yield on green (CIRCLE)" does not mean that left turn yields on green. It means, "when turning left, but the solid light is green, and the left turn arrow is not lit up, yield to oncoming traffic. But if the solid light is green and the left turn arrow is lit, then do not yield." So you literally do not yield on green.
Sure you can just tell people to "please learn the road signs" no matter how terrible... or we can acknowledge that this is an asinine design. I have no idea why anyone would spend energy defending this.
The thing is, you're not putting a dissertation on one of these signs. You're already supposed to yield on a solid green if you're turning left without a green arrow, that's already the law. This sign is a reminder for the stupid people about something they're already supposed to do, not allow someone who's never driven in their life to learn the laws as they go.
I interpret the sign correctly and would still strongly argue that it is a bad sign. I appreciate what you have added to the conversation!
•
But if the solid light is green and the left turn arrow is lit, then do not yield
If I remember correctly, both lights would never be lit at the same time. It's either a green circle (yield) or a green arrow (right of way) just like literally every other intersection in existence ever.
What are you taking about? Plenty of intersections are green on left turn and straight at the same time.
A driver that doesn't know the standard road signs and road laws is more dangerous. Stopping in the middle of the road to figure out what a common sign means isn't being careful, it's being a bad driver and making the road more dangerous for everyone else.
When the green arrow is absent, you may still turn, but you have to yield. Green arrow indicates right of way.
The sign says to yield on a green "ball" signal, not a green arrow.
The sign is superfluous: left turn is already supposed to yield on a green ball.