Giving way to people turning right..............
Discussion
I don't have any trouble with it, seems to work ok when people (a)follow it and (b)are awake/have their eyes open while driving. (a) Seems more achievable for most people than (b).Not sure how long this law has been enforced but I have had my licence for 15yrs and it’s always been that way.
Personally I don't have any issues with this law myself. I believe it gets a person wanting to turn right off a street out from sitting in the middle of the road quicker esp. on narrow streets that potentially block through traffic from behind. They're sitting ducks parked in the middle of the road, whereas the person turning left only has the traffic from behind to contend with. And yes these guys turning left if not having their own left turning lane risk getting shunted up the butt too. In Ozzy you always have to run an orange or red trying to get across.
I only wish those people who don't pull over to the left on a highway to let the following traffic pass before turning right would do so. They're asking to get rear ended big time.
Personally I don't have any issues with this law myself. I believe it gets a person wanting to turn right off a street out from sitting in the middle of the road quicker esp. on narrow streets that potentially block through traffic from behind. They're sitting ducks parked in the middle of the road, whereas the person turning left only has the traffic from behind to contend with. And yes these guys turning left if not having their own left turning lane risk getting shunted up the butt too. In Ozzy you always have to run an orange or red trying to get across.
I only wish those people who don't pull over to the left on a highway to let the following traffic pass before turning right would do so. They're asking to get rear ended big time.
Scenario 1 - Today, trundling along road, car infront indicates left and pulls to side of road which is quite wide, I have plenty of room to carry on straight so do so, car turning right pulls across straight infront of me and I have to swerve to avoid.
Scenario 2 - Yesterday on way home from work, I indicate to turn left on average width road, flash headlights to alert car turning right, clown behind me accelerates whilst swerving round me and nearly piles into stationary car.
Scenario 3 - Which I am not unhappy about but it would be avoided if law was different, I indicate left and come to a halt to allow right turning car to go, he then waves me to go first as he has a trailer on.
Scenario 2 - Yesterday on way home from work, I indicate to turn left on average width road, flash headlights to alert car turning right, clown behind me accelerates whilst swerving round me and nearly piles into stationary car.
Scenario 3 - Which I am not unhappy about but it would be avoided if law was different, I indicate left and come to a halt to allow right turning car to go, he then waves me to go first as he has a trailer on.
Most of those seem to be related to the right-turning car still having to give way the car going straight-ahead coming through behind the left-turning car (except sit1 which is just stupidity). Its something I remember since having it pointed out to me by the examiner in my restricted licence test (a good few years back now), I was turning left and waited for a truck turning right, he waved me to go so I did, examiner mentioned that if I'd checked my mirrors I would have known there was a car coming straight-ahead from behind me and wouldn't have waited for the truck.
The big swerves out past a turning vehicle come from crap driving/observation rather than the nature of the rule - people aren't paying attention, get surprised when you slow down to turn and do something stupid.
The big swerves out past a turning vehicle come from crap driving/observation rather than the nature of the rule - people aren't paying attention, get surprised when you slow down to turn and do something stupid.
Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 16th April 01:04
I agree it works more intuitively when left turn has priority as in virtually every other country in the world (does anyone do it the same as NZ?). It was a bit before I started driving but I think the original reasons for bringing this in back in the late '70s were as said earlier, to get the car in the middle of the road off. If it was as simple as switching to left turn priority one day they would probably do it, but the cost of education and inevitable injuries and loss of life would make it a political poisoned chalice to push IMO.
I can't believe anyone can defend this rule - it's downright dangerous. There's a good reason it's only found in NZ!
Without the rule, as a person turning right all you are really concerned with is if there is a decent gap in the oncoming traffic to turn and that the road you are turning into is clear. With the rule you are looking for a decent gap, checking whether the cars coming are turning right and if there is another car behind that may or may not be going straight ahead (which is a complete guess) and checking the road you are turning into is clear. Simple maths there, which one is less dangerous?
Without the rule turning left you are concerned about pedestrians and other cars crossing/using the road you are turning into. With the rule you have to check the road you are turning into is clear, check your rear vision mirror for cars going up your chuff or potentially around you and cars turning right. Simple maths again.
This rule doesn't work because it has too many variables. Every single road will be different and every single person will react differently because it causes indecision. On top of this, rather than reducing the amount of time a car spends in the middle of the road it places two cars in the line of danger - the one turning right and the one turning left - then it forces cars behind to run the gauntlet. I suspect if you did a study it would also reduce traffic flow.
I'd love to meet the t
t that came up with the rule so I could slap him round the head. I bet there are loads of accidents caused by ths idiotic rule.
Without the rule, as a person turning right all you are really concerned with is if there is a decent gap in the oncoming traffic to turn and that the road you are turning into is clear. With the rule you are looking for a decent gap, checking whether the cars coming are turning right and if there is another car behind that may or may not be going straight ahead (which is a complete guess) and checking the road you are turning into is clear. Simple maths there, which one is less dangerous?
Without the rule turning left you are concerned about pedestrians and other cars crossing/using the road you are turning into. With the rule you have to check the road you are turning into is clear, check your rear vision mirror for cars going up your chuff or potentially around you and cars turning right. Simple maths again.
This rule doesn't work because it has too many variables. Every single road will be different and every single person will react differently because it causes indecision. On top of this, rather than reducing the amount of time a car spends in the middle of the road it places two cars in the line of danger - the one turning right and the one turning left - then it forces cars behind to run the gauntlet. I suspect if you did a study it would also reduce traffic flow.
I'd love to meet the t
t that came up with the rule so I could slap him round the head. I bet there are loads of accidents caused by ths idiotic rule.jamieheasman said:
Without the rule, as a person turning right all you are really concerned with is if there is a decent gap in the oncoming traffic to turn and that the road you are turning into is clear. With the rule you are looking for a decent gap, checking whether the cars coming are turning right and if there is another car behind that may or may not be going straight ahead (which is a complete guess) and checking the road you are turning into is clear. Simple maths there, which one is less dangerous?
Not following you here - when you're turning right the only real difference is cars coming towards you turning left have to give way to you, so you have a better chance of finding a gap big enough to turn. If a car coming towards you is also turning right (ie if its a crossroads) then your paths shouldn't cross unless its a pretty unusual intersection layout that requires you to go past each other RHS/RHS before turning instead of LHS/LHS as you turn.jamieheasman said:
Without the rule turning left you are concerned about pedestrians and other cars crossing/using the road you are turning into. With the rule you have to check the road you are turning into is clear, check your rear vision mirror for cars going up your chuff or potentially around you and cars turning right. Simple maths again.
It isn't that much harder to check your mirrors before braking (in fact you should really be doing that anyway), so the only extra is to give way to right-turning cars if you don't have a car coming straight-through from behind.IME the people who dislike the NZ give-way rules are most often those who have moved here from other countries and had to adjust from the rules they learnt to drive under. I suspect Kiwis moving to other countries probably have similar issues adjusting - take the USA for example, the way I understand their rules everyone stops and the first car there has right-of-way.
I'm not a fan of the pull left before turning right rule, there are very few situations where it has any useful effect IMO - the only case I can think of off the top of my head is a road where you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic before turning right and you have traffic behind you, theres space on the left which is safe for you to pull onto to stop but not safe for the traffic behind to pass you on (eg loose shoulder), so it makes sense to pull left and let them past rather than stopping in the middle and holding them up while you wait for the oncoming traffic. But in general theres plenty of space so you may as well pull to the centreline and let them pass on the left, its the sort of thing which should be down to common sense rather than a simple rule.
Sorry I'm turning right.
The oncoming car is turning left - mebe they can make it before I cant turn, can they?
Mebe I;m going to have to stop because the car behind them may squeze past, making me stop.
That car doesnt know if I'll stop or go. or the car ahead turning left will go.
The car behind me isnt sure either, and , madly, I could decide to pull over to the left instead and wait to tuirn right!?!?!
It causes major confusion, even to those who understand the rule its so complex that it leaves 4 or more cars (not even mentioning peds) unsure as to whats going to happen, confusion and being unsure leads to accidents.
The oncoming car is turning left - mebe they can make it before I cant turn, can they?
Mebe I;m going to have to stop because the car behind them may squeze past, making me stop.
That car doesnt know if I'll stop or go. or the car ahead turning left will go.
The car behind me isnt sure either, and , madly, I could decide to pull over to the left instead and wait to tuirn right!?!?!
It causes major confusion, even to those who understand the rule its so complex that it leaves 4 or more cars (not even mentioning peds) unsure as to whats going to happen, confusion and being unsure leads to accidents.
GravelBen said:
IME the people who dislike the NZ give-way rules are most often those who have moved here from other countries and had to adjust from the rules they learnt to drive under.
And Kiwis who have lived overseas IMO. Rob describes it well - just too many 'what-ifs' and trying to second-guess just how the other person is going to react.RobDickinson said:
Sorry I'm turning right.
So I'm turning right without the rules...RobDickinson said:
The oncoming car is turning left - mebe they can make it before I cant turn, can they?
The oncoming car is turning left, I have to give way to them but mebe I can make it before they turn, can't I?RobDickinson said:
Mebe I;m going to have to stop because the car behind them may squeze past, making me stop.
Mebe I'm going to have stop even if I could make it in front of them because the car behind them may squeeze past as they slow to turn.RobDickinson said:
That car doesnt know if I'll stop or go. or the car ahead turning left will go.
That car doesn't know if I'll stop or go. Or if the car ahead turning left will go or have to stop for a pedestrian.RobDickinson said:
The car behind me isnt sure either, and , madly, I could decide to pull over to the left instead and wait to tuirn right!?!?!
The car behind me isn't sure either, but still has to wait for me to make my move before it can do anything.RobDickinson said:
It causes major confusion, even to those who understand the rule its so complex that it leaves 4 or more cars (not even mentioning peds) unsure as to whats going to happen, confusion and being unsure leads to accidents.
I don't think it causes any more confusion than the opposite rule would, there are still going to be a lot of variables to pay attention to and people unsure of whats going to happen. Playing DA a little with those comparisons to be fair but so were you.As I understand it the pull left before turning right rule only applies on the open road, I've never heard of it being used in town.
Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 16th April 02:59
I've seen the turn left rule in town, mainly because people arnt sure.
And that give way to people turning out of an unmakred junction if your turing right too.
Whacky.
As much as you protest Ben I see, daily, the confusion this causes on the roads and most of the people are Kiwi drivers, and having substantial experience of both systems in this case this rule causes moe confusion. and that causes more accidents.
And that give way to people turning out of an unmakred junction if your turing right too.
Whacky.
As much as you protest Ben I see, daily, the confusion this causes on the roads and most of the people are Kiwi drivers, and having substantial experience of both systems in this case this rule causes moe confusion. and that causes more accidents.
I'll have to take your word on that aspect as I haven't driven in another system, but I don't think I've seen any more people having problems with the give way rules than a number of others - using roundabouts for example. Mind you theres plenty of drivers around who don't even seem capable of using traffic lights properly so maybe indicating on roundabouts is hoping for too much.
Sorry Ben but the simple fact is the rule puts more cars in a position of danger and allows for more confusion and missunderstandings between different motorists.
What also needs to be factored in here is the attitude of the average NZ driver - I WILL NOT GIVE WAY, YOU'RE NOT COMING IN FRONT OF ME etc. Add that daft rule to the attitude and it's an accident waiting to happen.
All countries have little differences, some good, some bad. Most of them just take a bit of getting used to and don't affect your everyday driving. But this rule is just lunacy, and that is why it isn't used in any other country in the world (to my knowledge).
I think most people who defend it are Kiwis who take criticism of it like a personal affront to everything good about NZ. They treat this rule like it's a cute and cuddly flightless bird needing protection. Perhaps we should create a safe haven for it on a small island off the coast devoid of any immigrants where it can roam free without fear!
What also needs to be factored in here is the attitude of the average NZ driver - I WILL NOT GIVE WAY, YOU'RE NOT COMING IN FRONT OF ME etc. Add that daft rule to the attitude and it's an accident waiting to happen.
All countries have little differences, some good, some bad. Most of them just take a bit of getting used to and don't affect your everyday driving. But this rule is just lunacy, and that is why it isn't used in any other country in the world (to my knowledge).
I think most people who defend it are Kiwis who take criticism of it like a personal affront to everything good about NZ. They treat this rule like it's a cute and cuddly flightless bird needing protection. Perhaps we should create a safe haven for it on a small island off the coast devoid of any immigrants where it can roam free without fear!
jamieheasman said:
They treat this rule like it's a cute and cuddly flightless bird needing protection. Perhaps we should create a safe haven for it on a small island off the coast devoid of any immigrants where it can roam free without fear!
You should listen to yourselves.Look guys I admit sure I havent lived full-time anywhere else, why would I want to leave cute and cudly flightless birds
All you lot having a moan just need to take a bloody good defensive driving course
Nothing is ever going to be perfect NOT EVEN THE UK cause remember why you lovely lot are here 
Doesn't mean you cant change a stupid rule if its stupid. Remember the NZ AA have repetedly slated this rule as causing many 100's of accidents a year too.
BTW the UK is adopting a Kiwi style park in the direction of travel rule too, no reason why these things cant change if its an improvement.
BTW the UK is adopting a Kiwi style park in the direction of travel rule too, no reason why these things cant change if its an improvement.
Kylie/Ben - I don't recall either of you ever saying you've lived overseas so 'scuse me if this is a false assumption.... 
We seem to have two camps - those who haven't lived overseas saying the Kiwi rule is OK, and those who have experienced both systems saying it's not. We've got used to the Kiwi system and sure it works OK most of the time but it is a real pain in the arse (relatively). You don't even have to think about the UK system - it just works.
We seem to have two camps - those who haven't lived overseas saying the Kiwi rule is OK, and those who have experienced both systems saying it's not. We've got used to the Kiwi system and sure it works OK most of the time but it is a real pain in the arse (relatively). You don't even have to think about the UK system - it just works.
Gassing Station | New Zealand | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff