From: "Brian Sharrock"
References: wrote in message
> Steve wrote:
> > >> Guess you do have to move for a FIRE TRUCK, not just at the
> > >> direction of a police officer. And in theory, since that seems be
> > >> all there is in this thread, in order to do so you might have to
> > >> disgread the red light in order to "clear the intersection."
> > >> S
> > >
> > > no there is a positive command not to.
> > > §21-202. Traffic lights with steady indication
> > > (h) Steady red indication -- In general. -
> > > (1) Vehicular traffic facing a steady circular red signal alone:
> > > (i) Shall stop at the near side of the intersection:
> > > 1. At a clearly marked stop line;
> > > (ii) Except as provided in subsections (i), (j), and (k) of this
> > > section, shall remain stopped until a signal to proceed is shown.
> > >
> > >
> > > The statute repeadtly says Police officer. an obligation ot "pull
> > > over is not an obligation to "run a red light"
> > >
> > It also says emergency vehicles, which include FIRE TRUCKS, and it also
> > to clear the intersection.
> no it odes not say to enter an intersection against a red light and there
> clear command not to.
Brian wrote :)
But, as Vince wrote in a different thread, if there's
no conviction there can be no crime!
Picture the scene; rush hour traffic; intersection so constricted
with vehicles that it's difficult to negotiate a Fire Engine or
Ambulance through. [I can take you to several around here].
Traffic stopped at red light. Emergency vehicle with Blues, Two's,
blinking headlights, rotating lamps, crew screaming "Gerroutaway!
Gerroutaway!" And ...
Vince, at red light, sipping coffee selected from large number
of samples he'd previously brewed which he's checking with a thermometer,
probably digital and interface to a computer , sans speilchucker,
declaring;- "No! There is a positive command to remain stopped until a
signal to proceed is shown!"
Luckily for me, and my family, I seem to live in an area where
drivers exhibit more common sense.