4 ms·

> Illegal (no signal) lane change results in a steering wheel shaker (and optional audio alert). To be clear, tying the warning to the signal isn't about preve

> Illegal (no signal) lane change results in a steering wheel shaker (and optional audio alert). To be clear, tying the warning to the signal isn't about preventing unsignaled lane changes, it's gauging driver intent (i.e. is he asleep and drifting or just trying to change lanes). It's just gravy that it will train bad drivers to use their signals properly.

alistairSH 5y ago
Correct. It's not (primarily) a training thing, but used to ensure the driver is driving and not sleeping/watching movies/whatever.
sandworm101 5y ago
Is a lane change without signal always illegal? I know that it almost certainly make you liable for any resulting accident, but I'm not sure that it is universally illegal.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  I have no idea, but the point wasn't so much that the lane change is illegal, but that lack of signal is used to indicate lack of driver attention. I shouldn't have used "illegal" in my original post.
- peeters 5y ago
  This is technically true in Ontario (TIL). > 142 (1) The driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway before turning (...) from one lane for traffic to another lane for traffic (...) shall first see that the movement can be made in safety, and if the operation of any other vehicle may be affected by the movement shall give a signal plainly visible to the driver or operator of the other vehicle of the intention to make the movement. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 142 (1). That said there's zero cost to doing so regardless of whether other drivers are affected. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK243 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK243
  - sandworm101 5y ago
    That's the sort of law I remember. It is considered a failure to communicate your intention rather than a violation per se in every circumstance.
    - peeters 5y ago
      It could be one of those "if a tree falls in the forest" scenarios. If a cop is near enough to see you not signal, he could easily argue that he himself might have been affected by the turn or lane change.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Is a lane change without signal always illegal? I know that it almost certainly make you liable for any resulting accident Usually, it makes you liable because it is illegal. CA law for instance reqires signalling 100ft before a lane change or turn.
- hermitdev 5y ago
  Yes, failure to signal is a traffic violation. At least everywhere I've lived/traveled in the US. It's also a rather convenient excuse for police to "randomly" pull you over (I've been pulled over by Chicago PD for not signaling for a lane change, despite actually having done so).

alistairSH 5y ago

Correct. It's not (primarily) a training thing, but used to ensure the driver is driving and not sleeping/watching movies/whatever.

sandworm101 5y ago

Is a lane change without signal always illegal? I know that it almost certainly make you liable for any resulting accident, but I'm not sure that it is universally illegal.

alistairSH 5y ago
I have no idea, but the point wasn't so much that the lane change is illegal, but that lack of signal is used to indicate lack of driver attention. I shouldn't have used "illegal" in my original post.
peeters 5y ago
This is technically true in Ontario (TIL). > 142 (1) The driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway before turning (...) from one lane for traffic to another lane for traffic (...) shall first see that the movement can be made in safety, and if the operation of any other vehicle may be affected by the movement shall give a signal plainly visible to the driver or operator of the other vehicle of the intention to make the movement. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 142 (1). That said there's zero cost to doing so regardless of whether other drivers are affected. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK243 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK243
- sandworm101 5y ago
  That's the sort of law I remember. It is considered a failure to communicate your intention rather than a violation per se in every circumstance.
  - peeters 5y ago
    It could be one of those "if a tree falls in the forest" scenarios. If a cop is near enough to see you not signal, he could easily argue that he himself might have been affected by the turn or lane change.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> Is a lane change without signal always illegal? I know that it almost certainly make you liable for any resulting accident Usually, it makes you liable because it is illegal. CA law for instance reqires signalling 100ft before a lane change or turn.
hermitdev 5y ago
Yes, failure to signal is a traffic violation. At least everywhere I've lived/traveled in the US. It's also a rather convenient excuse for police to "randomly" pull you over (I've been pulled over by Chicago PD for not signaling for a lane change, despite actually having done so).