Ernie,

You are correct about turning right and staying in the lane closest to the curb. However, when turning left you are not required to turn into the left lane. A lot of people misread that one.

Mytwocents,

They were Class C violations which are not arrestable unless they happened in their (officer) presence or view.

He would have been arrested had he been walking on the wrong side of the road.....it's all about priorities.

My biggest driving pet peeve? Drivers who are too lazy to turn the steering wheel!

TAC:Transportation Code § 545.101. TURNING AT INTERSECTION. (a) To make a right[0] turn[0] at an intersection, an operator shall make both the
approach and the turn[0] as closely as practicable to the right[0]-hand curb or edge of the roadway.

That means if you're turning right, you do so from the RIGHT lane and into the RIGHT lane unless you're driving a truck or other vehicle or vehicle combination that would cause the rear wheels to pass over the curb.

A similar law controls left turns. You turn from the LEFT lane (or turning lane) into the LEFT lane, not across a 1/4 mile of roadway just so you don't have to turn the steering wheel another couple of inches.

Of course though, that means about two thirds of the people who can't seem to slow down below 30 mph to MAKE a turn are gonna need a lot of new tires.....

Ernie

If you start picking and choosing which laws you will obey, and everyone else does the same, we have anarchy. The government has authority over its citizens in the form of laws. Citizens have authority over their government in the form of elections. Pretty good checks and balances if people will use it.

Podunk, you disagree with speed limits. You have that right, and I will not try to talk you out of your belief. Find like-minded people and try to get the law changed. But until then, you have a legal responsibility to abide by the laws currently in effect. Breaking a law just because you disagree with it, or because it inconveniences you is still breaking the law.

Conservation.  The 55 miles per hour law was to save gas.  And--it did. People started driving 60 rather than 75....LOL

Podunk just illustrated my point. Once law enforcement quits enforcing the law, the public starts believing that breaking the law is no big deal. The signs posted on the side of the road are there to inform us the MAXIMUM allowable speed, not the minimum.

I had an idea a while back for a valuable public service the Police Dept. could do in cooperation with the Acvocate. Each week a public relations rep with the PD could write an article for the Advocate explaining a certain traffic law. Why it is important, and how we as law-abiding citizens should best observe it. Then after about a week's grace period, START ENFORCING IT! It would do wonders for public safety and city revenues.

Well Thank you Wrood and Patriot.. well I must of been gone out of the country during that time it was so publicized.... and well as far as worrying I guess I donot have to worry about them being cameras... I should of known better though we aren't that far up in technology yet...if some areas in town of victoria still don't have fast internet...infact I spoke to some of Geanie Morrison people and complained about fast internet in the surrounding areas..and they said that even Ms. Morrison had just recieved fast interent not to long ago.. so, go figure..

The cameras you see on the stop lights in Victoria are NOT ticket cameras. The cameras are used just to control the lights. They don't take pictures of your vehicle.

Huckleberry, the cameras in Victoria are not for catching red light runners. It was well publicized in the Advocate when they put them up. They are for the purpose of timing the traffic lights. Supposed to "see" when there are cars in each lane approaching the intersection. Can't say as I've ever noticed any effect from them.

While I'm on the subject, I would like to remind everyone that the traffic lights on Navarro are timed so that you will hit them all green IF YOU DRIVE THE SPEED LIMIT. I get tired of all the speeders bunching up at the lights and slowing me down as they have to come back up to speed. I guess I should congratulate them for winning the race to the light.

the purpose of loop 463 was not to make it illegal for heavy trucks to use navarro FATBOY. there is no restrictions at all for heavy trucks on navarro. that could be why there have never been any tickets written to the drivers of heavy trucks on navarro. there is a higher percentage of small 4 wheel automobiles that cause accidents (like the pickup from emory in this story) than 18 wheelers anyway. if the drivers of 4 wheel automobiles would learn to pay attention and to obey the law on navarro and every other street in america, then there would be way, way, way less accidents. don't always point the finger at 18 wheelers people.

Well, why did they install those camera's anyway if They DONOT WORK...or are they camera's.... cause the other day I was riding with a friend of mine and I told her ... dont pass the yellow light so close to turning to red as she was crossing the intersection they are going to take your picture and send you the bill..... I told her...... and she said, Please those things dont even work..

Ok.. I was in Houston a week ago and this guy was beside me on the left side and he decided to do the same thing but he left alittle later and ran the red light ..I on the other hand held back..and Boom the camera went off and got him....and that was the very first time I had seen it happen...So, I gather the cameras are a Christmas Ornament then...

and the people who had the accident weren't even from Victoria I gather they were visiting poor things... one from Austin and the other from Emory..

Navarro south of L463 overpass is Business77...why is there still heavy trucks and such still using it? Give a ticket as well here...

You are exactly right, waywardwind. The city of Victoria is missing out on a lot of revenue by failing to enforce the law in this town. Just enforcing the speed limit on Navarro alone could probably finance the entire city budget. Don't even get me started on using the left turn lane as an on-ramp!

I wonder why the V.A. didn't give the drivers name. What was his legal status in the U.S. As far as the person who got hit he's probably S.O.L. My daughter was rearended in Houston about two weeks ago by a young lady who had no insurance. She was ticketed and her car was towed. It totaled my daughter's car. When they went to court last week the judge ruled that since the young lady was a collage student and only works part time she would only be required to pay $150.00 per month. Since my daughter's car was paid for she only carried liability insurance and now had to go into debt to buy a car, because she had to get to work and take my grandson to school, ball practice and do the other things that a young mother needs to do. By the way the young lady that hit my daughter was a U.S. citizen. What concerns me is that the young lady served no jail time and was not punished in any way. What type of example are the courts setting?

Speeding, running a red light, causing an accident that fortunately didn't kill anyone, no license, no insurance and no registration and he only got tickets for the last three and didn't even get tickets for the first three and didn't go to jail because of the whole lot???? What's going on with the Victoria revenue agency? Don't they know that they can get money from those offenses also? Not to mention taking off the streets a person who REALLY shouldn't be driving. I feel badly for the people who were injured. The idiot who hit them doesn't have insurance and, I'm just guessing here, probably doesn't have any money either. Those people can sue, but I doubt they'll ever collect damages.

Good Point.I'm guessing the excuse for this will be....KNOW ONE DIED.....yet, there are others whom have been arrested for these three violations WITHOUT causing a wreck.