On July 10, a 75-year-old woman surnamed Cheng (鄭) was struck and killed by a left-turning truck after taking fewer than 10 steps onto a crosswalk at the intersection of Zhiyuan First Road and Xian Street in Taipei’s Beitou District (北投). On July 19 — less than 10 days later — Taoyuan General Hospital surgeon Chou Chia-cheng (周佳正) was fatally struck by a left-turning bus while crossing the street at the intersection of Zhongshan S Road and Aiguo E Road in Taipei’s Zhongzheng District (中正). Both incidents occurred on pedestrian crossings and involved vehicles making a left turn.
According to US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data, approximately 22.2 percent of all traffic accidents involve left turns. Over a decade ago, the United Parcel Service implemented a strategy to reduce the proportion of left turns on delivery routes to about 10 percent of all turns, significantly lowering accident rates, while conserving fuel and increasing operational efficiency.
While it might be impossible to eliminate left turns completely, could routes be designed to minimize the risk of pedestrian injuries as a result of left-turning vehicles?
Most people assume that incidents involving left turns are a result of a driver’s failure to pay attention or properly slow down, but the truth is more complex.
Many drivers have a habit of initiating a left turn before reaching the center of an intersection, steering the vehicle diagonally. In such a scenario, a driver is forced to complete a sharp turn quickly in a short distance. The vehicle approaches the crosswalk at a slant, which means that pedestrians enter the driver’s field of view from the rear left, making them difficult to detect. At the same time, pedestrians are typically focused on the oncoming traffic in front of them and might not immediately be aware of a vehicle cutting in from behind on their right side.
The position and width of a vehicle’s A-pillar — the structural support on either side of the windshield — can create a blind spot in the driver’s field of view. When a driver begins initiating a left turn before reaching the center of an intersection, the blind spot overlaps with the crosswalk earlier than it normally would. If a pedestrian happens to be walking in the obscured area, the driver might not be able to see them. Because a pedestrian’s view is wide and unobstructed, they assume the driver can see them.
The A-pillar’s blind spot is not fixed — it shifts constantly as a vehicle moves and changes direction. Even if a driver checks both sides, they might still lose awareness of certain areas during a left turn, causing misjudgements or delayed reactions.
Following an incident, many drivers recall that a pedestrian suddenly ran out into the street, but in reality, the pedestrian did not just appear out of nowhere — they were positioned within the moving blind spot created by the A-pillar. The driver was only able to see them after the vehicle’s angle moved and shifted their line of sight.
Conversely, pedestrians are often left wondering: “Why did that car come right at me?” That is due to a combination of the blind spot caused by the A-pillar and the pedestrian’s own misjudgement — errors with brutal consequences.
If a vehicle begins a left turn only after arriving at the center of an intersection, its front would naturally become perpendicular with the crosswalk much sooner. That path not only gives the driver optimal visibility of the crosswalk during a turn, but also makes it easier for pedestrians to predict the vehicle’s intentions, thereby significantly reducing the risk of misjudgement and collision.
That approach does not require technological innovation, nor is it difficult to implement; it is a traffic regulation that has long been ignored. According to Article 102 of the Road Traffic Security Rules (道路交通安全規則), vehicles turning left must first proceed to the center of the intersection and shall not occupy oncoming lanes to turn early.
That is not just a matter of driving preference, it is a clear baseline for traffic safety. Driving forward just a few more meters and slowing down for one or two seconds — think “straight first, then turn left” — is the key to preventing tragedies. Yet, somehow, the concept has not taken root in Taiwan’s driving culture. Most people still do not understand the difference between “I looked” and “I saw.” What is needed is not only the correct response to traffic signals, but also a comprehensive understanding of the dangers of left turns, supported by renewed efforts in driver education.
Mike Chou is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Information and Computer Education at National Taiwan Normal University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS