Advice before my court appointment tomorrow morning? (1 Viewer)

[DaveHo]

You're breaking the law because you are impeding the flow of traffic and by doing so are creating an unsafe condition. Let's be realistic. Many if not the majority of drivers are going faster than the speed limit. It is not your God given right to control that. If you truly do drive like this I bet you get flipped off, cut off, and nearly run off the road on a regular basis. Get a clue.

-Dave

 

[Elinor]

>"People who drive at the speed limit, but are not actively passing, or are clogging up traffic are also breaking the law."

Um, isn't this depending on what state you're in?

I've never seen anyone pulled over for being in the left lane in Maryland.

I think we're way too overcrowded here for such niceties as lanes dedicated to passing.

I've driven through many states, and generally, the ones where it's illegal post signs to the effect "keep right except to pass." I think you would have to.

 

[AjayM]

Yesterday morning I was behind a left lane vigillante such as yourself. Somebody in the line of traffic pulled out to the right to make the pass, however there wasn't enough room to fully make the pass on said vigillante, but he came over anyway. This of course drove the vigillante off the road and onto the shoulder (and almost into the grass) and of course slammed on his brakes pretty damn good. Me being behind (but at a safe distance) hit my brakes, but the guy behind me who was impatiently tailgating had to go max on his brakes, and luckily the guy behind him left enough room to get out of the way. The end result is that everybody made it through the incident with nothing more than some swear words and some elevated blood pressure.

But of course the above scenario (which I see at least once a week, usually not that bad, sometimes a lot worse) is a lot safer than letting faster traffic by. So keep on trying to save us all, it'll be worth it when somebody with an extreme road rage problem runs you off the road or some other innocent bystander who was close by.

Andrew

 

[Elinor]

>"Somebody in the line of traffic pulled out to the right to make the pass"

Isn't that illegal in many states?

And UNSAFE in all of them?

I'd blame THAT person more than the guy going too slow in the left lane.

 

[AjayM]

IIRC most states have something on the books about it, but as you mentioned it's usually very rare to get ticketed for it. However I read a month or so ago about one or two states who just went into a big crackdown on the left lane vigillantes, basically they are going into a "no-tolerance" mode and ticketing everybody in the left lane who isn't passing (I want to say Virginia was one of them, but I'm not positive on that).

 

[AjayM]

So would I, but they both share blame for what happened. And while the guy making unsafe lane changes is more responsible the whole thing wouldn't have happened if the guy in front wasn't trying to be the traffic savior (I commute 50+ miles a day, I see this crap all the time).

Which would be safer, the almost 5+ car pile up at 70mph.

Or letting traffic move at 5-10mph over the limit with proper lane dicipline (ie the faster traffic get's through as they want).

From my own experience's in said commuting the danger comes from impatient people weaving in and out of cars because people don't know how to keep right except to pass. AND from the left lane bandits who suddenly realize their exit is coming and cross 3-lanes of traffic. Much more so than somebody going over the speed limit (but not resorting to weaving in and out of traffic, not tailgating, paying attention). But those are only my experiences.

 

[Ron-P]

I commute 150 miles on average per day and see it all the time as well. I accept it, pass, and move on. But, I've seen some pretty angry people lash out at guys that drive slow in the fast lane. A guy I worked with at a previous employer would see to it personally that these people got run off the road. He was an angry guy.

 

[Elinor]

Ajay, we're not in disagreement.

I just get very irritated by the unsafe practices of impatient people. Too many times, I have had to do stuff to avoid being hit by these idiots. I've never had to avoid a "too slow" driver though. But I agree, plopping your butt out there in the left lane and staying isn't good.

To be fair, I think they are mostly oblivious rather than righteous. I'm not sure that matters ... except maybe the oblivious can be educated, the righteous KNOW they're right even when they're wrong

 

[Shayne Lebrun]

Scott,

Try http://www.xcopper.com.

I have ABSOLUTELY NO experience with these people, and vouch for them in NO way, shape, or form. However, I do see a sign of theirs every time I drive into Toronto, and it's stuck in my head.

 

[MikeSerrano]

Colorado is the other:

Colorado state troopers are now ticketing drivers for using the left lane of multilane roads for anything other than passing. A law passed by the Colorado legislature last year authorized the issuance of warning tickets until Jan. 1, 2005.

Now police have started issuing $35 tickets, plus a $6.20 surcharge.

The law says the left lane is to be used only for passing where the speed limit is 65 mph or faster. Lawmakers passed the bill hoping to prevent traffic congestion and cut down on road rage.

The law actually when into effect July 1, 2004, but troopers spent the past six months warning drivers in hopes of educating them about the law, which requires motorists to stay in the right lane, except to pass slower-moving traffic. If a highway has three or more lanes, motorists are expected to stay out of the far left lane. The exception is rush hour, when motorists are not able to move over.

-Mike

 

[george kaplan]

I'd sooner get into a car that you were driving John, than agree with that incorrect assessment.

 

[Kirk Gunn]

In a related incident, I recall seeing a State Trooper "Pace Car" on the NJ Turnpike in the early 90s. It had a big sign on the back reading: "55 mph pace car".

He was straddling the center lanes to ensure no one passed. Very annoying

(of course this was on the part of the turnpike where the next exit was 20+ miles away !)

 

[Elinor]

Have you seen those cardboard trooper/patrol car silhouettes?

There's a stretch of I70 W of Hagerstown, where the highway comes down off a mountain into a flat stretch of valley ... dead straight. I have (occasionally) used the stretch to see how fast I was comfortable in whatever particular car I was driving. (The 318i started to feel a hair "light" at about 95 mph ....)

Anyway, I nearly became incontinent one time as I spied what I thought was a trooper near the end of that stretch of highway, on the median. I hadn't returned to normal speed yet. Turns out it was a cardboard silhoutte ... but I couldn't tell til about 25 yeards or so.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Isn't the point of a speed limit saying that the fastest car on that road should be going at the speed limit, and not anything faster?

Lane 1 on a freeway should be for passing, but at whatever the limit is. If it is posted at 65, then that should be the top speed. You could go down 5 MPH for lane 2, and so on.

If it is unsafe to go faster than what is posted, then anyone in lane 1 doing the posted limit shouldn't get a ticket for going too slow. If a judge disagreed with that, then you should send your fine to a local representative, and have them pay it. If they make the laws and you get a ticket for obeying them, then something is wrong.

Glenn

 

[george kaplan]

But you're not getting a ticket for obeying law one (the speed limit), you're getting a ticket for breaking law two (obstruction of traffic). Obeying one law is NO EXCUSE for breaking another law.

And to be clear, the law against driving slower than the flow of traffic in the fast lane does NOT force you to break the law by driving over the speed limit. You have the option to move to the right and travel the speed limit all you like.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Why does the law of obstructing traffic take priority over the law of breaking the speed limit? I could speed down a city street and take the defense that I wasn't obstructing any traffic, right?

As for the actual speed limits, if it says 65 - you don't know if it is safe at 80 unless you have read all the specs needed for that. If it is 65 because of the federal law wanting people to slow down (ha, ha), then we should just vote out our representatives. We should all just scream bloody murder.

Look at it this way. Let's say that the state police decided to crack down on speeders. If you went over the speed limit you'd get a ticket. Sure, thousands of drivers would get tickets, but then what would they do? Complain? You get enough people to complain and the laws get changed.

Of course, with a new speed limit of 80 everyone would be doing 95 now. The funeral directors love this stuff!
Speed kills!

Glenn

 

[ScottHH]

It is illegal to drive in the left lane when you are not passing cars. Here's the new law in Illinois.

" I've been asked if one is driving the speed limit in the left lane and cars come up form behind speeding, is the car in the left lane at fault. If one is detaining traffic in the left, it is their obligation to move over to the right. The lead car in the left is not responsible to be the enforcer of the law, not to be the hall monitor. It would be their obligation to get out of the left lane and let the law enforcement officials ticket the speeders. I've had people tell me that they like to drive in the left lane because it is smoother than the deteriorated right lane. That's all well and good, but if one is detaining traffic in the left, move over, let them pass, and then go back to the left. Lead foot drivers . . . beware!"
Illinois State Rep. John Millner (R-St. Charles)

Colorado
Texas
Pennsylvania

It is illegal to tailgate. It is illegal to change lanes without signaling, it is illegal to weave in and out of traffic. It is illegal to sit in the left lane and block traffic. It is illegal to speed. When was the last time any of you were on an interstate when all of these infractions DIDN'T take place. I find speeding to be the only one of these that isn't downright obnoxious to your fellow drivers.

I saw this show about the Autobahn on cable. Despite having no speedlimit, there are less accidents and fatalities per mile on the Autobahn than in the US. This was attributed to the curtious driving on the road, and the extremely stiff fines for any discurtious or dangerous driving (including sitting in the left lane when you're not passing).

So, did you contact a lawyer yet?

 

[Philip_G]

I have to admit, I do likes to speed

 

[george kaplan]

No. No, no, no.

Look, speeding and obstructing the flow of traffic are not intertwined like you keep making them out to be. They are BOTH illegal. It doesn't matter whether you are obstructing traffic or not, if you are speeding you are breaking the law. And it doesn't matter whether you are speeding or not, if you are obstructing traffic, you are breaking the law (in those states).

If you are stopped at a red light, and an ambulance pulls up behind you what do you do? Do you say, "I'm legally stopped at a red light, so I don't have to get out of the way?" No. In this case, you actually have to break one law (going, carefully, through a red light), in order to obey a more important law (getting out of the way of an ambulance).

In the case of obstructing traffic in the fast lane you do NOT have to break one law to obey the other. You don't have to speed up, you just have to get out of the way.

Why is this so hard to understand?

 

[AjayM]

Surely you have lots of tech to back these statements up, right?

I always found it funny that when the feds got rid of the mandate to states to keep the 55mph speed limit (through highway funding), and most of them increased speed limits to 65-70-75mph (Montana had no daytime speed limit for YEARS) that the death toll went down. When Montana put a real number speed limit in place of "reasonable and prudent" the amount of highway deaths went up.

And as mentioned, compare the fatality rate on German highways and US highways and you're in for a shock with your "speed kills" theory.

Andrew