Move Over And/Or Slow Down Laws

[webny99]

What does your state law say about moving over and/or slowing down for stopped emergency vehicles with flashing lights?

Personally, I find it quite irksome when people do both - isn't it supposed to be one or the other?
If there's a pre-existing slowdown - which there wouldn't be, if people did it properly - I make a point of not moving over, as I've already slowed down. Hopefully, those behind me will follow suit, and I will have assisted in clearing up the backlog of traffic!
If there's no backlog, I will move over, and typically slow down slightly without hitting the brakes. If I do have to hit the brakes, however, then I have "slowed down", so no legal obligation to move over, but I'll still do it if I can without undue disruption to traffic.

Thoughts?

[jeffandnicole]

Your opinion of slowing down may be different than the law's version.

Either way, the whole purpose of the law is because people can't exercise common sense. A cop isn't superman. He's a human on the roadway, just a few feet from thousands of pounds of an object that, if hit, can easily kill or seriously injure. You, my friend, are more concerned with the nuances of the law than using common sense.

Whenever possible, move over. If you can't move over, slow down - Significantly if you can. I've often see 20 mph below the speed limit on a highway as a goal. If there's a traffic jam, so be it. Believe it or not, a speed limit isn't a minimum goal to be obtained at all times. The whole purpose of those flashing lights is to bring attention to an issue, and for motorists to exercise caution.

If you think you alone can clear a backlog of traffic, you are humbly mistaken. You can only control the guy behind you to an extent. A few more cars back and you probably have had no effect whatsoever.  If you think one person can do something, put a camera out there, do what you think is the best thing possible, then review the recording later on. Your actions probably didn't make a difference.

And one final opinion: Let's say you get a flat tire and need to change it. You're a foot away from a travel lane. I have no legal obligation to move over or slow down, but I'm sure you'll be glad if there was no one driving a foot away at the speed limit from you.

[ilpt4u]

And one final opinion: Let's say you get a flat tire and need to change it. You're a foot away from a travel lane. I have no legal obligation to move over or slow down, but I'm sure you'll be glad if there was no one driving a foot away at the speed limit from you.

That depends on the state

Pretty sure the current version of Scott's Law in IL (the move over law name in IL) requires Moving Over and Slowing Down for ALL vehicles. Harsher penalties for Emergency Vehicle violations, tho

Earlier in 2019 IL had about a 2 month stretch where 3 or 4 State Troopers, on Highway duty, lost life in the line of duty by getting hit on the side of the road. And that was with Scott's Law firmly already on the books. I don't recall if the Legislature increased any penalties, tho

[Napsterbater]

I make a point of not moving over, as I've already slowed down. Hopefully, those behind me will follow suit, and I will have assisted in clearing up the backlog of traffic!

As someone who works on the side of the road who benefits from these laws.

MOVE OVER!!!!!

If you can safely move over DO IT, Slow down ONLY IF YOU CANNOT move over safely.

If you choose to slow down after moving over you can do so as well, though not required and generally you should not be slowing down as much as you would if you were still in the lane adjacent.

[webny99]

You, my friend, are more concerned with the nuances of the law than using common sense.

I am not sure who you are talking to, but I don't think it's me...
I know what the law is, what it's for, and have no objections to it. What I do have objection to, is people slowing down to a crawl AND moving over. Doing one of those two things is necessary. Doing both is absolutely not. There is a balance between respecting those on the side of the road, and maintaining some semblance of traffic flow.

If you think you alone can clear a backlog of traffic, you are humbly mistaken. You can only control the guy behind you to an extent. A few more cars back and you probably have had no effect whatsoever.  If you think one person can do something, put a camera out there, do what you think is the best thing possible, then review the recording later on. Your actions probably didn't make a difference.

What I can do, is use the available lane, and proceed (slowly) past whatever vehicles on the shoulder. My idea of slowly, is about 10-15 mph, which is often considerably faster than the lane that everyone is cramming into. My hope would be, that others would follow suit behind me, and also use the lane right next to the emergency vehicles. Obviously, I have no control over whether they do so or not, but the best I can do is set the proper example.

As someone who works on the side of the road who benefits from these laws.
MOVE OVER!!!!!
If you can safely move over DO IT, Slow down ONLY IF YOU CANNOT move over safely.

Well, that's just it. Where do you draw the line as to whether you can or cannot move over safely?
My argument is that when there's a backlog of traffic, moving over is unnecessarily adding to the disruption being caused.

Of course, I would never go past in the adjacent lane at full speed. I would hope that would be obvious.
I will always move over as long as conditions are free-flowing. When conditions aren't free flowing, it will be a judgment call as to whether to cram into the next lane over, or stay put and go past slowly (at about 10-15 mph, as noted above).

[vdeane]

Whenever possible, move over. If you can't move over, slow down - Significantly if you can. I've often see 20 mph below the speed limit on a highway as a goal. If there's a traffic jam, so be it. Believe it or not, a speed limit isn't a minimum goal to be obtained at all times. The whole purpose of those flashing lights is to bring attention to an issue, and for motorists to exercise caution.

I've seen people come to a complete stop and wait for someone in the adjacent lane to come to a complete stop to let them in (bumper to bumper traffic) to move over when they could very well have gone past the cop at 15 (regular speed limit 55) easily enough.  I'm pretty sure the definition of "move over if you can safely do so" doesn't involve people in that lane braking to let you in, but unfortunately with the media advertising the law as "slow down and move over" rather than "move over if possible or slow down if not", people sometimes try to move over no matter what.

[Napsterbater]

As someone who works on the side of the road who benefits from these laws.
MOVE OVER!!!!!
If you can safely move over DO IT, Slow down ONLY IF YOU CANNOT move over safely.

Well, that's just it. Where do you draw the line as to whether you can or cannot move over safely?
My argument is that when there's a backlog of traffic, moving over is unnecessarily adding to the disruption being caused.

If you're talking about backlog and both/all lanes are moving say sub 20mph, then pay attention to what is going on and use your judgment, If any responding vehicle is even partially in the lane or you see workers or emergency personnel having to enter the lane then get out of it no matter the speed. Of course generally that won't be the case and the lane will be completely blocked with a vehicle.

But if traffic is moving at speed and by that I mean about 30 mile an hour or more past the incident then do your best to move over safely And again if you cannot feel free drive by at 10 miles an hour again talking about a backlog situation with left lane doing 30 or so And the biggest thing is always be prepared to Make an emergency stop no matter the speed if you're going to be In the lane adjacent.

Also pay attention and look for anyone directing traffic. If someone is waving you on to speed up then do it. Also look for variable message signs mounted on DOT/responding vehicles giving direction.


And again if traffic is moving at speed even if not at the speed limit move over. Just think to yourself how would you feel if you got hit at the speed you're driving In the adjacent to the scene.



And as a side note, the responders on the side of the road can understand if you cannot safely move over that's fine, we understand, we are drivers too we run into the same situation. But SLOW DOWN If you cannot move over that is the biggest issue we have.

[Brandon]

And one final opinion: Let's say you get a flat tire and need to change it. You're a foot away from a travel lane. I have no legal obligation to move over or slow down, but I'm sure you'll be glad if there was no one driving a foot away at the speed limit from you.

That depends on the state

Pretty sure the current version of Scott’s Law in IL (the move over law name in IL) requires Moving Over and Slowing Down for ALL vehicles. Harsher penalties for Emergency Vehicle violations, tho

Earlier in 2019 IL had about a 2 month stretch where 3 or 4 State Troopers, on Highway duty, lost life in the line of duty by getting hit on the side of the road. And that was with Scott’s Law firmly already on the books. I don’t recall if the Legislature increased any penalties, tho

Nope, the law is slow down or move over, but for all vehicles (somehow the state police haven't gotten the message*).  Scott's Law is a law that should've been vetoed as the guy in question was hit by a drunk driver, and we already have laws on the books for that.  In fact, most of the drivers who hit these state troopers are impaired.  The sober don't tend to hit them.

*I watched a state trooper, no lights, no siren, just cruising along I-88 in Warrenville, in the far left lane, pass a maintenance crew on the left shoulder changing out the lights to LEDs, at 80 mph.  I really wished I had a dash cam that day as Scott's Law meant nothing to that trooper, but heaven forbid you should pass him the same way he did that maintenance crew.

(625 ILCS 5/11-907) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-907)
    (Text of Section before amendment by P.A. 101-173)
    Sec. 11-907. Operation of vehicles and streetcars on approach of authorized emergency vehicles.

(c) Upon approaching a stationary authorized emergency vehicle, when the authorized emergency vehicle is giving a signal by displaying alternately flashing red, red and white, blue, or red and blue lights or amber or yellow warning lights, a person who drives an approaching vehicle shall:
        (1) proceeding with due caution, yield the
       
right-of-way by making a lane change into a lane not adjacent to that of the authorized emergency vehicle, if possible with due regard to safety and traffic conditions, if on a highway having at least 4 lanes with not less than 2 lanes proceeding in the same direction as the approaching vehicle; or
        (2) proceeding with due caution, reduce the speed of
       
the vehicle, maintaining a safe speed for road conditions, if changing lanes would be impossible or unsafe.
    As used in this subsection (c), "authorized emergency vehicle" includes any vehicle authorized by law to be equipped with oscillating, rotating, or flashing lights under Section 12-215 of this Code, while the owner or operator of the vehicle is engaged in his or her official duties.

http://ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/documents/062500050K11-907.htm

Note the "or" in there.  However, this law is ambiguous (and why I hate the law) as to what "slow down" actually means.  Slow down can be anything from 1 mph upward slower.

[ilpt4u]

After reading Scott's Law's actual text, it is only officially for the protection of Emergency and Maintenance Vehicles. I thought there was a general provision for any vehicle, but that is not in this law's text, anyway

It should be Common Sense...if someone is stopped or working in a Lane or the Shoulder, move over and/or slow down as is appropriate...especially when its a Police, Fire, or Medical vehicle

[sprjus4]

I've seen instances on a 4-lane freeway (2 lanes each way) where there will be a truck / bus (only seen with large vehicles, yet into encounter a passenger vehicle doing this) that will move into the center of both lanes, and slow considerably under the speed limit for any vehicles pulled over (I got stuck behind a truck on a 70 mph rural freeway before slow down to 45 mph doing this maneuver), whether it be a car, large vehicle, or emergency vehicle.

I get the point, but please either stay in the right lane and slow way down, or fully get over to the left and maintain your speed. This centering stuff gets annoying especially when it's not necessary. There needs to be a fine line between slow down / move over and blocking both lanes of traffic at 45 mph on a rural freeway just for a stopped car. It can get dangerous too, because if you leave enough room to your left, somebody could easily recklessly squeeze in and fly by.

[Napsterbater]

I've seen instances on a 4-lane freeway (2 lanes each way) where there will be a truck / bus (only seen with large vehicles, yet into encounter a passenger vehicle doing this) that will move into the center of both lanes, and slow considerably under the speed limit for any vehicles pulled over (I got stuck behind a truck on a 70 mph rural freeway before slow down to 45 mph doing this maneuver), whether it be a car, large vehicle, or emergency vehicle.

I get the point, but please either stay in the right lane and slow way down, or fully get over to the left and maintain your speed. This centering stuff gets annoying especially when it's not necessary. There needs to be a fine line between slow down / move over and blocking both lanes of traffic at 45 mph on a rural freeway just for a stopped car. It can get dangerous too, because if you leave enough room to your left, somebody could easily recklessly squeeze in and fly by.

Also most(some?) Of the move over laws say 1 Lane, not a half of lane, not move over a little.

I see a lot of drivers with nobody around them only move over half lane. If they move over at all of course..

There is no reason not to at the very minimum move over one entire lane if there is nobody around you. And if you can move half ablane that means you can move over one whole lane.

[jeffandnicole]

Look...you can't fix stupid, so there's always going to be people doing odd things that the laws never intended, or do things that they believe are for the good of everyone else.  Someone straddling 2 lanes probably also do the same thing approaching a lane ending situation where they don't want people continuing in the lane that ends.

Consider other ambiguous laws...like stopping at a stop sign. Most states only say you must come to a complete stop. They don't say how long you must remain stopped. But if you only stop for a second and pull out hitting someone, you won't be able to use your 1 second stop as much of a defense...if anything, it's gonna go against you when you're cited for causing the accident by failing to yield.

Here's the thing which I tried pointing out...the shoulder of the highway is a dangerous place.  If you can move over, do so. If you think slowing down by 1 mph satisfies the law, then that's your opinion. But if something unexpected were to happen and you accidentally hit someone, would you think telling a judge, when you're spending thousands of dollars in legal fees, looking at 2 years of jail...that slowing down 1 mph was acceptable, you may want to reconsider your obligation to keep you and others safe

[renegade]

Michigan's law says you must do both:
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/MDOT_Vehicle_Caution_Law_116834_7.pdf

[1995hoo]

Florida's rest areas have the most detailed signage I've ever seen about a "Move Over Law":




(Obviously, that sign is too detailed for use on the open highway. There's a much simpler version used there.)

[sprjus4]

Michigan's law says you must do both:
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/MDOT_Vehicle_Caution_Law_116834_7.pdf

Seems like a traffic hazard IMO. Should be either or. It's pointless to slow down once you're in the other lane away from the stopped vehicle.

[sprjus4]

https://wmmlegal.com/virginia-strengthens-highway-move-over-law-now-reckless-driving

Virginia recently made the Move Over / Slow Down law a reckless driving offense if violated.

Any other states do this?

IMO, it's absurd to punishable as reckless driving. Seems like a money grab if anything.

[Napsterbater]

https://wmmlegal.com/virginia-strengthens-highway-move-over-law-now-reckless-driving

Virginia recently made the Move Over / Slow Down law a reckless driving offense if violated.

Any other states do this?

IMO, it's absurd to punishable as reckless driving. Seems like a money grab if anything.

Good! With how many people continue to fail to move over even when there's absolutely nobody around them and then you still have the idiots who won't even slow down a touch if they cannot get over.

Maybe the threat of reckless driving charge will get people to comply. And if they don't they get what they deserve.

[sprjus4]

https://wmmlegal.com/virginia-strengthens-highway-move-over-law-now-reckless-driving

Virginia recently made the Move Over / Slow Down law a reckless driving offense if violated.

Any other states do this?

IMO, it's absurd to punishable as reckless driving. Seems like a money grab if anything.

Good! With how many people continue to fail to move over even when there's absolutely nobody around them and then you still have the idiots who won't even slow down a touch if they cannot get over.

Maybe the threat of reckless driving charge will get people to comply. And if they don't they get what they deserve.

I understand the reasoning of it, but my issue is with this state, it almost seems like it's more of a money grab in reality rather than in the name of safety.

If it's used properly, understandable. There have been an uptick in the amount of worker / emergency vehicle crashes, a couple of weekends ago here in Hampton Roads, I believe there was 2-3 shoulder crashes within a 24 hour period, all at different locations. Idiots who A) won't move over or slow down, and B) don't know how to maintain their lane and think they can veer on/off the shoulder.

[Mergingtraffic]

I just don't like how the law just pertained to emergency vehicles and not the average driver.  Does that mean the average driver isn't as important?  I take the same amount of care no matter who I see on the shoulder. 

I have noticed the media call it the "move over" law so now people think they have to move over no matter what even if somebody is in that lane.  If if there isn't any room, people move over, which causes vehicles to slow down more than they probably need to and creates a bigger traffic jam.

I did see a cop with his lights on in the shoulder (no other vehicle there), the car ahead of me didn't move over (b/c he couldn't as there was a car in the left lane next to him) and he was pulled over.  I'm guessing b/c he violated the move over law.  He was going the speed limit and did slow down and there was no other vehicle with the cop on the shoulder.

[sprjus4]

I did see a cop with his lights on in the shoulder (no other vehicle there), the car ahead of me didn't move over (b/c he couldn't as there was a car in the left lane next to him) and he was pulled over.  I'm guessing b/c he violated the move over law.  He was going the speed limit and did slow down and there was no other vehicle with the cop on the shoulder.

$$$$! Absurd.

[jakeroot]

I will move over in all situations unless physically impossible (including during heavy traffic, even if no one else does). It makes me uncomfortable to drive directly adjacent to someone under any circumstances. Even on urban roadways, there's usually a buffer between the travel lane and sidewalk. No such buffer between the outside lane and the shoulder. Main reasoning: if someone stumbled over, and I hit them, I wouldn't sleep for weeks, probably months. Even if I was "in the right", I wouldn't be able to mentally handle it.

I will move over for pretty much anyone on the side of the road, unless it's clear that no one is in the vehicle. Primary reasoning being that someone who has broken down, might not be thinking straight. They could randomly swing their door out into the outside lane, which wouldn't end well. Or if they opened the door successfully, but then climbed out and stumbled into traffic, I could very well hit them (not much reaction time at freeway speeds).

WA has not had move over laws for a super long time, but Washington State Patrol now enforces that law, and the mobile phone laws, far more than any other law (including speeding). WA law requires slowing down to 10 below the limit if you choose not to move over, for the record.

[6a]

I just don't like how the law just pertained to emergency vehicles and not the average driver.  Does that mean the average driver isn't as important?  I take the same amount of care no matter who I see on the shoulder. 

I have noticed the media call it the "move over" law so now people think they have to move over no matter what even if somebody is in that lane.  If if there isn't any room, people move over, which causes vehicles to slow down more than they probably need to and creates a bigger traffic jam.

I did see a cop with his lights on in the shoulder (no other vehicle there), the car ahead of me didn't move over (b/c he couldn't as there was a car in the left lane next to him) and he was pulled over.  I'm guessing b/c he violated the move over law.  He was going the speed limit and did slow down and there was no other vehicle with the cop on the shoulder.

Ohio's law says public safety, emergency, road service, waste collection, motor vehicle inspection, and highway maintenance vehicles, but the actual signage says "move over for stopped vehicle with flashing lights" . That leaves a little ambiguity in my brain regarding the general public, but common sense tells me to do it no matter what.

[renegade]

Michigan's law says you must do both:
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/MDOT_Vehicle_Caution_Law_116834_7.pdf

Seems like a traffic hazard IMO. Should be either or. It's pointless to slow down once you're in the other lane away from the stopped vehicle.

I would agree with you, but we've buried tow truck operators and police officers here a few times and in the interest of their safety, this was the solution that was offered up.

[Flint1979]

In Michigan you are suppose to move over and slow down to 5 mph under the speed limit.

[renegade]

In Michigan you are suppose to move over and slow down to 5 mph under the speed limit.

Thanks for mansplaining that one for me.  I guess I didn't make myself clear enough in post #12 by stating, "you must do both" and citing state law to back it up.  We need more fine, upstanding citizens like you who are more than willing to help out those who don't need any.



The 'block' function is totally useless.