Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Crash_It]

As shown by two of my most recent videos, it seems to become common for someone to block the left lane and not allow anyone else in front of them no matter what:

and...

[kphoger]

While coming back to Wichita from Del Rio with my best friend, I was mildly irritated at his left lane behavior.  He gets over into the left lane early, and he doesn't dip back into the right lane to let people by as long as there's someone within sight that he plans to pass as well.  This behavior prompted a couple of drivers between OKC and Wichita to gun it around him in the right lane, and one even blared his horn at us.

When a driver with New Mexico plates gunned it around us in the right lane, my friend muttered "That's illegal in your state too".

— What's illegal? I asked
— Going around me in the right lane.
— I'm not aware of any state where that's illegal.
— It's illegal in Kansas.
— No it isn't.  I've never seen that law.  It is illegal to drive in the left lane when someone is wanting trying to get around you.

He slowly nodded his head and didn't say anything.
I don't know if he believed me or not.

[Max Rockatansky]

Never heard of the Left Lane Prius Facebook group?

[achilles765]

I have never understood why it really matters which lane someone is in as long as they aren't driving too slowly.  I almost exclusively drive in the left lane but then again I am also usually driving about 5-10 miles over the speed limit.  I switch to the right lane only if there is not a lot of traffic ahead of me or someone is coming up behind me on the left and they are driving faster than I seem to be. 
When there's three or more lanes, I almost always stay in the center unless Im nearing an exit.

[Max Rockatansky]

I have never understood why it really matters which lane someone is in as long as they aren't driving too slowly.  I almost exclusively drive in the left lane but then again I am also usually driving about 5-10 miles over the speed limit.  I switch to the right lane only if there is not a lot of traffic ahead of me or someone is coming up behind me on the left and they are driving faster than I seem to be. 
When there's three or more lanes, I almost always stay in the center unless Im nearing an exit.

The OP has to be dramatic about a non-issue per usual.

[kphoger]

I have never understood why it really matters which lane someone is in as long as they aren't driving too slowly.

(Cue the guy who points out the following distances aren't realistic, thinking he's debunked it by doing so.)

[Rothman]

Never heard of the Left Lane Prius Facebook group?

My life is enriched now.

[jakeroot]

Never heard of the Left Lane Prius Facebook group?

My life is enriched now.

Dear god, like half the posts in that group are all from WA. Very embarrassing.

[MikeTheActuary]

I have never understood why it really matters which lane someone is in as long as they aren't driving too slowly.

Visibility.  If you are overtaking another vehicle, you want to be as visible as possible to that vehicle's driver, passing them on the driver's side of that vehicle.

While (with properly aligned mirrors) drivers should have visibility on both sides of their vehicles...the fact of the matter remains that because of visibility and convention it's safer to pass on the left in countries that drive on the right side of the road.

That doesn't even begin to consider that on properly-designed roads, you improve traffic flow and improve safety if there's consistency on which lanes move slower/faster than other lanes.

[1]

Is this the first video where Crash_It did nothing wrong?

[cabiness42]

Is this the first video where Crash_It did nothing wrong?

No, in the first video he flashed his brights at the driver ahead of him in the left lane because the other car didn't switch from decelerating to accelerating within .00001 seconds of the light turning green, because as we all know, cross drivers never, ever run red lights, so there's never, ever any danger in getting out into the intersection as quickly as possible.

I don't know the laws about flashing your brights, but that's a dick move at the least.

I can't figure out if this guy is just doing this stuff for his videos, or if he always drives as if he owns the road and everybody should get out of his way.

Maybe he should move to Wyoming.

[kphoger]

Is this the first video where Crash_It did nothing wrong?

No, in the first video he flashed his brights at the driver ahead of him in the left lane because the other car didn't switch from decelerating to accelerating within .00001 seconds of the light turning green, because as we all know, cross drivers never, ever run red lights, so there's never, ever any danger in getting out into the intersection as quickly as possible.

I don't know the laws about flashing your brights, but that's a dick move at the least.

If he was within 300 feet of the other driver, then he was prohibited by Illinois state law from using his high beams for any reason.

Chapter 625 - VEHICLES
 625 ILCS 5/ - Illinois Vehicle Code.
  Chapter 12 - Equipment Of Vehicles
   Sec. 12-210. Use of head lamps and auxiliary driving lamps.

(a) Whenever the driver of any vehicle equipped with an electric driving head lamp, driving head lamps, auxiliary driving lamp or auxiliary driving lamps is within 500 feet of another vehicle approaching from the opposite direction, the driver shall dim or drop such head lamp or head lamps and shall extinguish all auxiliary driving lamps.

(b) The driver of any vehicle equipped with an electric driving head lamp, head lamps, auxiliary driving lamp or auxiliary driving lamps shall dim or drop such head lamp or head lamps and shall extinguish all auxiliary driving lamps when there is another vehicle traveling in the same direction less than 300 feet to the front of him.

(c) No vehicle shall have the lighting system modified to allow more than 2 electric head lamps to be lighted while operating in the dimmed or dropped position.

(d) Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the use of auxiliary driving lamps, commonly referred to as "fog" lamps, when used in conjunction with head lamps, if such auxiliary driving lamps are adjusted and so aimed that the glaring rays are not projected into the eyes of drivers of oncoming vehicles.

[jakeroot]

I would have assumed that flashing your high beams was protected by the first amendment as free speech.

I use my high beams to communicate with other drivers very often. Cops do it too. It's a way to alert numerous different conditions.

Leaving your high beams on because you're a moron is not speech and definitely not legal.

[cabiness42]

I would have assumed that flashing your high beams was protected by the first amendment as free speech.

I use my high beams to communicate with other drivers very often. Cops do it too. It's a way to alert numerous different conditions.

Leaving your high beams on because you're a moron is not speech and definitely not legal.

Using them to alert someone about a potential safety hazard is fine. Using them because you are impatient and can't wait a few seconds for someone to get up to speed, not fine.

[kphoger]

I would have assumed that flashing your high beams was protected by the first amendment as free speech.

I don't see how that could be any more protected as free speech than, say, driving with red headlights and blue taillights.

I use my high beams to communicate with other drivers very often. Cops do it too. It's a way to alert numerous different conditions.

Leaving your high beams on because you're a moron is not speech and definitely not legal.

I occasionally flash my high beams as well.  My point was that it's illegal, and Illinois law doesn't carve out any exceptions.

Using them to alert someone about a potential safety hazard is fine. Using them because you are impatient and can't wait a few seconds for someone to get up to speed, not fine.

As already stated:  socially acceptable, yes;  legal, no.

[1995hoo]

Regarding the First Amendment issue, courts in several states have cited the First Amendment to throw out tickets some cops have purported to issue to people who flashed their high-beams to warn of an upcoming speedtrap. In that sort of situation, if the state has a statute like the one kphoger quoted, the cop could probably issue a ticket for violation of that statute because it's a content-neutral restriction—as kphoger notes, the statute doesn't make a distinction as to why you're flashing your high-beams. But if the cop issues a ticket strictly because a driver was warning of a speedtrap, the driver is likely to win.

With all that said, some people have apparently decided that the longstanding custom of flashing your brights a few times at someone who is blocking the left lane is an asshole move and I'm not sure why that practice is suddenly being deemed taboo all of a sudden. It's long been universally understood as a simple request to get out of the way. However, here in the DC area there's an annoying fad where people who don't like something you do will turn on their high-beams and keep them on as though it's some way to "teach you a lesson" or "send a message." That's stupid, rude, and dangerous, especially if you have newer headlights.

(I didn't watch the OP's video, BTW, and at first I didn't realize it was a Crash_It thread. Referring strictly to the subject line, however, I do think left-lane camping is unfortunately all too common and there's no reason for it. It's one thing in urban areas with heavy traffic—often it's simply impractical to get over. It's quite another on rural Interstates where there's simply no reason to be in the left lane. In Maryland, I sometimes feel like I'm on a British motorway—Maryland drivers are so terrified of the right lane that you can usually get through faster if you keep right.)

[CtrlAltDel]

I would have assumed that flashing your high beams was protected by the first amendment as free speech.

I don't see how that could be any more protected as free speech than, say, driving with red headlights and blue taillights.

There have been plenty of court cases about it. See the Wiki for a brief rundown. Most of these cases revolve around flashing high beams to warn drivers of speed traps and other similar dangers, though, and not to intimidate them.

[zzcarp]

I would have assumed that flashing your high beams was protected by the first amendment as free speech.

I don't see how that could be any more protected as free speech than, say, driving with red headlights and blue taillights.

I use my high beams to communicate with other drivers very often. Cops do it too. It's a way to alert numerous different conditions.

Leaving your high beams on because you're a moron is not speech and definitely not legal.

I occasionally flash my high beams as well.  My point was that it's illegal, and Illinois law doesn't carve out any exceptions.

Using them to alert someone about a potential safety hazard is fine. Using them because you are impatient and can't wait a few seconds for someone to get up to speed, not fine.

As already stated:  socially acceptable, yes;  legal, no.

In many if not most places, flashing your high beams is protected speech. This google search brings up many cases - Tennessee, Ohio, Oregon are the first three states, and there probably are others.

Now, in the real world, revenuers police may decide to pull you over for whatever reason including flashing your lights and find a legal reason later. That's always something to be aware of.

Regarding the OP, in Colorado we have a "Keep Right Except to Pass" law. It's rarely enforced in my experience, though people traveling below the speed limit in the left lane is as or more dangerous than speeding. Many times driving from Denver to Colorado Springs (including this 4th of July) I've found the far right lane of I-25 south of C-470 is the only lane where one can accelerate and do the speed limit until traffic sorts itself out halfway to Castle Rock.

[kphoger]

Now, in the real world, revenuers police may decide to ...

I prefer the term "local REOs".  Which stands for "Revenue Enhancement Officer".

Hmm, I thought I got that term from this forum, but I must have gotten it from a now-defunct hitchhiking forum instead.

[1995hoo]

So this afternoon this thread surfaced on another forum I visit. I promise I didn't tip the OP off to Crash_It's thread here.

[SectorZ]

Now, in the real world, revenuers police may decide to ...

I prefer the term "local REOs".  Which stands for "Revenue Enhancement Officer".

Hmm, I thought I got that term from this forum, but I must have gotten it from a now-defunct hitchhiking forum instead.

You know what REOs drive, right?

[kphoger]

Now, in the real world, revenuers police may decide to ...

I prefer the term "local REOs".  Which stands for "Revenue Enhancement Officer".

Hmm, I thought I got that term from this forum, but I must have gotten it from a now-defunct hitchhiking forum instead.

You know what REOs drive, right?

Speedwagons?

[SectorZ]

Now, in the real world, revenuers police may decide to ...

I prefer the term "local REOs".  Which stands for "Revenue Enhancement Officer".

Hmm, I thought I got that term from this forum, but I must have gotten it from a now-defunct hitchhiking forum instead.

You know what REOs drive, right?

Speedwagons?

 

[Crash_It]

I have never understood why it really matters which lane someone is in as long as they aren't driving too slowly.  I almost exclusively drive in the left lane but then again I am also usually driving about 5-10 miles over the speed limit.  I switch to the right lane only if there is not a lot of traffic ahead of me or someone is coming up behind me on the left and they are driving faster than I seem to be. 
When there's three or more lanes, I almost always stay in the center unless Im nearing an exit.

The OP has to be dramatic about a non-issue per usual.

Driver, often with a weak car or not a resident of the state where it occurs in is slow in the left lane...blocking anyone who wants to pass and get where they need to with minimal delay. There are numerous laws against this, how is this a non-issue?

[Max Rockatansky]

I have never understood why it really matters which lane someone is in as long as they aren't driving too slowly.  I almost exclusively drive in the left lane but then again I am also usually driving about 5-10 miles over the speed limit.  I switch to the right lane only if there is not a lot of traffic ahead of me or someone is coming up behind me on the left and they are driving faster than I seem to be. 
When there's three or more lanes, I almost always stay in the center unless Im nearing an exit.

The OP has to be dramatic about a non-issue per usual.

Driver, often with a weak car or not a resident of the state where it occurs in is slow in the left lane...blocking anyone who wants to pass and get where they need to with minimal delay. There are numerous laws against this, how is this a non-issue?

Your whole brand is about sensationalizing the mostly minor subpar habits of every driver except yourself.  Why should any of us care what a subpar driver like yourself has to say when they are in active denial of their own bad driving habits and come with a Jerry Springer-like presentation?