This is going into effect July 1st in Indiana, I'm curious, what is everyone's opinion of this? Do any other states have this law? I'll post what I think later in the thread.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/05/26/new-indiana-law-requires-slower-drivers-move-right-lane/27959911/
What if I have a religious objection to driving fast in the left lane?
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
It's one thing to get a ticket for driving too fast, but this is ridiculous!
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
How is this two separate concepts though, don't speed limits govern ALL lanes on a road in ALL situations? Wouldn't this invalidate speed limits as a whole? Or do speed limits only apply to the right lane(s)? Why have speed limits at all if you can still get a ticket for supposedly following the law? If this is such a problem, should speed limits be raised? I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand the other side on this issue.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
How is this two separate concepts though, don't speed limits govern ALL lanes on a road in ALL situations? Wouldn't this invalidate speed limits as a whole? Or do speed limits only apply to the right lane(s)? Why have speed limits at all if you can still get a ticket for supposedly following the law? If this is such a problem, should speed limits be raised? I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand the other side on this issue.
There is already a law in place telling people what the "safe" speed is, but now there is one telling people the "safe" lane in which to drive.
In practice, I doubt a police officer will ever ticket anyone for this, but its also rare to get a ticket for speeding if you're within 5 of the speed limit. Its just on the books to facilitate better traffic flow (at least in theory).
Quote from: Mr. Matté on June 01, 2015, 12:44:56 PM
What if I have a religious objection to driving fast in the left lane?
:-D
Quote from: trafficsignal on June 01, 2015, 01:45:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
How is this two separate concepts though, don't speed limits govern ALL lanes on a road in ALL situations? Wouldn't this invalidate speed limits as a whole? Or do speed limits only apply to the right lane(s)? Why have speed limits at all if you can still get a ticket for supposedly following the law? If this is such a problem, should speed limits be raised? I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand the other side on this issue.
There is already a law in place telling people what the "safe" speed is, but now there is one telling people the "safe" lane in which to drive.
In practice, I doubt a police officer will ever ticket anyone for this, but its also rare to get a ticket for speeding if you're within 5 of the speed limit. Its just on the books to facilitate better traffic flow (at least in theory).
I agree, this is likely to be rarely in force
Quote from: trafficsignal on June 01, 2015, 01:45:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
How is this two separate concepts though, don't speed limits govern ALL lanes on a road in ALL situations? Wouldn't this invalidate speed limits as a whole? Or do speed limits only apply to the right lane(s)? Why have speed limits at all if you can still get a ticket for supposedly following the law? If this is such a problem, should speed limits be raised? I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand the other side on this issue.
There is already a law in place telling people what the "safe" speed is, but now there is one telling people the "safe" lane in which to drive.
In practice, I doubt a police officer will ever ticket anyone for this, but its also rare to get a ticket for speeding if you're within 5 of the speed limit. Its just on the books to facilitate better traffic flow (at least in theory).
Left lane camping causes road rage and gets people pissed off. Pissed off drivers do stupid things, and people have been seriously hurt or even killed because of a driver's road rage.
One easy way to cut down on road rage is allow drivers to not be impeded by other drivers, and their opinions on what the safe speed is. Sure, the speeders might travel at ludicrous speed, but they'll get their just deserts.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
How is this two separate concepts though, don't speed limits govern ALL lanes on a road in ALL situations? Wouldn't this invalidate speed limits as a whole? Or do speed limits only apply to the right lane(s)? Why have speed limits at all if you can still get a ticket for supposedly following the law? If this is such a problem, should speed limits be raised? I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand the other side on this issue.
No, you can still get a ticket for speeding in the left lane, but regardless of your driving speed you should keep right unless passing. Speed limit has no bearing on the latter concept.
I feel like very few drivers understand the whole "keep right except to pass" concept, they just see a lane and ride it, which can be very annoying especially in rural areas!
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
Can you get a ticket for speeding and going to slow at the same time and if so What will the court say when you ask the judge HOW CAN I BOTH SPEEDING AND GOING TO SLOW AT THE SAME TIME?
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on June 01, 2015, 02:36:11 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
Can you get a ticket for speeding and going to slow at the same time and if so What will the court say when you ask the judge HOW CAN I BOTH SPEEDING AND GOING TO SLOW AT THE SAME TIME?
It's not a ticket for going too slow though- it's a ticket for not passing in the passing lane. You could be going 100 mph with nobody on your right (not passing anybody) and be in violation of this law. It has nothing to do with speed.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 02:25:59 PM
I feel like very few drivers understand the whole "keep right except to pass" concept, they just see a lane and ride it, which can be very annoying especially in rural areas!
Which it sounds like is why this law was passed, to help people understand that this is the law and good driving behavior.
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 02:40:00 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on June 01, 2015, 02:36:11 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
Can you get a ticket for speeding and going to slow at the same time and if so What will the court say when you ask the judge HOW CAN I BOTH SPEEDING AND GOING TO SLOW AT THE SAME TIME?
It's not a ticket for going too slow though- it's a ticket for not passing in the passing lane. You could be going 100 mph with nobody on your right (not passing anybody) and be in violation of this law. It has nothing to do with speed.
That clarifies everything for me, I see how that article was misleading now, but that's what it's been painted as in the media, so I think most people are confused.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 02:50:15 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 02:40:00 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on June 01, 2015, 02:36:11 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
Can you get a ticket for speeding and going to slow at the same time and if so What will the court say when you ask the judge HOW CAN I BOTH SPEEDING AND GOING TO SLOW AT THE SAME TIME?
It's not a ticket for going too slow though- it's a ticket for not passing in the passing lane. You could be going 100 mph with nobody on your right (not passing anybody) and be in violation of this law. It has nothing to do with speed.
That clarifies everything for me, I see how that article was misleading now, but that's what it's been painted as in the media, so I think most people are confused.
I remember seeing signs like this when I drove I-40 in Texas. They said something along the lines of "Keep right except to pass" or "Left lane for passing only".
Quote from: US 41 on June 01, 2015, 02:57:00 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 02:50:15 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 02:40:00 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on June 01, 2015, 02:36:11 PM
Quote from: corco on June 01, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Many states have a similar type of law on the books. This behavior is why the Germans can drive 200 km/h on the autobahn and everybody doesn't die. It's just good sense.
I don't like how it is portrayed in the article though. Keeping right and violating the speed limit are two separate concepts. Saying that drivers going the speed limit should not have to move right is like saying drivers going the speed limit should not have to comply with stop signs- they're different laws with different purposes. Speed limit is one of many tools used to promote safe driving and shouldn't sit on its own pedestal over other equally important laws.
Can you get a ticket for speeding and going to slow at the same time and if so What will the court say when you ask the judge HOW CAN I BOTH SPEEDING AND GOING TO SLOW AT THE SAME TIME?
It's not a ticket for going too slow though- it's a ticket for not passing in the passing lane. You could be going 100 mph with nobody on your right (not passing anybody) and be in violation of this law. It has nothing to do with speed.
That clarifies everything for me, I see how that article was misleading now, but that's what it's been painted as in the media, so I think most people are confused.
I remember seeing signs like this when I drove I-40 in Texas. They said something along the lines of "Keep right except to pass" or "Left lane for passing only".
I saw the same signs ("Keep right except to pass") on 37 today going to bloomington there should be more of them honestly.
"State law: Keep right except to pass. $500 fine." does a lot more than just "Keep right except to pass." Every state should have a law like this.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 01, 2015, 02:25:59 PM
I feel like very few drivers understand the whole "keep right except to pass" concept, they just see a lane and ride it, which can be very annoying especially in rural areas!
Very. In really rural areas, I can just pass on the fail side.
Worse is when the area is starting to pick up traffic volume, and people get creative notions of passing. So like when there's a large gap between trucks, someone going just a hair faster than the leading truck stays in the left because they're "passing". No, what you're doing is making a train of passenger cars who would *very much* like to be going faster yet. I know this stuff is highly related to judgement and very subjective, but it feels much more common in slightly higher traffic areas.
Quote from: sipes23 on June 01, 2015, 03:59:17 PM
[quote author=silverback1065 link=topic=15647.msg2067983#msg2067983 date=1433183159
Worse is when the area is starting to pick up traffic volume, and people get creative notions of passing. So like when there's a large gap between trucks, someone going just a hair faster than the leading truck stays in the left because they're "passing". No, what you're doing is making a train of passenger cars who would *very much* like to be going faster yet. I know this stuff is highly related to judgement and very subjective, but it feels much more common in slightly higher traffic areas.
This is a very common situation on the East-West Toll Road. How would this new law apply?
I wonder how it would work on the Frank Borman Expressway.
Quote from: Henry on June 01, 2015, 01:06:24 PM
It's one thing to get a ticket for driving too fast, but this is ridiculous!
No, it's not. It's call obstructing traffic, and was used at least once during the 55 mph years in Michigan on a driver who camped out in the left lane at 55 mph.
Friends don't let friends left lane hog.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 01, 2015, 01:51:57 PM
Left lane camping causes road rage and gets people pissed off. Pissed off drivers do stupid things, and people have been seriously hurt or even killed because of a driver's road rage.
I'm not passing judgment on left lane laws (I can see arguments both for and against them), but this is a horrible
justification for left lane laws. If slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
Quote
One easy way to cut down on road rage is allow drivers to not be impeded by other drivers, and their opinions on what the safe speed is.
What about violence committed by someone (or some group) who was offended by someone's speech or artistic expression? Should we cut down on violence by allowing people not to be offended? Again, there are probably some good reasons for left lane laws, but this is not one of them.
Quote
Sure, the speeders might travel at ludicrous speed, but they'll get their just deserts.
Does a speeding ticket mean as much to a rich person as it would to someone struggling to afford car payments? It's a fallacy to assume the system is just, no matter how one decides to sugar-coat it.
It is not up to individual motorists to enforce the speed limit. The ones who drive at or just below the limit in the left lane to prove a point and block others from traveling at the prevailing speed are causing a hazard that would not exist without them. Move over, pass, and move back.
Traveling at any speed, above or below the posted limit, in the left lane without passing anyone is what the law targets.
The media articles with headlines "watch out law-abiding motorists!" are deceiving and misleading. They make good click-bait and teases for the story after the commercial, though.
Tennessee has a similar law, however, I argue that it ends at the speed limit. The courts haven't ruled on speeds over the limit that I am aware of. However, the logic is that the speed limit is the speed limit and one should not drive faster. The fine in TN is nowhere near $500 and it is not defined in the same manner. The law really relates to impeding traffic and exercising due care.
So drive the speed limit, but do it in the right lane, except to pass.
I honestly don't understand the confusion here, or the idea that "I can drive like a jackass as much as I want, as long as I'm obeying the speed limit!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjtQKND4W8
Drivers like the one in that video are who the laws are intended for. Totally oblivious, committed to staying in the lane whether they are passing someone or not. They might argue that they didn't want to speed up because of the cop behind them, but then they should have moved over.
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PM
If slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
There are plenty of laws in this country which seek to penalize the everyday actions of citizens, so as to prevent them from getting in harms way. Laws like not allowing people to warm their cars up in the morning while they aren't in it (someone could steal the car), to requiring vehicle occupants to wear seat belts -- both of these laws make citizens, who aren't
really doing anything wrong, law-breakers. While these laws might seem ass-backwards (penalizing citizens before a heinous act occurs), they're effective, and that's all that matters.
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PM
What about violence committed by someone (or some group) who was offended by someone's speech or artistic expression? Should we cut down on violence by allowing people not to be offended?
Yelling your opinion loudly on the street corner doesn't usually result in the death of others...driving according to your own opinions because "free speech" can. Thus, the road is no place for opinions (hence why we have driving laws to begin with?).
For what it's worth, I'm not advocating speeding. I'm simply saying that Suzie Homemaker, much like the speeder in the left lane, doesn't hold the ultimate opinion on what a safe speed is. Ergo, we have left lane laws to prevent the two from interacting.
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PM
Does a speeding ticket mean as much to a rich person as it would to someone struggling to afford car payments? It's a fallacy to assume the system is just, no matter how one decides to sugar-coat it.
Anglo-Saxon law generally dictates that first-offense misdemeanors be punished by a warning or fine. Are you proposing something else?
Quote from: tradephoric on June 01, 2015, 10:47:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjtQKND4W8
Looks like I-287 in NJ.
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 02, 2015, 08:56:02 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on June 01, 2015, 10:47:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjtQKND4W8
Looks like I-287 in NJ.
You're right - those empty gantries at around :20 seconds in the video I believe were used when I-287 experimented with HOV lanes - though I could be wrong. Regardless, it's definitely New Jersey, and I would venture I-287 as well.
As for the video itself, more cops need to do this. The law states "KEEP RIGHT
EXCEPT TO PASS" - this guy was just derping in the left lane, which causes traffic to congest. There are a lot of left lane hogs in this state, but most of them just blow by you doing 20 above the limit. This guy needed to move his ass over. He could've gotten a ticket, but the cop decided to just troll the shit out of him, something I rather enjoyed.
Quote from: Zeffy on June 02, 2015, 09:58:03 AMYou're right - those empty gantries at around :20 seconds in the video I believe were used when I-287 experimented with HOV lanes - though I could be wrong.
That's what lead me to believe that it was indeed along I-287. Addtionally, although the video is somewhat blurred; one can easily spot the NJSP markings on that white CVPI.
Quote from: tradephoric on June 01, 2015, 10:47:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjtQKND4W8
Oh God I LOVE IT!
Cross-post with "which is worse" thread, but oh well. A seemingly rare and reasonable article (http://www.ohio.com/news/local/bob-dyer-indiana-will-fine-left-lane-hogs-1.596681) about the Indiana law--although it's not an outright news article; it's Bob Dyer's column. Still, much better than the "look out law-abiding drivers!" claptrap that has been out so much about the law.
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PMIf slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
No. The aim of the law is to eliminate one of the causes of road rage, which is lack of lane discipline. Road rage does not occur unless something/someone causes it. Left-lane blockers cause it.
The obvious comparison is to Germany, where LLB'ing on multi-lane roads is strictly forbidden and strictly enforced, as is the ban on passing on the right. Making roads safe for high-speed travel means that, among other things, motorists must have a reasonable expectation that other drivers will operate in a safe and (as far as possible) predictable manner. Allowing drivers to drive slower than prevailing speeds in any lane they damn well please is unpredictable and leads, as others have mentioned, to unsafe maneuvers by other drivers to get around the slowpokes. If everyone knows that slow traffic keeps right except to pass and must yield the high-speed lane to faster drivers, that is predictable and therefore safer.
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 02, 2015, 08:56:02 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on June 01, 2015, 10:47:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjtQKND4W8
Looks like I-287 in NJ.
Quote from: Zeffy on June 02, 2015, 09:58:03 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 02, 2015, 08:56:02 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on June 01, 2015, 10:47:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJjtQKND4W8
Looks like I-287 in NJ.
You're right - those empty gantries at around :20 seconds in the video I believe were used when I-287 experimented with HOV lanes - though I could be wrong. Regardless, it's definitely New Jersey, and I would venture I-287 as well.
As for the video itself, more cops need to do this. The law states "KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS" - this guy was just derping in the left lane, which causes traffic to congest. There are a lot of left lane hogs in this state, but most of them just blow by you doing 20 above the limit. This guy needed to move his ass over. He could've gotten a ticket, but the cop decided to just troll the shit out of him, something I rather enjoyed.
Close. That's I-80 WB in the Denville/Parsippay area. They too had an experiment with HOV lanes and the empty gantries remain.
I once saw a trooper do the same thing to a left lane bandit further west along I-80. The driver did the exact same thing-refused to move over for the cop until he put his lights on. The trooper then deposited the bandit in the right lane and the cop went on his way without pulling the driver over. Sadly, the driver didn't learn his lesson. Within 2 miles the vehicle was back out in the left lane for absolutely no reason.
I know we have this law in Florida.. haven't heard of it being enforced. I wish it was... the worst is a lot of people seem to just want to get out of the right lane as soon as they get on the highway, even if there is no one in front of them.
I know in Illinois we have one, but I never seen police enforce it, and I read in the news that it may not even be enforced in Indiana, the threat of a $500 fine should be enough that it be self enforced, and not be pulled over by the cops to be reminded of it, but not every driver will know about it, or just don't care.
Heck I rarely see Indiana State Police enforcing the semi's in the 2 right lane laws on the Borman, so I don't think that this will be enforce. Local streets most likely, but on the Interstates we will see.
I been in Georgia, and they have one too the slowpoke law, and are enforcing it, but also in Georgia also has a super speeders law also to catch those who drive fast also thou. Plus in Georgia in which local,and county, cops can patrol the interstates through their jurisdictions along with GSP, not like in Illinois, & Indiana where there is only state police on the Highways when I drive on a regular basis, GA slowpoke laws are more enforced.
I remember seeing it enforced in Connecticut on I-84 a bit west of Waterbury a few years back. Connecticut posts lane usage signs on their multi-lane highways, so no driver can claim ignorance of the law.
The LLB was driving exactly at the speed limit with a state cop (not using emergency lights) right behind. The cop waited about two miles and then pulled him/her over.
While I generally support KRETP, I have reservations about criminalizing failure to adhere to it, because this has the potential to raise issues related to compliance and enforcement tolerance that I don't think have been thought through. In this connection it should be remembered that the strict enforcement of KRETP in Germany occurs largely on Autobahnen without speed limits.
Consider this situation:
I am driving the speed limit on a freeway. I pull out to the left to pass a car that is going 5 MPH slower. The driver of the other car then speeds up to the speed limit, so that he and I are travelling abreast. Meanwhile, a faster car approaches me from behind.
How do I get out of this situation without breaking the law or encouraging the car behind me to undertake a risky slalom maneuver? What is my recourse for the fact that it is effectively the other driver (the one whom I am trying to overtake) who has forced me to break the law?
For the people commenting on using the left lane when at the speed limit - Virginia has a special sign (R4-V1) they post on hilly sections of Interstate that say "Commercial Vehicles Except Buses: Use Right Lane When Operated XX MPH or Below" where XX is the posted speed limit.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 04, 2015, 04:18:39 PM
How do I get out of this situation without breaking the law or encouraging the car behind me to undertake a risky slalom maneuver? What is my recourse for the fact that it is effectively the other driver (the one whom I am trying to overtake) who has forced me to break the law?
Well, he broke the law first by attempting to undertake. I would slow down and merge back in behind. I might even turn my hazard lights on so the sudden slowdown didn't look too dickish.
It's also confusing when the left lane is an HOV lane. If the HOV lane is moving at 50 mph, the general purpose lanes are moving at 35 mph, and someone comes up behind wanting to go 65 mph (like we all do), is the entire HOV lane obligated to move over for them?
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 04, 2015, 04:18:39 PM
While I generally support KRETP, I have reservations about criminalizing failure to adhere to it, because this has the potential to raise issues related to compliance and enforcement tolerance that I don't think have been thought through. In this connection it should be remembered that the strict enforcement of KRETP in Germany occurs largely on Autobahnen without speed limits.
Consider this situation:
I am driving the speed limit on a freeway. I pull out to the left to pass a car that is going 5 MPH slower. The driver of the other car then speeds up to the speed limit, so that he and I are travelling abreast. Meanwhile, a faster car approaches me from behind.
How do I get out of this situation without breaking the law or encouraging the car behind me to undertake a risky slalom maneuver? What is my recourse for the fact that it is effectively the other driver (the one whom I am trying to overtake) who has forced me to break the law?
For some states, the law has been on the books for decades, so I'm sure it's been thought thru.
There's almost always a tolerance: cops just don't drive up and pull someone over. They generally give it a little time. If the situation that you refer to happens, you have two options...slow down and move over, or speed up slightly and move over. If you're adamant about not breaking the law, put on your turn signal, slow down slightly, and merge behind him. Chances are the cop saw what happened. If he didn't and you've been side by side for a while, then yes, you are now in the wrong, and you're probably holding up traffic which doesn't gave a damn who sped up or who slowed down. All they know is that you are in the left lane blocking traffic.
Seems like simple recourse to me.
Quote from: kkt on June 04, 2015, 04:49:50 PM
It's also confusing when the left lane is an HOV lane. If the HOV lane is moving at 50 mph, the general purpose lanes are moving at 35 mph, and someone comes up behind wanting to go 65 mph (like we all do), is the entire HOV lane obligated to move over for them?
If there are people in front of you going 50, then of course not. How is that different from any other congestion situation?
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 04, 2015, 04:18:39 PM
I am driving the speed limit on a freeway. I pull out to the left to pass a car that is going 5 MPH slower. The driver of the other car then speeds up to the speed limit, so that he and I are travelling abreast. Meanwhile, a faster car approaches me from behind.
How do I get out of this situation without breaking the law or encouraging the car behind me to undertake a risky slalom maneuver? What is my recourse for the fact that it is effectively the other driver (the one whom I am trying to overtake) who has forced me to break the law?
Make every speed limit law
prima facie in addition to the KRETP law. Bamdone.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 04, 2015, 04:18:39 PM
While I generally support KRETP, I have reservations about criminalizing failure to adhere to it, because this has the potential to raise issues related to compliance and enforcement tolerance that I don't think have been thought through. In this connection it should be remembered that the strict enforcement of KRETP in Germany occurs largely on Autobahnen without speed limits.
Consider this situation:
I am driving the speed limit on a freeway. I pull out to the left to pass a car that is going 5 MPH slower. The driver of the other car then speeds up to the speed limit, so that he and I are travelling abreast. Meanwhile, a faster car approaches me from behind.
How do I get out of this situation without breaking the law or encouraging the car behind me to undertake a risky slalom maneuver? What is my recourse for the fact that it is effectively the other driver (the one whom I am trying to overtake) who has forced me to break the law?
My primary problem with left-lane hotheads is essentially this. Let's say I use the left lane pass several cars, let's say they are doing 55 in a 65, and I do 65 to pass them. Quite often someone shows up in this process and rides my bumper, flashes their lights, or some other gesture that says "you're blocking the left lane," to which my inexpressible reaction is "I can't move right, I'm passing faster than the rest of traffic except you, and I'm not done, so suck it." Sadly, my rear-window text scroll is not yet installed.
Side note: does the title of this thread read to anyone else as "The fines of the new speed limit law are slowing drivers"? I have to read it twice every time.
Good law. I have seen it in other states but don't know the fine. It sure helps with the flow of traffic.
I am one of those people who gets really pissed at the drivers hanging out in the left lane. Even after flashing the lights they still just cruise along although there is plenty of room in the right lane to move over long enough to let me by.
I learned how to do my high speed long distance driving as a high school senior and college student in Germany. The Germans don't put up with that crap. Their fines for "cruising" in the left lane are stiff. If you are cruising in the left lane your are lucky if you are not ran over by someone doing 200+ KPH (120mph).
My brother in law and I were doing 115mph in the left lane and passing when we saw lights flashing from a mile back. We pulled into the right lane and were passed like we were doing 35.
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 03, 2015, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PMIf slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
No. The aim of the law is to eliminate one of the causes of road rage, which is lack of lane discipline. Road rage does not occur unless something/someone causes it. Left-lane blockers cause it.
No. Road rage does not occur unless a driver fails to control his or her emotions.
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 04, 2015, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 03, 2015, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PMIf slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
No. The aim of the law is to eliminate one of the causes of road rage, which is lack of lane discipline. Road rage does not occur unless something/someone causes it. Left-lane blockers cause it.
No. Road rage does not occur unless a driver fails to control his or her emotions.
This. It's not my problem that some idiot has road rage.
Quote from: tribar on June 04, 2015, 10:00:11 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 04, 2015, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 03, 2015, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PMIf slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
No. The aim of the law is to eliminate one of the causes of road rage, which is lack of lane discipline. Road rage does not occur unless something/someone causes it. Left-lane blockers cause it.
No. Road rage does not occur unless a driver fails to control his or her emotions.
This. It's not my problem that some idiot has road rage.
If you're not moving over and purposely blocking traffic, that is road rage.
I follow speed limits and mostly stay in the right lane. Even though I infrequently have occasion to use the left lane, it annoys me to see left lane abuse. I'm thinking specifically of those who enter a freeway with little traffic and head straight for the left lane. Even though they may not be in anyone's way, it still shows a disruptive way of thinking: that the left lane is the default correct one to drive in. I wonder what those people are thinking.
However, I question about how effectively the behavior can be changed. Texas is pretty good at setting reasonable speed limits, so I can't complain myself. But in a lot of places, the basic setup is to have speed limits that are too low and then mostly ignore speeding. Unreasonable speed limits and lack of enforcement breeds disrespect for the law. Speeding tickets do not slow people down, and I suspect that left lane abuse tickets won't end that behavior, unless enforcement is vigorous. Vigorous speed limit enforcement (about which people would complain, well, vigorously), would also help end the societal belief that the roads don't really have any rules. There's a culture of ignorance of the rules and casual noncompliance. Training (before driving) and on-going education (penalties for violations) are needed to change that culture. I doubt if this will happen until cars start driving themselves.
Cruising along in the left lane seems to be an Ohio thing. I don't see it in east
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 03, 2015, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PMIf slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
No. The aim of the law is to eliminate one of the causes of road rage, which is lack of lane discipline. Road rage does not occur unless something/someone causes it. Left-lane blockers cause it.
The obvious comparison is to Germany, where LLB'ing on multi-lane roads is strictly forbidden and strictly enforced, as is the ban on passing on the right. Making roads safe for high-speed travel means that, among other things, motorists must have a reasonable expectation that other drivers will operate in a safe and (as far as possible) predictable manner. Allowing drivers to drive slower than prevailing speeds in any lane they damn well please is unpredictable and leads, as others have mentioned, to unsafe maneuvers by other drivers to get around the slowpokes. If everyone knows that slow traffic keeps right except to pass and must yield the high-speed lane to faster drivers, that is predictable and therefore safer.
Good post.
Anyone who has driven in Europe knows that European lane discipline is 1000% better than here in the U.S. I was reminded of this while driving in Ireland last summer. Drivers there stay out of the passing lane on the motorway unless passing. Even on two lanes, the common courtesy is to to pull off the road and let the car behind pass if they have been behind you for a couple of minutes.
I don't know why the U.S. has such horrible lane discipline, but I suspect it developed during the days of the national 55 speed limit. People developed this sense of entitlement that if they were going the speed limit, they didn't have to move from their lane.
If safety is the main goal, the left lane cruiser laws are no-brain era. I wish we had laws like he Germans do to curb it. Freeway speed limits should also be raised outside of most urban areas. People will only drive as fast as they feel comfortable. I've noticed that in the western states with higher speed limits, left lane cruising seems to be less prevalent because people will stay to the right and under the speed limit. Coloradans are very good about keeping to the right. In good conditions, driving 90 mph on the interstate is not particularly dangerous, especially if there's an expectation that other drivers won't do something like clog the left lane.
I do a lot of freeway driving here in Florida and will admit to personally tailgating people in the left lane. The reason I do it is I find that it is often the only effective way to get people to move over. If you sit there and leave a large distance, people will think there is no reason to move over to the right. When I see someone speed up or put their signal on to let me know they are going to change lanes, I will back off.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2015, 10:04:47 PM
Quote from: tribar on June 04, 2015, 10:00:11 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 04, 2015, 09:49:01 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 03, 2015, 03:50:37 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 01, 2015, 05:53:21 PMIf slow drivers in the left lane are becoming victims of road rage, then banning slow driving in the left lane in order to reduce road rage is simply legislating the victims' actions in order to achieve desired results from the perpetrators.
No. The aim of the law is to eliminate one of the causes of road rage, which is lack of lane discipline. Road rage does not occur unless something/someone causes it. Left-lane blockers cause it.
No. Road rage does not occur unless a driver fails to control his or her emotions.
This. It's not my problem that some idiot has road rage.
If you're not moving over and purposely blocking traffic, that is road rage.
That's assuming a lot. Road rage is understood to mean direct aggression by a driver toward others motivated by anger. People do stupid things for all kinds of reasons, not just out of rage.
Declaring a passive condition "aggressive" and making assumptions about its motivations actually sounds like one of the building blocks of road rage.
If you're driving in the left lane by ignorance of the law and others around you, that's just being an idiot.
If you're purposely doing it, then one is doing so to feel superior to others. And yes, that is road rage.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on June 04, 2015, 10:22:35 PM
Cruising along in the left lane seems to be an Ohio thing. I don't see it in east
Jump on Rt 42 or the AC Expressway. PA drivers absolutely try to own that left lane.
On the GSP, there's frequent complaints about New Yorkers camping out in the left lane.
On the Turnpike, it seems like there's a whole mess of people that love the left lane.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2015, 11:20:58 PM
If you're driving in the left lane by ignorance of the law and others around you, that's just being an idiot.
If you're purposely doing it, then one is doing so to feel superior to others. And yes, that is road rage.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on June 04, 2015, 10:22:35 PM
Cruising along in the left lane seems to be an Ohio thing. I don't see it in east
Jump on Rt 42 or the AC Expressway. PA drivers absolutely try to own that left lane.
On the GSP, there's frequent complaints about New Yorkers camping out in the left lane.
On the Turnpike, it seems like there's a whole mess of people that love the left lane.
Yeah, I drove back east for about a week a week ago, in NYC, Philly, Baltimore, Washington, and areas in between. One thing I noticed is that compared to out west it seems like nearly nobody keeps right except to pass. You folks back east really have a liberal definition of what that means. I thought places like Phoenix were bad for left lane campers, but even that is nothing compared to back east.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2015, 11:20:58 PM
If you're driving in the left lane by ignorance of the law and others around you, that's just being an idiot.
If you're purposely doing it, then one is doing so to feel superior to others. And yes, that is road rage.
You and I have different ideas of what "road rage" is understood to mean. Passive aggressive behavior doesn't cut it for my definition. Sure, it's being a dick, but only once in many dozens of times is it on the level of following someone and intimidating them, tailgating them, screaming at them, etc., which are the kinds of acts one usually hears called "road rage."
Stubborn, yes. Inconsiderate, sure. Juvenile, perhaps. But "rage" requires evidence of directed hostility.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2015, 11:20:58 PM
If you're driving in the left lane by ignorance of the law and others around you, that's just being an idiot.
If you're purposely doing it, then one is doing so to feel superior to others. And yes, that is road rage.
You and I have different ideas of what "road rage" is understood to mean. Passive aggressive behavior doesn't cut it for my definition. Sure, it's being a dick, but only once in many dozens of times is it on the level of following someone and intimidating them, tailgating them, screaming at them, etc., which are the kinds of acts one usually hears called "road rage."
Stubborn, yes. Inconsiderate, sure. Juvenile, perhaps. But "rage" requires evidence of directed hostility.
The three lane sector of the Ohio Turnpike from Youngstown to Toledo has maybe 25% of the traffic one would find on the New Jersey Turnpike. Half of that is trucks travelling along in the right hand lane bothering nobody. So the center and left lanes are almost empty. And yet there are drivers just cruising along in the left hand lane. It isn't really a problem; it's just a situation you don't see in the east.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on June 04, 2015, 10:22:35 PM
Cruising along in the left lane seems to be an Ohio thing. I don't see it in east
Heh. Happens constantly in Virginia, and Virginia drivers do it constantly elsewhere. To be sure, in several parts of the state it's hard to avoid the left lane simply due to traffic volume, and that includes I-81 with its two lanes in each direction and heavy truck traffic. But you know, on more than one occasion I've been out in the middle of nowhere in Canada on empty roads, spotted a car cruising in the left lane up ahead, and found that car had Virginia plates.
This is not to say it's a problem exclusive to Virginia. When I drive through Maryland, I often think the people there are practicing for a trip to the UK–"slower traffic keep left." I often find I get through faster in Maryland if I stay in the right lane.
A friend who lives in California who has a high-school-age daughter told me she showed him the California drivers' manual, which calls the left lane the "fast cruising lane," when he told her to keep right except to pass. To his credit, he told her it doesn't matter what the DMV says because just because something may be allowed doesn't make it the correct thing to do, and he says he also told her if she wanted to be allowed to get a license (I guess a parent has to sign off if you're under a certain age), she would keep right except to pass because left-lane hogs annoy everyone else.
Point being, it's a problem all over the place.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 04, 2015, 11:20:58 PM
If you're driving in the left lane by ignorance of the law and others around you, that's just being an idiot.
If you're purposely doing it, then one is doing so to feel superior to others. And yes, that is road rage.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on June 04, 2015, 10:22:35 PM
Cruising along in the left lane seems to be an Ohio thing. I don't see it in east
Jump on Rt 42 or the AC Expressway. PA drivers absolutely try to own that left lane.
On the GSP, there's frequent complaints about New Yorkers camping out in the left lane.
On the Turnpike, it seems like there's a whole mess of people that love the left lane.
and on I-95. it's the 3rd worst part of my daily commute to Center City.
2nd worst: left lane drivers who drive at "normal" speed but are afraid to actually pass anyone and slow down on approach until they hover right at the rear driver's side corner - so it's like the above except it's impossible to get by them at all
absolute worst: drivers who panic in construction zones