Nearly Identical State Law Signs between 2 neigboring states

[peterj920]

Wisconsin and Illinois both post "Move over or slow down for emergency or stopped vehicles" signs when entering either state on I-90 and I-94.  It is pretty redundant since both states have the same law and the signs are very similar.  I'm sure there are other examples of state law signs posted between 2 states that inform of the same law.  What are some other cases?

[vdeane]

I imagine that case is due to move over laws being relatively new.  Whichever state got one first probably put a sign up, then when the other one did they had to put up one saying "we have that law too".

[jeffandnicole]

Stop for School Buses applies to all 50 states, and you see those signs posted quite often.

Seat Belts must be worn applies to every state other than those bordering New Hampshire.

[Brandon]

Stop for School Buses applies to all 50 states, and you see those signs posted quite often.

But is the signage the same in the adjoining states (what the OP wanted to know).

Illinois: https://goo.gl/maps/dnQBejFnAcK2
Indiana: https://goo.gl/maps/jxy1QEsLFTp
Michigan: https://goo.gl/maps/CcgLcbCWZUU2
Wisconsin: https://goo.gl/maps/EFjCmVqrZvM2

Seat Belts:

Illinois: https://goo.gl/maps/4hU54QyWYhF2
Indiana: https://goo.gl/maps/wBnqcxYgimw
Michigan: https://goo.gl/maps/Q5HrVcYnAnn
Wisconsin: https://goo.gl/maps/1bMf66YEpyA2

Some are similar, but not exactly alike.

[MASTERNC]

Delaware and Maryland use the same cell phone restriction sign, though the font in Delaware seems more compressed.

Maryland



Delaware

[UCFKnights]

lights on when raining in at least a lot of the southeastern states

[Brandon]

lights on when raining in at least a lot of the southeastern states

We have the same law, but never any signs for it.

[roadman]

lights on when raining in at least a lot of the southeastern states

We have the same law, but never any signs for it.

Massachusetts enacted a similar "Lights on when wipers in use" law last January.  Although PSAs about the law have been occasionally posted on CMS boards, MassDOT has not yet posted any permanent signs at border crossings about the law like they have for "Move Over" and "No Texting/Seat Belt Use required."

[jeffandnicole]

But is the signage the same in the adjoining states (what the OP wanted to know).
...
Some are similar, but not exactly alike.

The OP didn't say *the same*...he said "Nearly Identical"

Every example presented is nearly identical.

[Brandon]

But is the signage the same in the adjoining states (what the OP wanted to know).
...
Some are similar, but not exactly alike.

The OP didn't say *the same*...he said "Nearly Identical"

Every example presented is nearly identical.

They are?  Did you check the difference between the Michigan seat belt sign and the Illinois one?  Hardly nearly identical.

[jeffandnicole]

Let's re-read the OP's entire statement:

Wisconsin and Illinois both post "Move over or slow down for emergency or stopped vehicles" signs when entering either state on I-90 and I-94.  It is pretty redundant since both states have the same law and the signs are very similar.  I'm sure there are other examples of state law signs posted between 2 states that inform of the same law.  What are some other cases?

Let's ignore the fact that Michigan and Illinois only meet in the middle of a lake, so they're not even adjoining as far as the road network goes.  Both have the state law that one must wear seat belts.  The OP didn't want exactly the same sign.  He wanted signs nearly identical in nature that inform of the same law.  Other than one being more colorful than the other (and the fact the states don't have roads that actually connect with each other), everything  meets the requirements the OP was looking for.

[Brandon]

[vdeane]

Honestly, people really need a reminder on using headlights in the rain even in states that had it forever.  Today, heading down the Northway, it was pouring quite hard and traffic was moving 10-20 mph slower than it could have because nobody could be bothered to turn their headlights on, and consequently all the cars were nearly invisible.  I must have been the only driver on the road using headlights.

[MikeTheActuary]

Honestly, people really need a reminder on using headlights in the rain even in states that had it forever.  Today, heading down the Northway, it was pouring quite hard and traffic was moving 10-20 mph slower than it could have because nobody could be bothered to turn their headlights on, and consequently all the cars were nearly invisible.  I must have been the only driver on the road using headlights.

Actually, I think the reminder could use a refresh.

Between daytime running lights, and cars that automatically turn on headlights when light levels fall below a certain point, there needs to be an added reminder of, "Turn on headlights when raining (daytime running lights don't count)."

Alternatively, it'd be cool if car manufacturers realized that their auto headlights setting should also test for prolonged wiper usage.

[hbelkins]

(daytime running lights don't count)

And why shouldn't they?

[Brandon]

(daytime running lights don't count)

And why shouldn't they?

Because they do not turn on the rear lights (just as important as the headlights in fog and rain).  The object is to be seen, not necessarily to see.

[roadman]

Alternatively, it'd be cool if car manufacturers realized that their auto headlights setting should also test for prolonged wiper usage.

Don't know about other makes, but Ford's autolamp feature (automatic headlight setting) will turn the headlights and taillights on if the wipers are activated for (IIRC) at least a minute.  From my 2012 Focus - which has the autolamp feature - owner's manual:

Note: If the vehicle is equipped with autolamps, it will have the windshield wiper rainlamp feature. When the windshield wipers are
turned to low- or high-speed wiping during daylight, and the headlamp control is in the autolamp position, the exterior lamps will turn on after a
brief delay and will remain on until the wipers are turned off.

Because they (daytime running lights) do not turn on the rear lights (just as important as the headlights in fog and rain).  The object is to be seen, not necessarily to see.

Which is precisely why the standard for DLRs should be to activate both the headlights and taillights.

[vdeane]

At that point why not make the DRLs brighter so the headlight switch would just be a "set the interior displays to night mode" switch.  Of course, then vehicles that already travel with lights on all the time for visibility (such as motorcycles) would need additional measures to stay visible.

[MASTERNC]

Alternatively, it'd be cool if car manufacturers realized that their auto headlights setting should also test for prolonged wiper usage.

Some cars already do.  My 2015 Honda CR-V turns my lights on when I am using wipers for an extended period of time.  I can tell because there is a separate indicator for headlights vs. DRLs.

[FrCorySticha]

Alternatively, it'd be cool if car manufacturers realized that their auto headlights setting should also test for prolonged wiper usage.

My 2007 Dodge does this as well. It is a setting in the car's computer that can be disabled, but it does it by default.

[1995hoo]

Honestly, people really need a reminder on using headlights in the rain even in states that had it forever.  Today, heading down the Northway, it was pouring quite hard and traffic was moving 10-20 mph slower than it could have because nobody could be bothered to turn their headlights on, and consequently all the cars were nearly invisible.  I must have been the only driver on the road using headlights.

Our sign for that law in Virginia doesn't say "State Law." It just says "Headlights on when using wipers." Strange sign that I think could be more in-your-face, although people will ignore it anyway. The Maryland cell phone sign seen further up the thread is much more noticeable, IMO, especially since often (not always, but often) the area after you cross a state line seems to have a bit more sign clutter than other places might.

Then you have North Carolina's strange variant that says it's state law to "Burn headlights" when using wipers (another sign uses the same wording for motorcycles). The sign is too small anyway, but "burn headlights" is a very strange way to word it. It sounds like something written 50 or 60 years ago and never changed. Every time I see that sign it makes me think of how until 2004 the NHL rulebook prescribed a five-minute penalty for "fisticuffs" (in 2004 they finally changed it to "fighting").

[kkt]

Honestly, people really need a reminder on using headlights in the rain even in states that had it forever.  Today, heading down the Northway, it was pouring quite hard and traffic was moving 10-20 mph slower than it could have because nobody could be bothered to turn their headlights on, and consequently all the cars were nearly invisible.  I must have been the only driver on the road using headlights.

Our sign for that law in Virginia doesn't say "State Law." It just says "Headlights on when using wipers." Strange sign that I think could be more in-your-face, although people will ignore it anyway. The Maryland cell phone sign seen further up the thread is much more noticeable, IMO, especially since often (not always, but often) the area after you cross a state line seems to have a bit more sign clutter than other places might.

Then you have North Carolina's strange variant that says it's state law to "Burn headlights" when using wipers (another sign uses the same wording for motorcycles). The sign is too small anyway, but "burn headlights" is a very strange way to word it. It sounds like something written 50 or 60 years ago and never changed. Every time I see that sign it makes me think of how until 2004 the NHL rulebook prescribed a five-minute penalty for "fisticuffs" (in 2004 they finally changed it to "fighting").

Burn headlights seems to date from the time your coach had candlelight lamps at the corners...

[cl94]

(daytime running lights don't count)

And why shouldn't they?

Because they do not turn on the rear lights (just as important as the headlights in fog and rain).  The object is to be seen, not necessarily to see.

The New York law, for example, does not discriminate between DRLs and "normal" headlights.

[vdeane]

Is that why there's such an epidemic of people driving in the rain with no lights on these days?  They really should change that, DRLs don't cut it!

[1995hoo]

Is that why there's such an epidemic of people driving in the rain with no lights on these days?  They really should change that, DRLs don't cut it!

I think some of that is just the MFFY attitude. "I can see, so why should I turn on my lights?"