Move Over laws

[swbrotha100]

Don't know if other states have a law like this. Explains the "Move Over" messages I saw on various freeways yesterday.

http://www.moveoveraz.org/

[agentsteel53]

I absolutely despise those laws.  I have been forced into the median, and have come within a half-second of hitting a bridge abutment, all because an idiot trucker decided to move over instead of slow down.

[tdindy88]

Yeah, it seems that people always forget the fact that slowing down is ALSO an option.

[kphoger]

Depending on the situation, I either move over a lane, straddle the lane line, hug the lane line, slow down but stay put, or none of the above.  I generally choose "none of the above" if I can see that the police have tagged the vehicle (around here, they use little orange stickers).  When someone has abandoned his vehicle but left the flashers on, and I can tell that's the case upon approach, then why the heck should I be required by law to do anything?

In general, I think the "move over" laws are good, but that one carries it too far.

[J N Winkler]

Don't know if other states have a law like this. Explains the "Move Over" messages I saw on various freeways yesterday.

They are more or less universal (I don't think there is a state left that doesn't have one).

I absolutely despise those laws.  I have been forced into the median, and have come within a half-second of hitting a bridge abutment, all because an idiot trucker decided to move over instead of slow down.

I don't like them either.  "Move over" is vague, and the specific legal requirements can vary from state to state (some allow you just to "move over" within the same traffic lane, while others require lane changes or reduction of speed a fixed increment under the posted limit).

And while I can agree with the broad aim of reducing deaths among traffic police, I would rather focus on the police themselves and the people they pull over than apply a vague duty on the driving public at large.  Do the police really have to toe the shoulder stripe with their cruisers when they pull someone over?  Can we instead make it the law that if a person proceeds at a legal speed to the next exit when the police give pursuit, instead of pulling over immediately, then that person cannot be prosecuted for attempting to flee the police?  Can we impose criminal liability on a person who stops so close to traffic that a police officer standing at the window is at risk of sideswiping?

[agentsteel53]

Can we impose criminal liability on a person who stops so close to traffic that a police officer standing at the window is at risk of sideswiping?

I've been instructed, via megaphone to "move farther to the right".  or they come up to the passenger-side window instead.

[kphoger]

I've been given a warning for not slowing down.  I was in a company delivery truck, and there was a vehicle parked along the side of the road here.  I noticed the vehicle a little late, and there was an oncoming truck, so I had to make a snap decision.  The decision I made was to straddle the center line and increase my speed in order to get safely around the parked car before the truck and I crossed paths.  I determined that stepping on the brake would be dicier, since it would put the oncoming truck passing by mine just as we were both passing by the parked vehicle–no wiggle room.

It turns out the parked vehicle was a cop car; he was doing some paperwork, and clocked me at 61 in a 55 zone.  Normally, 61 in a 55 woudn't get you pulled over around there, but he specifically mentioned Scott's Law.  Plus, my truck only had half a license plate.  Plus, he thought (incorrectly, fortunately) that my driver's license wasn't rated for that class of vehicle.  My written warning had three items:  not moving over, speeding, and incompleted license plate.  I don't know if my explanation of why I'd sped up helped me or not.

[corco]

Yeah, screw that law.

My Dad got a warning in Wyoming a few years ago when I was in the car with him. The cop was just sitting in his cruiser on the shoulder, no car pulled over or anything. My Dad actually wanted to get over, but felt it wouldn't be safe because there was a vehicle in the left lane- not super close to us, but close enough to at least give pause. I probably wouldn't have gotten over either- it was arguably safe to do so, but not worth the risk.

Officer pulled my Dad over for not getting over- my Dad got off when he explained that there was another car in the left lane and he didn't think it was safe to get over, but the officer still gave him shit. It was really stupid.

[Sonic99]

This is actually a reason I like having an aftermarket exhaust on all of my vehicles. If I can't move over, I downshift so that if there's any doubt, they can hear that I am making an attempt to reduce my speed and that I am not on the throttle (you can hear the engine note change when under load decelerating).

I understand the point of the law completely. My Dad was a Paramedic for 13 years and he always taught me to give every inch possible to a First Responder, whether they be police, fire, ambulance, etc. AS LONG as I don't create another danger in the process (i.e. cutting someone off, etc.).

[bugo]

There are big signs explaining to move over or slow down for stopped emergency vehicles posted at the beginning of expressways.  I personally think the law should apply to any car that is on the shoulder, because I've been broken down on the shoulder with cars flying by my at 70 MPH mere inches from me.

[Scott5114]

The first generation of those signs in Kansas said "MOVE AWAY FROM EMERGENCY VEHICLES". On a roadtrip up there, my dad wondered aloud if that meant if a cruiser came up behind you doing 100, you could legally do 120 to fulfill your obligation to "move away" from them. "Move over or slow down" was the standard phrasing within a couple of years.

[1995hoo]

Around here those laws seem to be universally ignored, although people are slow to get out of the way of ambulances too. Whenever I go to Florida, on the other hand, I've been impressed by how people seem to obey the move over law pretty religiously.

I've always moved over or slowed down even prior to there being a law. It just seems like the right thing to do. But I've never slammed on my brakes just because I see a cop unless I'm really speeding and I can see he's not already doing something else. The move over law is essentially something that's well-intentioned but shouldn't be necessary if people had some common sense.

I do think the way the cops stop their cars at an angle isn't the best thing in terms of safety. I know there are several reasons for it, but it doesn't help in terms of safety.

[jeffandnicole]

It sounds like, for the majority of the people, they don't WANT to slow down if they're unable to move over, not that they can't slow down.

In most cases, the cop car or emergency vehicle on the side of the road is visible from a distance.  There's plenty of time to move over.  If someone can't do that safely, then the next option is to slow down, and who the hell wants to do that?  So they don't.

[texaskdog]

In Texas they just make it something like "whenever possible" so if you can't sometimes you can veer a little bit over in your lane.  Of course the cops go to the passenger side too for their own safety.

[agentsteel53]

Around here those laws seem to be universally ignored, although people are slow to get out of the way of ambulances too. Whenever I go to Florida, on the other hand, I've been impressed by how people seem to obey the move over law pretty religiously.

that doesn't sound impressive at all... it's that sort of religious behavior that nearly got me killed on I-8 once.

[abc2VE]

I absolutely despise those laws.  I have been forced into the median, and have come within a half-second of hitting a bridge abutment, all because an idiot trucker decided to move over instead of slow down.

News outlets around Virginia, for some reason, always phrase the law as the "move over law" and leave out the "slow down" portion, when our signs mention slow down or move over for stopped emergency vehicles.

[1995hoo]

Around here those laws seem to be universally ignored, although people are slow to get out of the way of ambulances too. Whenever I go to Florida, on the other hand, I've been impressed by how people seem to obey the move over law pretty religiously.

that doesn't sound impressive at all... it's that sort of religious behavior that nearly got me killed on I-8 once.

I don't mean they just religiously move over without looking. I just mean that compliance was very good, especially compared with the nearly-nonexistent compliance I see around here.

Heck, I move over if I see someone changing a tire, simply for the same reason I said before–it's simply the sensible thing to do, regardless of whether it's "required."

[Duke87]

I've been given a warning for not slowing down.  I was in a company delivery truck, and there was a vehicle parked along the side of the road here.  I noticed the vehicle a little late, and there was an oncoming truck, so I had to make a snap decision.

See, I would not think of moving over at all in that situation unless the parked vehicle was physically blocking part of my lane, since it is a two lane road and not a spot where passing is allowed. "Slow down" would be the only option.

Hell, even if it were a passing zone, I still wouldn't move into the oncoming lane. My understanding is that that is not legal unless you're overtaking someone.

[rarnold]

The law should be very simple to follow and understand. If you can move over, do so. If you can't, slow down. On two-lane roads, I think slow down should be the first thing you do, since there is less opportunity to maneuver. The problem is you cannot legislate common sense, and a lot of the problem is people get surprised by a situation because they are not paying attention, using a cell phone, etc, and they are reactionary instead of proactive.

[SP Cook]

Move over laws are dangerous, as they cause motorists, particularly 18 wheelers and slow moving mid-sized delivery van/trucks to change lanes.  This is because, as with speed traps, traffic cops set up traps designed to random tax motorists. 

Standing beside a high speed highway is indeed dangerous. 

So don't do it. 

Turn the radar gun off, give a signal at the next exit, and go down off the highway.  To the place where the rapes, murders, drug deals, thefts, etc, are committed.

[hbelkins]

Kentucky's move over law applies not only to police officers who have someone pulled over, but any emergency or service vehicle with caution lights. This includes highway repair vehicles, wreckers, ambulances, motorist assistance vehicles or anything else. It's not just to protect cops who have someone pulled over.

[vdeane]

NY's includes any vehicles with mounted lights (emergency vehicles and tow trucks).  I can DEFINITELY see it in the case of tow trucks (who need room to maneuver), though it seems that in most traffic stops, the police officer could use common sense to avoid problems.

[theline]

*edit*

I've always moved over or slowed down even prior to there being a law. It just seems like the right thing to do. But I've never slammed on my brakes just because I see a cop unless I'm really speeding and I can see he's not already doing something else. The move over law is essentially something that's well-intentioned but shouldn't be necessary if people had some common sense.

I do think the way the cops stop their cars at an angle isn't the best thing in terms of safety. I know there are several reasons for it, but it doesn't help in terms of safety.

I've been driving for for 46 years, and I didn't need this law to know to move over safely or slow down. Like 1995hoo says, it's just common sense. Unfortunately, common sense isn't so common, so the law is necessary.

As for the cop cars sticking out into the traffic lane, I figure it's just some self-preservation for the officer. If he or she has to stand next to a customer's car, having the cop car stick out may provide some measure of shielding from the traffic.

I ran afoul of the Indiana "pull over" law a week after it was enacted, a few years ago. I came around a curve on the St. Joseph Valley Parkway near Elkhart and spotted (too late) a state trooper with a customer. He caught up with me a couple of miles down the road and ticketed me. I thought briefly I'd protest that I spotted him too late, but I realized that the reason I couldn't react in time was because I was driving 10-15 MPH over the limit. I figured saying "I shouldn't get a ticket because I was speeding" was weak excuse.

[allniter89]

I have always moved over a lane (if possible) for any vehicle on the shoulder, car, truck, bus, towtruck, motorcycle, rickshaw,  its common courtesy imho. I have experienced the terror of changing a flat tire on the shoulder of a highway, a larger vehicle passes in the right lane and my car sways on the jack  .
I suppose the cops have a reason why the officer walks up to the drivers window but it seems to me walking to the passenger window wouldnt create any additional danger or an even better solution (as someone posted here) is to follow the car to the next exit ramp and do your bizness, how stupid is it to get out of your car when traffic is speeding by a few feet from you? As a trucker, when I broke down and couldnt get to a ramp I either pulled as far right as possible and exited the truck from the right door. Even more extreme(?) I would walk up to the tree line and wait there for help.

[realjd]

Move over laws are dangerous, as they cause motorists, particularly 18 wheelers and slow moving mid-sized delivery van/trucks to change lanes.  This is because, as with speed traps, traffic cops set up traps designed to random tax motorists. 

Standing beside a high speed highway is indeed dangerous. 

So don't do it. 

Turn the radar gun off, give a signal at the next exit, and go down off the highway.  To the place where the rapes, murders, drug deals, thefts, etc, are committed.

So you clearly support eliminating Highway Patrol agencies. Do you propose replacing them with enforcement cameras or just abolishing traffic laws all together?