grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Apr 25, 2016 11:16:38 GMT
I think they should first focus on the drivers going 15 under the speed limit in perfect weather. If they were doing the limit, the rest of the world wouldn't need to remain in the fast lane! Agreed. Slow drivers are more dangerous than the fast ones. Focus on the idiots who can't drive on highways and then once they are taken off the road and that is cleaned up they can start thinking about the people who are actually using the highway properly. Start with idiot mergers and those who don't follow the flow of traffic. Then worry about people using the wrong lane. Sheesh.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Apr 25, 2016 11:17:36 GMT
It's a law to keep the traffic flowing. Go left to pass, stay right to go. I gong rance of the law is not an excuse, it is a drivers responsibility to stay up to date with the laws. They are all on the DMVS website. I'm sorry you got a ticket but name calling an officer for doing his job is uncalled for. That f#$@#r, will keep going and doing his job, even for those that call him names for it. It really doesn't keep traffic flowing. It makes already bad gridlock even worse.
|
|
|
Post by gar on Apr 25, 2016 11:19:49 GMT
Well that went south fast. Perhaps I use the wrong choice of words. I didn't mean to sound entitled. I simply meant that based on my 40 years of a perfect driving record he could've let me off with a warning. I'm pissed that that type of a ticket ruined my driving record. I truly did not know that that law existed and I know that ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law however, it would've been nice to just have a warning. That's all. Cindy But you haven't been driving perfectly - you've just got away with speeding and driving in the wrong lane for a long time. A warning was well overdue from what you've said.
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Apr 25, 2016 11:54:05 GMT
Well that went south fast. Perhaps I use the wrong choice of words. I didn't mean to sound entitled. I simply meant that based on my 40 years of a perfect driving record he could've let me off with a warning. I'm pissed that that type of a ticket ruined my driving record. I truly did not know that that law existed and I know that ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law however, it would've been nice to just have a warning. That's all. Cindy But you haven't been driving perfectly - you've just got away with speeding and driving in the wrong lane for a long time. A warning was well overdue from what you've said. That is actually a new thing in our state that they have just begun talking about enforcing. (I live in the same state as cindosha ).
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Apr 25, 2016 11:56:23 GMT
It's a moronic law. The lane is there. USE IT. There is no reason to waste a perfectly good lane on "passing only". I'd be pissed and I would drive the two hours to fight the damn thing just on principle that the law is stupid and slows traffic. I'm surprised that there are people who actually think the law is a good idea. I've never heard of anyone actually using the left lane for passing only. Why bother having the lane if that's all it's for? Gridlock is bad enough, let's not make it worse by taking a lane out for stupid things like passing only. So, I did a test this morning on my way to work. Traffic was very light, and I kept to the right lane except when passing. I was continually changing lanes, while the left lane remained largely empty. I would think it would have been safer for me to remain in the left lane than to have changed lanes as many times as I needed to in order to avoid the slower drivers. On a busier traffic morning, the number of times I would have needed to change lanes would have been ridiculous.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 10:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2016 11:59:20 GMT
It's a law to keep the traffic flowing. Go left to pass, stay right to go. I gong rance of the law is not an excuse, it is a drivers responsibility to stay up to date with the laws. They are all on the DMVS website. I'm sorry you got a ticket but name calling an officer for doing his job is uncalled for. That f#$@#r, will keep going and doing his job, even for those that call him names for it. It really doesn't keep traffic flowing. It makes already bad gridlock even worse. I'll have to disagree. Coming from NY to NC, that is one law we would love to have here. I can't tell you how many time people drive below the speed limit in both lanes. This allows gridlock and impedes the flow of traffic.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 25, 2016 12:02:25 GMT
It's a moronic law. The lane is there. USE IT. There is no reason to waste a perfectly good lane on "passing only". I'd be pissed and I would drive the two hours to fight the damn thing just on principle that the law is stupid and slows traffic. I'm surprised that there are people who actually think the law is a good idea. I've never heard of anyone actually using the left lane for passing only. Why bother having the lane if that's all it's for? Gridlock is bad enough, let's not make it worse by taking a lane out for stupid things like passing only. The law isn't there for places and times where there is gridlock and heavy traffic. It's there for open freeway driving where traffic is moving at or above posted speeds.
|
|
Kerri W
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,794
Location: Kentucky
Jun 25, 2014 20:31:44 GMT
|
Post by Kerri W on Apr 25, 2016 12:03:45 GMT
But you haven't been driving perfectly - you've just got away with speeding and driving in the wrong lane for a long time. A warning was well overdue from what you've said. That is actually a new thing in our state that they have just begun talking about enforcing. (I live in the same state as cindosha ). No, it is not a 'new thing' in the state of Michigan as has been pointed out several times on this thread. They *are* currently running a campaign to cut down/bring awareness to the issue.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 10:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2016 12:06:00 GMT
For driving in the left lane on the freeway. Apparently there is a new law in Michigan. Stay right unless you are passing. The cop asked me how my driving record was and I told him that it was excellent. He checked it out and came back to my car and said "you do have an excellent record. Here's your ticket. Fucker!!! Cindy He is not a fucker. He is a police officer doing his job and enforcing the law. I absolutely hate when people blame the police for doing their job when they get caught breaking the law.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Apr 25, 2016 12:06:04 GMT
It's a law to keep the traffic flowing. Go left to pass, stay right to go. I gong rance of the law is not an excuse, it is a drivers responsibility to stay up to date with the laws. They are all on the DMVS website. I'm sorry you got a ticket but name calling an officer for doing his job is uncalled for. That f#$@#r, will keep going and doing his job, even for those that call him names for it. It really doesn't keep traffic flowing. It makes already bad gridlock even worse. Gridlock is when traffic is not flowing through intersecting streets with stoplights, for example in a downtown area. The term doesn't apply to freeways. The pass on the left law applies to highways and freeways with four or more lanes, not urban traffic. It also doesn't apply in situations where passing is not possible; for example, in heavy traffic congestion during rush hour on an urban highway.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 10:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2016 12:07:43 GMT
Scrubologist.....wow. Bitchy much??? Read my post. If I blatantly broke the law, that's one thing. I didn't know it was a law. The speed limit was 70. I was going 76. I wasn't going slower than the right lane. I was going faster than the right lane. I didn't have any attitude with the officer. I was very polite as I had my 18 year old son with me. I didn't deserve it. Get a new outlook on life. Cindy You DID break the law. And you have now called him a fucker and an asshat. Not knowing the law, is not a defence. And apparently you were breaking two laws.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Apr 25, 2016 12:20:17 GMT
It really doesn't keep traffic flowing. It makes already bad gridlock even worse. I'll have to disagree. Coming from NY to NC, that is one law we would love to have here. I can't tell you how many time people drive below the speed limit in both lanes. This allows gridlock and impedes the flow of traffic. I can tell you that in the Greater Toronto Area, if the left lane was empty for passing only and traffic was only in the other two lanes gridlock would be a nightmare. It's a nightmare on many of the highways with people in all three lanes. Trust me, in my area, a passing only lane would make things worse not better. You can only go the speed that the traffic is going in gridlock and that's in all three lanes. Having experience with losing one lane to either mandated HOVs for the PanAm or even just an accident, traffic goes at a crawl in two lanes, a passing only lane will not make it better. Not even close.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Apr 25, 2016 12:21:18 GMT
It's a moronic law. The lane is there. USE IT. There is no reason to waste a perfectly good lane on "passing only". I'd be pissed and I would drive the two hours to fight the damn thing just on principle that the law is stupid and slows traffic. I'm surprised that there are people who actually think the law is a good idea. I've never heard of anyone actually using the left lane for passing only. Why bother having the lane if that's all it's for? Gridlock is bad enough, let's not make it worse by taking a lane out for stupid things like passing only. So, I did a test this morning on my way to work. Traffic was very light, and I kept to the right lane except when passing. I was continually changing lanes, while the left lane remained largely empty. I would think it would have been safer for me to remain in the left lane than to have changed lanes as many times as I needed to in order to avoid the slower drivers. On a busier traffic morning, the number of times I would have needed to change lanes would have been ridiculous. Exactly. You can't expect to change lanes every time. Just staying in the left lane is more productive. Especially during gridlock.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Apr 25, 2016 12:24:21 GMT
It's a moronic law. The lane is there. USE IT. There is no reason to waste a perfectly good lane on "passing only". I'd be pissed and I would drive the two hours to fight the damn thing just on principle that the law is stupid and slows traffic. I'm surprised that there are people who actually think the law is a good idea. I've never heard of anyone actually using the left lane for passing only. Why bother having the lane if that's all it's for? Gridlock is bad enough, let's not make it worse by taking a lane out for stupid things like passing only. The law isn't there for places and times where there is gridlock and heavy traffic. It's there for open freeway driving where traffic is moving at or above posted speeds. Fair enough. I still think it's a stupid law that creates more trouble than it's worth. Stay in your lane, go the right speed and stop changing lanes every two seconds. If everyone did that, things would flow much more efficiently. Passing lanes just encourage more lane changes, which create more accidents, which creates more gridlock. Even in free flowing areas. I don't know how many times I've experience a three lane highway reduced to a crawl because one lane is taken out. Usually because of bad lane changes because slow drivers aren't doing the speed of traffic. Get rid of the slow drivers and there's no need for passing.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Apr 25, 2016 12:25:19 GMT
It really doesn't keep traffic flowing. It makes already bad gridlock even worse. Gridlock is when traffic is not flowing through intersecting streets with stoplights, for example in a downtown area. The term doesn't apply to freeways. The pass on the left law applies to highways and freeways with four or more lanes, not urban traffic. It also doesn't apply in situations where passing is not possible; for example, in heavy traffic congestion during rush hour on an urban highway. Sigh. Fine. You win. My experiences with gridlock on area highways is wrong. Happy now?
|
|
|
Post by AN on Apr 25, 2016 12:27:45 GMT
I'll have to disagree. Coming from NY to NC, that is one law we would love to have here. I can't tell you how many time people drive below the speed limit in both lanes. This allows gridlock and impedes the flow of traffic. I can tell you that in the Greater Toronto Area, if the left lane was empty for passing only and traffic was only in the other two lanes gridlock would be a nightmare. It's a nightmare on many of the highways with people in all three lanes. Trust me, in my area, a passing only lane would make things worse not better. You can only go the speed that the traffic is going in gridlock and that's in all three lanes. Having experience with losing one lane to either mandated HOVs for the PanAm or even just an accident, traffic goes at a crawl in two lanes, a passing only lane will not make it better. Not even close. I don't think you're understanding how this law works and traffic/road engineering. The lane doesn't sit empty when there is backed up traffic. The point of the law is that it prevents traffic from being formed behind a line of cars that are all going the same speed across all the lanes. If you have 3 lanes in the same direction, and there is a car in each of them going 5 mph below the speed limit (legal), no one would be able to pass and the traffic would build up behind them. With this law, the person in the left lane isn't allowed to cruise there and needs to get into one of the right-hand lanes -- preventing traffic from forming. I lived in IL when this law was implemented, and it is a great law and does prevent traffic from building and makes driving on highways much nicer. When there is heavy traffic, it doesn't prevent the lane from being used, it just mandates that people can't be in the left lane and doing lower than the "flow of traffic" if that makes sense. It keeps people from blocking the left lane when there is open road ahead of them, not when there is gridlock. Great law, can't believe OP's attitude, but I think that has been soundly covered already.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Apr 25, 2016 12:30:29 GMT
I hate this law. I think it's stupid. The road is there for driving on. That's why it exists. Yes, you shouldn't be doing 50 in the left lane, but I think it's ridiculous that they are actually ticketing for driving over there.
|
|
|
Post by cakediva on Apr 25, 2016 12:34:42 GMT
It really doesn't keep traffic flowing. It makes already bad gridlock even worse. Gridlock is when traffic is not flowing through intersecting streets with stoplights, for example in a downtown area. The term doesn't apply to freeways. The pass on the left law applies to highways and freeways with four or more lanes, not urban traffic. It also doesn't apply in situations where passing is not possible; for example, in heavy traffic congestion during rush hour on an urban highway. I know of the area grinningcat is talking about. We are talking a major highway, 8-10 lanes of traffic (going both directions) and there is STILL gridlock. Particularly in one section, no matter the time of day (I hate driving though Mississauga ick) there is always a slowdown and traffic stopping at points. We don't have the "left for passing only" law here in Ontario - unless it is specifically signed for an area. DH drives me nuts - he STILL calls it "fast lane & slow lane" - even though I've heard mention on a phone in "ask a cop" radio show several times - NO fast & slow lanes, only lanes. All 3, 4 or 5 lanes on the highways are used by all. But when we've driven through the US, DH is very careful to stick to the "pass only on the left" rule and drives with cruise control on -we don't know the laws by individual state, so we err on the side of caution!
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 12:38:11 GMT
All 50 states have some law that states slower traffic must move to the right in a four-lane (or more) highway. It's rarely enforced in my state. The two bolded items from your previous post show the officer that your attention is lacking. That's probably why he issued the citation - to make you pay closer attention to what you are doing and stay abreast of new laws. I know it bites to get a ticket. In my neck of the woods drivers using the cruise control in the left lane have caused more accidents because it frustrates the drivers who are moving faster. Being "stuck" behind the cruiser causes the lane weaving/tailgating/anger management issues and the situation escalates. Yes, those drivers are in the wrong for speeding but you have to pay attention to your surroundings and get out of the way when someone is flying up on your tail. I have never seen police officer on a motorcycle in the area I live in, and Cindy lives in the same county/area as I do, so if I were driving on the West side of the state it wouldn't be on my radar that a cycle behind me was a police officer. I don't think we have them in our area.
That being said, I did know they were cracking down on people driving in the fast lane in certain areas in MI.
|
|
|
Post by rockymtnpea on Apr 25, 2016 12:40:01 GMT
So let me get this right...Officer out there working his shift issues a citation and he is a jerk. So when I go into a clothing store and the prices are to high do I call the workers a-holes and just take what I want? I mean after all, they should know my funds are low or I haven't bought any new clothes in a long time and I deserve them.
And how about the utility company...those people in the billing department are horrible...they charge me every month. How come they don't just knock a few bucks off since I have been paying them for years. Jerks.
Seriously...dude was doing his job. If we don't like the laws work to get them changed
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 12:40:24 GMT
The ticket was for impeding traffic and improper lane usage. My cruise control was set at 76. So I wasn't impeding traffic. If you are just going along at the speed limit (I am assuming it is 75 where you live), then you are indeed impeding traffic if others are wanting to pass. We have this law here in TX and I'm happy that they are starting to enforce it. There are too many who cause backups in traffic because they just toodle along at the speed limit, not allowing others to pass. Even if there is space to the right to pass, it is less safe and shouldn't be done. As for the motorcycle office, did he not have flashing lights? They are equipped with them here. In MI it is still 70 on expressways.
|
|
|
Post by momofkandn on Apr 25, 2016 12:41:29 GMT
I think some of you are being too literal with the law. As another poster pointed out, it doesn't apply during rush hour when traffic is stop and go and no one can pass. The lane can be used. It also doesn't apply that you have to move right immediately after passing someone. It means that if you are in the lane you should be traveling at a higher speed than those to your right. And most importantly, you should move right of someone behind you wants to go faster.
It is always safer to pass on the left and in many states that's the law. If there is someone hanging out in the left lane that is preventing other traffic from passing them on the left, then they are breaking the law.
|
|
|
Post by cmhs on Apr 25, 2016 12:44:29 GMT
Is your 18 year old son who was with you a driver? If so, he's probably aware of this law since he's taken a written driving test sometime in the last few years.
I get your frustration with getting a ticket -- I didn't get my first ticket until I was about 50. I rolled through a stop sign at an intersection. yep, it sucked but it was my own fault. The LEO just happened to see me do it and ticketed me. The only person I could be mad at was me.
|
|
|
Post by AN on Apr 25, 2016 12:44:48 GMT
I hate this law. I think it's stupid. The road is there for driving on. That's why it exists. Yes, you shouldn't be doing 50 in the left lane, but I think it's ridiculous that they are actually ticketing for driving over there. The road is there for the good of the public and traffic management, not the convenience of any particular individual. This law relieves/prevents traffic and increases safety (avoiding unexpected passing on the right). Traffic engineering is a super interesting topic, and after I learned a little bit more about it, I felt a lot more understanding/respectful of the various laws. They honestly don't just put these laws in place because someone had a harebrained idea and thought it would be nice for themselves to be able to speed in the left lane. The studies backing up various methods of traffic management are pretty impressive. It is interesting too how they vary around the country! When we moved to Texas, where U-turns are a way of life, it was a huge adjustment for me!! U-turns are illegal in many areas and very rare everywhere in Illinois. It felt dangerous and when you're turning right out of an intersection or parking lot, you have a whole additional direction to watch for traffic from! The way the highway on/off ramps are set up are totally different here too. It got me interested in the topic and I found out there is so much behind these decisions and laws, and made me less frustrated on the road.
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 12:49:28 GMT
Wait....you didn't notice the motorcycle behind you? I bet if you had moved over to allow someone to pass he probably wouldn't have pulled you over. Sounds like you ride in the left lane oblivious to what is going around you. THAT is probably why he ticketed you. She noticed the motorcycle. She didn't know it was a police officer, is what she said. They are not common in our part of the state, if they even exist. I have never seen one and don't know if I would recognize one.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 10:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2016 12:53:21 GMT
I go the posted speed limit. I stay in the right lane. If I come across a car going lower than posted I will pass. I do not find myself changing lanes frequently, I just go with the flow of the traffic. I have a perfect driving record as well, but honestly if I break the law, I deserve a ticket, simple as that.
|
|
luckyexwife
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,069
Jun 25, 2014 21:21:08 GMT
|
Post by luckyexwife on Apr 25, 2016 12:54:21 GMT
Well that went south fast. Perhaps I use the wrong choice of words. I didn't mean to sound entitled. I simply meant that based on my 40 years of a perfect driving record he could've let me off with a warning. I'm pissed that that type of a ticket ruined my driving record. I truly did not know that that law existed and I know that ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law however, it would've been nice to just have a warning. That's all. Cindy Are you aware that speeding is breaking the law? You were breaking two laws, and you got a ticket for one. I'm not sure about your state law, but here, a speeding ticket will give you points. You should be thankful he gave you the lesser of two tickets.
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 12:56:53 GMT
It's a moronic law. The lane is there. USE IT. There is no reason to waste a perfectly good lane on "passing only". I'd be pissed and I would drive the two hours to fight the damn thing just on principle that the law is stupid and slows traffic. I'm surprised that there are people who actually think the law is a good idea. I've never heard of anyone actually using the left lane for passing only. Why bother having the lane if that's all it's for? Gridlock is bad enough, let's not make it worse by taking a lane out for stupid things like passing only. I remember learning about the law in drivers training but I never "understood" it. Even when people explain it here, I don't get it. Because if everyone was "obeying" the law, as Cindy is being scolded for not doing, there would be no need for it, right? So, in essence those "left lane passers" are actually breaking the law by speeding, too, right? Why is one way of breaking the law ok but the other not?
I do not drive in the left lane because of the law, but that doesn't mean I understand the law.
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 12:58:42 GMT
Well that went south fast. Perhaps I use the wrong choice of words. I didn't mean to sound entitled. I simply meant that based on my 40 years of a perfect driving record he could've let me off with a warning. I'm pissed that that type of a ticket ruined my driving record. I truly did not know that that law existed and I know that ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law however, it would've been nice to just have a warning. That's all. Cindy Are you aware that speeding is breaking the law? You were breaking two laws, and you got a ticket for one. I'm not sure about your state law, but here, a speeding ticket will give you points. You should be thankful he gave you the lesser of two tickets. But then, passing in the left would be speeding, too, wouldn't it? If everyone obeyed the law and drove the speed limit, instead of driving likes bats out of heck, there would be no need for a passing lane.
|
|
|
Post by mari on Apr 25, 2016 13:00:03 GMT
Wait....you didn't notice the motorcycle behind you? I bet if you had moved over to allow someone to pass he probably wouldn't have pulled you over. Sounds like you ride in the left lane oblivious to what is going around you. THAT is probably why he ticketed you. She noticed the motorcycle. She didn't know it was a police officer, is what she said. They are not common in our part of the state, if they even exist. I have never seen one and don't know if I would recognize one.
I have definitely seen police officers on motorcycles on SW Michigan highways. I don't think it's unusual. Either way, if she saw the motorcycle tailing her (cop or not) and choose not to move right, she was deliberately impeding traffic. If she didn't see it, she was being inattentive. Both situations are problematic.
|
|