tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979 
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 15:12:16 GMT
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.
Lots of people on the highway drive under the speed limit (person is distracted or just a slow driver, they have something in the back of their car or truck they don't want to tip or jostle, etc), or there are variable speed limits for semis vs cars. Driving under the speed limit (often by up to 20 MPH) is legal. You could be passing in the left lane and not speeding. I hadn't taken into consideration the idea people drive the posted min, so you are correct. |
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Apr 25, 2016 15:29:46 GMT
As she'd never been caught, her driving might not have been perfect, but her driving record was.
Legally, I think they would have a hard time making a case for the OP impeding traffic if she was actually going above the speed limit. Improper lane usage, maybe. Speeding, sure. But by arguing that she was impeding traffic, they are giving an implicit stamp of approval on speeding.
I think that being followed closely by a police officer for a number of miles without switching into the right lane to let him pass would easily qualify as impeding traffic - it doesn't matter what the speed. She was in the left lane driving and didn't move over to let the motorcycle pass her, police officer or not. That it was a police officer meant getting caught. Probably semantics but I still don't think that constitutes impeding traffic. She's going above the speed limit. In most jurisdictions, police officers also have to follow the posted limits unless they have their lights or sirens on, although I would imagine they are given some leeway. |
|
|
|
Post by ~Sherri~ on Apr 25, 2016 15:33:43 GMT
Be glad you don't live in NC, where they were giving out tickets for being ONE mile over the speed limit a couple of weeks back. Sorry you got a ticket OP. I too have a perfect driving record and hope to keep mine. It's tough when you're going through a new place and aren't familiar with the laws in that area. I am so glad I saw your post!!! DD and I will be traveling to the east coast of NC this weekend. I try my best to stay at the posted speed limit but I will be driving our Tundra and I can be speeding before I realize it.  I wasn't planning on using our Garmin, just Google maps on the phone, but I think I will keep the Garmin on the dash. That way my DD can help me keep track of my speed since the Garmin shows how fast I am going. I don't want to get a ticket and spoil our trip. |
|
|
|
Post by southerngirl on Apr 25, 2016 15:33:53 GMT
I get that you are frustrated to receive your first ticket and I think this is a case where he could have just given you a warning. Having said that, I don't get the righteous indignation on your part or the insulting way you view this officer doing his job. You were breaking the law. And you may have been unfamiliar with the left lane law, but you were also speeding by your own admission. (76 in a 70 zone is speeding. 70 is the limit allowed by law, anything over is speeding). You broke the law, you got the ticket. Pay the fine and move on.
Honestly, when he asked you if you saw him following you, he probably wasn't trying to ask if you realized a cop was following you. That was probably a test. If you had said you didn't notice he was following you, you might have got the warning you wanted. But since you said you did see him following you, and you also did not move out of the lane, you were knowingly not moving over to allow traffic behind you to pass. Also, had you not been speeding as well, he might have just given you a warning. But many times, if you have two moving violations at the same time, you won't get off with a warning. He really could have ticketed you for both. He may have taken your excellent record into consideration when choosing to only ticket you for the lane violation.
|
|
|
|
Post by AN on Apr 25, 2016 15:34:26 GMT
Lots of people on the highway drive under the speed limit (person is distracted or just a slow driver, they have something in the back of their car or truck they don't want to tip or jostle, etc), or there are variable speed limits for semis vs cars. Driving under the speed limit (often by up to 20 MPH) is legal. You could be passing in the left lane and not speeding. I hadn't taken into consideration the idea people drive the posted min, so you are correct. Glad this was helpful!! I know for me, things are more frustrating when I don't "get" them (like you mentioned about not understanding how the person passing wouldn't be breaking the law), and so just wanted to offer that alternative view. Now, in reality -- you're totally right, most people passing are speeding. But there are lots of circumstances where I've passed and I'm doing the speed limit or even still under! DH and I drive 10 hours, all highway, each way to see family every few months, and I've gotten some new lessons for myself on annoying highway behavior since we started that!  |
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Apr 25, 2016 15:48:17 GMT
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. I've often wondered why this law is so hard to understand and by that I mean when I'm on the road and reading various threads about traffic and traffic laws. Driving is not that difficult. Another thing that is now coming up is that OP didn't realize the motorcycle behind her was a cop. But there WAS a vehicle behind her at which point she was supposed to move over to the right and let them pass. That is the point of the law, cop or not. OP was impeding traffic by preventing the car behind her from passing. |
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 25, 2016 15:53:19 GMT
This has got to be the greatest handslap thread we've had in a long time...it only rivals the infamous "I was almost run off the road by a semi- why didn't he slow down to let me merge!!?!?!!" thread from a couple of years ago. I think most of us sympathize with the idea that getting a ticket after having a perfect driving record sucks. I know I do, but my perfect record was broken when I was 18 and really late for work one day...80 in a 55 - I totally deserved it.  Got a 2nd one for speeding a year or so later - also totally my fault. I own it. I've talked my way out of an additional three tickets so, I figure I've more than broke even.  |
|
|
|
Post by Dori~Mama~Bear on Apr 25, 2016 15:56:05 GMT
If we all drove in the right lane here we would be always in traffic jams. We have 3 or 4 lanes of traffic here in places. We also have car pool lanes in some areas. My husband always got mad at me if I drove in the inside lane but there are so many semis going up and down I5 that you have to drive in the indie lane because on the hills the semis go REALLY REALLY SLOW! and you would be crawling up them hills.
Stupid law. I would be researching that law and making sure there is a law before paying the fine.
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 16:13:12 GMT
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. I've often wondered why this law is so hard to understand and by that I mean when I'm on the road and reading various threads about traffic and traffic laws. Driving is not that difficult. Another thing that is now coming up is that OP didn't realize the motorcycle behind her was a cop. But there WAS a vehicle behind her at which point she was supposed to move over to the right and let them pass. That is the point of the law, cop or not. OP was impeding traffic by preventing the car behind her from passing. I wasn't arguing she *shouldn't move whether it was an officer or not. Someone else questioned why she didn't recognize it as an officer and I offered a reason. |
|
|
|
Post by bostonmama on Apr 25, 2016 16:14:19 GMT
If I were the (non-cop) motorcyclist/car behind you in the left lane, *I* would want to give you a ticket myself for not getting out of my way!
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
|
Post by tduby1 on Apr 25, 2016 16:14:44 GMT
If we all drove in the right lane here we would be always in traffic jams. We have 3 or 4 lanes of traffic here in places. We also have car pool lanes in some areas. My husband always got mad at me if I drove in the inside lane but there are so many semis going up and down I5 that you have to drive in the indie lane because on the hills the semis go REALLY REALLY SLOW! and you would be crawling up them hills. Stupid law. I would be researching that law and making sure there is a law before paying the fine. It is a law. |
|
|
|
Post by Dori~Mama~Bear on Apr 25, 2016 16:16:13 GMT
that sucks. but have you read the law, Some times you can get out of the ticket if you didn't know it was a law find out what year it went into affect. you can fight this.
|
|
|
|
Post by scrapsotime on Apr 25, 2016 16:23:32 GMT
that sucks. but have you read the law, Some times you can get out of the ticket if you didn't know it was a law find out what year it went into affect. you can fight this. Someone posted earlier that the law has been around since 1949. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 14:08:23 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2016 16:35:13 GMT
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. I've often wondered why this law is so hard to understand and by that I mean when I'm on the road and reading various threads about traffic and traffic laws. Driving is not that difficult. Another thing that is now coming up is that OP didn't realize the motorcycle behind her was a cop. But there WAS a vehicle behind her at which point she was supposed to move over to the right and let them pass. That is the point of the law, cop or not. OP was impeding traffic by preventing the car behind her from passing. I think it's because the laws are different from state to state. Also, in areas where traffic congestion is an issue, utilizing the left lane as a passing lane only (when there is no congestion) can result in congestion forming quicker/earlier than it would have had drivers been allowed use of all lanes. I do see the logic behind the law, but I also see why it doesn't make sense for all locations. |
|
J u l e e
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,531
Location: Cincinnati
Jun 28, 2014 2:50:47 GMT
|
Post by J u l e e on Apr 25, 2016 16:42:49 GMT
Maybe people with perfect driving records maintain their perfect driving records because they've been pulled over several times but only ever given warnings. You know, due to the fact that they have perfect driving records. Maybe those people have racked up dozens of warnings instead of deserved tickets. Who's to know?
|
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Apr 25, 2016 16:53:13 GMT
I've often wondered why this law is so hard to understand and by that I mean when I'm on the road and reading various threads about traffic and traffic laws. Driving is not that difficult. Another thing that is now coming up is that OP didn't realize the motorcycle behind her was a cop. But there WAS a vehicle behind her at which point she was supposed to move over to the right and let them pass. That is the point of the law, cop or not. OP was impeding traffic by preventing the car behind her from passing. I wasn't arguing she *shouldn't move whether it was an officer or not. Someone else questioned why she didn't recognize it as an officer and I offered a reason. I wasn't saying you were arguing and I didn't quote you. I just noticed a couple people mentioned that, not just you |
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Apr 25, 2016 16:58:19 GMT
I think that being followed closely by a police officer for a number of miles without switching into the right lane to let him pass would easily qualify as impeding traffic - it doesn't matter what the speed. She was in the left lane driving and didn't move over to let the motorcycle pass her, police officer or not. That it was a police officer meant getting caught. Probably semantics but I still don't think that constitutes impeding traffic. She's going above the speed limit. In most jurisdictions, police officers also have to follow the posted limits unless they have their lights or sirens on, although I would imagine they are given some leeway. Except it happened in a jurisdiction that had a well publicised campaign to education drivers on the law and let them know LEO would be ticketing drivers. If you are forcing another car to slow down or pass you on the right side, you are impeding traffic. |
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 25, 2016 17:01:37 GMT
If we all drove in the right lane here we would be always in traffic jams. We have 3 or 4 lanes of traffic here in places. We also have car pool lanes in some areas. My husband always got mad at me if I drove in the inside lane but there are so many semis going up and down I5 that you have to drive in the indie lane because on the hills the semis go REALLY REALLY SLOW! and you would be crawling up them hills. Stupid law. I would be researching that law and making sure there is a law before paying the fine.  The reason for this law is so that no one gets stuck behind a slow moving semi. Good grief, all you have to do is PASS the semi on the left. That's the whole point. |
|
|
|
Post by katlady on Apr 25, 2016 17:05:26 GMT
A co-worker got a ticket for driving too slowly on the freeway. I think she was going about 15mph under the speed limit. And a couple of times I have seen the CHP get behind a slow car in one of the left lanes and put his lights on. And by slow I mean under the speed limit. As the car slowly makes it way to the right to pull over, the CHP will then turn off his lights when the car is in the right most lane and keep going. Lol! Poor guys thought they were getting pulled over for a ticket. They always tell us to keep up with the flow of traffic, but what if everyone is doing 80?!  |
|
|
|
Post by coaliesquirrel on Apr 25, 2016 17:08:34 GMT
ing" 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? Because the person behind might be an emergency vehicle, as it was in this case, which is not necessarily subject to posted speed limits. I am probably sounding like a broken record... isn't traffic moving *above* posted speeds breaking the law as well? I am having a hard time wrapping my brain around a law designed to penalize people driving the speed limit-- and thus causing them to be labeled as the ones "breaking the law" for the convenience of the people breaking the law to begin with. I am not trying to be oppositional, but I have never gotten this. Legally, I think they would have a hard time making a case for the OP impeding traffic if she was actually going above the speed limit. Improper lane usage, maybe. Speeding, sure. But by arguing that she was impeding traffic, they are giving an implicit stamp of approval on speeding. She was impeding a cop, who doesn't necessarily have to observe posted speed limits. |
|
|
|
Post by STBC on Apr 25, 2016 17:11:31 GMT
I think it's because the laws are different from state to state. Also, in areas where traffic congestion is an issue, utilizing the left lane as a passing lane only (when there is no congestion) can result in congestion forming quicker/earlier than it would have had drivers been allowed use of all lanes. I do see the logic behind the law, but I also see why it doesn't make sense for all locations. In Illinois, the law addresses when there's traffic congestion: |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 14:08:23 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2016 17:17:41 GMT
I think it's because the laws are different from state to state. Also, in areas where traffic congestion is an issue, utilizing the left lane as a passing lane only (when there is no congestion) can result in congestion forming quicker/earlier than it would have had drivers been allowed use of all lanes. I do see the logic behind the law, but I also see why it doesn't make sense for all locations. In Illinois, the law addresses when there's traffic congestion: Interesting. In your state, that means you can drive in the left lane as long as no one is behind you. I wonder if that's true of all states who have the left lane passing law? Our traffic is so bad here. Even if there is no congestion, loss of a lane will quickly result in congestion forming. |
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 25, 2016 17:25:44 GMT
A co-worker got a ticket for driving too slowly on the freeway. I think she was going about 15mph under the speed limit. And a couple of times I have seen the CHP get behind a slow car in one of the left lanes and put his lights on. And by slow I mean under the speed limit. As the car slowly makes it way to the right to pull over, the CHP will then turn off his lights when the car is in the right most lane and keep going. Lol! Poor guys thought they were getting pulled over for a ticket. They always tell us to keep up with the flow of traffic, but what if everyone is doing 80?! |
|
|
|
Post by katlady on Apr 25, 2016 17:29:08 GMT
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Apr 25, 2016 17:32:06 GMT
Another couple of videos for those who need to know more about this law:
And my favorite:
|
|
|
|
Post by Spongemom Scrappants on Apr 25, 2016 17:41:07 GMT
Are you sure you didn't mean to say that you've gone 55 years without being caught robbing a bank? Stop saying this ruined your perfect driving record. It's not perfect. You've just never been caught. You've been breaking the law for years. In actuality, I have not ever robbed a bank, so I'm clutching my "perfect bank robbing record" proudly.  If every person with a perfect driving record always got off with a warning, no one would ever receive a ticket. Ha! That statement is so simple, yet so true. Very profound there padresfan619. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Apr 25, 2016 17:44:34 GMT
It's really not that complicated people. If you're driving in the right lane - which is where we all start - and the person in front of you is going too slow, move to the left and pass them. If there's a whole line of cars in that lane going slower than you want to drive, stay in the left lane. If you find someone approaching you from behind traveling faster than you, move to the right so they can pass. If you find that there is now no one in the right lane to pass, move over. It helps if one occasional looks in their rearview mirror and otherwise is observing the cars and conditions around them and not in their own world.
|
|
MorningPerson
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,550
Location: Central Pennsylvania
|
Post by MorningPerson on Apr 25, 2016 17:47:17 GMT
It helps if one occasional looks in their rearview mirror and otherwise is observing the cars and conditions around them and not in their own world. Bingo! |
|
|
|
Post by Chips on Apr 25, 2016 17:53:46 GMT
Oh that stinks! I am a left lane driver and I read some where that depending on a person being left or right eye dominant they'll be more comfortable and relaxed in either the right or left lane. Until I read that it never occurred to me!
But I agree that he should of given you a warning for something so minor.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Apr 25, 2016 18:04:15 GMT
Probably semantics but I still don't think that constitutes impeding traffic. She's going above the speed limit. In most jurisdictions, police officers also have to follow the posted limits unless they have their lights or sirens on, although I would imagine they are given some leeway. Except it happened in a jurisdiction that had a well publicised campaign to education drivers on the law and let them know LEO would be ticketing drivers. If you are forcing another car to slow down or pass you on the right side, you are impeding traffic. Forcing traffic to slow down to a speed already above the speed limit - not impeding traffic.
Honestly, people who do it tend to piss me off but, legally, I think you can make an argument.
|
|
I wasn't planning on using our Garmin, just Google maps on the phone, but I think I will keep the Garmin on the dash. That way my DD can help me keep track of my speed since the Garmin shows how fast I am going. I don't want to get a ticket and spoil our trip.
