Major suckage on the road to work

[Rine]

On the interstates, I always follow the rule and use the left for passing. On the highway and streets, I stick in the left lane because there's a lot of people turning off to the right so I don't want to get slowed down. We don't have signs that say keep to the right, mostly because I think the highway is too busy to enforce rules like that.

Now, when you get out into the country, people treat the highways like the interstate and keep to the right.

[delidewd]

Now suppose that you are on a two lane highway and are passing people in the left lane going perhaps 5-10 mph faster than people in the left lane.

I hate it when people tailgate me when I do not yet have a chance to get over (though had I seen them coming, I wouln't have gotten over in the left lane to begin with) until and least 5-10 cars ahead while I am still passing them up.

Second, it bothers me when people talgate me when I am fairly close to another car or a line of cars, but they think that by tailgating me, the line will move faster.

[EmiOfBrie]

Massachusetts is a bit weird in that there are no lane restrictions on a freeway, however on a multi-lane surface street you MUST "Keep right except to pass" as the signs say. I once got pulled over on US 6 in Eastham (surface street) for passing on the right, and when I explained my ignorance (due to that I thought surface streets had the same rules as freeways), the officer corrected me and understood how people can be confused. I was let off with a warning as I was only going 3+ the speed limit.

[Pagan]

Like others have said, it varies from state to state. As far as I know in NM, they only get upset when you use the shoulder to pass on the right. Otherwise, as far as I can find there's no law against it....especially since I've seen the state police do it.

That depends on the road and the posted speed.

Some roads - even some highways - have unusual exits on the left side, so staying on the left isn't too weird. In fact on the highway i use to take to get to work, the 3 lanes turn into 4 lanes, and then split off into two different roads... so it was actually easier (and safer) to stay in the left "passing" lane, as opposed to keeping to the right and then trying to cut over 3 lanes of heavy traffic.

Yeah, we've a couple of those in the Big I, when you switch from I25 to I40 (and vice-versa). There's one entrance onto I25 in Las Cruces that messes me up every time now. Used to be, it was on the right side of University. A couple of years ago, the city redid the area and moved it to the left. So guess where I end up every time I'm leaving Cruces.

Of course, if you're going through ABQ on your way to or from Santa Fe, the best place to stay on I25, is the middle lane.

And then there's the Spaghetti Bowl in El Paso. If you're not careful, you can wind up on the overpass that takes you down into Juarez....and there's no place to turn around!

Speed is irrelevant.

Um, not really. This was a big topic in the traffic column in one of our papers a while back. People asking about the cops giving you 5mph over the speed limit before they stop you....doesn't exist. If you are on a road (city street, hwy, interstate, doesn't matter) here and you are going even 1mph over the speed limit you could, technically, get a ticket. There is no "keeping up with the flow of traffic". Again, going over the posted speed limit earns you a ticket.

[hq_]

Um, not really. This was a big topic in the traffic column in one of our papers a while back. People asking about the cops giving you 5mph over the speed limit before they stop you....doesn't exist. If you are on a road (city street, hwy, interstate, doesn't matter) here and you are going even 1mph over the speed limit you could, technically, get a ticket. There is no "keeping up with the flow of traffic". Again, going over the posted speed limit earns you a ticket.

I wasn't talking about the possibility of getting a ticket, rather than common courtesy of not hogging the left lane, sometimes even having the audacity to use the excuse of "I'm already driving XXmph so no-one can have the need to pass me". No-one would intentionally block a sidewalk, walking side-by-side with a few other people, and not moving over when someone, say, a jogger, wants to pass. Much less throw a fit when someone finally does.

Why on earth people do this and see nothing wrong with it when they're driving? Lack of perspective, perhaps, plain ignorance or is it done on purpose?

[ditchdj]

One major peeve that I see a lot of interstates is when you come up on a construction zone and the semi trucks decide to "Play Traffic Cop" and drive side-by-side and block both lanes right up to the point when they merge into one. As much as I dont like it when people cut in line in traffic, I still don't think anyone has the right to take it upon themselves to enforce the rules of the road if you're not a cop.

[otakuneko]

People asking about the cops giving you 5mph over the speed limit before they stop you....doesn't exist. If you are on a road (city street, hwy, interstate, doesn't matter) here and you are going even 1mph over the speed limit you could, technically, get a ticket. There is no "keeping up with the flow of traffic". Again, going over the posted speed limit earns you a ticket.

That's the legality. Reality is somewhat different, IME. Some areas have actually de-criminalized "5 over," effectively raising all their speed limits by 5, without redoing the signs.

I even once had a cop tell me he wouldn't go after a speeder 'til 13+.

[crazylegs]

I even once had a cop tell me he wouldn't go after a speeder 'til 13+.

I don't know how it is in the US (seeing as I don't live there) But it's not always the speed that will generate the ticket, but the manner in which you are driving.

Unless of course you're just massivly over the limit!

[JLRodgers]

I don't know how it is in the US (seeing as I don't live there) But it's not always the speed that will generate the ticket, but the manner in which you are driving.

Unless of course you're just massivly over the limit!

I've seen that be the case numerous times, the safety of the driving being more likely to get police to hit the lights than the speed itself. With exceptions of course -- 10-15 over on the interstate, police sit there and laugh when they see tail lights light up --- 5 mph over in a town with houses -- and they'll pull you over. One town by me, if you're going 30 in a 30, you might get pulled over for "speeding".

[Pagan]

That's the legality. Reality is somewhat different, IME. Some areas have actually de-criminalized "5 over," effectively raising all their speed limits by 5, without redoing the signs.

They haven't here. It's actually caused a few problems since the red light/speed cameras have gone in. Generally, cops won't pull you over, but you go through one of the speed cams, even at only 1mph over, you get a friendly little letter from RedFlex. (I've seen the cops do it though. We've got a little problem with APD anyway. They have a tendency to arrest people for "contempt of cop".)

This is why I avoid those intersections like the plague.

[otakuneko]

Ew they have speedcams in Albuquerque? If I caught wind of even plans of putting those pieces of suck on roads here, you can bet I'd be firing off some letters, emails, faxes and phone calls to try and stop 'em. The red light cams are bad enough, speed cams I cannot abide.

[Pagan]

Oh, yeah. They been in place for at least 2 years, I think. There's really only two over on the west side where I live and I never use those intersections anyway.

Every now and then, someone still gets all uptight and files a lawsuit about it violating civil rights since the cops don't actually see the violation.

And contrary to what the powers-that-be say, rear-end accidents around these intersections have gone up....since you really have no warning of when the damn light is going to change. Although, the city did put out some information that maybe they should have kept to themselves. They finally caved and put in rumble strips reminding you about the cameras. But, the rumble strips are only on the roads that have cameras aimed at them. So, if you are coming up to the intersection and there's no rumble strip, you can bust the light and/or speed and nothing's going to happen! Nitwits.

[Kogarashi]

We actually could use some red-light cams in my city. I've lost count of the number of cars I've seen just blow through stop lights (and some stop signs) well after they've turned. These people have plenty of time to see the yellow and slow down appropriately, but they gun it instead. I'm still waiting to hear about T-bone accidents in the intersections.

[Chromatix]

I heard there was a scandal in some places where the light timing was deliberately changed so that the red-light cameras would "earn their keep". In effect, they would shorten the amber light's timing so that it was impossible to stop before the red light if you hit it at the wrong time. So a percentage of drivers were being given fines that they couldn't have reasonably avoided.

I believe that in Europe there are regulations about traffic-light timing, originally devised for safety reasons, which prevent that kind of problem. The amber light must be shown for a length of time that depends on the braking distance for the road it controls, and then there is also a safety margin before the pedestrian and conflicting traffic signals are cleared. I'm disappointed (but not hugely surprised) that no such regulations exist in the US.

Also in Europe, the speed cameras have a tolerance built into them, largely because most cars' speedometers are not accurately calibrated - they're close but not precise. So the camera will only activate for a few mph above the limit - and the camera itself must be proved to be within calibration to avoid any chance of contesting the fine. This is true of the new "average speed" types as well as the older "spot speed" Gatsos.

FWIW, I'm in favour of the "average speed" cameras. A major criticism of the Gatsos is that they distract the driver from watching the road (in favour of the camera box and the speedo) at precisely the moment when alertness is most needed (near the road hazard that the camera is "protecting"). The average-speed cameras spread out the speed-awareness need so that it should become a habitual part of the driver's routine, rather than a crisis-mode thing.

[JLRodgers]

If there weren't speed limits, the "will run a red light no matter what" exists for every light. But since there are speed limits set, I really think all lights should display yellow long enough that if someone were driving a few over the limit, they could safely stop before red. At the same time I've seen pictures online where people have been given tickets for making a right on red (legally) because they "blew the red light" (the camera shows the car at a stop, half way through the turn, and on the other road) -- that would be a bit much.

I've ran lights before (not intentionally mind you!) because the light turned yellow, then red without any real time to slow down (you see green, then yellow and start to slow -- too late! it's red!). Once I hit the brakes so hard that the car's ABS light came on and the car slid a bit to the side -- and I still ran through the intersection (despite applying the brake the second the yellow came on). Others stay yellow so long if you slow to a stop, you're sitting at a yellow light waiting for it to turn red (had that happen a few times too!).