[vtvette]

Originally Posted by dba07

A weak argument made by weak people. I have every right to travel freely.

I never said I don't move out of the way if safety is an issue. I made it clear that I never hit them. My issue is with this law. Perhaps if they stopped using traffic law and our roads as fundraisers, less cops would be in danger.
[off topic]

You have every right to travel freely - just not in an automobile. Possessing a license is contingent on obeying the rules and regulation associated with driving an automobile.

You really believe that a drivers license is a right and not a privilege?

So, you should be able to speed through school zones as well right? It's not as if you're going to hit any children?
[orphaned]

I have no doubt you do use caution and don't hit them. With millions of people operating vehicles you can't assume all are as cautious or as competent as we are.

[poopskooper]

Originally Posted by todd00

I don't understand what the big deal is about moving over. Really it comes down to common courtesy. They shouldn't have to enforce this law and attach a big fine to get people to drive with courtesy and common sense. If this law is making money, its only due to inconsiderate drivers. I don't have a problem with this law as long as they realize that sometimes in heavy traffic one can not immediately move over.

In all states much of a troopers job is writing tickets. I agree its more about revenue than safety. When a trooper chases someone going 10 over and has to go 25 over to catch up to the guy and without emergency equipment on, he is more the safety issue than the 10 over speeder. I do have a problem with that.

Most --and I will definitely not say ALL-- troopers are dedicated to traffic safety and keeping everybody safe. They don't directly get a commission off of every ticket they write so it's not as much a money issue with them personally as it is just doing their job ...which most will agree is about keeping the motoring public safe.

This whole thing about "how dare they tell me that I have to move over one lane or slow down when something is happening on the shoulder" is empty logic. I can tell you first hand that it is downright scary standing on the shoulder of a freeway watching traffic streak by at 70 MPH just feet away. We've all watched those videos where troopers are hit or their cars struck while on the shoulder. How else are they really going to get the public to give them a little breathing room than to deliberately set up such a sting? --if you want to call it that. They have to get it into the public's head that they NEED that extra space while working on the shoulder of a freeway.

Not all drivers have the same competence and there are always those who are distracted (texting, changing radio stations, talking to passengers in the car, etc., etc.) or could be under the influence of something. Not that moving over one lane will prevent these drivers from still hitting something on the shoulder but to get everybody aware that this is a real issue for LEOs who fear for their lives and the safety for not only themselves but the people they have pulled over, is worth doing what it takes to really hammer into the public that this is in fact a real issue to the troopers individually. I doubt that the higher ups are developing this strategy just to make more revenue as there are other ways to bring in money or write citations than what this is all about.

A couple of months ago, I was on 95 up near Fallon on a two-lane road and a trooper had somebody pulled over on the shoulder. The guy in front of me hardly slowed down and stayed right in the lane. I could see the trooper look quickly over his shoulder at the guy go by. As I approached, I slowed way down, put on my 4-ways, and almost got entirely over in the oncoming lane of traffic. The trooper looked up and gave me a wave. I felt good that I was doing my part in making him feel safer.

[dba07]

Originally Posted by vtvette

You have every right to travel freely - just not in an automobile. Possessing a license is contingent on obeying the rules and regulation associated with driving an automobile.

You really believe that a drivers license is a right and not a privilege?

So, you should be able to speed through school zones as well right? It's not as if you're going to hit any children?

[orphaned]

I have no doubt you do use caution and don't hit them. With millions of people operating vehicles you can't assume all are as cautious or as competent as we are.

SO what you're saying is that not everyone is cautious or careful, which I agree with! These people shouldn't have licenses. Since I do have one, and I am careful, I have a right to travel freely. No, you shouldn't speed through a school zone, as it is unsafe, but you shouldn't have to drive 15 mph when no children are in sight.

There is a line between safety and arbitrary law (or fundraising laws), and legislators cross that line constantly. That's the point I wanted to make.
[off topic, orphaned]

[ehfrvrlvsth]

I understand why this law was enacted & fully support the safety of officers & stranded motorists. But PLEASE, let people know!!!! I watched the news most nights & never heard about this law except from a friend that was pulled over today. Most people don't follow the things passed into law & rely on hearing it from the media, websites, friends, etc. The government spends money on ads about DUI, seat belt law, cell phone law; no ads about new DMV fines & this move over law.

[Erratikmind]

This is a much needed law, which should be enforced, as many drivers refuse to yield to common sense and courtesy while driving on the public roads.

In California, motorists have been notified/warned of this law for quite sometime. Yet, I seldom see drivers practice either slowing down or making a lane chage, as they approach construction crews, LE vehicles, service vehicles, etc.

Liken to many laws, some people consider themselves exempt for whatever reason(s). Unfortunately, their actions have a potential for severe consequences for the rest of us.

I am still quite surprised by the number of drivers whom I see toying with their cell phones while driving.

[Raiderman]

I've noticed it most in younger drivers, the very ones who should be more cautious, since their level of skill in driving is not the same as someone who has been driving for 20 or 30 years!

But, then again, this generation feels entitled and impervious to consequence.

[observer53]

We have the same law in AZ, there's been a lot of publicity about it, on the roads and in the media. We've had MANY DPS officers killed while on the roadside over the years. This is a much needed safety law everywhere.

[acerbic37]

The same law exists in the KC area as well (I believe on both sides of the state line). Last year a young tow truck driver was killed on the MO side while trying to help a motorist. I guess I just view it as common courtesy, no matter who is on the side of the road - average joe with car trouble, cop, highway worker...

[dba07]

[orphaned]. My point stands. Exercise caution, but why can't I use a lane if it isn't being obstructed?

[observer53]

Originally Posted by dba07

[orphaned]. My point stands. Exercise caution, but why can't I use a lane if it isn't being obstructed?

For the safety of those stopped in the adjoining shoulder/lane. Get off the "I have a right" to do "X" in this discussion, as that's actually not true in the context of driving, as others have stated. Like others, I don't see what all the fuss is about requiring people to move over. It's not that different from other road safety laws that have been on the books for a long time.