Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And for anyone here shouting "Its the law", I would want them to swear on their parents and children that they have always come to a complete stop on each and every stop sign (and I mean zero miles per hour). I mean cmon, it IS the law too !!
If you cannot swear, then try to explain why should anyone listen to your arguments on this topic of following the law ?
Are you saying you don't stop at stop signs? I mean, the sign says exactly what you should be doing, so I would hope you could read and follow such a simple instruction.
Maybe whichever website that came up when you Googled this question doesn't see it that way, but the New York State traffic code states literally the same exact thing in quite a few more words. How could they have made this anymore perfectly f-ing crystal clear?
This part says that all vehicles being driven at less than the normal speed of traffic in any given situation - not less than the posted speed limit - must be driven in either the right-hand lane or as close as safely possible towards the right side of the road on single-lane/unmarked roads.
This part says that the only instances when vehicles traveling below the normal speed of traffic should be out of the right-hand lane/right side of road are situations where they need to overtake and pass traffic moving even slower than them or making a left-hand turn. This is entirely in line with what was outlined in Subsection (a) ("Upon all roadways of sufficient width a vehicle shall be driven upon the right half of the roadway, except as follows: When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction under the rules governing such movement").
Gpsma's reading of the law is entirely incorrect, because Subsection (a) Part 5 ("Upon a roadway divided into three marked lanes for traffic under the rules applicable thereon;") only applies to vehicles traveling at the normal speed of traffic. If you are doing 55MPH while the normal speed of traffic is 65MPH, this Part is superseded wholly by Subsection (b).
Subsection (a) Part 6, which you've bolded in the quote, only applies to One-Way Streets. The Southern State Parkway, for instance, is not a roadway restricted to one-way traffic - it's a two-way roadway with a center divider. Subsection (c), which you also quoted (although I'm not sure if you meant to), applies to roads without a center divider and only states that if there are two lanes in the same direction available, you cannot cross the center-line to pass in the lanes of oncoming traffic. You actually are allowed to pass in lanes of oncoming traffic under certain conditions on a two (total) lane, two-way road (see Section 1124), and that's what this is solely making reference to.
So no, it doesn't say the exact words "THE LEFT LANE IS FOR PASSING ONLY" - but it says that you will be in violation of the Traffic and Vehicle Law if you are traveling at less than the normal speed of traffic and not staying to the right. Same exact f-ing thing. You can be ticketed for it, although I'm sure that's not too common. It doesn't make it any less illegal. The fact that the speed limit is 55MPH and it's illegal to surpass that speed is another matter entirely. Both speeding and hogging the left lane are breaking the law. Period. End of discussion. Here is the copy of the NYS VAT Law I referenced, since someone else said they wouldn't believe this without links (LOL).
Now beyond the legal ramifications, as most have stated - it's also just a crappy thing to do and fairly dangerous. If you are not staying to the right you are impeding the flow of traffic. Let the police officers worry about some jagoff flying by you and keep your cruise control locked at 55 in the right lane of Richard Nixon's America. Not only are you breaking the law, but that guy or gal is going to fly right around you at the first chance he/she gets and create an even more dangerous passing-on-the-right situation. No one who is speeding ever thinks to themselves "gee, I'm so glad that courteous motorist before me reminded me to respect the posted speed limits by clogging a major traffic artery for noModerator cut: language removed reason beyond amplifying their own smug, selfish personal gratification!" You're just being a jerk, or you're seriously deluded/misinformed if you're doing this.
Sorry I_Love_LI -- didn't mean to pick on you, it was just that your post gave me the best source material to address this crazy topic.
Caselaw:
See People v. Ilieveski, 175 Misc. 2d 943; 670 N.Y.S.2d 1004 (Monroe County N.Y. 1998).
Defendant is charged with violating subdivision (b) of V & T § 1120. That subdivision reads as follows:
[u]pon all roadways, any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic․
...
Both parties agree that defendant was travelling at a legal rate of speed. To find defendant guilty of the violation charged-V & T Law § 1120(b) when he was travelling within the speed limit, albeit at the maximum, would require that I interpret the statute to mandate an incongruous result: that law-abiding drivers risk a ticket and a fine for failing to move to the right to accommodate speeders in the passing lane.
Both parties agree that defendant was travelling at a legal rate of speed. To find defendant guilty of the violation charged-V & T Law § 1120(b) when he was travelling within the speed limit, albeit at the maximum, would require that I interpret the statute to mandate an incongruous result: that law-abiding drivers risk a ticket and a fine for failing to move to the right to accommodate speeders in the passing lane.
That is so beautiful but I suspect the road ragers will still not see the logic.
Are you saying you don't stop at stop signs? I mean, the sign says exactly what you should be doing, so I would hope you could read and follow such a simple instruction.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
Ok, one down... next !!!
FYI, it was not about me, the question was for you and you were supposed to answer it by swearing on your kids or parents, which should not be a problem if you are truthful. I know.... talk about a such a simple instruction, seems like its very hard to follow.
Both parties agree that defendant was travelling at a legal rate of speed. To find defendant guilty of the violation charged-V & T Law § 1120(b) when he was travelling within the speed limit, albeit at the maximum, would require that I interpret the statute to mandate an incongruous result: that law-abiding drivers risk a ticket and a fine for failing to move to the right to accommodate speeders in the passing lane.
That is so beautiful but I suspect the road ragers will still not see the logic.
Then they can bring forth caselaw in New York State showing drivers getting convicted for driving the speed limit in the left lane and impeding speeders.
Both parties agree that defendant was travelling at a legal rate of speed. To find defendant guilty of the violation charged-V & T Law § 1120(b) when he was travelling within the speed limit, albeit at the maximum, would require that I interpret the statute to mandate an incongruous result: that law-abiding drivers risk a ticket and a fine for failing to move to the right to accommodate speeders in the passing lane.
That is so beautiful but I suspect the road ragers will still not see the logic.
Law and logic are often far at odds. That's how laws get changed....albeit very very slowly and above the objections of the small minority that disagrees...kind of like this forum. Try to remember this law was created to (potentially) save gas, not for safety, but then of course, you intentionally dismiss that and repeat your self devised mantra on safety.
Peace, out....of this never ending thread........................................
Do you feel your arguments are now totally discredited?
There really is no argument. 55 is the law. Obey it and be safe.
The simplemindedness on this point is really a stretch. The LAW is as written and was pointed out pages ago. In the isolated case dredged up above a judge ruled in favor of a shnook for whatever reason in that incident (appears a technicality in that he couldn't see ticketing someone for driving badly as long as it is within the law...he clearly did not know how to interpret the "keep right" part of the statute...what a shock). It didn't change the law or statute...it just created a precedent for another shnook who drives badly to beat the rap. I would love to know if that case included said plaintiff causing an accident by driving too slowly in the passing lane. Food for thought. Would the State sue over a ticket or was the guy really driving badly? Did someone get hurt? Maybe a cop? Who knows.
The law is 55. Eeryone should do it....but they won't....and the police will not make them. Now what?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
