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.
Nope. If you are going by the law (and if you want people to obey the slower traffic keep right law then presumably you are going by the law), then you have to include the speed limit law. By THAT, slower traffic is that traffic that is driving slower than the speed limit, and traffic that is driving the speed limit is not slower traffic.
Now, you may WANT slower traffic to mean anyone driving slower than YOU want to drive, but you cannot insist that people obey the slower traffic keep right law while insisting that you can disobey the speed limit law without being, at the very best, a hypocrite.
Nope. If you are going by the law (and if you want people to obey the slower traffic keep right law then presumably you are going by the law), then you have to include the speed limit law. By THAT, slower traffic is that traffic that is driving slower than the speed limit, and traffic that is driving the speed limit is not slower traffic.
Now, you may WANT slower traffic to mean anyone driving slower than YOU want to drive, but you cannot insist that people obey the slower traffic keep right law while insisting that you can disobey the speed limit law without being, at the very best, a hypocrite.
Upon all roadways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, except (a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (b) when traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow, (c) when moving left to allow traffic to merge, or (d) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit, or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted.
So the guy doing 65 in a 60 in the left lane is of course breaking the law, but so are you if you don't move over to the right lane to let him by if you are doing 60. You are in violation of (b), unless (a), (c), or (d) happens to apply in your circumstance. Which I doubt that it does.
Bottom line if you don't move over to the right in Washington state, you have violated the law, and you are on the same plane as the guy who broke the speed limit.
So the guy doing 65 in a 60 in the left lane is of course breaking the law, but so are you if you don't move over to the right lane to let him by if you are doing 60. You are in violation of (b), unless (a), (c), or (d) happens to apply in your circumstance. Which I doubt that it does.
Bottom line if you don't move over to the right in Washington state, you have violated the law, and you are on the same plane as the guy who broke the speed limit.
And, what so many here seem to miss, or deliberately ignore, HE is on the same plane as YOU - which is to say, he is as much a lawbreaker as you are. No moral high ground there.
Also, I do note that in that little snippet of law, there is no mention of the speed limit either way. Which means that you would have to look in the rest of the statute to find if there is, indeed, a speed limit law which is in effect in every lane. If there is, it does not have to be in that snippet to be just as much in effect as the snippet itself.
I never fail to be amazed (though the amazement is wearing thin) at the people who will do ANYTHING to justify their deliberate violation of the speed limit law while castigating others for not obeying the slower traffic keep right law.
And, what so many here seem to miss, or deliberately ignore, HE is on the same plane as YOU - which is to say, he is as much a lawbreaker as you are. No moral high ground there.
Also, I do note that in that little snippet of law, there is no mention of the speed limit either way. Which means that you would have to look in the rest of the statute to find if there is, indeed, a speed limit law which is in effect in every lane. If there is, it does not have to be in that snippet to be just as much in effect as the snippet itself.
I never fail to be amazed (though the amazement is wearing thin) at the people who will do ANYTHING to justify their deliberate violation of the speed limit law while castigating others for not obeying the slower traffic keep right law.
I guess the old saw of 'two wrongs don't make a right' would apply here. The guy doing 65 in a 60 in the left lane is breaking the law, but so are you if you are doing 60 in the left lane and don't move over to let him by. At least this is the case in Washington state. It should be the rule everywhere, IMO, in the interest of safety.
I guess the old saw of 'two wrongs don't make a right' would apply here. The guy doing 65 in a 60 in the left lane is breaking the law, but so are you if you are doing 60 in the left lane and don't move over to let him by. At least this is the case in Washington state. It should be the rule everywhere, IMO, in the interest of safety.
Nope, but I understand that those who want to go as fast as they want to would see it that way.
The person in the left lane doing 60 in a 60 is doing nothing wrong; he is obeying BOTH parts of the law, the part that says the fast traffic only goes 60, and the part that says slower traffic, that is, traffic driving below the speed limit, should move right. It's the person coming up behind him wanting to push their way through in violation of the traffic law but wanting him to move right just because they want to speed that is actually doing something wrong, though you will never in a million years get them to admit it. I must admit when I read some of the twistings and squirmings to get out of acknowledging that that I read on these threads, and the downright hostility at the very idea that they are actually causing the problem by violating the speed limit in the first place (because if they didn't there would be no problem with someone obeying the law in front of them, remember), I feel that our generation has a LOT to answer for as regards raising children.
Now, practically, yes, move over and let the idiot go by and don't give them a heads up that there's usually a cop just ahead. But as far as what's actually right and who is responsible for causing the problem in the first place, it's the person choosing to exceed the speed limit. Again, I don't expect them to acknowledge it, or even to be able to acknowledge it, in a million years. But it's a fact.
I don't even want them to stop speeding. I just want them to acknowledge the reality that they are choosing to disobey the law and that their anger should not be directed at those that obey it but they should accept, those times when they are stymied in getting their speed fix, the predictable consequences of their own deliberately chosen actions. That at least would indicate someone mature enough to be on the public roads.
said perfectly; I have never in my entire driving career, which spans ALOT of years, ever heard of ANYONE getting a ticket for driving too slow in the left lane when they were doing the speed limit or above..
anyone who thinks otherwise is a dreamer..
and, I have alot of friends in law enforcement, and they all laughed when I asked them this question, and every one of them said you could never get convicted in a court of law for going the speed limit in any lane..
I guess the old saw of 'two wrongs don't make a right' would apply here. The guy doing 65 in a 60 in the left lane is breaking the law, but so are you if you are doing 60 in the left lane and don't move over to let him by. At least this is the case in Washington state. It should be the rule everywhere, IMO, in the interest of safety.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady
Nope, but I understand that those who want to go as fast as they want to would see it that way....
The person in the left lane doing 60 in a 60 is doing nothing wrong; he is obeying BOTH parts of the law, the part that says the fast traffic only goes 60, and the part that says slower traffic, that is, traffic driving below the speed limit, should move right.
Yep, again, this is going to vary from state to state, but in WA you would be breaking the law by failing to move over for the guy doing 65 when you are doing 60. The law uses the phrase 'flow of traffic.' It does not mention 'fast traffic.' See the above RCW (revised code of WA).
It does not matter what speed I'm doing in the left lane. If I see someone come up behind me, I move over to the right ASAP. If he's going too fast for the sake of safety, then hopefully he will get a speeding ticket, but that's not my problem as a driver. My problem is to get over and get out of his way, thus ensuring that what lane changes and passes that occur, occur in the safest possible manner.
Okay, I'm going to have to go look at the WHOLE transportation code for the State of Washington and see if there's anything in there about speed limits. (I've noticed that those of the "the speed limit doesn't exist in the left lane if I don't want it to" crowd tend to ignore all of the statute except the part that makes other people get out of their way so they can break the law, and so far when I look into it, just like in Texas, there's some pesky thing in there about the speed limit being the speed limit, darn it!)
Will get back to you once I've read it - shouldn't take too long.
And, as I said, it only makes sense in real life to get out of the way of speed addicts (for that matter, I only drive in the left lane to pass or to exit left). That doesn't make them any less wrong or the person who is driving the speed limit in the left lane any less right.
(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety.
Note that "or in compliance with law". That's important - it means that if you are impeding traffic because you are driving the speed limit, and it goes on to say that if someone is driving BELOW the speed limit you can exceed the speed limit in order to safely pass them but ONLY for as long as it takes to safely complete the pass. Not because you want to drive fast - you're either passing a vehicle, moving over, and dropping back to the speed limit, or you're in violation of the Washington State traffic code.
RCW 46.61.465
Exceeding speed limit evidence of reckless driving.
The unlawful operation of a vehicle in excess of the maximum lawful speeds provided in this chapter at the point of operation and under the circumstances described shall be prima facie evidence of the operation of a motor vehicle in a reckless manner by the operator thereof.
Let's not get into a prima facie discussion again. Further investigation on my part turned up that what that means is that if you are going faster than the speed limit you are considered to be guilty of reckless driving unless YOU can prove otherwise.
RCW 46.61.400
Basic rule and maximum limits.
(1) No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. In every event speed shall be so controlled as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.
(2) Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subsection (1) of this section, the limits specified in this section or established as hereinafter authorized shall be maximum lawful speeds, and no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of such maximum limits.
(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety.
Note that "or in compliance with law". That's important - it means that if you are impeding traffic because you are driving the speed limit, and it goes on to say that if someone is driving BELOW the speed limit you can exceed the speed limit in order to safely pass them but ONLY for as long as it takes to safely complete the pass. Not because you want to drive fast - you're either passing a vehicle, moving over, and dropping back to the speed limit, or you're in violation of the Washington State traffic code.
RCW 46.61.465
Exceeding speed limit evidence of reckless driving.
The unlawful operation of a vehicle in excess of the maximum lawful speeds provided in this chapter at the point of operation and under the circumstances described shall be prima facie evidence of the operation of a motor vehicle in a reckless manner by the operator thereof.
Let's not get into a prima facie discussion again. Further investigation on my part turned up that what that means is that if you are going faster than the speed limit you are considered to be guilty of reckless driving unless YOU can prove otherwise.
RCW 46.61.400
Basic rule and maximum limits.
(1) No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. In every event speed shall be so controlled as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.
(2) Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subsection (1) of this section, the limits specified in this section or established as hereinafter authorized shall be maximum lawful speeds, and no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of such maximum limits.
That last is pretty specific.
Thanks for that; I actually enjoy reading the code; maybe I should have been a lawyer, but I'm not, and here is where I would have to defer to one. The code you cite seems to be somewhat in conflict with the earlier cited 46.61.100(b) ('flow of traffic' clause). I think I would argue that since 100(b) specifically refers to the situation under discussion (left lane of two lanes going in the same direction) it trumps, but I am not a lawyer.
Regarding the driver doing 65 in the left lane in a 60, and the guy in front of him doing 60 in a 60 who refuses to get over to the right to let mr. 65 by, I still believe that both are violating the law. The guy doing 65 is violating the speed limit of course, and the guy doing 60 and not moving over is violating 46.61.100(b) (unless meeting one of the other exceptions, such as coming up to an exit on the left).
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.
