The problem is the difference between slow and fast drivers. When we sane people go into the left lane,going 15 or 20 over the speed limit is a problem. Tickets are very expensive and then they jack up your insurance. I don’t play that.
If you people with a lack of control just drove closer to the speed limit, it would be safer for everybody.
I had to take a 10 hour traffic course last weekend and I liked what the instructor said about people who make these kind of arguments. It applies all over the SDMB. There are exceptions to every rule, and if you just want to argue about them all the time, I’m not going to listen to you and neither is anyone else in your life. Ninety-nine-point-whatever percent of people don’t drive on the Eisenhower during rush hour on a regular basis. And you know good and damn well that no one making my argument would try to apply it there, where it obviously doesn’t apply. You’re just typing to see your words on the screen.
I don’t accept the premise of your question. “Five states have banned it, so prove that everyone else shouldn’t as well” is a patently ridiculous demand. Obviously, most traffic law is the balancing of multiple practical considerations as well as political interests. If it were so bleeding obvious that cruising in the left lane is so dangerous and anti-social as you suggest, it would be as widely reviled and banned as drunken driving.
Fine, then my standard is that unless you are actively preventing someone from overtaking you, then you should feel free to drive in the left lane, so long as you move over to the right in a reasonable amount of time after noticing a car that wants to pass. If your complaint is “I don’t want to have to slow down at all and wait for someone to change lanes!” then I’ve no sympathy.
Seems like there’s a bloody lot of them driving on it whenever I do.
It’s well-established that “keep right” rules generally won’t apply on busy multilane urban expressways, where typically all lanes are moving at approximately the same speed (which is quite often well under the speed limit anyway, due to congestion) and the lanes typically have different roles depending on one’s proximate destination. If you look into the actual text of the “keep right” law you’ll find that it is beladen with exceptions anyway. For example, the relevant Illinois statute (625 ILCS 5/11‑701) has 8 exemptions to the general rule of “keep to the right” (which is actually “keep out of the left”). Most of the “exceptions” that have been mentioned in this thread fall within the scope of one or more of the eight exceptions identified by the Legislature.
And this is the Straight Dope Message Board. We pick nits here for fun.
Sigh. Why am I bothering with someone who keeps putting words in my mouth, creating strawmen, and blatantly refusing to answer simple questions? I’ll try one last time.
The question was not “prove that everyone else shouldn’t ban it” (as you know.) The question was: if there is nothing wrong with it, how did 5 states gather the consensus required to pass a law banning it?
WHY do you want to be in the left lane? It is unnecessary. If someone has to slow down and wait for you to move over, you are unnecessarily impeding their travel (and possibly their Right of Way, which is illegal in almost every jurisdiction in the world to my understanding.) It’s not your business to have sympathy or not for other drivers on the road. Just stay out of their way.
Well la-dee-freakin’-da. This thread, much like the world, does not revolve around you. Tragic breaking news, I know.
If there’s nothing wrong with driving on the right, why has Britain mandated driving on the left? If there’s nothing wrong with the color red, why have most states required school buses to be painted yellow? Proof that the political consensus in a handful of states has found the balance at a particular point isn’t a proof of right or wrong. It’s a balance of a number of considerations, not proof of absolute moral clarity.
Because the left lane is clear and I don’t want to constantly switch back and forth when I don’t have to. It is unnecessary.
This is neither impeding travel nor interfering with right of way. It’s borderline hysteria to make this claim. That’s why those five states need a specific provision to address it.
I’m expressing a lack of sympathy with your point of view and your purported source of frustration.
Let me know when you’re ready to have an intellectially honest discussion without using strawmen and I’ll gladly rejoin you.
I think it’s fair to say that people that exceed the speed limit safely on their daily commutes aren’t exhibiting a “lack of control”, rather, they (me) drive faster when and if I (we) can do so in a manner consistent with safe driving.
The 55mph speed limit on wide open expressways was (or is) too slow, which is wy many states changed their speed limits once the feds got out of the way on the issue.
I live in Indiana, the speed limit is 70mph on many if not all intersates and I and many others like me can and do safely travel at 75-80mph. Stay out of the way if you don’t like it. There’s a lane over to your right to proceed slower in if you wish.
The point of the thread is that people whom intentionally or obliviously block faster moving traffic by refusing to yield to the right are far more dangerous and frustrating than the people that wish to travel faster than them.
I happily move out of the way when I can when someone is driving faster than I.
Obviously this isn’t always possible, but many, many times, it is.
Ask an intellectually honest question, and I’ll engage you. I already told you I don’t accept the premise of your question, which is a rhetorical question anyway.
I am still hoping for statistics that show it. If the law is based upon a legitimate safety concern due to slower drivers it shouldn’t be difficult to prove.
Why should I ask the same question a third time? You’ve already blatantly dodged it and strawmanned it the first two times I asked.
After I’ve already told you I think it’s a bullshit question, you should come up with different arguments, not ask the same question.
I’m sure there are some stats that back this up. Otherwise, why even bother with all the “Slower Traffic Keep Right” signs?
Fortunately for the rest of us, what you think has no effect on reality. It is a perfectly valid question. LOTS of people had to come together in agreement to ban this practice in 5 different states. If it is perfectly innocuous like you claim, are they all idiots?
When I make an analogy, you label it as strawmanning or putting words in my mouth and then accuse me of intellectual dishonesty while posting statements like this.
Hoping to rescue this from the “no YOU’RE a bad driver” abyss, I’d like to ask acsenray how often he’s checking the rear view mirror while in the left lane.
Who cares? There should still be a special circle of hell for them.
The traffic rules do not state “Stay to the right to allow others at or below the posted speed limit to pass”, or even "Stay to the right, except when passing at or below the posted limit.". They say, "Stay to the right, except when passing."
And passing at 0.1 miles per hour doesn’t count.
I drive highway where traffic comes to a stand-still before 7:00 am because people insist on cutting across to the left lane for an exit ten miles away! They bring all three lanes to a full stop doing this.
Then they slap on the cruise control, and all three lanes go at the same speed, except for those freaks that weave in and out, risking everyone’s life.
Learn to merge, people, and stay to the right.
(Well, stay in the middle lane, because I quite like to travel in the empty right lane.)
In the form of a traffic circle with no exit, just people slowing down.
Traffic circles are already listed by Dante in his book.