# Michigan speeding tickets in Feb **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 24, 2008, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828 "2008-01-24T16:55:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2008, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/21 "2008-01-24T23:05:53Z")
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF] No. What is safe about packing people together on the road moving in one big pack? For those of us that watch auto racing, this bears an eerie similarity to “restrictor-plate” racing, i.e., Daytona and Talladega, tracks that are known for their monstrous crashes, a direct result of everybody going the same speed in close proximity to each other. It is far more beneficial to let people go by and break the pack up a little bit. Lots of traffic leads to nervous drivers, panic stops, multi-car accidents, and traffic jams. Breaking it up lets people out of the logjams and allows them to find more open space, which dramatically increases the comfort level (and by extension, the level of safety) of the average driver. The problem with “traffic enforcement” during high-volume times is that when people see police officers they slow down, hit the brakes, or take their eyes off the road for a split-second to check their speed. That is the formula for disaster, and the cause of many thousands of reactionary traffic jams and accidents. Therefore, they cause the very thing they purport to prevent, unsafe driving conditions. With the exception of egregious speeding and weaving through traffic and drunk driving enforcement, traffic enforcement is nothing but revenue generation. Look at the laws of your vicinity and tell me that some of them aren’t written to extract max dollars out of the public over the most petty of things. [/QUOTE] I tend to agree. Look at this Youtube video where a bunch of kids get together and drive the speed limit on the expressway: [![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1B-Ox0ZmVIU/hqdefault.jpg "A Meditation On The Speed Limit") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B-Ox0ZmVIU) I love the ending. A four-wide funeral procession with a half-mile of open road ahead. IMHO, these traffic laws have created a situation where any given car is probably in violation of two or three laws at any point in time. And that is a reason for a police stop (if needed) It turns the 4th amendment on its head. How can anyone watch the above video (at the end) and tell me that the speed limit is proper for that road? ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/22 "2008-01-25T00:05:38Z")
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF] No. What is safe about packing people together on the road moving in one big pack? [/quote] I’m not sure I understand. Why would enforcement of traffic laws result in cars “packed together”? It doesn’t mean everyone will be driving _at_ the speed limit. And drivers are still required to maintain a safe distance between cars. Anyway, even if this is done for revenue generation, so what? It’s a tax on people who break the law. I’ve got no problem with that. > [@jtgain](#): > > IMHO, these traffic laws have created a situation where any given car is probably in violation of two or three laws at any point in time. It’s really the _lack of enforcement_ that created this situation. Since everyone gets away breaking the law, there is no incentive to obey the law _or_ to change the law. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/23 "2008-01-25T00:56:07Z")
A few years ago several drivers drove the speed limit in a pack on one of Detroits arteries during morning rush hour. They were pulled over by the police. I think one got a questionable ticket previously and tried to make a point. The police did not like that at all. I can not remember what they got them for but it sounded bad. It was more than 20 yrs ago so I don’t remember if they were nailed for bliocking traffic or impeding or whatever. But it felt wrong to me. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/24 "2008-01-25T01:16:35Z")
The original story that started this thread came from a school teacher friend of mine. You know it can not be wrong. It may be an urban myth but I never got it in my email before. New to me. But in the internets I found some reference to it being passed around for a couple years. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/25 "2008-01-25T01:22:45Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] A few years ago several drivers drove the speed limit in a pack on one of Detroits arteries during morning rush hour. They were pulled over by the police. I think one got a questionable ticket previously and tried to make a point. The police did not like that at all. I can not remember what they got them for but it sounded bad. It was more than 20 yrs ago so I don’t remember if they were nailed for bliocking traffic or impeding or whatever. But it felt wrong to me. [/QUOTE] Well, a likely candidate is: > [@](#): > > 257.676b Interference with normal flow of vehicular or pedestrian traffic prohibited; exception; violation as civil infraction. > > Sec. 676b. > > (1) A person, without authority, shall not block, obstruct, impede, or otherwise interfere with the normal flow of vehicular or pedestrian traffic upon a public street or highway in this state, by means of a barricade, object, or device, or with his or her person. This section shall not apply to persons maintaining, rearranging, or constructing public utility facilities in or adjacent to a street or highway. > > (2) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction. Sometimes, the lane usage statute might apply: > [@](#): > > 257.634 Driving on right half of roadway; exceptions; driving on roadway having 2 or more lanes for travel in 1 direction; traveling on freeway having 3 or more lanes for travel in same direction; ordinance regulating same subject matter prohibited; violation as civil infraction. > > Sec. 634. > > (1) Upon each roadway of sufficient width, the driver of a vehicle shall drive the vehicle upon the right half of the roadway, except as follows: > > (a) When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction under the rules governing that movement. > > (b) When the right half of a roadway is closed to traffic while under construction or repair or when an obstruction exists making it necessary to drive to the left of the center of the highway. A driver who is driving on the left half of a roadway under this subdivision shall yield the right-of-way to an oncoming vehicle traveling in the proper direction upon the unobstructed portion of the roadway. > > (c) When a vehicle operated by a state agency or a local authority or an agent of a state agency or local authority is engaged in work on the roadway. > > (d) Upon a roadway divided into 3 marked lanes for traffic under the rules applicable on the roadway. > > (2) Upon a roadway having 2 or more lanes for travel in 1 direction, the driver of a vehicle shall drive the vehicle in the extreme right-hand lane available for travel except as otherwise provided in this section. However, the driver of a vehicle may drive the vehicle in any lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the same direction of travel when the lanes are occupied by vehicles moving in substantially continuous lanes of traffic and in any left-hand lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the same direction of travel for a reasonable distance before making a left turn. > > (3) This section shall not be construed to prohibit a vehicle traveling in the appropriate direction from traveling in any lane of a freeway having 3 or more lanes for travel in the same direction. However, a city, village, township, or county may not enact an ordinance which regulates the same subject matter as any provision of this subsection. The driver of a truck with a gross weight of more than 10,000 pounds, a truck tractor, or a combination of a vehicle and trailer or semitrailer shall drive the vehicle or combination of vehicles only in either of the 2 lanes farthest to the right, except for a reasonable distance when making a left turn or where a special hazard exists that requires the use of an alternative lane for safety reasons. > > (4) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/26 "2008-01-25T01:36:37Z")
So GFactor, your cites are saying that if a person, or several persons drive at the posted speed limit, he can be cited for obstructing the normal flow of traffic? So what speed can we drive without police interference? Obviously not faster, that is speeding. And according to your cites, AT the speed limit is obstructing the flow of traffic. What speed should we drive to keep from getting a citation for something? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/27 "2008-01-25T01:54:55Z")
[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF] No. What is safe about packing people together on the road moving in one big pack? [/quote] I hear tell that some people actually go a bit slower than the speed limit on interstates. In fact, a friend of a friend’s cop buddy says he’s actually seen this happen. > [@](#): > > It is far more beneficial to let people go by and break the pack up a little bit. Lots of traffic leads to nervous drivers, panic stops, multi-car accidents, and traffic jams. Obviously this is the latest variation in the argument that speeders are not a problem on the roads, it’s those durn slow drivers frustrating everybody else who must therefore speed, or explode. Or something. “The pack” is not a uniform entity. It is true that some maniac trying to go 80 mph in heavy traffic may well “break it up”, with attendant crumpled metal and shards of glass. I have a feeling that “egregious speeders” means “some jerk who has to go faster than me, when I’m _already_ doing 20 mph over the limit”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/28 "2008-01-25T01:58:22Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] So GFactor, your cites are saying that if a person, or several persons drive at the posted speed limit, he can be cited for obstructing the normal flow of traffic? So what speed can we drive without police interference? Obviously not faster, that is speeding. And according to your cites, AT the speed limit is obstructing the flow of traffic. What speed should we drive to keep from getting a citation for something? [/QUOTE] The same speed as the cop? Or, failing that, the same speed as everyone else. They can’t pull the entire expressway over, so even if they go nuts and decide to tag someone, you’re indistinguishable from the crowd and thus have equal (low) odds (all other things being equal). ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/29 "2008-01-25T02:03:33Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] So GFactor, your cites are saying that if a person, or several persons drive at the posted speed limit, he can be cited for obstructing the normal flow of traffic? [/QUOTE] Maybe, maybe not. Probably not if you are just one person driving in one lane, and it’s not the passing lane. It’s an easier case if you admit that you were working with others to block all of the lanes. > [@](#): > > So what speed can we drive without police interference? Obviously not faster, that is speeding. And according to your cites, AT the speed limit is obstructing the flow of traffic. It’s not just about speed. The speed limit sets the \*maximum \* speed. It doesn’t give you the right to tailgate, and you’ve got to follow the rules for lane usage. In fact, the speed \*limit \* doesn’t guarantee you can drive at any particular speed. > [@](#): > > 1. A person operating a vehicle on a highway shall operate that vehicle at a careful and prudent speed not greater than nor less than is reasonable and proper, having due regard to the traffic, surface, and width of the highway and of any other condition then existing. A person shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than that which will permit a stop within the assured, clear distance ahead. [http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(3vnklz450tpbm555fh31miis)](http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(3vnklz450tpbm555fh31miis)))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-257-627 > [@](#): > > Michigan’s Basic Speed Law means you must drive at a > “careful and prudent” speed in all driving conditions. You must > drive at a speed that always allows you to stop within the clear > distance ahead. This speed is never faster than the posted speed > limit. Depending on conditions, it may be slower than the posted > speed limit. Anticipate trouble ahead. Be ready to stop safely. [http://www.michigan.gov/documents/wedmk\_16312\_7.pdf](http://www.michigan.gov/documents/wedmk_16312_7.pdf) And it’s Gfactor with a small “f” ---
**Author:** ![Zulema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/db5fbb/32.png) [@Zulema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zulema)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/30 "2008-01-25T02:21:16Z")
OK so say the speed limit now is 70 on a MI highway. Everyone knows that the understood speed limit is 75 and that anything over that is fair game for a ticket. So now they’re saying 74 and over is fair game. So what, they gave you 70 and all you MI drivers have to be greedy and want more. I drive in MI all the time and on the way there I can guess how close we are to MI by how obnoxiously fast the drivers are. The speed limit isn’t the speed you must drive, it is the maximum speed you’re allowed to drive. If so many people weren’t trying to drive 90 they wouldn’t have to crack down. If everyone was going btwn 70-75 and only speeding up a little to pass once in a while they wouldn’t have to spend all the money to keep people safe. (A former MI resident) P.S. I love your nice fast speed limit, if you all abuse it they’ll take it away again. rantrantrant And hey, there’s no “pack” did you all leave the same place at the exact same time? NO ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2008, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/31 "2008-01-25T23:49:07Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] Maybe, maybe not. Probably not if you are just one person driving in one lane, and it’s not the passing lane. It’s an easier case if you admit that you were working with others to block all of the lanes. [/QUOTE] Gfactor (with a small f) …I stand corrected… So, how exactly would the state contend that I was “blocking” a lane, or impeding the flow of traffic? By driving at the maximum speed allowable under the law? Perhaps my friends and I were attempting to prevent crimes (or civil infractions) by forcing people to obey the state mandated speed limit? Surely that is a laudable goal? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/32 "2008-01-26T16:12:35Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] So, how exactly would the state contend that I was “blocking” a lane, or impeding the flow of traffic? By driving at the maximum speed allowable under the law? [/QUOTE] 1. Because one of you is blocking the left lane, which as you can see from the other statutes, is not permitted, at least in some cases.\* 2. Because in the case I was referring to, the parties admitted that their plan was to create a blockade in order to protest speed limits. If a driver admits he was being an asshole (I’m not directing this at a particular poster, btw) and inconveniencing other drivers to prove a point, what’s he to expect? 3. The “hey, I was going the maximum speed so I didn’t have to let traffic pass me” argument is probably most persuasive to the over-clever folks who make it. From what I’ve seen in traffic court, the district court judiciary is less impressed with it. 😉 > [@](#): > > Perhaps my friends and I were attempting to prevent crimes (or civil infractions) by forcing people to obey the state mandated speed limit? Surely that is a laudable goal? 1. Where do you find your authority to prevent civil infractions? 2. Again, one way to prevent civil infractions would be not to commit them yourself. I think the other drivers on the road and the police would rather prefer that method. I know I would. \*When a driver remains in the left lane, thereby causing traffic to back up, I call it vehicular tamponade. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/33 "2008-01-26T16:33:39Z")
Doesn’t it stand to reason that there isn’t necessarily a speed limit so much as there should be a speed zone? Instead of the speed limit being 70, have the speed zone 70 to 75 with strict enforcement. Having an enforceable zone (being over that cushion) makes the law easier to uphold without any of the fuzzy “well, it’s 5 over, so it’s not speeding…or is it?” kind of thoughts. Or we really need to start working on a crapload more mass transit, which is fine by me. By the way, I’m one of those drivers that drives 70 to 75 in the left lane. If someone wants to pass me, I’ll usually move over a lane to let them pass. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/34 "2008-01-26T17:19:55Z")
When I drive through Ohio I see people are cowered by the Gestapo police. They have a lower speed limit and enforce it ridiculously. Once we cross the state line into Mich. drivers take off. I doubt Ohio is safer. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/35 "2008-01-26T17:30:58Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] 1. Because one of you is blocking the left lane, which as you can see from the other statutes, is not permitted, at least in some cases.\* 2. Because in the case I was referring to, the parties admitted that their plan was to create a blockade in order to protest speed limits. If a driver admits he was being an asshole (I’m not directing this at a particular poster, btw) and inconveniencing other drivers to prove a point, what’s he to expect? 3. The “hey, I was going the maximum speed so I didn’t have to let traffic pass me” argument is probably most persuasive to the over-clever folks who make it. From what I’ve seen in traffic court, the district court judiciary is less impressed with it. 😉 4. Where do you find your authority to prevent civil infractions? 5. Again, one way to prevent civil infractions would be not to commit them yourself. I think the other drivers on the road and the police would rather prefer that method. I know I would. \*When a driver remains in the left lane, thereby causing traffic to back up, I call it vehicular tamponade. 😉 [/QUOTE] I don’t disagree with anything you say, however is my point lost on you that a state would set a maximum speed limit of say, 70mph, and then tell a driver who was in the left hand lane, driving at 70mph, that he was impeding the flow of traffic by driving so slowly? I am also pissed at the arguments of people that “I was driving the speed limit” as a reason to block traffic. But I am more pissed that the state gives these people a very rational argument by having the maximum limit set so artificially low. And I will respond to your first point #1 specifically: How can the state say that I am “blocking” a lane by travelling at the maximum allowable speed under law? And to your second point #1, I prevent civil infractions because I am a very good citizen. 😉 Hell, we hire professionals to stop civil infractions, why would you punish me for doing it for free? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/36 "2008-01-26T21:48:02Z")
[QUOTE=Least Original User Name Ever] Doesn’t it stand to reason that there isn’t necessarily a speed limit so much as there should be a speed zone? Instead of the speed limit being 70, have the speed zone 70 to 75 with strict enforcement. [/QUOTE] Not sure what you mean - are you suggesting the minimum speed should be 70 and maximum be 75? What makes sense to me is to set a maximum speed limit at a reasonable level, then enforcing it literally. It’s a **limit** , there shouldn’t be any buffer zone at all. They should be able to give you a ticket for being 0.5 mph over the limit. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/37 "2008-01-26T22:05:09Z")
Speed limits fall under a category of laws where setting some behaviour by law is necessary, but equally necessary is that the law be flexible and only enforced to make sure the ‘spirit’ of the law is kept. There is no one ‘safe’ speed limit on a road. Or rather, there is one perfectly safe limit - 0 mph. Everything else is a compromise between safety and efficiency/productivity/tolerable behaviour. For example, when determining a public limit, you have to set it based on the least-safe vehicle and the least-safe driver, lest you wind up with a limit that is above someone’s capability to handle safely. This means the old guy in the '65 pickup with the bald bias-ply tires and slow reflexes has to be able to negotiate curves safely at the limit. If you set the limit such, it’s obviously going to be too low for someone driving a BMW with active suspension, traction control, and with good reflexes and vision. Forcing them to adhere to the limit is not just inefficient, but impractical. They just won’t do it. There are plenty of studies which show that people tend to drive at the speed which they feel comfortable at - no slower and no faster. The trick is to find that speed on average, set the limit to that, _and then look the other way as people find their own comfort zones within a reasonable band around that speed_. You can’t just say there is no limit, because you need the tools to be able to bust someone driving like a lunatic. But you also can’t force everyone to exactly adhere to one speed, or you’ll get gridloc, tailgating, and eventually aggressive behaviour and aggressive passing. Clumping up cars on the road is dangerous - you wind up with tailgaters, and when people have to pass they have to pass multiple vehicles at once, which hands them out in the oncoming traffic lane for long periods of time. Most police officers understand this - Highway 2 between Edmonton and Calgary has a posted limit of 110 km/h, but the flow of traffic on that highway is easily 125-135, depending on conditions. I’ve gone though many speed traps at those speeds with no consequences. Police officers are taught to look not just for speeding, but for aggressive driving. It’s one thing to be going 130 in a 120 zone when you’re the only car on the road, or when there is a huge gap between you and the other cars. It’s quite another to go 130 in a 120 zone when the other traffic is doing 120 and you’re tailgating, flashing your lights to get people to move over, aggressively cutting and thrusting through traffic, etc. Police are trained to focus on that type of driver and let the other ones be, unless the speed itself is reckless (i.e. going 160). But once in a while, a spectacular accident will happen, or a funding goal won’t be met, or tickets given won’t meet some quota, and the directive will come down from on high to ‘crack down’, and suddenly behaviour that is commonly ignored is punished. Somestimes it’s also done to ‘send a message’ when the speed of the normal flow of traffic starts creeping up to dangerous levels. If you want to cut down on traffic accidents, the ‘big three’ things are drunk driving, reckless driving, and driving while distracted/sleepy/medicated. Speeding is a ‘contributory cause’ because when there is an accident higher speeds mean more damage. But going after speeders in general won’t do much for accident rates. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/38 "2008-01-26T22:08:33Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] I don’t disagree with anything you say, however is my point lost on you that a state would set a maximum speed limit of say, 70mph, and then tell a driver who was in the left hand lane, driving at 70mph, that he was impeding the flow of traffic by driving so slowly? [/QUOTE] They may not say you were driving too slow, but that does not mean you didn’t break traffic laws. For example, in [Maine](http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/29-A/title29-Asec2052.html) we see the law as > [@](#): > > Ways with speed limit of 65 miles per hour. An operator driving on a limited-access way with a speed limit of 65 miles per hour is restricted in ordinary operation to the right-hand lane and may use adjacent lanes for overtaking and passing another vehicle, but must return to the right-hand lane at the earliest opportunity. This requirement does not apply to an authorized emergency vehicle, or to a vehicle otherwise directed by posted signs, a law enforcement officer or a highway maintenance crew. Drive 65 if you want, but if you’re not passing another vehicle at the time, you are not supposed to be in the left lane. Here’s a [chart](http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html) of keep right laws, which may or may not be current. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/39 "2008-01-26T22:35:10Z")
If the speed limit is 65 you are not allowed to go faster to pass. You can be ticketed. If you are passing a vehicle going 60 you can go 65 to pass. Late at night should cops ticket people on empty roads?. The answer would be no if it were simply about safety. It is also about revenue. I know people that late at night when they hit a red light ,look about . If they see no traffic or cop cars they go through. I would never do it. I know its not a safety issue but I don’t want to put up with cop shit . ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2008, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828/40 "2008-01-26T22:40:54Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] Late at night should cops ticket people on empty roads?. The answer would be no if it were simply about safety. [/quote] Bullshit. Speeding can, in fact, all by itself be a safety issue. Speeding alone can, in fact, lead to an accident. Just 'cause there’s no other cars on the road doesn’t mean that there are no safety factors involved. > [@](#): > > It is also about revenue. of course it can also include revenue, but to claim that, as you did just now, that there’s no safety issues for people speeding if there’s no other traffic is in error. (edited for @#(\*@( coding ) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-speeding-tickets-in-feb/434828.md?page=3)