No, I’m not kidding. Describe how an actual driver’s behavior would differ under the two principles. It seems to me that both yield the left lane–the only, immaterial distinction being that one yields the lane before actually spotting the approaching vehicle behind him, a distinction which makes no difference to the would-be passer.
The one rule requires you to be in the right lane, unless you’re passing. If you never pass, you are required to be in the right lane 100 percent of the time. But realistically, it will probably be 90 percent of the time.
The other rule requires you to move over only if someone wants to pass you. Of course the level of congestion will affect the outcome, but on many days, you can be driving in the left lane 75-99 percent of the time. And the second rule does make a difference to the passing car, because it doesn’t require the driver ahead to move right until it’s clear that the car behind him wants to pass, not when “actually spotting the approaching vehicle behind him.” There will be some period of time, perhaps a few seconds to a few minutes, during which the following car will have to wait for the car ahead to safely change lanes.
It is safer to drive in the left lane under certain circumstances, traffic allowing of course. Neither of these apply to the thread topic or Dio’s delusion. 1) Full-access urban dual carriageways, and 2) Rural interstates and or urban interstates with critters crossing. The 1st example lessens the collision risk from driver’s pulling out from side streets. the 2nd mitigates collision risk with wildlife somewhat, enabling slightly more visibility and reaction time.
A vehicle visibly gaining ground behind you in the left lane is indication that he wants to pass–there’s no reason to drive faster than a preceding vehicle without intending to pass it. Who intends to run up behind someone else and have to brake in highway traffic?
And if the left-side car doesn’t have room to move right under the one rule, he wouldn’t have under the other, either. Either principle can still leave you with two full lanes, if traffic is heavy enough.
I recently lived in a foreign country – one that lots of people make fun of – but their behavior in highway traffic is top-notch, even if their city driving skills inspire fear. I miss it when driving in Michigan.
Essentially, I could (and often did, especially in the dark!) stay in the left lane. I check my rear-view often enough to see if someone is overtaking me, and so I yield the lane. Most of the natives would do so as well, meaning that if I were overtaking them, I’d go on my merry way.
Beautiful post! I agree 100%
Goddamn. You are wrong, just please for the love of everybody’s sanity stop it.
If you are going 60 in the passing lane (the speed limit) on I-270 here in St. Louis during rush hour you are seriously fucking everyone over and causing people to lose their cool.
The Highway Patrol does not pull you over unless you are going significantly faster than anyone else. They will pull your inconsiderate ass over for going 60 in the passing lane especially during rush hour.
The police have stated many times here that their main goal during rush hour is to ensure the smooth flow of traffic.
When a representative gets on the flipping radio for an interview here and the local radio personality tries to pin them down on the speed limit during rush hour they always recite the first sentence again. (wink,wink)
They look the other way because it is in the best interest of the general public even if it is illegal because it has been shown that it cuts down on traffic accidents. Go with the flow has extra meaning for this situation.
Are you trying to suggest that an angry person is going to make better driving decisions than a calm person? Really?
Let’s not dive back into that morass, o.k.?
Actually, I think your rebuttal was less than effective. You said:
If you are doing something that annoys others, you are not excused by saying that you don’t yourself happen to find that particular thing annoying. You might be able to plead this way if you genuinely didn’t know your driving was annoying - but you have made it clear that you do know this, and indeed that you intend it to be annoying.
Sorry to come late to the party, but Minnesota Statutes, section 169.18, subdivision 1, does not cover travel on four-lane, divided highways. It cover travel on two and three-lane highways. Hence, the reference that a motorist should keep to the “right half of the roadway.” Not the rightmost lane. The section dates back to ancient times (before Minnesota Statutes were compiled in 1945), and so refers to a time when it apparently wasn’t obvious that traffic keeps to the right.
Subdivision 10 seems to be more to the point, but it uses (not accidentally) the weasel words “normal speed of traffic.”
I’d doubt that you could be pulled over for traveling in the left lane at 55 mph, since that would be the highest “normal speed of traffic,” if “normal” meant “legal.”
Don’t they shoot left lane campers in California?
I went to school there when vigilantes were shooting slow drivers in the left lane so now I pull into the right lane no matter how fast I’m going if someone comes up behind me.
oh yeah!!!
… /"
… |./|
… | |
… | |
… |>~<|
… | |
… /‘| |/’..
… /~| | | |
… | =[@]= | |
… | | | | |
… | ~ ~ ~ ~ | ) ........... | / ........... \ / ............. \ / .............. \ _____ / ............... |--//''--|
… | (( +==)) |
… |–_|_//–|
Edit: Darn i can’t get the thing to work just right but you get the idea.
Next time use
tags and leave off the periods.And thereby illustrating Xema’s to a nicety.
Moderator Comment.
Insults at other posters, even if drawn, are still against the rules in this forum.
It’s not 100% clear that this is actually directed at anybody, so I’m not going to issue a note or a warning, but be careful with this sort of thing.
Looks a lot better with the code tags. I like the detail of the hands on the watch.
................... /"\
................... |\./|
................... | |
................... | |
................... |>~<|
................... | |
............... /'\| |/'\..
........... /~\| | | | \
........... | =[@]= | | \
........... | | | | | \
........... | ~ ~ ~ ~ |` )
........... | /
........... \ /
............. \ /
.............. \ _____ /
............... |--//''`\--|
............... | (( +==)) |
............... |--\_|_//--|
It often doesn’t. In Michigan we adjust speed limits based on the 90% percentile. In most cases, it means 90% of the people (“normal”) exceed the existing, posted (“prima facie”) speed.
My understanding is that the term “prima facie” applies to speed only when there is no posted speed.
Are there places still without posted speeds? All Minnesota roads have set speed limits, or is there some difference between a speed limit and a posted speed?
I’m pretty sure there are a lot of roads, especially in the rural west, where there aren’t speed limit signs. In such cases, either state law will have a default speed limit set by statute or it will allow the driver the opportunity to argue that the speed he was going was safe for the existing conditions. Those are the cases in which the term “prima facie speed limit” is applicable.
Not that the term “prima facie” as used in law generally means something completely different.