"He's not even going the speed limit!" WTF?

[PoorManQ45]

I have been hearing this more and more lately when riding with my friends.

Why do people say this?

Are you chastising someone for not breaking the law?

If the speed limit is 70MPH you can legally go 69.9MPH. Cops usually let more slide, but that's not the point.

How can you get pissed off at someone for obeying the law?

This applies to everyone that complains about "slow" drivers in the left lane. If they are doing the speed limit they can be where ever the hell they want to be.

Thoughts?

[numbnuts240]

first, the left lane is technically the passing lane. second, if there are 5 people stuck behind one person who's doing the speed limit, that person is obstructing the flow of traffic and legally should be moving over.

[PEZi]

i'm with ya.... i'm one of those people that everyone gets pissed at because i don't want tickets... most of my friends are the same way

my mom on the other hand is one of those that complains about people being too slow.... it seems she always wants to be 5-10 over (its scary really cause she sucks at driving too)

[PoorManQ45]

first, the left lane is technically the passing lane. second, if there are 5 people stuck behind one person who's doing the speed limit, that person is obstructing the flow of traffic and legally should be moving over.

There is a part to the law that people often miss.

"While abiding by the posted speed limit".

[RicerX]

Move over and let them pass. Let them run the risk of getting pulled over. IMHO, it's not my job on the highway to enforce the speed limit. Someone riding my arse is more of a liability to me, so why cruise in the left lane and piss off everyone behind me, no matter how fast I'm going?

[AZhitman]

These threads always follow the same path.

Brien posts up a thought that pops into his peabrain without researching it. He argues until someone proves him wrong, then he moves on to poop someplace else.

The part you fail to realize is this: The second part of that law is not applicable to the offending slowpoke. In fact, it doesn't come into play unless the speeding driver is pulled over, at which point it applies to him/her. The law in most states is clear: You can't impede the flow of traffic, regardless of where you are or at what speed you are traveling.

Here, if you're on I-10, doing 75 in the fast lane, and there's a line of traffic behind you, YOU can be cited.

Slower traffic keep right. It's posted. No caveats. No conditions.

My message to anyone who impedes the flow of traffic in the left lane: You are NOT the law. You do NOT have the right to make me obey the posted speed limit. If I choose to speed, that is my choice. I am fully aware of the consequences of my actions and am willing to accept them. However, you need to GTFO of the way.

[AZhitman]

Move over and let them pass. Let them run the risk of getting pulled over. IMHO, it's not my job on the highway to enforce the speed limit. Someone riding my arse is more of a liability to me, so why cruise in the left lane and piss off everyone behind me, no matter how fast I'm going?

^ THIS.

[marlin29311]

I'm sick of someone going 40 mph on the 50 mph road i take to work in the morning. End of story.

[PoorManQ45]

Interesting Greg. This says otherwise.

"No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law or except when the vehicle is temporarily unable to maintain a greater speed due to a combination of the weight of the vehicle and the grade of the highway. ""

The bold part is not an or statement. It is an allowance for when you can legally "impede or block" traffic. A posted speed limit would fall under "compliance with law" wouldn't it?

*edit* I wasn't talking about only the left lane. It was in general. It has happened on two lane roads...

[Ar878]

why is this even worth arguing over?
left = fast lane, if someone wants to pass, let them. not that hard.

[rc1honda]

people need to just be courteous thats all. You will see they don't have this problem in Europe. Only in the US where everyone think they own the road. In Europe you can lose your lisensce for for going slow in the fast lane. it's a very serious offense. Im telling you it's dangerous for people to do.

BTW in all honesty have never had a accident that was my fault.

[dre1507]

"Get out of the left lane you under the speed limit driver person you!!!!"
I take it you've never driven on the Florida Palmetto/826, cause then you'd completely understand the hate some people have for slow drivers in general. i know i sure can't stand people who clutter the left lane all while driving directly beside the other two idiots in the middle and right lane, preventing anyone else from passing. I sure get jealous of the motorcyclists.

[IBCoupe]

I have been hearing this more and more lately when riding with my friends.

Why do people say this?

Are you chastising someone for not breaking the law?

If the speed limit is 70MPH you can legally go 69.9MPH. Cops usually let more slide, but that's not the point.

How can you get pissed off at someone for obeying the law?

This applies to everyone that complains about "slow" drivers in the left lane. If they are doing the speed limit they can be where ever the hell they want to be.

Thoughts?

Keep right and it's not a problem, dude.

The speed limit is there for fuel efficiency, not safety. National speed limits were established in response to the '73 oil crisis. What creates a safety hazard is not high speed, but speed disparity. Two cars traveling at 95 mph in single-file will not hit each other. One car, at 95 mph, approaching another car, traveling at 65 mph, could run into trouble. By impeding traffic and placing a slow-moving object (yourself) in front of the faster-moving cars, you are the safety concern. But if you stay right and they can pass you on the left, there's no problem.

Regardless of what the law says, these are the civil engineering arguments. And this is a law student talking, so you know it pained me to write that.

[The Siath]

This is interesting. I'm in Florida now, where speed is 'absolute' to the posted signage. HOWEVER, I remember my brother's ticket in Texas - posted speed was 70, he was going 75, received a ticket for 'Obstructing Traffic Flow' he was in the left lane.

[S13_love]

why is this even worth arguing over?
left = fast lane, if someone wants to pass, let them. not that hard.

^This and...

Slower traffic keep right. It's posted. No caveats. No conditions.

My message to anyone who impedes the flow of traffic in the left lane: You are NOT the law. You do NOT have the right to make me obey the posted speed limit. If I choose to speed, that is my choice. I am fully aware of the consequences of my actions and am willing to accept them. However, you need to GTFO of the way.

^This.

[dre1507]

This is interesting. I'm in Florida now, where speed is 'absolute' to the posted signage. HOWEVER, I remember my brother's ticket in Texas - posted speed was 70, he was going 75, received a ticket for 'Obstructing Traffic Flow' he was in the left lane.

That's messed up. LOL. In Florida you rarely get pulled over for going 5-10 over the limit, unless it's not your lucky day and you just happened to meet that one cop trying to fill his quota. More than 5-10 is just asking for it though. Where i live, cops are lenient on the whole "flow of traffic" bit, so long as it's not a ridiculous amount over the limit.

[RicerX]

You'll break the law this afternoon when you go driving at some point. I guarantee it. So let's get off this self-righteous law-abiding-citizen holier-than-thou perch we're on here.

Let's examine the wild insurance fraud scenario you have schemed up to make an argument to guilt trip honda-man:

Here's how brake checking could fold out in the real world, and we'll try to draw a line between brake checking and insurance fraud:
- First, let's say the vehicles would have to make contact with each other. This event would be classified as a "collision" or "accident". Typically, if the art of "brake-checking" is performed correctly, a "collision" will never take place.
- Second, the officer in charge of the scene of the incident would take the statements of each of the drivers involved and any witnesses. In this case, if there are any witnesses that attest to ol' dude's road rage and brake checking, charges would be filed for anything up to vehicular assault depending on the severity of the accident.
- Third, n00b brake-checker gets arrested, cars get towed, and brake-checker's insurance company gets the bill for the whole thing. It goes to trial... etc. etc.
-Fourth. INSURANCE FRAUD! Oh wait... there isn't any.

[Razi]

LOL @ PMQ wondering more bs.

PMQ do you follow every law to an exact tee?

[PoorManQ45]

LOL @ PMQ wondering more bs.

PMQ do you follow every law to an exact tee?

I never said I followed the law.

My original question was about the phrase "not even doing the speed limit". The negative connotation in that statement "bottles my mind".

Kind of like when someone asks you how was your food and you respond, "It wasn't bad". Really, you were expecting it to be bad?

[PoorManQ45]

You'll break the law this afternoon when you go driving at some point. I guarantee it. So let's get off this self-righteous law-abiding-citizen holier-than-thou perch we're on here.

Let's examine the wild insurance fraud scenario you have schemed up to make an argument to guilt trip honda-man:

Here's how brake checking could fold out in the real world, and we'll try to draw a line between brake checking and insurance fraud:
- First, let's say the vehicles would have to make contact with each other. This event would be classified as a "collision" or "accident". Typically, if the art of "brake-checking" is performed correctly, a "collision" will never take place.
- Second, the officer in charge of the scene of the incident would take the statements of each of the drivers involved and any witnesses. In this case, if there are any witnesses that attest to ol' dude's road rage and brake checking, charges would be filed for anything up to vehicular assault depending on the severity of the accident.
- Third, n00b brake-checker gets arrested, cars get towed, and brake-checker's insurance company gets the bill for the whole thing. It goes to trial... etc. etc.
-Fourth. INSURANCE FRAUD! Oh wait... there isn't any.

The glorious thing about our system, and others, is that you can be charged for an attempt, or even planning of, a crime :P

[Razi]

That wasn't even what got me asking that question.

[ADDirishboy]

You rear ended me=automatically your fault.

LOL! You better hope there are no witnesses. I work in insurance buddy, I have denied plenty of those claim. I'm also confused as to how you think you can sue them. What for? Damaging your car? That's what car insurance is for a$$. If you're not injured, you're not getting a dime over the cost of repairs or the actual cash value of your vehicle, in the chance of a total loss.

Interesting Greg. This says otherwise.

"No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law or except when the vehicle is temporarily unable to maintain a greater speed due to a combination of the weight of the vehicle and the grade of the highway. ""

The bold part is not an or statement. It is an allowance for when you can legally "impede or block" traffic. A posted speed limit would fall under "compliance with law" wouldn't it?

*edit* I wasn't talking about only the left lane. It was in general. It has happened on two lane roads...

You seem to have forgotten what Greg said about you NOT BEING THE LAW. It is NOT your job to force people into going the speed limit. Get off your high horse and go b**** about fire fighters getting paid, a$$.

[rc1honda]

Yeah but , you have to prove that. And like Xenon said, i don't brake check to cause a wreck. i brake check to wake the slow person out of thier coma and realize they are being selfish and rude.

Truth is you can tell the cop anything you want, if you can't prove it your going to be in the worng and the accident will be reported as your fault.

@ addirish. Ok so your telling me that hitting my brakes it against the law now? And becuase you hit am totllaed my car i can't sue you? Ok i hate people who make frivilous lawsuits. But everyone knows, if it;s not your fault and you go to the hospital and claim back pain you are going to get paid. maybe not a lot but you will still get paid. Up to 50,000 is common for laibilty insurance. Like 25k property and 50k bodily injury.

[ADDirishboy]

Yeah but , you have to prove that. And like Xenon said, i don't brake check to cause a wreck. i brake check to wake the slow person out of thier coma and realize they are being selfish and rude.

Truth is you can tell the cop anything you want, if you can't prove it your going to be in the worng and the accident will be reported as your fault

If witnesses say otherwise, that's proof enough. Believe me man, I deal with this on a day to day basis. We may still accept part fault, but that means he's only paying for PART of your damage, and your gonna pay for part of his too. Now, I'm all for pissing off the guy who's going 20 in the left lane, but you are going about it the wrong way. Also, what you are doing is called insurance fraud, and YOU are the reason everyone's insurance rates are so effing high.

[Razi]

Layin down the knowledge.
Go Tyler!!

[PoorManQ45]

You seem to have forgotten what Greg said about you NOT BEING THE LAW. It is NOT your job to force people into going the speed limit. Get off your high horse and go b**** about fire fighters getting paid, a$$.

I did not say you should "be the law". It is your duty as a citizen to obey the law of suffer the consequences. If a party chooses to obey the legally posted limit they are not "being the law", they are simply following the law!

[ADDirishboy]

And if that person is trying to get to the hospital to see his baby be born? See a relative before they pass? Get home to help a child who was hurt? WHo the f*** are you to hinder this person? Now, I'm not saying even a quarter of the people trying to pass you are doing it for a good reason, but the fact remains that you have no idea why that person is trying to speed around you. So instead of being an a** about it, get out of the way and move over to the right.

[rc1honda]

Yeah but , you have to prove that. And like Xenon said, i don't brake check to cause a wreck. i brake check to wake the slow person out of thier coma and realize they are being selfish and rude.

Truth is you can tell the cop anything you want, if you can't prove it your going to be in the worng and the accident will be reported as your fault

If witnesses say otherwise, that's proof enough.

How would a witness know intetionally hit my brakes to cause a accident? If that were the case i could pay off some guy to say the person brake checked me anytime a rear ended someone? There is no way to prove it. Im not saying you don't see it. Im just saying the brake checker had a s*** lawyer. There are mutliple reason why someone would make a sudden stop, pot holes, animals, road debris. I mean where does the speculation end?

[Razi]

You seem to have forgotten what Greg said about you NOT BEING THE LAW. It is NOT your job to force people into going the speed limit. Get off your high horse and go b**** about fire fighters getting paid, a$$.

I did not say you should "be the law". It is your duty as a citizen to obey the law of suffer the consequences. If a party chooses to obey the legally posted limit they are not "being the law", they are simply following the law!

Following the law isn't what he means by "being the law".
He is talking about trying to force everyone behind you to go the same speed as you and enforcing the speed limit on them.

[PoorManQ45]

And if that person is trying to get to the hospital to see his baby be born? See a relative before they pass? Get home to help a child who was hurt? WHo the f*** are you to hinder this person? Now, I'm not saying even a quarter of the people trying to pass you are doing it for a good reason, but the fact remains that you have no idea why that person is trying to speed around you. So instead of being an a** about it, get out of the way and move over to the right.

I'll give you the same answer a Police officer did when I got pulled for speeding. I told him I was going to be late for work. He responded with, "Now you're going to be even later, and give up a chunk of your paycheck".

Again, you are committing insurance fraud. Quit jacking up my rates you little bastard and making someone who pissed you off buy you another car, cause lord knows your f*** s*** 240 is gonna be totaled out if someone rear ends you.

Thank you for backing my original statement. I thought it was fraud

Following the law isn't what he means by "being the law".
He is talking about trying to force everyone behind you to go the same speed as you and enforcing the speed limit on them.

I don't think the people driving slow are thinking to themselves, "This will keep those law breakers in line!"