GOOD NEWZ 4 FAST DRIVERS!

[JumpinJack AJ]

This is from AOL

---

Target: Left Lane Hogs - Finally!

by Eric PetersSome good news: Left lane hogs are finally getting the attention they deserve from traffic cops -- and traffic laws.

In at least two states -- Colorado and Florida -- cops are beginning to target drivers who squat in the far left lane and refuse to move right to let faster-moving traffic get by. For decades, these drivers have been allowed to create rolling roadblocks and interrupt the smooth (and therfore safe) flow of traffic with virtual impunity because "faiure to yield" laws were either not on the books -- or not enforced. And twenty-plus years of dumbed-down, politicized "driver's education" and "safety" campaigns had effectively propagandized the populace into believing their was only one cardinal sin -- "speeding."

And so the focus of traffic "safety" enforcement was speed limit laws -- which of course were often ridiculous (the best example being the 55-mph National Maximum Speed Limit that Congress finally repealed in 1995.) But these under-posted, artificially low speed limits were found to be very useful in terms of generating an unforseen flow of easy money for state and local governments -- which soon became addicted. And it was so much easier for traffic cops to simply shoot fish in a barrel with their radar guns -- because almost every car on the road was going faster than the absurdly low posted limits.

Much easier than actually looking for dangerous drivers, anyhow.

This is finally changing, though.

In Colorado, state police have written more than 500 tickets to left lane hogs since the beginning of the year.

Twenty years ago, this would have been an unthinkable violation of the politically correct orthodoxy that only "speed kills" -- and therefore only enforcing speed limits (no matter how absurd or contrived) matters.

But in fact, people who refuse to move right represent a major traffic safety hazard -- whether "they are doing the speed limit" (as they often bleat in self-righteous high dudgeon) or not.

By refusing to allow other motorists to get by, the left lane dawdler causes traffic to back up unnaturally; drivers then angrily jockey for position -- and typically are forced into making a passing attempt in the right lane to get around the hog -- who seems to get some sort of weird passive-aggressive satisfaction from his obstinancy.

The situation is frustrating, distracting -- and very unsafe. In fact, the lack of reflexive lane courtesy in this country is arguably the biggest single safety problem we have -- not "speeding."

Consider the example of Germany -- where yielding to faster-moving traffic is part of the national culture and adhered to religiously. As a result, it is possible for the Germans to have unlimited speed Autobahns -- where drivers in the left lane often overtake other cars at tripe digit speeds. But because German drivers are taught to use their mirrors -- and immediately move right to allow faster-moving approaching cars to pass -- they have a lower accident and fatality rate than we do here in the United States with our dumbed-down speed limits.

It will take time for the facts about the danger of left lane hogging to sink into the general consciousness -- the consequence of 20-plus years of neglect and outright disinformation peddled by know-nothing "safety" advocates.

But, at last, things are beginning to change for the better.

[WesSyde]

wow that's different! i think there's 2 sides 2 this theory tho. this guy points out that it could be dangerous for fast drivers because they're jockying to pass the slow driver, but it's also dangerous when ur driving that fast. i know we all like 2 think we're good drivers, but in reality there's so many distractions that can distract u when ur driving that fast.

generally, i don't drive faster than 70 mph on freeways unless there's really no traffic. i don't feel comfortable goin 75 or 80 in traffic and having to manuever my way around traffic so i just go with the flow. on the other hand, i almost never drive in the left lane, for the reasons stated in the article, and when i do, i always move over 2 the right when someone comes up behind me.

right now, since i'm neither a lane-hogger or a fast driver, i don't favor either side. i'm not sure if this "law" will make it 2 every state or not :hmm:

[MaxFly]

The article is definitely a bit one sided. Though a number of the speed limits are indeed absurd, the number one reason for deaths on the highway is still speeding. I've never heard of someone dying from going slow or causing someone else to die because they were going 45 on the highway. Even more... there are a number of people who have been given licenses that really can't drive... they can't parallel park, they can't reverse straight, they have trouble doing a 3-point turn... but they're the first ones to be doing 85 on your local highway because the one thing they can do is go straight... and they can do that fast. A lot of them are irresposible, and what the article does not state is that the reason some of these speed limits were set is because a lot of young people died from speeding. Also, it isn't much of a shock that a decent percentage of people who are pulled over for speeding are found to be under the influence. I'd love to be able to do 85 on the highway, but I'm a bit wary of some of my peers...

Edited May 29, 2005 by MaxFly

[WesSyde]

The article is definitely a bit one sided. Though a number of the speed limits are indeed absurd, the number one reason for deaths on the highway is still speeding. I've never heard of someone dying from going slow or causing someone else to die because they were going 45 on the highway. Even more... there are a number of people who have been given licenses that really can't drive... they can't parallel park, they can't reverse straight, they have trouble doing a 3-point turn... but they're the first ones to be doing 85 on your local highway because the one thing they can do is go straight... and they can do that fast. A lot of them are irresposible, and what the article does not state is that the reason some of these speed limits were set is because a lot of young people died from speeding. Also, it isn't much of a shock that a decent percentage of people who are pulled over for speeding are found to be under the influence. I'd love to be able to do 85 on the highway, but I'm a bit wary of some of my peers...

←

:word: that's what i was sayin in with much less description. the article definitely is one sided. there are two sides, and both of them have valid points. i think we need 2 find a medium ground right in the middle.

[Jazzy Julie]

yeah i see what they mean with the people in...well the right lane here (fast lane). Sometimes when they are going really slow i find myself undertaking them which i know is wrong too, but on the motorway in the morning sometimes i find im practically the only 1 in the slow lane. It just causes more congestion.

but i also understand that people shouldnt go speeding on it, like my driving instructer used to say to me, the limt is there for a reason. I cant go fast anyway coz my car will die.

They have started something on the motorway i use at the moment where they put cctv vans on bridges above to catch people speeding, then later on you see a police car go flying down the motorway to catch the speeder, its actually really cool to see.

[JumpinJack AJ]

At the same time, as someone who travels 2 the neighboring cities and towns all the time. There's lots of times when i've been stuck behind 2 or 3 cars driving at the same speed side by side. Next thing u know, there's a mile worth of drivers in 2 or 3 different lanes streaming cuz they are being held back by 2 or 3 drivers. It sucks....and those kinda freaks need 2 be ticketed for setting up slow-mo roadblocks. It's not like they aren't gonna keep ticketing wreckless drivers or anything.

[bea321]

Fortunately, people from USA have to respect down speed limits!!! The Americans didn't already adopt the protocol of Kyoto whose aim is reducing the rejections of greenhouse effects gas although they are responsible for 21% of the worldwide emissions of these gas (I feel obliged to precise I'm not making dumb anti-americanism, these are facts lol). If they could drive faster, they would reject much more CO2 in the atmosphere (one of the gas in question) that causes in particular the thawing of polar glaciers. And beyond the fact it wouldn't be very cool for the polar bears, it is said that the thawing of polar glaciers could even stop the gulf stream that warms the Atlantic up. It would be more cold in Europe and I know you don't care but I-live-in -Europe!!!

Otherwise, like Will, people driving all fast get me kinda upset... In France, on highways, the limit speed is 130 and it's really too much to my way of thinking (and driving).