3 ms·

The law is not always in touch with reality. Regardless of where you drive, if there are people behind you in the left lane, you should move over to let them p

by na85 12y ago

The law is not always in touch with reality. Regardless of where you drive, if there are people behind you in the left lane, you should move over to let them pass. Don't piss people off unnecessarily for no reason other than to prove a point. Move to the right.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> Regardless of where you drive, if there are people behind you in the left lane, you should move over to let them pass. This is different than "the left lane...is for passing. Unless you are passing you should NOT be in this lane". Under this rule, it would be perfectly acceptable to be in the left lane if you aren't passing and also aren't obstructing faster traffic. However, this rule has traffic management problems similar to those with the left-is-reserved-for-passing-rule (which is probably why its even rarer in law than the left-is-reserved-for-passing-rule, though a couple states do have something like it). The more common legal rule -- and there are good reasons for this rule to be preferred -- is that you have to use the rightmost lane if you are moving slower than the normal speed on the road (independent of the legal limit); this is different than a reserved for passing rule and also different than a move-right-for-faster traffic rule, and is superior to either for traffic management, since with a simple move-right-for-faster-traffic rule, a very small number of drivers wishing to drive at excessive speed could oblige significantly greater congestion in the other lanes with drivers forced to yield to them (and, of course, a strict reserved-for-passing rule has a similar effect). The move-right-if-slower-than-normal rule is pretty much the best rule for traffic management.
JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Here's the breakdown for the US states: http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html
- talmand 12y ago
  Why is Michigan listed as "weird" for having a straight-forward and sensible rule?
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    If you click through to the actual law, its weird in terms of the categorization since it doesn't use any of the standard rubrics. The rule applicable to roads with more than two lanes in the same direction is neither a "left lane for passing" rule, or a "yield left lane to faster moving traffic" rule or a "must keep up with normal speed for the road except in the rightmost lane" rule. Its a "you must always drive exclusively in the rightmost lane no matter how many are available, unless there is 'substantially continuous' traffic in the lane, or you are using the left lane for turning." It might be straight-forward and sensible (that, particularly the latter, is particularly subjective), but its very distant conceptually from the rules commonly used elsewhere that form the basis for the categorization and thus is, in context, weird.

by na85 12y ago

dragonwriter 12y ago

> Regardless of where you drive, if there are people behind you in the left lane, you should move over to let them pass. This is different than "the left lane...is for passing. Unless you are passing you should NOT be in this lane". Under this rule, it would be perfectly acceptable to be in the left lane if you aren't passing and also aren't obstructing faster traffic. However, this rule has traffic management problems similar to those with the left-is-reserved-for-passing-rule (which is probably why its even rarer in law than the left-is-reserved-for-passing-rule, though a couple states do have something like it). The more common legal rule -- and there are good reasons for this rule to be preferred -- is that you have to use the rightmost lane if you are moving slower than the normal speed on the road (independent of the legal limit); this is different than a reserved for passing rule and also different than a move-right-for-faster traffic rule, and is superior to either for traffic management, since with a simple move-right-for-faster-traffic rule, a very small number of drivers wishing to drive at excessive speed could oblige significantly greater congestion in the other lanes with drivers forced to yield to them (and, of course, a strict reserved-for-passing rule has a similar effect). The move-right-if-slower-than-normal rule is pretty much the best rule for traffic management.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago

Here's the breakdown for the US states: http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html

talmand 12y ago
Why is Michigan listed as "weird" for having a straight-forward and sensible rule?
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  If you click through to the actual law, its weird in terms of the categorization since it doesn't use any of the standard rubrics. The rule applicable to roads with more than two lanes in the same direction is neither a "left lane for passing" rule, or a "yield left lane to faster moving traffic" rule or a "must keep up with normal speed for the road except in the rightmost lane" rule. Its a "you must always drive exclusively in the rightmost lane no matter how many are available, unless there is 'substantially continuous' traffic in the lane, or you are using the left lane for turning." It might be straight-forward and sensible (that, particularly the latter, is particularly subjective), but its very distant conceptually from the rules commonly used elsewhere that form the basis for the categorization and thus is, in context, weird.