Advocacy & Safety - Would this be a good or bad law...?

To reduce road rage some local lawmakers are talking about passing a law that requires slower traffic to stay in the right lane (I would assume this applies only to roads with four or more lanes and that passing is okay). Does anyone live in an area that has this kind of regulation and, if so, what has the implications been? To me it seems like they are giving in to the road ragers. Doesn't it send the message that poor driving behavior will be rewarded by forcing everyone else to get out of their way?

I thought that was law in most states. I know it that in Virginia it's law that slower traffic keep right. How is that giving in to "road ragers"? Wouldn't allowing slow drivers to drive in the left lane be giving in to inconsiderate drivers? More importantly, how does this relate to bicycles?

this is the norm in Europe- slower traffic to the right and faster to the left-I have never experienced anything else but I fell that the major drawback with this system is that it promotes and encourages high speeds. The only way to qualify to get out of the slow lane away from the trucks is to go faster than everyone on the inside lane and the only way to get in the outside lane is to travel faster than those in the inner lane. Just try and slow down and see what happens-not good.

This is already the case in NC. As far as it being an enforcable law, I'm not sure.
We have signs on all the highways that read, "Slower Traffic Keep Right"

If you're driving through and some 'jerk' comes speeding up behind you in the left lane,
he expects you to move right.
I personally hate this, and practice passive agression every time.

To reduce road rage some local lawmakers are talking about passing a law that requires slower traffic to stay in the right lane (I would assume this applies only to roads with four or more lanes and that passing is okay). Does anyone live in an area that has this kind of regulation and, if so, what has the implications been? To me it seems like they are giving in to the road ragers. Doesn't it send the message that poor driving behavior will be rewarded by forcing everyone else to get out of their way?

This already is the law in many countries and in parts of the U.S., and it is implicit almost everywhere. It is certainly standard practice among conscientious road users because it makes sense. There are, of course, exceptions, such as when preparing to make a left turn.

I heard Florida is working on something like that. Even if it's passed, I don't think it's going to make any difference if it's not enforced any better than any other highway law. Like speeding, for example.

In Southern Africa you can be ticketed/fined for staying in the right hand lane(Drive on the left over there) unless overtaking. This creates clear roads with less time spent stuck behind the slow car/truck/bus. Rhis isn't the case in the UK so there is a lot of(perceived) delay with slow cars/trucks/buses in the "fast" lane.

Colorado has long had a "slower traffic keep right" law, but has just passed a more aggressive version that says you must stay to the right unless you're actively passing somebody. Which seems to me to encourage ever-increasing speed, but I'm don't think it's been around long enough to have any real numerical data.

This is already law here. Right lane only unless passing.

South Carolina has some case law that muddies the "slower traffic keep right" law. If you are not speeding, you can keep the lane. Had to do with a motorist in Charleston that was ticketed for impeding traffic, but he was doing the speed limit (55). He fought the ticket and won, on the grounds everyone else was breaking the law and he wasn't.

Another thing, when you're in a sprawled out area with many right turn cuts, the left lane becomes a straight ahead lane, not a passing lane. The right lane is for right turn traffic.

Slower traffic to the right and faster to the left has been the custom/law in the US for the longest time, it only broke down as a courtesy/custom when we got millions and millions of immigrants with no concept of the social contract.

A concept I comply with routinely.

They've got it here in California. When going through a "refresher" course on driving, with the Highway Patrol, we were told that even if you're doing the speed limit, you have to move to the right to let other traffic pass. The only people allowed to regulate traffic speed is law enforcement.

Keep right unless passing is generally good, but not something that should be law on suburban and city streets.

Slower traffic right is bad as it enourages faster driving.

I should be able to pass cars who are going below the speed limit while not going over it myself without having some enraged motorist behind me freaking out since I am going 'slow in the fast lane'

Al

NC law requires through-drivers who travel slower than the posted max speed limit to use the rightmost through-lane except when passing or preparing to turn left.

Drivers traveling at the posted speed may, by state law, travel in the leftmost lane even if they are slower than the predominant speed. However, some roads are posted with signs saying "Slower traffic keep right" and this signage may make it illegal to travel in the left lane at the posted limit when most other drivers are speeding.

There is a bill in the NC legislature designed to require slower drivers to stay right regardless of the posted speed limit.

Is this the right solution? I don't think so. If it is safe to travel much faster than the posted speed limit, then the speed limit should be raised. If many drivers are traveling faster than an appropriate posted max speed limit, then the faster drivers should be ticketed.

I think this is pretty standard most places, but, as one othe poster noted, I'm not sure that it is terribly easy to enforce. The other thing that I always consider is that many of the people in the right lane are already moving close to the speed limit. Inevitably, the speed demon on the left is exceeding the limit considerably. I have to wonder if it is a bit of poor policy to give them room to do that, but it may just be realism.

Here in Missouri it is called a 'lane violation', and you can be fined for being in the left lane unless overtaking, or for passing on the right. It is also a handy way for cops to pull you over on a completely empty stretch of highway and detain you 3 hours while they accuse you of being high and having pot, until the K9 dogs finally come and it turns out that you aren't high and that you have no pot, and you were just trying to drive home after spending 7 hours on the road that day, and of course my eyes were a little red, it was 98 degrees out and I was in a car with no A/C, and the window down.

Can you sense I'm a little bitter? ;)

But in general, that sort of law is common, and makes sense. I think they rarely enforce it all by itself however, unless they think you are a dopehead for some reason.

peace,
sam

Colorado has long had a "slower traffic keep right" law, but has just passed a more aggressive version that says you must stay to the right unless you're actively passing somebody. Which seems to me to encourage ever-increasing speed, but I'm don't think it's been around long enough to have any real numerical data.

We call it the Speeder Bill of Rights! It is supposed to reduce road rage but my experience has been that it only increases it. For example, on Saturday, I was passing a line of cars in my car at slightly over the speed limit. I could not move back over safely until I had passed them. Some jerk came roaring up behind me at about 20 mph over the speed limit and "expected" me to get out of his way! Flipped me off after I moved over. This attitude that "I'm in a hurry and I'm in a car so get the hell out of my way!" is becoming common in our state now.

Most of what everyone said here reinforces what I thought. From a bike sharing the road stand point, does anyone find any other issues (i.e. more cars in the right lane to deal with or drivers acting less patient with slower bicycles)?

Most of what everyone said here reinforces what I thought. From a bike sharing the road stand point, does anyone find any other issues (i.e. more cars in the right lane to deal with or drivers acting less patient with slower bicycles)?
I'd say as to impact to cycling it is likely minimal if at all. Overall its better if roads have fewer speeders and less agressive drivers, not sure if these laws really affect that one way or the other.

Then again perhaps there is the possibility that if there are indeed fewer slower drivers in the right lane, then there will be fewer (often agressive) right side passers which would make cycling safer.

Al

To reduce road rage some local lawmakers are talking about passing a law that requires slower traffic to stay in the right lane (I would assume this applies only to roads with four or more lanes and that passing is okay). Does anyone live in an area that has this kind of regulation and, if so, what has the implications been? To me it seems like they are giving in to the road ragers. Doesn't it send the message that poor driving behavior will be rewarded by forcing everyone else to get out of their way?


Don't they already "reward" the bad drivers by upping speed limits in an area based on driving speed averages?