taylor192

This is why the impeding traffic law does not state anything about the posted speed limit. You could be going 150 mph in your CLK and I want to pass you at 170 mph in my SL and you're still impeding my desire to go faster.

Your comment about "find their way around", well if someone was doing 50 mph, they are within the min and max of the posted speed limit, they have every right to do 50 mph using your reasoning. You cannot differentiate based on what speed you "think" is reasonable, that's why the impeding traffic law was not written with any reference to the posted speed limit.

If you were a good defensive driver you wouldn't need to "find a way into traffic" you'd already have a planned route to the right and left lane to incase an emergency manuver needs to be performed to avoid a bad situation.

I still invite you all to take a defensive driving course to understand.

taylor192

Sorry you feel that way, read my reponse, you are not a police officer, you cannot decide what speed you "think" is "appropriate", its either all or nothing, the person driving 50 mph is right and the person doing 80 mph behind is wrong, or the person driving 80 mph in the way of the person doing 110 mph is wrong.

You cannot have it both ways.

taylor192

This thread just started in the Off Topic forum:
Policing the left lane
Read some of the responses, someone has already joked about using the shoulder... maybe it wasn't a joke... this is one of the reasons we have the impeding traffic law.

MrMan

we are talking about RIGHT MOST lane here, not left lane. I think many of us agree that slow cars on the left should move to the slower lane (right lane). (Up to a reasonable speed limit). What I don't agree is running people off to the shoulder at the rightmost lane.

And reading those posts, many are saying PASS LEFT, drive right. Which in the case of the rightmost lane, a driver should do if they want to pass. Move to the left lane.

DeeGuy

Yeah, be safe and responsible

MrMan

Straight from Ontario's Ministry of Transportation.
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/
Click on Highway Traffic Act


"
Careless driving

130. Every person is guilty of the offence of driving carelessly who drives a vehicle or street car on a highway without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway and on conviction is liable to a fine of not less than $200 and not more than $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both, and in addition his or her licence or permit may be suspended for a period of not more than two years. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 130.
"

No Explanation Needed


"
Unnecessary slow driving prohibited

132. (1) No motor vehicle shall be driven on a highway at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic thereon except when the slow rate of speed is necessary for safe operation having regard to all the circumstances.
"

There goes your impeding rule. Blocking NORMAL and REASONABLE movement of traffic. Your 100+ miles per hour, or any unreasonable speeding is now out the window.



"
Slow vehicles to travel on right side

147. (1) Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of the roadway.
"

All you slow cars stay on the right. Yep, speeders stay away from right side.


"
Driving off roadway prohibited

(2) No driver of a motor vehicle shall overtake and pass another vehicle by driving off the roadway.
"

No explanation needed.



"
Passing meeting vehicles

148. (1) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting another vehicle shall turn out to the right from the centre of the roadway, allowing the other vehicle one-half of the roadway free.
"

Move right of roadway, allowing vehicle to pass on the left.



"
Vehicles or equestrians overtaking others

(5) Every person in charge of a vehicle or on horseback on a highway who is overtaking another vehicle or equestrian shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision with the vehicle or equestrian overtaken, and the person overtaken is not required to leave more than one-half of the roadway free.
"

If you are the one overtaking, pass on the left to avoid collision with vehicle you are overtaking.



I didn't write these laws, I'm just interpreting it for you.

taylor192

Thanks for posting the law, now how about reading it. Does it state a:
1. Speed limit, or;
2. Lane?

Nope. As for reasonable, I just asked my officer buddy, and he said its his call, not yours, that's why he wears the badge, not you. Your 80 mph isn't reasonable either when the posted speed limit is 65 mph, but if the weather is bad, 65 mph isn't reasonable either.

So don't police the left lane @ 80 mph and maybe someone won't police the left lane @ 65 mph. Leave policing to the police.

Lets read what someone else already posted:This guy thinks its reasonable to police the left lane at 80 mph, but not at 50 mph. If you read the law 148 (that you so nicely posted for me, thanks) then its your duty to make at least 1/2 of the roadway clear for the overtaking vehicle.
No explanation need cause it states overtake, thus don't pass on the right, but you can still pull off the roadway to allow another vehicle to pass... WAIT that's what the next law states... the vehicle being overtaken must move to allow 1/2 of the roadway for the overtaking vehicle to overtake them...

***

MrMan, I will never convince you that is it reasonable to expect you to move outta the way for a faster car, you seem like the kinda person who'd rather be right than alive.

taylor192

MrMan, and all others I will summerize what I was trying to say.

Yes the Accord driver was an idiot for 1. Racing, and 2. Passing on the right.

Its really sad the mother and 2 children were involved in this accident, I truely feel sorry for them, but there are things the mother could've done to prevent the accident, even though she is not the bad driver in this situation.

The mother could've watched her rear view mirror, saw the fast approaching vehicle, and moved accordingly to allow the vehicle to overtake safely.

Did she have to move? Legally yes the law states she was 1. impeding traffic, and 2. didn't provide the overtaking driver room to overtake. Reasonably, no, the mother should not have to expect that the overtaking driver would overtake on the right and eventually lead to an accident.

All I'm asking is for everyone to consider using some common sense. I cross-linked another active thread discussing "Policing the left lane" where I am sure we'll find more than a few fellow drivers who have used the right lane to pass a slow moving driver in the left lane cause the driver in the left lane has failed to move to allow the overtaking driver space to overtake. Everything in this thread is both illegal and unreasonable.

We can all argue the law to death, but I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd rather be ALIVE than RIGHT, go take a defensive driving course!

pocholin

Horseback, equestrian, does that sound a little outdated?

I do belive laws need to be updated already.

MrMan

"
Unnecessary slow driving prohibited

132. (1) No motor vehicle shall be driven on a highway at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic thereon except when the slow rate of speed is necessary for safe operation having regard to all the circumstances.
"


I'm reading the law very carefully and see the word NORMAL. It doesn't state a speed limit, because different places have different speed limits. The NORMAL traffic is the usual everyday traffic, not the Formula 1 traffic. It doesn't have to specify a right lane, because other laws already does that. (The pass left law, and the driving off roadway prohibited). But if you still want your buddy over there to decide what is NORMAL... then read the next statement.

Law 147 also states "Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the NORMAL speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic".

So whatever it is your officer buddy decides what is NORMAL. She's going slower than his NORMAL and is staying on the right, like the law states.


"Did she have to move? Legally yes the law states she was 1. impeding traffic, and 2. didn't provide the overtaking driver room to overtake. Reasonably, no, the mother should not have to expect that the overtaking driver would overtake on the right and eventually lead to an accident. "


I don't think you understand something. At the rightmost lane, there are no other right lanes to move onto. This was a FOUR lane, meaning, not only did the lady leave half a lane for him to pass on the left. She left him THREE WHOLE LANES! How can you say she did not provide the overtaking driver, room to overtake.

Legally, NO she wasn't impeding traffic. The law states that she is only impeding if she blocks NORMAL and REASONABLE traffic. Are you telling me that the racers are driving the normal everyday reasonable speed?


I think you don't even know what we're arguing about. You keep confusing the right lane (which I am talking about) and your left lane. You also confuse a defensive driver's safety tip with the law. We are talking about laws here, not safety tips. If the woman here did not follow your safety tip, doesn't mean she broke the law.

Your police officer buddy guy over there believes he is above the law. He really does. The law states this and that, but he's saying it's all up to him.

MrMan, I will never convince you that is it reasonable to expect you to move outta the way for a faster car, you seem like the kinda person who'd rather be right than alive.

You mean I have a better chance of surviving by getting run off the road and losing control like the Accord, than getting hit from behind? I don't know about that.

MrMan

and like I also said before. What if she was the one that pulled over the shoulder, lost control like the Accord, and hit some other innocent driver, now what?

taylor192

If anyone can't safely perform an emergency stop onto the shoulder of a roadway then they should have their licence taken away.

MrMan

In order for her to perform an emergency stop, she would have to slow down enough. Allowing the Accord to hit her faster, than if she didn't slow down.

taylor192

From the same website:
A highway can have 2 or more "roadways", so equate roadway with lane, and you'll see that the law does not apply to the highway as a whole, but to each lane, aka "roadway". So it does not matter, left lane, right lane or otherwise.

If you read other laws, they would not make sense if roadway meant multiple lanes, especially the pedestrian laws.

***

Lets do a simple comparison:
a) The woman driving the minivan doesn't pull outta the way, puts herself in danger of an impending bad situation because she thinks she is "legally" correct, what is the outcome?
Mother injured.
Boy lost an arm.
Girl dead.
Stupid driver dead.
b) The woman driving the mimivan realizes there might be a bad situation, performs an emergency stop to let the stupid driver pass safely, what's the outcome?
Mother fine.
Boy fine.
Girl alive.
Stupid driver still stupid, but alive.

What was your point again? I lose sight of all your arguments when I consider the above outcomes.

I guess its better to be safe than sorry.

taylor192

That's what I thought... I'm sure the woman driving the minivan wished she'd just pulled over to the side of the road and let the idiot pass her... her little girl might still be alive... then again she's probably pissed at herself for not buckling either of her kids too...

MrMan

"roadway" means the part of the highway that is improved, designed or ordinarily used for vehicular traffic, but does not include the shoulder, and, where a highway includes two or more separate roadways, the term "roadway" refers to any one roadway separately and not to all of the roadways collectively; ("chaussée")"

Good. Yes, roadway DOES NOT include shoulder. As I also said, that one rule does not state a lane, because other rules already imply it. Instead of basing your point on one law, base it on all the laws. As far as I see it, your argument is weak. You're seeing things in parts and not as a whole.



Lets do a simple comparison:
a) The woman driving the minivan doesn't pull outta the way, puts herself in danger of an impending bad situation because she thinks she is "legally" correct, what is the outcome?
Mother injured.
Boy lost an arm.
Girl dead.
Stupid driver dead.
b) The woman driving the mimivan realizes there might be a bad situation, performs an emergency stop to let the stupid driver pass safely, what's the outcome?
Mother fine.
Boy fine.
Girl alive.
Stupid driver still stupid, but alive.

What was your point again? I lose sight of all your arguments when I consider the above outcomes.

Point, was and always (as seen in the first post), that the mother's only fault was not putting on a seatbelt on her child. It was not her fault that the accident occurred. Everybody wearing a seatbelt was not seriously injured.

MrMan

where did that quote come from? I didn't write that. Now you have to put words in my mouth to prove your point?

MrMan

Easier said than done. If she slowed down to perform an emergency stop, Accord would hit her from behind.

If she goes directly to the rough shoulder, she may lose control as the Accord did.

taylor192

People perform emergency stops on the side of the road where there is a shoulder all the time. Its actually a requirement of getting your licence here in Ontario is being able to perform an emergency stop.

I'll agree, that if she slows that the Accord driver will slam into the back of her even faster, but her signal and brake lights should be sufficient even for the dumbest of drivers to realise her intentions and brake also to avoid running straight until the back of a minivan.

taylor192

No, just havin fun with ya, because none of your arguments are for helping the Mother avoid the bad situation, they are all for assigning blame to those who are at fault.

This is one of the things about our culture I don't like, it seems people like to assign blame than fix the problem.

I started this discussion by "blaming" the Mother of doing wrong, but even I admitted, the driver of the Accord is the person wrong in this situation. I just used the severity of "blaming" the Mother and the legal arguments to prove a point:

Common sense dictates that if a 3000 lb object is accelerating toward you, and you have no indication that it will stop in time, or it will move to avoid you, you better move to avoid it.

On the road this holds so true, you cannot assume that everyone will drive within the law, thus you cannot assume that 110 mph car coming up behind you will change lanes, or brake intime to prevent hitting you. This is why they teach several techniques at defensive driving schools (and driver's ed somewhat) of how to avoid bad situations.

For instance one of the techniques they teach is when coming to a stop at a red light, stop behind the white line, not at it. Usually there is some distance that the sensors will pickup your car without having to be parked right at the white line. This extra space gives you a few feet to move forward if it looks as if the car behind you will run into the back of you. Now you may ask why do this, well lets say you get hit and it bumps your foot off the brake pedal, and you suddenly now are driving into an intersection with cross traffic.

I have already described another technique, an emergency stop to avoid fast appraoching cars.

Now you can rip both apart and just say "the car will hit you regardless", well that is life too, no matter how hard you try, there will eventually be something unavoidable (thus why they are called "accidents"), but I am pointing out that this situation with the Mother and the minivan wasn't one of those times.

taylor192

Wouldn't it be better if no-one was injured? If there was no accident?

Yes there would be no accident if the racer wasn't an idiot, but I accept the fact that there are idiots in our society, and we will eventually have to deal with one, so I'll prepare myself as best I can to deal with the eventual situation, I hope you do too and don't become another victim.

PhucNguyen57

Maybee I'm a little late, but that really is a reality check for me. In another post I wrote about how I punish other drivers, maybe form now on I should just calm down and wait. I really quit racing on the streets for the most part, but I dont stop for cops at night, I think I will now. I dont want to be in ths same position as the driver of any of those cars.

MrMan

You mean at night, you run away from the police when they chase after you? Wouldn't they just radio a police unit ahead?

PhucNguyen57

I have done this so many times, usually on the highway when I have a speed advantage. Say that I am gonig 100 and the cop is going 60, or even better just sitting there shooting radar. He/ She has no chance.
First you should know that you sould not run, no matter what. If you have to though, makes sure you are in a performance oriented car. Exit the highway asap and turn into the first neighborhood. In most places they are not allowed to persue at speed in a neighborhood. IF this is not possible, turn left a lot, but dont backtrack or turn circles. If the cop is directly behind you stop, and say you were looking for a good place to do so. If the cop is still way back there, keep the pedal as far down as possible. Check your brakes and tires every day so that you are sure about what you can do. Make sure that you have plenty of gas all the time. If you are worried about radios get a scanner, just make sure that it has trunk tracker 2 capabilities. You will be amazed at the number of lone wolves there are outhere. After 5 years of not stopping I have never been caught but remember that evasion is worse than a moving violation in most states. So it is a big risk, some times it was much a bigger risk than others. I will not be taking this risk to often any more though it used to be a weekly thing, and sometimes just for fun. It is the biggest rush you can get from driving.

dadsMerc

Dont speed