Topic: B.C.'s left-lane hogs to face tougher rules, transportation minister promises

[X-Traction]

But is there a level of speed at which you are not willing to speed up to just to accommodate the person coming up from behind? People going at extremely high speeds show up on your back bumper pretty suddenly.

Rarely happens.  I keep track of what's going on behind - and if someone's coming on that hard I will slow behind the car in front, stay in the right lane, and wait until Mr. Speedy is by.  Even if someone is coming up at a very high speed I rarely have to go more than 140 or 150 to get past the person I'm passing and move over without causing anyone to slow.

At some point though, you are increasing your own risk of getting a speeding ticket, even an excessive speeding ticket.  No one has any right to expect you to do that.

[X-Traction]

There is one circumstance that reveals how half-baked this law is.  When I've passed someone in wet or dirty conditions, and if there is no one catching up to me, I remain longer in the left lane so as not to spray water, crud, rocks etc. on the car I've passed, before I cross back into the right lane.  This law makes such road courtesy illegal.

(In addition, on dry roads with patchy wet spots, I make some effort to avoid the wet spots so as to not spray water on cars behind me.)

I'm also wondering if, where this law already exists, anyone driving in the left lane at or above the speed limit has been ticketed for being there and not in the act of passing.  If this law really was to keep slowpokes from obstructing traffic in the left lane, it would say something like: "anyone traveling at or below the speed limit in the left lane, and where it is possible to move to the right lane, shall not obstruct overtaking traffic by remaining in the left lane."

Instead, it says you can't be in the left lane unless you're passing.  The difference is that in the real world, this requires law-abiding drivers to facilitate speeders.  Isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers?  Seems to me anyone ticketed for left lane hogging, who was at or above the speed limit, could challenge the ticket on this basis.

[JG20]

There is one circumstance that reveals how half-baked this law is.  When I've passed someone in wet or dirty conditions, and if there is no one catching up to me, I remain longer in the left lane so as not to spray water, crud, rocks etc. on the car I've passed, before I cross back into the right lane.  This law makes such road courtesy illegal.

(In addition, on dry roads with patchy wet spots, I make some effort to avoid the wet spots so as to not spray water on cars behind me.)

I'm also wondering if, where this law already exists, anyone driving in the left lane at or above the speed limit has been ticketed for being there and not in the act of passing.  If this law really was to keep slowpokes from obstructing traffic in the left lane, it would say something like: "anyone traveling at or below the speed limit in the left lane, and where it is possible to move to the right lane, shall not obstruct overtaking traffic by remaining in the left lane."

Instead, it says you can't be in the left lane unless you're passing.  The difference is that in the real world, this requires law-abiding drivers to facilitate speeders.  Isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers?  Seems to me anyone ticketed for left lane hogging, who was at or above the speed limit, could challenge the ticket on this basis.

Why do you keep equating speeding with crimes that can land you in jail?  Speeding in and of itself, when caught, does not warrant jail time, no matter how fast you're going.  Wrong analogy.

As for your other points, the whole point of the law is to not impede traffic.  And doing so reasonably.  I doubt any cop would pull you over for staying in the left lane a little longer to avoid spraying the car just passed.  IMO, this is more targeted to people who refuse to move out of the left lane regardless of the line-up of cars behind them waiting to pass.

[Fobroader]

There is one circumstance that reveals how half-baked this law is.  When I've passed someone in wet or dirty conditions, and if there is no one catching up to me, I remain longer in the left lane so as not to spray water, crud, rocks etc. on the car I've passed, before I cross back into the right lane.  This law makes such road courtesy illegal.

(In addition, on dry roads with patchy wet spots, I make some effort to avoid the wet spots so as to not spray water on cars behind me.)

I'm also wondering if, where this law already exists, anyone driving in the left lane at or above the speed limit has been ticketed for being there and not in the act of passing.  If this law really was to keep slowpokes from obstructing traffic in the left lane, it would say something like: "anyone traveling at or below the speed limit in the left lane, and where it is possible to move to the right lane, shall not obstruct overtaking traffic by remaining in the left lane."

Instead, it says you can't be in the left lane unless you're passing.  The difference is that in the real world, this requires law-abiding drivers to facilitate speeders.  Isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers?  Seems to me anyone ticketed for left lane hogging, who was at or above the speed limit, could challenge the ticket on this basis.

Why do you keep equating speeding with crimes that can land you in jail?  Speeding in and of itself, when caught, does not warrant jail time, no matter how fast you're going.  Wrong analogy.

As for your other points, the whole point of the law is to not impede traffic.  And doing so reasonably.  I doubt any cop would pull you over for staying in the left lane a little longer to avoid spraying the car just passed.  IMO, this is more targeted to people who refuse to move out of the left lane regardless of the line-up of cars behind them waiting to pass.

[johngenx]

I've be "caught" speeding on a few occasions when a police cruiser witnessed me briefly exceeding the (formal and informal) limit in order to not impede traffic, and have never been pulled over.  The rig-rocket that went blasting past oblivious to the dark grey Crown Vic with hubcaps and fat tires?  He got the ticket.

When you find someone coming up FAST behind you and you need to speed up to get out of the way?  Don't forget that cops are people and can see what's going on.

Also, when I do speed up, it's VERY brief.  Usually just for long enough to get by the car I'm passing, then move right.

I can say that I can't recall ever being ticketed for using speed to be safe.  Yeah, once I was passing someone on a two lane on my motorcycle and got nabbed, but hey, 192 in a 90 is tough to justify "in the name of safety."  But, even at THAT stupid speed was written down to 120 and I faced nothing more than a fine - it was a very quiet highway, he acknowledged I was passing someone, and it was 1983, and we weren't as hysterical about speed.  Ironic since our cars were junk then compared to now.

[X-Traction]

There is one circumstance that reveals how half-baked this law is.  When I've passed someone in wet or dirty conditions, and if there is no one catching up to me, I remain longer in the left lane so as not to spray water, crud, rocks etc. on the car I've passed, before I cross back into the right lane.  This law makes such road courtesy illegal.

(In addition, on dry roads with patchy wet spots, I make some effort to avoid the wet spots so as to not spray water on cars behind me.)

I'm also wondering if, where this law already exists, anyone driving in the left lane at or above the speed limit has been ticketed for being there and not in the act of passing.  If this law really was to keep slowpokes from obstructing traffic in the left lane, it would say something like: "anyone traveling at or below the speed limit in the left lane, and where it is possible to move to the right lane, shall not obstruct overtaking traffic by remaining in the left lane."

Instead, it says you can't be in the left lane unless you're passing.  The difference is that in the real world, this requires law-abiding drivers to facilitate speeders.  Isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers?  Seems to me anyone ticketed for left lane hogging, who was at or above the speed limit, could challenge the ticket on this basis.

Why do you keep equating speeding with crimes that can land you in jail?  Speeding in and of itself, when caught, does not warrant jail time, no matter how fast you're going.  Wrong analogy.

I'll revise: "isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers" to say: "assisting people breaking laws or regulations".  Does that handle your objection?

As for your other points, the whole point of the law is to not impede traffic.  And doing so reasonably.  I doubt any cop would pull you over for staying in the left lane a little longer to avoid spraying the car just passed.  IMO, this is more targeted to people who refuse to move out of the left lane regardless of the line-up of cars behind them waiting to pass.

You may want to discuss this with our friend Rrocket.  He has a strong belief that speeding tickets are a cash grab, and this left lane thing would be vulnerable to the same sort of abuse.  I agree with what you said is the intent of this law.

[aquadorhj]

There is one circumstance that reveals how half-baked this law is.  When I've passed someone in wet or dirty conditions, and if there is no one catching up to me, I remain longer in the left lane so as not to spray water, crud, rocks etc. on the car I've passed, before I cross back into the right lane.  This law makes such road courtesy illegal.

(In addition, on dry roads with patchy wet spots, I make some effort to avoid the wet spots so as to not spray water on cars behind me.)

I'm also wondering if, where this law already exists, anyone driving in the left lane at or above the speed limit has been ticketed for being there and not in the act of passing.  If this law really was to keep slowpokes from obstructing traffic in the left lane, it would say something like: "anyone traveling at or below the speed limit in the left lane, and where it is possible to move to the right lane, shall not obstruct overtaking traffic by remaining in the left lane."

Instead, it says you can't be in the left lane unless you're passing.  The difference is that in the real world, this requires law-abiding drivers to facilitate speeders.  Isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers?  Seems to me anyone ticketed for left lane hogging, who was at or above the speed limit, could challenge the ticket on this basis.

Why do you keep equating speeding with crimes that can land you in jail?  Speeding in and of itself, when caught, does not warrant jail time, no matter how fast you're going.  Wrong analogy.

I'll revise: "isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers" to say: "assisting people breaking laws or regulations".  Does that handle your objection?

As for your other points, the whole point of the law is to not impede traffic.  And doing so reasonably.  I doubt any cop would pull you over for staying in the left lane a little longer to avoid spraying the car just passed.  IMO, this is more targeted to people who refuse to move out of the left lane regardless of the line-up of cars behind them waiting to pass.

You may want to discuss this with our friend Rrocket.  He has a strong belief that speeding tickets are a cash grab, and this left lane thing would be vulnerable to the same sort of abuse.  I agree with what you said is the intent of this law.

[/quote]

i am with RR on the cash grab thing.    if you've driven anywhere where cop is cruising around in, you know as well as we do that that's when people abide by the speed limit the most.

their presence stops speeding, not the fact that they are ticketing people.

and you know as well as any that once speeders are most often a repeat offenders. 

i was once in a line with a woman with 3 speeding tickets, and she didn't see anything wrong with that at all, and she will probably come back with more speeding tickets in the future.  it's free money for the government.

i don't begrudge the cops/cities taking money from these people.  however, it doesn't ever stop them speeding. (or at least until their demerit becomes too much and they cannot afford to speed anymore)

[X-Traction]

i am with RR on the cash grab thing.    if you've driven anywhere where cop is cruising around in, you know as well as we do that that's when people abide by the speed limit the most.

their presence stops speeding, not the fact that they are ticketing people.

and you know as well as any that once speeders are most often a repeat offenders. 

i was once in a line with a woman with 3 speeding tickets, and she didn't see anything wrong with that at all, and she will probably come back with more speeding tickets in the future.  it's free money for the government.

i don't begrudge the cops/cities taking money from these people.  however, it doesn't ever stop them speeding. (or at least until their demerit becomes too much and they cannot afford to speed anymore)

That's something we haven't talked about.  It gets REALLY expensive as you rack up points, and don't licenses get taken away at some point?  It would be interesting to have some idea of how many people we don't see on the roads because they're not allowed to drive.

Back when we had photo radar, a woman driving the length of Vancouver Island got caught at about 30kph over the limit three times during her drive.  The tickets alone were almost $1000, plus whatever the increased cost for license renewal/insurance. I guess some people can afford this, but most wouldn't.

[johngenx]

In Alberta, photo radar is a true cash grab.  They hide.  There's no points or insurance impact.  It's just a "speed tax."  Thresholds are now as low as 2km/h over.  It's used in cities.

It's my experience that police speed enforcement on the highways is much more about finding grievous offenders.

[pi314]

I wonder if Alberta will add more photo radar now that they're raising speeding tickets, etc to increase revenue?

[johngenx]

I wonder if Alberta will add more photo radar now that they're raising speeding tickets, etc to increase revenue?

Considering that just on my drive to the gym and back this morning I drive through four photo radar traps I saw plus however many I didn't notice, I'm not sure how they could add more.

[X-Traction]

We drive between and in the Calgary and Edmonton areas every summer.  Used to be that there was as much speeding on the highways as in BC.  However, in the summer drive of 2014, Alberta drivers seemed to be obeying the speed limit much more than in BC, and much more than in the past.  Nice to see.  Did the enforcement change between 2013 and 2014?

[johngenx]

We drive between and in the Calgary and Edmonton areas every summer.  Used to be that there was as much speeding on the highways as in BC.  However, in the summer drive of 2014, Alberta drivers seemed to be obeying the speed limit much more than in BC, and much more than in the past.  Nice to see.  Did the enforcement change between 2013 and 2014?

Alberta added a lot more police in the form of provincial sheriffs - they do most of the traffic enforcement on the highways.  Highway 2 is a known horror-show, so enforcement is way up on it.  Drive between Edmonton and Jasper - traffic is much lighter, and so is enforcement.

[X-Traction]

We drive between and in the Calgary and Edmonton areas every summer.  Used to be that there was as much speeding on the highways as in BC.  However, in the summer drive of 2014, Alberta drivers seemed to be obeying the speed limit much more than in BC, and much more than in the past.  Nice to see.  Did the enforcement change between 2013 and 2014?

Alberta added a lot more police in the form of provincial sheriffs - they do most of the traffic enforcement on the highways.  Highway 2 is a known horror-show, so enforcement is way up on it.  Drive between Edmonton and Jasper - traffic is much lighter, and so is enforcement.

Highway 16 and 11 area almost always part of these trips.  11 is the real snore-fest.  I don't speed on them anyway because we're on vacation.

[JG20]

I'll revise: "isn't this the same as expecting people to hold the bank door open for escaping bank robbers" to say: "assisting people breaking laws or regulations".  Does that handle your objection?

You may want to discuss this with our friend Rrocket.  He has a strong belief that speeding tickets are a cash grab, and this left lane thing would be vulnerable to the same sort of abuse.  I agree with what you said is the intent of this law.

Ok, if you follow every single law and regulation to the "T" then all the power to you.  Fact of the matter is, there are many examples of unreasonable and outright stupid laws.  I'm not going to go over them as that's going off topic but there are degrees. Jaywalking is not the same as robbing a bank.

Back to the left lane discussion, most people drive at a speed they consider reasonable.  In the case of the 400 series highways in Ontario, on clear days with normal traffic, that's around 120km/h.  Yes, that would mean 99% of the drivers are breaking the law according to your definition.  Cops know this and generally will not pull anyone over going around this speed. 

When average speed is around 120, there are going to be people driving faster or want to pass, yet there are plenty of people who, despite there being plenty of room in the middle 2 lanes, park themselves at 120 or even less in the left hand lane.  Yes, they're already technically speeding but they're also impeding traffic.

Others have already mentioned that our highways and cars were designed to handle way more speed than the current limits.  Plenty of states south of the border have already made changes to reflect that.  Weather conditions here though are more variable.  Ideally, we would have a system like in some stretches of the Autobahn where the speed limit is variable depending on weather and traffic conditions.

[Ron]

It may still be possible to get in the way of excessive speeders.  All one has to do is to pass someone or a line of vehicles only a little faster than the vehicle(s) being passed.  As long as one is near the speed limit, there's no law saying you have to speed to reduce the passing time.  (I know this can be annoying for those wanting to go even faster, and I try to accommodate them even though it means I'm at greater risk for getting a speeding ticket.)

I drive the island highway daily, ranging from Victoria to Campbell River and I must say this type of behaviour is fairly common, sometimes extremely so, ie it is obvious to everyone the person is either dicking around, or completely clueless, and slowing down traffic. This is especially apparent Parksville south, going north it seems along with the increased speed limit everyone grabs a sense of courtesy previously lost and pulls over. For those '' I would love to see some sort of action from the police. However, statements from the police publicly and from a private conversation, nothing will come of this whatsoever. The reason being provided the vehicle in question is going at least the speed limit, the police believe any infraction brought up would simply be thrown out.

[X-Traction]

It may still be possible to get in the way of excessive speeders.  All one has to do is to pass someone or a line of vehicles only a little faster than the vehicle(s) being passed.  As long as one is near the speed limit, there's no law saying you have to speed to reduce the passing time.  (I know this can be annoying for those wanting to go even faster, and I try to accommodate them even though it means I'm at greater risk for getting a speeding ticket.)

I drive the island highway daily, ranging from Victoria to Campbell River and I must say this type of behaviour is fairly common, sometimes extremely so, ie it is obvious to everyone the person is either dicking around, or completely clueless, and slowing down traffic. This is especially apparent Parksville south, going north it seems along with the increased speed limit everyone grabs a sense of courtesy previously lost and pulls over. For those '' I would love to see some sort of action from the police. However, statements from the police publicly and from a private conversation, nothing will come of this whatsoever. The reason being provided the vehicle in question is going at least the speed limit, the police believe any infraction brought up would simply be thrown out.

To be clear, I'm not advocating using this technique to defeat the intent of the lane hogging law.  I mention it because there are a few militant motorists out there who might be interested in this approach. Not that anyone on this forum would be like that.  And to be honest, I'd rather have people obstructing traffic like this than excessively speeding.

I think a lot of the glacial overtaking on the Island Highway is because people are using cruise control.  Even without using cruise control a few drive at a very steady pace and want to stay at that speed even when passing someone going steadily just a bit slower.

What I really dislike is people who can't drive at a steady speed on highways.  If you're anywhere near them on the highway you're frequently having to make decisions about passing them over and over.  And because their speed is varying above and below your pace, this means that their speed will cause you to have to back out of some passes as they speed up beyond your speed.  Or you get trapped behind them as they slow down as a line of cars comes past both of you.
 
And then there's the annoying folks on windy highways like Vancouver to Whistler.  It's a combination of 2, 3 and 4 lanes.  The 2-lane sections tend to comprise sharp corners where it was too expensive to widen the road.  People pass 20kph over the limit on the straight sections with left lanes to get ahead of you, then they poke around the corners holding you up far under the speed limit and the safe cornering speed.

[dkaz]

I am one of those, but my rules are quite simple:

I maintain speed on flats.
My speed drifts down going uphill.
My speed drifts up going downhill.

By hill, I mean 6%+ grades.

[X-Traction]

I am one of those, but my rules are quite simple:

I maintain speed on flats.
My speed drifts down going uphill.
My speed drifts up going downhill.

By hill, I mean 6%+ grades.

Why do you slow down going uphill?

[dkaz]

It's a hypermiling technique. Work with gravity, not against it.