Here in Utah, it's as stated above, "i'm the only one on the road, if you don't like the way that i'm drive, you won't like my other speed either". (usually revers) The lovely legislature cuts back the funding for law inforcement so much that we don't have enough patrolman on the road to move these lane hogs over where they belong, and when you start to push them, then they bring out the good o'l shoot'n iron and--ROAD RAGE-- now is under way, we have had far to much of this going on. and the d--- driving lite thing in good weather, is beyond a joke, and really, they are only effetive up to maybe 75' in front any way. it's about time they grabbed thier ear lobes and pulled there heads out of the dark place. (---) just my pennys worth.
-
TDR Magazine subscribers receive more than the magazine! You also gain additional forum privileges!
Details here: TDR Privileges
Subscribe to TDR Magazine here: https://www.tdr-online.com/
I hate drivers that do this!!!
- Thread starter LarryB
- Start Date
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.
Thanks, TDR Staff
What gets me is when someone will pass me and then slow down after they pull back into the right lane. Or, when I am gradually overtaking someone and pull out to pass them and they gradually increase their speed to match mine then, as I gradually keep speeding up to get around them so do they. Eventually they seem to come out of their dazed state and let off on the gas. 
DEFENSIVE DRIVING
I know you all have heard it before but I want to say it again, defensive driving is paramount, Our fire dept was call to a severe 10-50 ( wreck) this morning at 3 am and I just received my several hundreth reminder of how much you need to watch out for the other guy, it is most likely inconclusive as to who was in the wrong on this one because there were no skid marks and the impact has disrupted evidence of which lane this all happened in, the law has ther hands full on this one and if they come up with any thing at all there would have to be some spectulation on the final outcome, the bottom line is that one of the vehicles was in the wrong and 3 people had to die a horrific and firey death over a cituation that most likely could have been avoided. If at any time a class is offered on defensive driving I highly reccomend it if you have time, it may one day help you and your passengers out .
Seat bealts required at all times
God Bless You All and be safe and cautious... ... ... ... ... Kevin
I know you all have heard it before but I want to say it again, defensive driving is paramount, Our fire dept was call to a severe 10-50 ( wreck) this morning at 3 am and I just received my several hundreth reminder of how much you need to watch out for the other guy, it is most likely inconclusive as to who was in the wrong on this one because there were no skid marks and the impact has disrupted evidence of which lane this all happened in, the law has ther hands full on this one and if they come up with any thing at all there would have to be some spectulation on the final outcome, the bottom line is that one of the vehicles was in the wrong and 3 people had to die a horrific and firey death over a cituation that most likely could have been avoided. If at any time a class is offered on defensive driving I highly reccomend it if you have time, it may one day help you and your passengers out .
Seat bealts required at all times
God Bless You All and be safe and cautious... ... ... ... ... Kevin
DonS
Prima Facia means the different posted zones (school zones, 35 mph, 45 mph, etc) The 65 or sometimes 55 mph limits are maximum speed limits (for that highway) and not prima facia ones.
You can tell a Lawyer wrote these laws when it takes a paragraph to say Don't Hold Up Traffic In The Fast Lane.
Prima Facia means the different posted zones (school zones, 35 mph, 45 mph, etc) The 65 or sometimes 55 mph limits are maximum speed limits (for that highway) and not prima facia ones.
You can tell a Lawyer wrote these laws when it takes a paragraph to say Don't Hold Up Traffic In The Fast Lane.
Last edited:
driving slow in the monfort lane
i have it on good authority that drivers in some counties in my state cannot get a drivers license, UNLESS they allow their brains to be reprogrammed to ALWAYS drive in the fast lane. oh yeah, at the reprogramming, they are set to run 10-15 MPH UNDER the speed limit.
i have it on good authority that drivers in some counties in my state cannot get a drivers license, UNLESS they allow their brains to be reprogrammed to ALWAYS drive in the fast lane. oh yeah, at the reprogramming, they are set to run 10-15 MPH UNDER the speed limit.
Looks like the speed thing or I should say "Lack of attenative" driving of others is something that we all have to contend with. Another thing that jerks my chain is when people coming off a 'T' road onto a four lane and invariably get into the wrong lane to merge with traffic. Then people wonder why they get 'T-boned' or rear ended. I've had this happen to where defensive driving can get real critical if not done properly. Some people just don't realize what they done that can put both themselves and yourself into a dangerous situation.
The 2 lane thing gets me. I can understand people being content with their speed BUT, when the cars follow each other so close that you can't pass one at a time (i. e. all or none) that just torques my jaw! In the Philippeans, you pass what you can and force a hole to get back into. Hmmmm. When someone is passing me, which I admit isn't very often, I slow down, and if it is a big rig (rarely) I also hug the right shoulder to give room. People in general suck. There is nothing you can do about it.
As far as the driving light thing. I find most people get annoyed by them because they can. Driving lights and fog lights are supposed to be on with the low beams and off with the Hi beams (the high beam thing I don't understand. ) If your auxillary driving lights are adjusted properly, they should, in no way affect the vision of people in front of you. They just fill in the area below and to the sides of the existing Lo-beams. If they are out of adjustment, that should constitute a ticketable offense. I check mine for allignment very often, and when some Bozo hits his high-beams on me just because I have my aux lights on, the will see what interfering light looks like! Aux. driving lights help reduce fatigue for the driver as a fill light, BELOW THE LEVEL OF THE LOW BEAMS. Mine will remain on!
As far as the driving light thing. I find most people get annoyed by them because they can. Driving lights and fog lights are supposed to be on with the low beams and off with the Hi beams (the high beam thing I don't understand. ) If your auxillary driving lights are adjusted properly, they should, in no way affect the vision of people in front of you. They just fill in the area below and to the sides of the existing Lo-beams. If they are out of adjustment, that should constitute a ticketable offense. I check mine for allignment very often, and when some Bozo hits his high-beams on me just because I have my aux lights on, the will see what interfering light looks like! Aux. driving lights help reduce fatigue for the driver as a fill light, BELOW THE LEVEL OF THE LOW BEAMS. Mine will remain on!
#1 problem in NJ. The "left lane Dick". This is self explanitory.
I'm in a heavily senior citizen area, they like to get in front of you... . AT ALL COSTS then proceed to travel at 50% of the posted speed.
I dont think most people in NJ KNOW that there is a switch that turns high beams off.
I'm in a pretty rural area, and I dont think I've EVER had my beams on for more than a mile!!
I must be pretty well known because everyone signals me with the #1 sign.
Eric
I'm in a heavily senior citizen area, they like to get in front of you... . AT ALL COSTS then proceed to travel at 50% of the posted speed.
I dont think most people in NJ KNOW that there is a switch that turns high beams off.
I'm in a pretty rural area, and I dont think I've EVER had my beams on for more than a mile!!
I must be pretty well known because everyone signals me with the #1 sign.
Eric
Just call me BOZO. 
#ad
I love beaming those dorks with driving lights. I've got four 130watt bulbs in my quad Hella headlights. I had to install relays directly to the battery because they draw so much power. I can burn their facial hair at 50'. You can actually see their faces when you zap em. Ha Ha Ha.
I had driving lights a while back, I thought they looked real cool. I used to get ticked at drivers that flashed me "don't they know these are cool driving lights" I would think. Found out that they are worthless except to annoy other drivers. I threw them away and bought a good set of Hella halogen 130/90 H4s. They are shielded on low beams to keep them out of other drivers eyes. I can see much better than with driving lights and I have yet to get flashed.
(stir. . stir)#ad
#adI love beaming those dorks with driving lights. I've got four 130watt bulbs in my quad Hella headlights. I had to install relays directly to the battery because they draw so much power. I can burn their facial hair at 50'. You can actually see their faces when you zap em. Ha Ha Ha.
I had driving lights a while back, I thought they looked real cool. I used to get ticked at drivers that flashed me "don't they know these are cool driving lights" I would think. Found out that they are worthless except to annoy other drivers. I threw them away and bought a good set of Hella halogen 130/90 H4s. They are shielded on low beams to keep them out of other drivers eyes. I can see much better than with driving lights and I have yet to get flashed.
(stir. . stir)
#ad
Last edited:
Larry, I have a pair of those aircraft landing lights on the back bumper. They stopped working about a month ago, gotta fix them.
It's worth it just for the entertainment value.
Eric
It's worth it just for the entertainment value.
Eric
DonS,
I should have expressed myself better. The times it irritates me is when the following traffic does not leave a sufficiently large gap between themselves and the traffic ahead, leaving no room for passers to merge when opposing traffic appears.
Jay
I should have expressed myself better. The times it irritates me is when the following traffic does not leave a sufficiently large gap between themselves and the traffic ahead, leaving no room for passers to merge when opposing traffic appears.
Jay
Gotcha. If there isn't enough room for you to merge back in, then the "passed" driver is probably following too close, anyway. Unless the "passee" is a complete moron, he'll probably back off when a 7500 lb truck starts moving into his left front wheel (but then you're probably guilty of an unsafe lane change - sheesh).
BTW DRR-24V - I know your profile says you're a retired CHP officer. So that you don't think I'm blowing smoke from my nether regions with my whole "speed limit doesn't matter in 21654" position, my information also comes from a CHP officer. Our local paper (San Jose Mercury News) has a column that answers questions about traffic laws, road conditions, etc. For most of the traffic law queries, the columnist consults a local CHP "spokesman". This exact question came up last year (it may have been in 2000). The "last word" on the subject came from the CHP, saying that if you are in the left lane moving slower than other traffic, even if you are moving at the speed limit, you must move over. He said that the CHP can and will cite you for it. He actually said "posted speed limit", so that should include both maximum and prima facie (since the posted speed limit will be either the maximum speed limit or a lower prima facie speed limit). I remember that part because I had looked it up before his anwer, and was wondering if it only applied to prima facie or also maximum. But then his use of "posted" seemed to imply that it did apply to the maximum speed limit. Perhaps that's only the policy of the local CHP, to deal with the Bay Area's messed-up traffic?
Edit: I think it could be argued that the "prima facie speed limit" is whatever speed limit is in force on a given road at a specific time and place. "Prima facie" means evident, self-apparent. Whether a certain speed limit is the "maximum", or it is some lower limit (posted or not), or it is a higher limit (e. g. 70 MPH on I-5), it would be the "evident" speed limit and therefore the "prima facie" limit. Therefore, every speed limit is a "prima facie" limit. But not every prima facie limit is a "maximum" (obviously).
Check out section 41100 - "the prima facie speed limit on the highway is the limit stated on the signs". This seems to clinch it - "prima facie" (and therefore section 21654) refers to every posted speed limit including "maximum speed".
-Don
Last edited:
Don,
This problem with the "left lane anti-destination league" has become so severe in Texas that the old "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs on Texas freeways are being replaced with "Left Lane for Passing Only" signs. It doesn't seem to make any difference, though - although I would hope the Highway Patrol could enforce the latter, speed limits notwithstanding!
Rusty
This problem with the "left lane anti-destination league" has become so severe in Texas that the old "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs on Texas freeways are being replaced with "Left Lane for Passing Only" signs. It doesn't seem to make any difference, though - although I would hope the Highway Patrol could enforce the latter, speed limits notwithstanding!
Rusty
DonS
There is a specific section for each speeding violation. The Maximum speed limit has nothing to do with the Prima Facia limit. Even with all these laws the Courts go by case law decided in a prior case. Case law will never tell someone to exceed the Max Limit to comply with any other law. Your theory doesn't make sense. If that were the case, any speeder could claim he was just with the Flow Of Traffic and get off. It Don't Work That Way. Anyway in closing, us who work the road call those who work in the office and deal with the Media, OFFICE DRONES Or SLUGS.
There is a specific section for each speeding violation. The Maximum speed limit has nothing to do with the Prima Facia limit. Even with all these laws the Courts go by case law decided in a prior case. Case law will never tell someone to exceed the Max Limit to comply with any other law. Your theory doesn't make sense. If that were the case, any speeder could claim he was just with the Flow Of Traffic and get off. It Don't Work That Way. Anyway in closing, us who work the road call those who work in the office and deal with the Media, OFFICE DRONES Or SLUGS.
DDR-24V
According to the section I quoted, the posted speed limit is the prima facie speed limit. Whether that posted limit is the maximum limit specified in the code, a lower limit put in force by local ordinance, or any other limit, it is still the prima facie speed limit. No, "maximum" and "prima facie" speed limits aren't necessarily related. Sometimes, however, they are the same limit. For example, if the "maximum" speed is 65 MPH, and that speed limit is posted, then it is also the "prima facie" speed limit - since any "posted" speed limit is, according to the CVC, the "prima facie" speed limit. I only referenced that section to clarify that 21654 does, in fact, apply to any posted speed limit. Do you have another section of the vehicle code (or case law, as you mention below) that shows otherwise?
I never suggested any such thing. I have maintained that a driver in the left lane on a multi-lane highway must move to the right if driving slower than the normal speed of traffic, whatever that "normal" speed may be. This is what 21654(a) says! I never said that driver should speed up and violate the prima facie speed limit, and I never said that the faster traffic (above the speed limit) is not breaking the law by speeding. I've only said that the fact that the traffic coming up behind you is breaking the law doesn't relieve you of your statutory obligation to get out of the way. If you can show something in the code (or case law) that contradicts this, please share it.
I don't have any problem with being wrong. But, when I put forth what I believe to be a clear, logical argument for something, if somebody is going to tell me it's incorrect, I need to see an equally clear, logical reason for why. So far, I haven't seen it. With all respect due to peace officers (active and retired), any type of statement like "I am/used to be a cop so I know" isn't enough.
EDIT: I realize that my quoting of a CHP spokesman in a previous post violates my "isn't enough" sentence above. That's one reason why I've continued to research this in the California Vehicle Code. I wanted to find out what the law says, instead of just quoting a spokesman's, an agency's, or a court's policy on enforcing that law. Just because a law isn't necessarily enforced doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. For example, I've never been cited for driving 66 MPH in a 65 MPH zone (right next to a peace officer), though I'm clearly exceeding the speed limit and thus breaking the law. Evidently, some courts in California fully expect 21654(a) to be enforced and citations to be issued - I've found several "fee schedules" from various courts that specifically list the fines to be levied for violation of 21654(a) (typically, $104, with the increased penalties for construction zones, etc. ).
Cheers,
-Don
According to the section I quoted, the posted speed limit is the prima facie speed limit. Whether that posted limit is the maximum limit specified in the code, a lower limit put in force by local ordinance, or any other limit, it is still the prima facie speed limit. No, "maximum" and "prima facie" speed limits aren't necessarily related. Sometimes, however, they are the same limit. For example, if the "maximum" speed is 65 MPH, and that speed limit is posted, then it is also the "prima facie" speed limit - since any "posted" speed limit is, according to the CVC, the "prima facie" speed limit. I only referenced that section to clarify that 21654 does, in fact, apply to any posted speed limit. Do you have another section of the vehicle code (or case law, as you mention below) that shows otherwise?
I never suggested any such thing. I have maintained that a driver in the left lane on a multi-lane highway must move to the right if driving slower than the normal speed of traffic, whatever that "normal" speed may be. This is what 21654(a) says! I never said that driver should speed up and violate the prima facie speed limit, and I never said that the faster traffic (above the speed limit) is not breaking the law by speeding. I've only said that the fact that the traffic coming up behind you is breaking the law doesn't relieve you of your statutory obligation to get out of the way. If you can show something in the code (or case law) that contradicts this, please share it.
I don't have any problem with being wrong. But, when I put forth what I believe to be a clear, logical argument for something, if somebody is going to tell me it's incorrect, I need to see an equally clear, logical reason for why. So far, I haven't seen it. With all respect due to peace officers (active and retired), any type of statement like "I am/used to be a cop so I know" isn't enough.
EDIT: I realize that my quoting of a CHP spokesman in a previous post violates my "isn't enough" sentence above. That's one reason why I've continued to research this in the California Vehicle Code. I wanted to find out what the law says, instead of just quoting a spokesman's, an agency's, or a court's policy on enforcing that law. Just because a law isn't necessarily enforced doesn't mean that the law doesn't exist. For example, I've never been cited for driving 66 MPH in a 65 MPH zone (right next to a peace officer), though I'm clearly exceeding the speed limit and thus breaking the law. Evidently, some courts in California fully expect 21654(a) to be enforced and citations to be issued - I've found several "fee schedules" from various courts that specifically list the fines to be levied for violation of 21654(a) (typically, $104, with the increased penalties for construction zones, etc. ).
Cheers,
-Don
Last edited:
other drivers
appreciated all the comments about using the hammer lane as the bumper lane. if those traits bother you i would suggest you avoid the sunshine state at all costs. here in florida we see these q tips just rising above the top of the drivers side seat. they always look forward and never look side to side when making a turn. they will drive miles having a side by side by side drag race at 20mph. when the speed limit is 55 plus. i new what i was in for before moving here. however, it tests my patience greatly. another wonderful experience is the non use of turn signals!!!!! i have also observed people stopping dead in the middle of a 6 lane to look at a map or to point and rubberneck!!! must confess my observations it's about 50/50 between fl. and out of state drivers. makes me rethink my behaviors on the road!!!!!!!!!! bruce
appreciated all the comments about using the hammer lane as the bumper lane. if those traits bother you i would suggest you avoid the sunshine state at all costs. here in florida we see these q tips just rising above the top of the drivers side seat. they always look forward and never look side to side when making a turn. they will drive miles having a side by side by side drag race at 20mph. when the speed limit is 55 plus. i new what i was in for before moving here. however, it tests my patience greatly. another wonderful experience is the non use of turn signals!!!!! i have also observed people stopping dead in the middle of a 6 lane to look at a map or to point and rubberneck!!! must confess my observations it's about 50/50 between fl. and out of state drivers. makes me rethink my behaviors on the road!!!!!!!!!! bruce
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
Turbo Diesel Register
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
