🚀 go-pugleaf

"Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote in message
news:9664el$qhv$1@perki.connect.com.au...
> Gee America, your still arguing basic lane discipline?
>
> In Australia, we have a Federal law which reads to the effect - that in
> speed limit zones 80km/h (50+ mph) and above, and/or where a "keep left
> unless overtaking" sign is posted, drivers MUST keep to the left lane.
>
> That would be "right" lane for the USA!!  This law was adopted into all
> Australian states and territories.
>
> The 'keep left unless overtaking signs" are black print over a white
ground
> with a black rim.  They are a rectangular shape.  Most of our national and
> state freeway and highways have them posted.

Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't make it
right.

> The law stands except where the location is affected by congestion.  As
the
> congestions 'clears' the law is once again enforced.
>
> On our (NSW Australia) three lane freeways (lanes of travel in each
> direction), we must first use the left lane, then the centre lane IF - the
> left lane is busy.  We then move back to the left lane once you have
passed
> that traffic.  The right lane may be used only for overtaking.  One must
> merge back to the middle lane, then to the left lane.
>
> Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just plain
bad
> driving, poor lane discipline.

For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the matter.

> I guess that with your increased speed limits and speeds, that the demands
> for improved lane discipline measures are growing, as well they should.

No, the demand for more lanes is growing.  Only out of touch politicians are
wanting more restrictions.

> You seem to have the speed nowadays but not necessarily the proactive
safety
> measures that should go with the increased speed limits.

Over regulating driving isn't the answer.

> As a foreigner I am pleased your 55mph limit was done away with those few
> years ago, it will help aid the push for improved vehicle, engineering and
> signage standards.

Ok, as someone in Virginia, I can already see that it's a bad idea.  On
I-64, we already have too much traffic for the two lanes that the interstate
bottlenecks into at the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel.  Taking one lane out of
service for normal travel is only going to tie things up even more.  It's
not like we have too many options to get from the peninsula to the south
side anyways, and the other options add about 10 miles onto the drive.

I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and the left
is open.

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

"Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote in message
news:9678ii$kih$1@perki.connect.com.au...

> > > The 'keep left unless overtaking signs" are black print over a white
ground
> > > with a black rim.  They are a rectangular shape.  Most of our national
and
> > > state freeway and highways have them posted.
> >
> > Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't
make it
> > right.
>
> Greetings Sanjian,
> The same law is applied throughout Europe, generally for the 'right' of
> course.  A similiar law operates in New Zeland South Africa etc.  More...

Just because it's employed elsewhere doesn't make it right.

> > > Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just
plain bad
> > > driving, poor lane discipline.
> >
> > For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the matter.
>
> The reasons are many and have bugger all to do with my personal preducices
> sir!  In countries which have high freeway speed limits the correct lane
> discipline helps in the overall traffic flow.  That flow is improved,
> drivers know what is expected of them and most behave accordingly.
>
> Believe me it works.  Please, take a holiday in France, visit Germany,
> Belgium, Luxemborg and see 'it' - in practice.  Better still, come to
> Australia we are more than happy to take your money!

Been to Spain, and I wasn't terribly impressed with the system.  Though I'd
love to go to Australia.  Maybe if my ship ever goes that way (I wish).

> > > I guess that with your increased speed limits and speeds, that the
demands
> > > for improved lane discipline measures are growing, as well they
should.
> >
> > No, the demand for more lanes is growing.  Only out of touch politicians
are
> > wanting more restrictions.
> >
> > > You seem to have the speed nowadays but not necessarily the proactive
safety
> > > measures that should go with the increased speed limits.
> >
> > Over regulating driving isn't the answer.
>
> Mate, I agree it's just this particular law has widespread public support,
> it actually aids driving and reduces nervous tension, road rage - call it
> what you will.

Not widespread public support, just among the politicians, who have lost
touch with the people long ago.  The thing is, I don't see more regulation
in this matter helping, but rather take some of the judgement out of the
hands of the driver.  While some may argue that some drivers haven't shown
the ability to excersise judgement, it is necessary to keep the decision
making process on the road, as opposed to letting Richmond make the
decsions.  (Richmond is the capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia, BTW)

> > > As a foreigner I am pleased your 55mph limit was done away with those
few
> > > years ago, it will help aid the push for improved vehicle, engineering
and
> > > signage standards.
> >
> > Ok, as someone in Virginia, I can already see that it's a bad idea.  On
> > I-64, we already have too much traffic for the two lanes that the
interstate
> > bottlenecks into at the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel.  Taking one lane
out of
> > service for normal travel is only going to tie things up even more.
It's
> > not like we have too many options to get from the peninsula to the south
> > side anyways, and the other options add about 10 miles onto the drive.
> >
> > I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and the
left
> > is open.
>
> Eh???
> The point is the law 'allows' you to then use the left lane, SINCE you
will
> OBVIOUSLY be passing that slower traffic Sanjian.  It is NOT intended to
> force you to 'have' to drive slowly in the right lane, this would be
> counterproductive.

The problem is, when the row of slow cars extends for a few miles with both
lanes open, it's bound to extend farther with only one lane as a driving
lane, and the other as the passing lane.  Even if it doesn't, I'm going to
be passing for a few miles at a time.  I'm not sure this is what's intended.

> The law is intended to stop drivers from blocking all lanes simultaneously
> when traffic lanes are otherwize relatively clear.  It is deemed that the

If traffic is relatively clear, then there is no real need for the law.
I've never had a problem getting to the lane I need to.  It takes a little
skill, but even in heavier traffic, one can get around the one assinine car.

> left lane (US) is the lane drivers should make a practice of getting out
> of - once they have passed other traffic.  If traffic is heavy, you may
keep
> using the left lane, just make a practice of moving to the right if an
> obvious faster vehicle comes up behind you, IF you have the safe space to
do
> so, otherwize the faster driver will have to wait - a little, till you can
> get back into the right lane.

The way it's currently viewed is that the left lane is the fast lane.  If
you're in it, you better not be being passed.

> You argument about the requirement for the additional traffic lanes
Hampton
> Roads Bridge Tunnel really is a separate issue, I agree you need those
> additional lanes, here for the moment the law applies only when the
traffic
> is lite (light) it does not apply and therefore would not be enforced
during
> times of traffic congestion.

Unfortuantly, the two cannot be separated.  As long as we continue not to
have sufficient lanes, restricting access to some will only compound the
problem.

> I suspect there may be a misunderstanding about the "keep right unless
> passing" signage and practice.
>
> Give it a few years (for drivers to learn and adopt) and you will see an
> improvement in traffic discipline with the 'keep right unless passing'
> practice.  I'll guarantee that one and I reckon I'll make a convert out of
> you:-)

Maybe with some improvements to the roads, but as it is now, it will just
tie the Hampton Roads area into a knot.

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

Gee America, your still arguing basic lane discipline?

In Australia, we have a Federal law which reads to the effect - that in
speed limit zones 80km/h (50+ mph) and above, and/or where a "keep left
unless overtaking" sign is posted, drivers MUST keep to the left lane.

That would be "right" lane for the USA!!  This law was adopted into all
Australian states and territories.

The 'keep left unless overtaking signs" are black print over a white ground
with a black rim.  They are a rectangular shape.  Most of our national and
state freeway and highways have them posted.

The law stands except where the location is affected by congestion.  As the
congestions 'clears' the law is once again enforced.

On our (NSW Australia) three lane freeways (lanes of travel in each
direction), we must first use the left lane, then the centre lane IF - the
left lane is busy.  We then move back to the left lane once you have passed
that traffic.  The right lane may be used only for overtaking.  One must
merge back to the middle lane, then to the left lane.

Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just plain bad
driving, poor lane discipline.

I guess that with your increased speed limits and speeds, that the demands
for improved lane discipline measures are growing, as well they should.

You seem to have the speed nowadays but not necessarily the proactive safety
measures that should go with the increased speed limits.

As a foreigner I am pleased your 55mph limit was done away with those few
years ago, it will help aid the push for improved vehicle, engineering and
signage standards.

Jeremy H. Pritchard
MA-OZ
jpkt@wxc.com.au


.

"John Gilmer" <gilmer@crosslink.net> wrote in message
news:3a870bd3$0$25217@dingus.crosslink.net...

> > "That sounds pretty crazy," said William Weaver, as he pumped
> > gas at a station off Interstate 66. Weaver knows from traffic
> > on his daily journey from Capitol Hill to his Tysons Corner
> > car dealership. "Don't they know the passing lane is an available
> > lane for drivers?"
>
> What, more common sense from the Washington P**?   Someone check to see if
> Hell has frozen over.

You by any chance listen to Liddy?

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

"Ken M." <poboxdc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3A868BB7.F3EEE25B@ix.netcom.com...
> Rural Lawmaker Wants to End Life in Virginia's Fastest Lanes
>
> By Lisa Rein
> Washington Post Staff Writer
> Sunday, February 11, 2001; Page C01
>
> RICHMOND -- Rural lawmakers incensed by slowpokes who swoop
> to the left side of a highway and refuse to budge have pushed a
> bill through the Virginia House of Delegates that would resolve
> once and for all who owns the fast lane.
>
> If the bill becomes law, drivers could not merely motor in the
> left lane. They would have to use it for passing only.

Some ass of a "legislator" brings up a version of this even session or so.
It will not pass; it is DOA.

The reason is that it addesses a non-existing problem.   The problem isn't
that the left lane is held up for less than a minute; the problem is that
there are asses that think that just because they want to go faster than the
speed limit everyone else should get the hell out of their way!

I am pleased to see that this time the ass pushing the bill is a democrat.


>
> "People can't get by. They blow their horns. They blink their
> lights. They take chances," said Del. Joseph P. Johnson Jr.
> (D-Washington), the bill's co-sponsor and a self-described
> country lawyer from the town of Abingdon, pop. 7,400, 14 miles
> from the Tennessee line. "It creates what we refer to as driver
> rage."
>

Why doesn't that asshole "country lawyer" push a law increasing the speed
limit?   The rage comes from drivers that are trying to go faster than the
speed limit.   I would enjoy looking at the driving record of this bunkin
lawyer.


> Did he say rage? Try telling commuters in Northern Virginia
> they could soon be denied the right to travel millions of
> precious cubic feet of asphalt on their slow crawl to the office
> and some road rage will follow.

At last some common sense!

>
> "That sounds pretty crazy," said William Weaver, as he pumped
> gas at a station off Interstate 66. Weaver knows from traffic
> on his daily journey from Capitol Hill to his Tysons Corner
> car dealership. "Don't they know the passing lane is an available
> lane for drivers?"

What, more common sense from the Washington P**?   Someone check to see if
Hell has frozen over.

>
> In the Old Dominion, where the 1,118 miles of interstate
> highways connect suburbs, with their daily horror stories of
> traffic congestion, to sleepy regions dotted with dairy farms,
> one man's quest for driver courtesy is another man's lifeline
> to sheer survival.


>
> Rural drivers may say they have nowhere to go behind a dawdler
> hogging the left-hand lane on a four-lane highway.

Huh?   "Rural drivers" lose a lot more time being stuck behind farm
machinery on country roads.   If someone is going the speed limit (or even a
few MPH faster) he just doesn't get held up by a "left land hog" more than a
fraction of a minute!

In article <9664el$qhv$1@perki.connect.com.au>,
  "Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote:
> Gee America, your still arguing basic lane discipline?
>
> In Australia, we have a Federal law which reads to the effect - that
in
> speed limit zones 80km/h (50+ mph) and above, and/or where a "keep
left
> unless overtaking" sign is posted, drivers MUST keep to the left lane.
>
I'm sure that works fine Down-Under, but Americans are so brazenly
oblivious to traffic laws, that instituting such a law here wouldn't do
much good.

--
Cyberbilly

http://www.cyberbilly.net


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

Well we got too many people on the roads.  What we should do is make a
drivers license tougher to get, w/mandatory retesting every 5 years.  Points
should be higher.  The goal of DMVs should be to winnow out drivers, not
give out licenses.  This would force more people to use public transport and
force businesses to stop moving further and further away from the cities.

Cyberbilly wrote:

> In article <9664el$qhv$1@perki.connect.com.au>,
>   "Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote:
> > Gee America, your still arguing basic lane discipline?
> >
> > In Australia, we have a Federal law which reads to the effect - that
> in
> > speed limit zones 80km/h (50+ mph) and above, and/or where a "keep
> left
> > unless overtaking" sign is posted, drivers MUST keep to the left lane.
> >
> I'm sure that works fine Down-Under, but Americans are so brazenly
> oblivious to traffic laws, that instituting such a law here wouldn't do
> much good.
>
> --
> Cyberbilly
>
> http://www.cyberbilly.net
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/

sanjian wrote:

>Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't make it
>right.

It is something that should never have to be legislated.  Combine
courtesy and common sense and you get a situation where if traffic is
light to middling, the left lane is used as a passing lane.  As
traffic densities get heavier and speeds get slower, the lane becomes
just another lane.

To put it into law invokes the law of unintended consequences, as the
original legislators likely never intended it to apply to rush hour or
other stop and go situations.
-- 
Brandon

"You'll never prove a thing, copper.  I'm just a 
 part time electrician.  I..., I..., BAD IS GOOD 
 BABY!  DOWN WITH GOVERNMENT!"
    - The Evil Midnight Bomber That Bombs at Midnight

Remove ".gov" to e-mail

"Brandon Sommerville" <gti@null.net.gov> wrote in message news:kt1e8t8g2vi79nu6n584ij7492hp8rtooa@4ax.com...
>
> To put it into law invokes the law of unintended consequences, as the
> original legislators likely never intended it to apply to rush hour or
> other stop and go situations.

Not to mention left exits and left merges, which I'm suprised haven't
been mentioned yet.  Is 1 mile too soon to get into the left lane to
exit?  1.5 miles?

"Keep to the right" is in fact honored in the only DC-area expressway
where traffic is light enough for it to work: the Dulles Access Road.

--
Michael Malak
malak@claygency.com

"Michael Malak" <malak@claygency.com> wrote:

>"Brandon Sommerville" <gti@null.net.gov> wrote in message news:kt1e8t8g2vi79nu6n584ij7492hp8rtooa@4ax.com...
>>
>> To put it into law invokes the law of unintended consequences, as the
>> original legislators likely never intended it to apply to rush hour or
>> other stop and go situations.
>
>Not to mention left exits and left merges, which I'm suprised haven't
>been mentioned yet.  Is 1 mile too soon to get into the left lane to
>exit?  1.5 miles?

Hopefully the left hand exits and entrance ramps are being phased out.
They aren't what motorists are expecting (even with specific signing)
and tend to cause confusion where present. But yes, where left hand
exits and entrances are present, I can see problems with this "keep to
the right except to pass" law.

As someone else said, it's common sense on uncongested roads to stay
out of the left hand lanes except when passing slower vehicles.

John Lansford, PE

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

"sanjian" <sanjian@widomaker.com> wrote in message
news:t8dq4iinnkugf3@corp.supernews.com...
> "Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote in message
> news:9664el$qhv$1@perki.connect.com.au...
> > Gee America, your still arguing basic lane discipline?
> >
> > In Australia, we have a Federal law which reads to the effect - that in
> > speed limit zones 80km/h (50+ mph) and above, and/or where a "keep left
> > unless overtaking" sign is posted, drivers MUST keep to the left lane.
> >
> > That would be "right" lane for the USA!!  This law was adopted into all
> > Australian states and territories.
> >
> > The 'keep left unless overtaking signs" are black print over a white
> ground
> > with a black rim.  They are a rectangular shape.  Most of our national
and
> > state freeway and highways have them posted.
>
> Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't make
it
> right.


Greetings Sanjian,
The same law is applied throughout Europe, generally for the 'right' of
course.  A similiar law operates in New Zeland South Africa etc.  More...

> >
> > Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just plain
> bad
> > driving, poor lane discipline.
>
> For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the matter.

The reasons are many and have bugger all to do with my personal preducices
sir!  In countries which have high freeway speed limits the correct lane
discipline helps in the overall traffic flow.  That flow is improved,
drivers know what is expected of them and most behave accordingly.

Believe me it works.  Please, take a holiday in France, visit Germany,
Belgium, Luxemborg and see 'it' - in practice.  Better still, come to
Australia we are more than happy to take your money!


> > I guess that with your increased speed limits and speeds, that the
demands
> > for improved lane discipline measures are growing, as well they should.
>
> No, the demand for more lanes is growing.  Only out of touch politicians
are
> wanting more restrictions.
>
> > You seem to have the speed nowadays but not necessarily the proactive
> safety
> > measures that should go with the increased speed limits.
>
> Over regulating driving isn't the answer.

Mate, I agree it's just this particular law has widespread public support,
it actually aids driving and reduces nervous tension, road rage - call it
what you will.


> > As a foreigner I am pleased your 55mph limit was done away with those
few
> > years ago, it will help aid the push for improved vehicle, engineering
and
> > signage standards.
>
> Ok, as someone in Virginia, I can already see that it's a bad idea.  On
> I-64, we already have too much traffic for the two lanes that the
interstate
> bottlenecks into at the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel.  Taking one lane out
of
> service for normal travel is only going to tie things up even more.  It's
> not like we have too many options to get from the peninsula to the south
> side anyways, and the other options add about 10 miles onto the drive.
>
> I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and the
left
> is open.

Eh???
The point is the law 'allows' you to then use the left lane, SINCE you will
OBVIOUSLY be passing that slower traffic Sanjian.  It is NOT intended to
force you to 'have' to drive slowly in the right lane, this would be
counterproductive.

The law is intended to stop drivers from blocking all lanes simultaneously
when traffic lanes are otherwize relatively clear.  It is deemed that the
left lane (US) is the lane drivers should make a practice of getting out
of - once they have passed other traffic.  If traffic is heavy, you may keep
using the left lane, just make a practice of moving to the right if an
obvious faster vehicle comes up behind you, IF you have the safe space to do
so, otherwize the faster driver will have to wait - a little, till you can
get back into the right lane.

You argument about the requirement for the additional traffic lanes Hampton
Roads Bridge Tunnel really is a separate issue, I agree you need those
additional lanes, here for the moment the law applies only when the traffic
is lite (light) it does not apply and therefore would not be enforced during
times of traffic congestion.

I suspect there may be a misunderstanding about the "keep right unless
passing" signage and practice.

Give it a few years (for drivers to learn and adopt) and you will see an
improvement in traffic discipline with the 'keep right unless passing'
practice.  I'll guarantee that one and I reckon I'll make a convert out of
you:-)

 Jeremy H. Pritchard
MA
jpkt@wxc.com.au


> sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
> http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
> President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
> ----------------------------------------------------------

"Ken M." wrote:

> "How is the trooper supposed to figure out how long you were
> in there, 30 seconds? A minute?" asked Hayward Corley, a parks
> worker who commutes to Arlington County from Upper Marlboro.

Ten seconds.  If it takes longer than ten seconds to pass anything up to
a double-trailer semi, it shows that the driver is not paying sufficient
attention to the task at hand, or is too timid about passing and needs
further driver training.

>
> Drivers could always say that they were intending to pass when
> they were pulled over.

And if they were in the lane longer than ten seconds, it'd still be
ticket time!

Heavy trucks might need a little longer, say twenty seconds (no passenger
vehicle is slow enough to warrant that), however they should additionally
simply not be allowed in the far left lane of any highway with more than
two lanes in each direction, period.

> "It's interesting this had to be made into a law," said Lon
> Anderson, director of public and government relations for
> the AAA's mid-Atlantic chapter. "This used to be known as
> driver courtesy. What these people are attempting to legislate
> is good manners on the road."

It shows that inhabitants of the east coast megalopolis, as a group, seem
to have no clue how to make efficient use of the roadway.  Rush-hour not
considered, that is.

This is also a problem in other very large urban areas, tollbooths (such
as those on the Illinois tollway) seem to exacerbate it as well.
Stop-start and a free-for-all in each lane--a bad idea all around,
especially on a road designed to be an expressway.

It _IS_ safer to pass left in left-hand-drive countries, and when faster
traffic is given the right of way in a tiered lane system, traffic flow
_DOES_ become much safer and more efficient.

People in the United States also must be taught that they need to _WAIT_
for faster traffic to pass before initiating their own pass, some
never-corrected competitive instinct seems to make most of them jump out
in front of a faster car from a farther-right lane in order to pass
first, sooner than they needed to and getting in the way, whereas if they
had waited no one would have been slowed down.

Aardwolf.

>> Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just plain
>> bad driving, poor lane discipline.
> 
> For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the matter.

Wrong.  The road is shared property (a commons), and it is wrong and
unacceptable to waste headway that other people are waiting in line to
use, just as it would be wrong to waste any other common resource.

If you do this, I hope the crowd takes it away from you.

Followups reset since the subject, driving behavior, belongs in r.a.d.

> >
> > What, more common sense from the Washington P**?   Someone check to see
if
> > Hell has frozen over.
>
> You by any chance listen to Liddy?

Guilty!

"Aardwolf" <"se1aard"@@itis.com> wrote in message
news:96797v$m3a$1@news.chorus.net...
>
>
> "Ken M." wrote:
>
> > "How is the trooper supposed to figure out how long you were
> > in there, 30 seconds? A minute?" asked Hayward Corley, a parks
> > worker who commutes to Arlington County from Upper Marlboro.
>
> Ten seconds.  If it takes longer than ten seconds to pass anything up to
> a double-trailer semi, it shows that the driver is not paying sufficient
> attention to the task at hand, or is too timid about passing and needs
> further driver training.

Maybe you should go back for some simple mathematics training!

If you pass at 10 MPH faster than the overtaken vehicle you are traveling
8.8 feet per second relative to the slow vehicle.   Tens second means that
relative to the over taken vehicle you only spend 88 feet in the fast lane.

Give you self some time, sport.   If you really pass in only 10 seconds you:
1) effectively tailgate before you start to pass; and 2) effectively cut off
the driver you just pass.

"sanjian"
> > > Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't
> make it
> > > right.
> >
> > Greetings Sanjian,
> > The same law is applied throughout Europe, generally for the 'right' of
> > course.  A similar law operates in New Zealand South Africa etc.
More...
>
> Just because it's employed elsewhere doesn't make it right.

Sure, on the face of it, but this law is proven to work, hence it is adopted
by many countries to aid traffic flow and to improve road safety which
benefits from fewer crashes - because of fewer unnecessary lane changes.

Speed managment and enforcment of course remains the in realm of police.

Lane discipline is vital.  In this environment driver enjoyment of the task
is improved, since one knows what is expected of themselves.

> > > > Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just
> plain bad
> > > > driving, poor lane discipline.
> > >
> > > For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the
matter.
> >
> > The reasons are many and have bugger all to do with my personal
prejudices
> > sir!  In countries which have high freeway speed limits the correct lane
> > discipline helps in the overall traffic flow.  That flow is improved,
> > drivers know what is expected of them and most behave accordingly.
> >
> > Believe me it works.  Please, take a holiday in France, visit Germany,
> > Belgium, Luxemborg and see 'it' - in practice.  Better still, come to
> > Australia we are more than happy to take your money!
>
> Been to Spain, and I wasn't terribly impressed with the system.  Though
I'd
> love to go to Australia.  Maybe if my ship ever goes that way (I wish).

Spain is an EU state however it has a long way to go to catch up with those
other EU partners I mention above in the road safety and road use stakes.

Simplistically, it is improving rapidly though and needs an increased share
of EU transport infrastructure development costs.


> > > Over regulating driving isn't the answer.
> >
> > Mate, I agree it's just this particular law has widespread public
support,
> > it actually aids driving and reduces nervous tension, road rage - call
it
> > what you will.
>
> Not widespread public support, just among the politicians, who have lost
> touch with the people long ago.

This is a 'very' common feeling throughout the western world, happens at a
time of globalization, does this surprise you?  I would guess not.

The public support is there, it is EU law passed by state (country)
parliaments and in may other jurisdictions worldwide.  The law literally
applies to hundreds of millions of drivers worldwide outside the U.S and
with good reason, it has nothing to with some authoritarian control BTW, it
simply makes road sense.


The thing is, I don't see more regulation
> in this matter helping, but rather take some of the judgement out of the
> hands of the driver.

Arguable sure, what about merely posting the "keep right unless passing"
signs as an 'advisory'?  Some countries do this for a few years and if
deemeed necessary later back it up with legislation.  This methology relies
on the goodwill and commonsense of drivers.


While some may argue that some drivers haven't shown
> the ability to excersise judgement, it is necessary to keep the decision
> making process on the road, as opposed to letting Richmond make the
> decisions.

I am very sympathetic of course to this, it is just that on this particular
issue however and by my own world experiences,- are that this particular law
has worked, and is working in those jurisdictions that adopt it.

(Richmond is the capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia, BTW)

I am a foreigner, however I know this sir.  In fact I was taught this when
attending Primary school in a country called Papua New Guinea of all places,
just north of Australia, not far from the Solomon Islands where thousands of
US service personnel lost their lives fighting the Japanese in various
bloody campaigns back in WWII.


> > > I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and
the
> left
> > > is open.
> >
> > Eh???
> > The point is the law 'allows' you to then use the left lane, SINCE you
> will
> > OBVIOUSLY be passing that slower traffic Sanjian.  It is NOT intended to
> > force you to 'have' to drive slowly in the right lane, this would be
> > counterproductive.
>
> The problem is, when the row of slow cars extends for a few miles with
both
> lanes open, it's bound to extend farther with only one lane as a driving
> lane, and the other as the passing lane.

The 'keep right unless passing' laws would only be enforced during light to
moderate traffic conditions, this is what happens everywhere else.  No one
has been fined for keeping left during times of traffic congestion, this
would be lunacy.


Even if it doesn't, I'm going to
> be passing for a few miles at a time.  I'm not sure this is what's
intended.

Sure, you get this sometimes, it is compounded when slower 'right' lane
traffic pulls out to pass adding to the left lane congestion, however given
a 24 hour clock, this scenario is certainly valid but is not the majority
condition.  I appreciate your concern and would not be overly concerned with
it.


> > The law is intended to stop drivers from blocking all lanes
simultaneously
> > when traffic lanes are otherwize relatively clear.  It is deemed that
the
>
> If traffic is relatively clear, then there is no real need for the law.
> I've never had a problem getting to the lane I need to. It takes a little
> skill, but even in heavier traffic, one can get around the one assinine
car.

This would indicate more than necessary lane changes, a slalom in and out of
slower traffic if you will.  The outside world has discovered that
encouraging correct, or improved lane discipline by legislating that those
drivers who have a clear right lane be made to move into it,- reduces the
incidence of crashes, the flow on is improved overall traffic flow as a
result of the reduction of those preventable crashes and because the
comprehension among drivers is as 'one'.

I make a point, that some countries (Australia is one) allows drivers to
pass in marked lanes despite the 'keep right unless passing' signs, if a
faster traffic is 'forced' or coerced into doing this, the driver causing
the 'block' is certainly fined and will lose points.

The blocking offence is considered one of the most annoying and potentially
dangerous activities a motorists can do to others as often reported in
polls, this poll 'response' is why the penalities for not keeping left
(right in the USA) are on the increase downunder.

> > left lane (US) is the lane drivers should make a practice of getting out
> > of - once they have passed other traffic.  If traffic is heavy, you may
> keep
> > using the left lane, just make a practice of moving to the right if an
> > obvious faster vehicle comes up behind you, IF you have the safe space
to
> do
> > so, otherwize the faster driver will have to wait - a little, till you
can
> > get back into the right lane.
>
> The way it's currently viewed is that the left lane is the fast lane.  If
> you're in it, you better not be being passed.

Some call it the 'fast lane', merely a descriptive term.  You see, take this
example, if you were in Germany on a freeway with three lanes of travel in
each direction with little traffic flow, you, regardless of your speed are
required to keep to the rightmost lane, you may then merge to the centre
lane to opass those vehicles in the right lane, once you are clear of them
you signal back again!

The 'keep right unless passing' signs come into particular play as traffic
builds, where you may then use the right (passing) lane to pass that middle
lane traffic, flow is encouraged by keeping a 'through' lane and encouraging
drivers to use it properly.  It takes time for drivers to adapt, they will
do so given time and experience.

My point being that 'fast lane' is perhaps a bit of a misnomer, since one
should keep right regardless of speed, only moving out when the need arises.
This in fact is perhaps a devious form of speed control, you accelerate
between lengths of vehicles as opposed to flying past them at speed in the
adjacent lane.  A clever German speed managment method.

An obvious issue is that with some U.S freeway you have olde style left lane
exits!!  This is engineering criminality to my mind:-)

Here, 'keep right unless passing' signs should perhaps not be posted at this
point until the subject exit - is reconstructed to the right as it always
should be.  This is a lesson in modern roads engineering.

Any future U.S freeway projects with right lane exits must be prevented from
being constructed until plans are upgraded to right lane exits.

> > Your argument about the requirement for the additional traffic lanes
> Hampton
> > Roads Bridge Tunnel really is a separate issue, I agree you need those
> > additional lanes, here for the moment the law applies only when the
> traffic
> > is lite (light) it does not apply and therefore would not be enforced
> during
> > times of traffic congestion.
>
> Unfortuantly, the two cannot be separated.  As long as we continue not to
> have sufficient lanes, restricting access to some will only compound the
> problem.

Does not apply.  The signs or legislation would "not" make it an offence
where or when the lanes are congested. I say again by experience it is not
an issue really.

> > I suspect there may be a misunderstanding about the "keep right unless
> > passing" signage and practice.
> >
> > Give it a few years (for drivers to learn and adopt) and you will see an
> > improvement in traffic discipline with the 'keep right unless passing'
> > practice.  I'll guarantee that one and I reckon I'll make a convert out
of
> > you:-)
>
> Maybe with some improvements to the roads, but as it is now, it will just
> tie the Hampton Roads area into a knot.

The bigger statewide picture, indeed country picture should come into play
for the greater national good, saved dollars.  Might sound like a
centralized grab, I don't mean it to be - since small localities can benefit
from the practice of 'keep right unless passing'.

More $$$ I guess??

Rule #1  Never enough money for anything.

Jeremy H . Pritchard
Motorists Advocate-AUS
jpkt@wxc.com.au

I don't see this being too bad of an idea as long as a couple of changes are
made to make it more "friendly" in heavier traffic areas.

Specifically, there does need to be some sort of expemtion in heavy
traffic...personally I think that's a given. It would be crazy to completely
close off a lane to traffic during the peak of rush hour.

Obviously, it also needs an exemption for traffic that is merging in the
left lane, as well as traffic that has a left lane exit.

I think this is a good idea, because I don't live in a rural area by any
means, but on a very consistent basis, when I'm driving on the area
freeways, I routinely see people get on the expressway, and move all the way
over to the left lane, and do about 5-10 mph less than the prevailing
traffic for that lane. In fact, I'd say that the traffic concentrates itself
over there, the far right lane is almost totally vacant, save the semis
which are required by state law to stay in the far right, or the 2 far right
lanes, depending on how many lanes there are.

At the very least, the Virginia lawmakers could hand down a "decree" or
whatever to instruct the LEO's to start enforcing the laws that forbid
driving slower than the prevailing flow of traffic in a lane, regardless of
how fast people are going. Only in very extreme circumstances have I ever
seen this law enforced, usually because someone's doing less than the limit
in the left lane. Even when someone is ticketed for this its usually a
little old lady, who promptly goes into court and uses what I call the
"little old lady defense"; "How dare he give me a ticket!! I've been driving
for xx years and I'm always safe and I wasn't going over the speed limit, I
should be able to drive wherever I want to if I'm not going over the limit!"
Usually, I've found that this defense gets the ticket dismissed, or the
sentence suspended. Then the little old lady, after leaving the courthouse,
promptly gets back on the road, and plants herself in the left hand lane.

Of course, this problem is going to remain with us as long as people don't
change their attidtude driving, although I could see legislation like this
go a long way in possibly curing and preventing some of these traffic jams
in the first place.

Bart
Ken M. <poboxdc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3A868BB7.F3EEE25B@ix.netcom.com...
> Rural Lawmaker Wants to End Life in Virginia's Fastest Lanes
>
> By Lisa Rein
> Washington Post Staff Writer
> Sunday, February 11, 2001; Page C01
>
> RICHMOND -- Rural lawmakers incensed by slowpokes who swoop
> to the left side of a highway and refuse to budge have pushed a
> bill through the Virginia House of Delegates that would resolve
> once and for all who owns the fast lane.
>
> If the bill becomes law, drivers could not merely motor in the
> left lane. They would have to use it for passing only.
>
> "People can't get by. They blow their horns. They blink their
> lights. They take chances," said Del. Joseph P. Johnson Jr.
> (D-Washington), the bill's co-sponsor and a self-described
> country lawyer from the town of Abingdon, pop. 7,400, 14 miles
> from the Tennessee line. "It creates what we refer to as driver
> rage."
>
> Did he say rage? Try telling commuters in Northern Virginia
> they could soon be denied the right to travel millions of
> precious cubic feet of asphalt on their slow crawl to the office
> and some road rage will follow.
>
> "That sounds pretty crazy," said William Weaver, as he pumped
> gas at a station off Interstate 66. Weaver knows from traffic
> on his daily journey from Capitol Hill to his Tysons Corner
> car dealership. "Don't they know the passing lane is an available
> lane for drivers?"
>
> In the Old Dominion, where the 1,118 miles of interstate
> highways connect suburbs, with their daily horror stories of
> traffic congestion, to sleepy regions dotted with dairy farms,
> one man's quest for driver courtesy is another man's lifeline
> to sheer survival.
>
> Rural drivers may say they have nowhere to go behind a dawdler
> hogging the left-hand lane on a four-lane highway. But drivers
> who use the Capital Beltway, I-95 and other parking lots that
> Northern Virginians call highways during rush hour say that
> being shut out of the lane unless they are passing would leave
> them with nowhere to go -- literally.
>
> "Now you've got everybody in the right two lanes, and you're
> going to create a madhouse," opined Mark Davis, a long-haul
> trucker from Stafford County, at a rest stop off I-95 in Dale
> City. "It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard."
>
> House Bill 1646 will go before a Senate committee this week.
> It would prohibit use of the left lane on limited-access
> highways for anything but passing other vehicles traveling in
> the same direction. Lawbreakers would be cited for a moving
> violation. The bill also would make it illegal for cars to pass
> on the right, a practice now allowed on Virginia roads and highways.
>
> The travel ban would apply not only to the interstates that course
> through Northern Virginia -- I-66, I-95, I-395 and I-495 -- but
> also to the smaller Fairfax County Parkway, Route 28 and Dulles
> Toll Road in Fairfax and the Route 234 Bypass around Manassas.
>
> The bill sailed through the House 63 to 32 last month after winning
> unanimous approval in the Militia and Police Committee. Gov. James S.
> Gilmore III (R) has not taken a position on the measure,
> spokeswoman Lila White said.
>
> Most highway drivers have watched a passing-lane lingerer hold
> up the flow of traffic -- and felt their own temper rise.
> Twenty-one states, from Utah to Rhode Island, have some
> passing-lane restrictions. In Kentucky and Maine, the ban on
> continuous left-lane travel is limited to rural
> roads where the speed limit is 65 miles per hour. Illinois
> allows only cars traveling at or above the speed limit in the
> left lane.
>
> The American Automobile Association, in a poll of Northern
> Virginia motorists last year, found overwhelming support for
> regulations that would ensure that slower drivers keep to the
> right lane. And one rural Maryland lawmaker exasperated with
> left-lane stragglers has tried to push a far less-restrictive
> measure through the General Assembly two years in a row. The
> measure would have required cars to move to the right
> when a faster car came up behind them.
>
> Del. Kevin Kelly (D-Allegany) was 10 miles out of Annapolis on
> his way home one weekend three years ago when he got stuck
> behind a driver clocking 50 mph. "I picked up my cell phone
> and said to the staff, 'Draft me a bill!' " he recalled last
> week. But his bill was torpedoed by suburban and urban
> legislators, and he did not bother to submit it this year.
>
> "The best way to summarize it is, the rural guys viewed this
> legislation as common-sense courtesy. The urban guys viewed it as
> advocating speeding," he said.
>
> Seventeen years ago, the same kind of rage incited a pillorying
> in print of Arlington doctor John O. Nestor, who wrote in a
> letter to the editor of The Post that he liked to set his
> cruise control at 55 mph and drive in the far left lane of
> the Beltway. His idea, which he described as a kind of
> vigilantism of the road, was to slow down speeders.
>
> Washington area drivers exploded in a torrent of Nestor-bashing,
> saying he was interfering with their rights. The doctor's name
> entered the local lexicon as a verb for loitering in the left lane:
> "Nestoring."
>
> That was 1984. Passing isn't even an option on today's suburban
> highways at certain times of day. Take a recent Saturday
> afternoon on I-66 at 4:35 p.m., where weekend traffic from the
> malls at Tysons Corner crawled past the Nutley Street
> intersection. It's the busiest stretch of the
> highway, crossed by 200,000 cars every day. The left lane
> was a sea of brake lights.
>
> Back in Southwest Virginia -- Johnson's home -- 40,000 cars
> a day pass over the junction of I-81 and Route 611, Washington
> County's busiest intersection.
>
> "We have intersections that handle 400,000 cars a day," said
> Del. John A. "Jack" Rollison III (R-Prince William), the
> lone lawmaker to speak against the bill when it came to the
> floor of the House. "All of a sudden, we're going to legislate
> that people have to drive single file. Wait until
> this law becomes effective. Then you'll see real road rage."
>
> While there appears to be no hard-and-fast data to document
> the effect of slow cars traveling in the left lane, traffic
> engineers and state police agree they can create a safety
> hazard. Angry drivers behind them start weaving into the lane
> to the right to pass. And the so-called lane discipline that
> promotes safe travel can become very undisciplined.
>
> But critics say that the law would be close to unenforceable.
>
> "How is the trooper supposed to figure out how long you were
> in there, 30 seconds? A minute?" asked Hayward Corley, a parks
> worker who commutes to Arlington County from Upper Marlboro.
>
> Drivers could always say that they were intending to pass when
> they were pulled over.
>
> Virginia and Maryland have both passed laws making it illegal
> to drive too slowly, especially when a faster car in the
> passing lane honks or flashes his lights. But the laws rarely
> are enforced.
>
> "We encourage motorists to travel at the speed limit" and not
> too far below it, said Lucy Caldwell, spokeswoman for the
> Virginia State Police. But she acknowledged that troopers
> rarely write violations for the little-known violation known
> as impeding traffic.
>
> "It's interesting this had to be made into a law," said Lon
> Anderson, director of public and government relations for
> the AAA's mid-Atlantic chapter. "This used to be known as
> driver courtesy. What these people are attempting to legislate
> is good manners on the road."
>
> ===============================================================
> http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54605-2001Feb10.html
> --
> (ken)
>
>
> Is this photo an optical illusion -- or is it real?
> http://www.zyworld.com/maryland/1-illusiont1.JPG
> ------------------------------------------
>
> To respond to this place (-) between x and d.
>
>
>         Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
>         the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.
> (Version 1.91)

"Joseph Huesmann" <standard@min.net> wrote in message
news:slrn98g8kk.22u.standard@min.net...
> In article <3a87d0e6$0$30859@dingus.crosslink.net>, John Gilmer wrote:
> >
> >
> >> >
> >> > What, more common sense from the Washington P**?   Someone check to
see
> >if
> >> > Hell has frozen over.
> >>
> >> You by any chance listen to Liddy?
> >
> >Guilty!

Figured as much.  Unfortuantly, since I'm not in shift work anymore, I can
only catch the last hour of his program.

> That would be the "Washington Pee?"  Or the "Washington Pen?"  The
> "Washington Pan?"

The Washington Post, also know as {G.G. Liddy voice} "Washington's quaint
alternative newspaper, the Washington -bleep-" {/G.G. Liddy voice}

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

In article <3A86DC5A.5B23B5FA@visuallink.com>,
Kenneth Coney  <superc@visuallink.com> wrote:
>Well we got too many people on the roads.  What we should do is make a
>drivers license tougher to get, w/mandatory retesting every 5 years.  Points
>should be higher.  The goal of DMVs should be to winnow out drivers, not
>give out licenses.  This would force more people to use public transport and
>force businesses to stop moving further and further away from the cities.

If only I could trick politicians I want gone to advocate this...
-- 
Matthew T. Russotto                                russotto@pond.com
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue." 

In article <3a87d0e6$0$30859@dingus.crosslink.net>, John Gilmer wrote:
>
>
>> >
>> > What, more common sense from the Washington P**?   Someone check to see
>if
>> > Hell has frozen over.
>>
>> You by any chance listen to Liddy?
>
>Guilty!

That would be the "Washington Pee?"  Or the "Washington Pen?"  The 
"Washington Pan?"

It's about time.  I can't believe there are states that don't have this
law on the books already.  Only the really poor drivers need to worry 
about it.  

-----------------  
Alex     __O 
       _-\<,_
      (_)/ (_) 
 

sanjian wrote:

> "Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote in message
> news:9664el$qhv$1@perki.connect.com.au...
> > Gee America, your still arguing basic lane discipline?
> >
> > In Australia, we have a Federal law which reads to the effect - that in
> > speed limit zones 80km/h (50+ mph) and above, and/or where a "keep left
> > unless overtaking" sign is posted, drivers MUST keep to the left lane.
> >
> > That would be "right" lane for the USA!!  This law was adopted into all
> > Australian states and territories.
> >
> > The 'keep left unless overtaking signs" are black print over a white
> ground
> > with a black rim.  They are a rectangular shape.  Most of our national and
> > state freeway and highways have them posted.
>
> Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't make it
> right.
>
> > The law stands except where the location is affected by congestion.  As
> the
> > congestions 'clears' the law is once again enforced.
> >
> > On our (NSW Australia) three lane freeways (lanes of travel in each
> > direction), we must first use the left lane, then the centre lane IF - the
> > left lane is busy.  We then move back to the left lane once you have
> passed
> > that traffic.  The right lane may be used only for overtaking.  One must
> > merge back to the middle lane, then to the left lane.
> >
> > Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just plain
> bad
> > driving, poor lane discipline.
>
> For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the matter.
>
> > I guess that with your increased speed limits and speeds, that the demands
> > for improved lane discipline measures are growing, as well they should.
>
> No, the demand for more lanes is growing.  Only out of touch politicians are
> wanting more restrictions.
>
> > You seem to have the speed nowadays but not necessarily the proactive
> safety
> > measures that should go with the increased speed limits.
>
> Over regulating driving isn't the answer.
>
> > As a foreigner I am pleased your 55mph limit was done away with those few
> > years ago, it will help aid the push for improved vehicle, engineering and
> > signage standards.
>
> Ok, as someone in Virginia, I can already see that it's a bad idea.  On
> I-64, we already have too much traffic for the two lanes that the interstate
> bottlenecks into at the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel.  Taking one lane out of
> service for normal travel is only going to tie things up even more.  It's
> not like we have too many options to get from the peninsula to the south
> side anyways, and the other options add about 10 miles onto the drive.
>
> I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and the left
> is open.
>

> THEN USE IT TO PASS!!!!!!!!!!!!

My God!  WHERE are these people coming from?????!!!!!!!  This isn't rocket
science folks!! It is a *passing* lane!!!!  How hard is that to grasp?????!!!!

Sorry for screaming, but I can't believe that some many people can get into
their thick heads that the lane is for PASSING!!!  If you are passing, USE IT!!
If not, move right!!  They aren't taking a lane away from anyone...

Now they have to have legislation to spell out for people what 5 simple words
mean "Keep right except to pass".

Shheesh, do we need Disney characters and crayons on the signs for you people to
figure this out!?!?!?!?

<blood pressure is up>





>
> --
>
> sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
> http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
> President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Smile -- Ruka
> Rythem -- Corvette
> Dignaty -- Extra
> Guts --  Layla
> Tomadachi -- Parapu
> Kokoro -- Shion
> Believe in yourself -- Yuri

--
John Henry
---------------
Visit the "BugShop" at http://www.geocities.com/thebugshop/

"Stupidity really should be more painful."

John Gilmer wrote:

> "Aardwolf" <"se1aard"@@itis.com> wrote in message
> news:96797v$m3a$1@news.chorus.net...
> >
> >
> > "Ken M." wrote:
> >
> > > "How is the trooper supposed to figure out how long you were
> > > in there, 30 seconds? A minute?" asked Hayward Corley, a parks
> > > worker who commutes to Arlington County from Upper Marlboro.
> >
> > Ten seconds.  If it takes longer than ten seconds to pass anything up to
> > a double-trailer semi, it shows that the driver is not paying sufficient
> > attention to the task at hand, or is too timid about passing and needs
> > further driver training.
>
> Maybe you should go back for some simple mathematics training!
>
> If you pass at 10 MPH faster than the overtaken vehicle you are traveling
> 8.8 feet per second relative to the slow vehicle.   Tens second means that
> relative to the over taken vehicle you only spend 88 feet in the fast lane.

Yo John.  Check the batteries in the old calculator there buddy.

10mph = 14.7 fps

Ten seconds = 147 feet.

Trailers in this country are limited in most metro/urban regions to 55ft.  Plus
tractor, something like 75 feet.  No explain to me why you need more than 147
feet to pass a truck?


>
>
> Give you self some time, sport.   If you really pass in only 10 seconds you:
> 1) effectively tailgate before you start to pass; and 2) effectively cut off
> the driver you just pass.

<sigh>
<head on table, sobbing, pounding fist>



--
John Henry
---------------
Visit the "BugShop" at http://www.geocities.com/thebugshop/

"Stupidity really should be more painful."

John Henry <johnshenry@sprintmail.com> wrote:

>My God!  WHERE are these people coming from?????!!!!!!!  This isn't rocket
>science folks!! It is a *passing* lane!!!!  How hard is that to grasp?????!!!!

Well, the left hand lane isn't specifically there for passing
purposes. That is what it is used for, but it is actually there to
carry either existing or expected traffic volumes. That you should use
it only for passing purposes when traffic levels are relatively low is
a bonus.

John Lansford, PE

The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

"Motorists Advocate J.H.P" <jpkt@wxc.com.au> wrote in message
news:967q8i$6sl$1@perki.connect.com.au...
>
> "sanjian"
> > > > Ok, just because you have a stupid law all over your country doesn't
make it
> > > > right.
> > >
> > > Greetings Sanjian,
> > > The same law is applied throughout Europe, generally for the 'right'
of
> > > course.  A similar law operates in New Zealand South Africa etc.
> More...
> >
> > Just because it's employed elsewhere doesn't make it right.
>
> Sure, on the face of it, but this law is proven to work, hence it is
adopted
> by many countries to aid traffic flow and to improve road safety which
> benefits from fewer crashes - because of fewer unnecessary lane changes.
>
> Speed managment and enforcment of course remains the in realm of police.
>
> Lane discipline is vital.  In this environment driver enjoyment of the
task
> is improved, since one knows what is expected of themselves.

I wouln't say vital.  We seem to get along quite well over here without it.
I think few, if any major pile ups are as a result of poor "lane
discipline".  Other larger factors, such as drunken driver, or inept drivers
are more of a problem.

> > > > > Sitting in the middle lane/s of an otherwise empty freeway is just
plain bad
> > > > > driving, poor lane discipline.
> > > >
> > > > For no particular reason, other than your own prejudices in the
matter.
> > >
> > > The reasons are many and have bugger all to do with my personal
prejudices
> > > sir!  In countries which have high freeway speed limits the correct
lane
> > > discipline helps in the overall traffic flow.  That flow is improved,
> > > drivers know what is expected of them and most behave accordingly.
> > >
> > > Believe me it works.  Please, take a holiday in France, visit Germany,
> > > Belgium, Luxemborg and see 'it' - in practice.  Better still, come to
> > > Australia we are more than happy to take your money!
> >
> > Been to Spain, and I wasn't terribly impressed with the system.  Though
I'd
> > love to go to Australia.  Maybe if my ship ever goes that way (I wish).
>
> Spain is an EU state however it has a long way to go to catch up with
those
> other EU partners I mention above in the road safety and road use stakes.
>
> Simplistically, it is improving rapidly though and needs an increased
share
> of EU transport infrastructure development costs.
>
>
> > > > Over regulating driving isn't the answer.
> > >
> > > Mate, I agree it's just this particular law has widespread public
support,
> > > it actually aids driving and reduces nervous tension, road rage - call
it
> > > what you will.
> >
> > Not widespread public support, just among the politicians, who have lost
> > touch with the people long ago.
>
> This is a 'very' common feeling throughout the western world, happens at a
> time of globalization, does this surprise you?  I would guess not.

Globalization is part of the problem.  The average American (especially in
the south) is about as eager to be Europeanized as the average European is
to be Americanized.  Don't try to tell me France and Greece are rushing
forward to embrace America (in Greece, many pubs have signs on the door
stating that Americans are not served).

> The public support is there, it is EU law passed by state (country)

Two points:

1)  The public support may be there in Europe, but not here in Virginia.
2)  EU law has no jurisdiction here.

> parliaments and in may other jurisdictions worldwide.  The law literally
> applies to hundreds of millions of drivers worldwide outside the U.S and
> with good reason, it has nothing to with some authoritarian control BTW,
it
> simply makes road sense.

I fail to see the advantages.

> The thing is, I don't see more regulation
> > in this matter helping, but rather take some of the judgement out of the
> > hands of the driver.
>
> Arguable sure, what about merely posting the "keep right unless passing"
> signs as an 'advisory'?  Some countries do this for a few years and if
> deemeed necessary later back it up with legislation.  This methology
relies
> on the goodwill and commonsense of drivers.

The question is, should it have the force of law?  If some drivers aren't
maintianing good "lane discipline", is that a severe problem, requiring
legislation?

> While some may argue that some drivers haven't shown
> > the ability to excersise judgement, it is necessary to keep the decision
> > making process on the road, as opposed to letting Richmond make the
> > decisions.
>
> I am very sympathetic of course to this, it is just that on this
particular
> issue however and by my own world experiences,- are that this particular
law
> has worked, and is working in those jurisdictions that adopt it.

It's hard to judge whether or not it works.  I could say that the
requirement to wear seat belts has worked to prevent accidents, since there
are fewer than ten majore pile ups in Hampton Roads per day, but that really
doesn't say anything.

> (Richmond is the capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia, BTW)
>
> I am a foreigner, however I know this sir.  In fact I was taught this when
> attending Primary school in a country called Papua New Guinea of all
places,
> just north of Australia, not far from the Solomon Islands where thousands
of
> US service personnel lost their lives fighting the Japanese in various
> bloody campaigns back in WWII.

^^;;;;  Why would they teach the capitals of the states?  I mean, I can see
the capital of the U.S., but each state?  Unless you're actually in an
American school, it seems a bit odd.

> > > > I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and
the
> > left is open.
> > >
> > > Eh???
> > > The point is the law 'allows' you to then use the left lane, SINCE you
will
> > > OBVIOUSLY be passing that slower traffic Sanjian.  It is NOT intended
to
> > > force you to 'have' to drive slowly in the right lane, this would be
> > > counterproductive.
> >
> > The problem is, when the row of slow cars extends for a few miles with
both
> > lanes open, it's bound to extend farther with only one lane as a driving
> > lane, and the other as the passing lane.
>
> The 'keep right unless passing' laws would only be enforced during light
to
> moderate traffic conditions, this is what happens everywhere else.  No one
> has been fined for keeping left during times of traffic congestion, this
> would be lunacy.

I see no provision for that in the bill as drafted.

> Even if it doesn't, I'm going to
> > be passing for a few miles at a time.  I'm not sure this is what's
> intended.
>
> Sure, you get this sometimes, it is compounded when slower 'right' lane
> traffic pulls out to pass adding to the left lane congestion, however
given
> a 24 hour clock, this scenario is certainly valid but is not the majority
> condition.  I appreciate your concern and would not be overly concerned
with
> it.

Not the majority condition, but it is the situation when it counts the most.

> > > The law is intended to stop drivers from blocking all lanes
> simultaneously
> > > when traffic lanes are otherwize relatively clear.  It is deemed that
> the
> >
> > If traffic is relatively clear, then there is no real need for the law.
> > I've never had a problem getting to the lane I need to. It takes a
little
> > skill, but even in heavier traffic, one can get around the one assinine
> car.
>
> This would indicate more than necessary lane changes, a slalom in and out
of
> slower traffic if you will.  The outside world has discovered that
> encouraging correct, or improved lane discipline by legislating that those
> drivers who have a clear right lane be made to move into it,- reduces the
> incidence of crashes, the flow on is improved overall traffic flow as a
> result of the reduction of those preventable crashes and because the
> comprehension among drivers is as 'one'.

I don't really have to slalom in traffic, and I routinely go ten to fifteen
miles above (since VA still has a speed limit of 55 mph).

> I make a point, that some countries (Australia is one) allows drivers to
> pass in marked lanes despite the 'keep right unless passing' signs, if a
> faster traffic is 'forced' or coerced into doing this, the driver causing
> the 'block' is certainly fined and will lose points.
>
> The blocking offence is considered one of the most annoying and
potentially
> dangerous activities a motorists can do to others as often reported in
> polls, this poll 'response' is why the penalities for not keeping left
> (right in the USA) are on the increase downunder.

That is a separate issue that needs to be taken care of.  It makes no sense
to correct it with a law to restrict lanes.  That doesn't address the source
of the problem.

> > > left lane (US) is the lane drivers should make a practice of getting
out
> > > of - once they have passed other traffic.  If traffic is heavy, you
may keep
> > > using the left lane, just make a practice of moving to the right if an
> > > obvious faster vehicle comes up behind you, IF you have the safe space
to do
> > > so, otherwize the faster driver will have to wait - a little, till you
can
> > > get back into the right lane.
> >
> > The way it's currently viewed is that the left lane is the fast lane.
If
> > you're in it, you better not be being passed.
>
> Some call it the 'fast lane', merely a descriptive term.  You see, take
this
> example, if you were in Germany on a freeway with three lanes of travel in
> each direction with little traffic flow, you, regardless of your speed are
> required to keep to the rightmost lane, you may then merge to the centre
> lane to opass those vehicles in the right lane, once you are clear of them
> you signal back again!

The way the German freeways work does not change the fact that the left lane
is viewed as the fast lane in the U.S.

> The 'keep right unless passing' signs come into particular play as traffic
> builds, where you may then use the right (passing) lane to pass that
middle
> lane traffic, flow is encouraged by keeping a 'through' lane and
encouraging
> drivers to use it properly.  It takes time for drivers to adapt, they will
> do so given time and experience.

Of course, people will adapt to anything, the beasts.

> My point being that 'fast lane' is perhaps a bit of a misnomer, since one
> should keep right regardless of speed, only moving out when the need
arises.

You say should, but it has yet to be proven.  You're looking at this from
the European perspective.  In the U.S., many places don't suscribe to that
view.

> This in fact is perhaps a devious form of speed control, you accelerate
> between lengths of vehicles as opposed to flying past them at speed in the
> adjacent lane.  A clever German speed managment method.

If you think it's better to accelerate between vehicles, as opposed to
maintaining a higher steady speed.  I don't.

> An obvious issue is that with some U.S freeway you have olde style left
lane
> exits!!  This is engineering criminality to my mind:-)
>
> Here, 'keep right unless passing' signs should perhaps not be posted at
this
> point until the subject exit - is reconstructed to the right as it always
> should be.  This is a lesson in modern roads engineering.

Some areas can't accomadate that change.

> Any future U.S freeway projects with right lane exits must be prevented
from
> being constructed until plans are upgraded to right lane exits.

Did that come out right?

> > > Your argument about the requirement for the additional traffic lanes
> > Hampton
> > > Roads Bridge Tunnel really is a separate issue, I agree you need those
> > > additional lanes, here for the moment the law applies only when the
> > traffic
> > > is lite (light) it does not apply and therefore would not be enforced
> > during
> > > times of traffic congestion.
> >
> > Unfortuantly, the two cannot be separated.  As long as we continue not
to
> > have sufficient lanes, restricting access to some will only compound the
> > problem.
>
> Does not apply.  The signs or legislation would "not" make it an offence
> where or when the lanes are congested. I say again by experience it is not
> an issue really.

No, your legislation doesn't.

> > > I suspect there may be a misunderstanding about the "keep right unless
> > > passing" signage and practice.
> > >
> > > Give it a few years (for drivers to learn and adopt) and you will see
an
> > > improvement in traffic discipline with the 'keep right unless passing'
> > > practice.  I'll guarantee that one and I reckon I'll make a convert
out of
> > > you:-)
> >
> > Maybe with some improvements to the roads, but as it is now, it will
just
> > tie the Hampton Roads area into a knot.
>
> The bigger statewide picture, indeed country picture should come into play
> for the greater national good, saved dollars.  Might sound like a
> centralized grab, I don't mean it to be - since small localities can
benefit
> from the practice of 'keep right unless passing'.

Again, I see the benefits as dubious.  Anyways, the greater good be damned.
There's a reason we leave decisions up to the most local government we can.
They're the ones who can best judge whether or not the law is appropriate to
their area.

There's also the lingering American sentiment against new laws (at least, in
the older generation, the younger crowd is just as willing to sell their
freedom as the Europeans).  If we're going to put restrictions on people,
then there better be a danged good reason.  I don't see the benefits of your
"lane discipline" as being all that great.

Instead of herding competent drivers like single file sheep, we need to take
care of people like the one driver I was behind, who couldn't decide on a
lane, so he just took both.  *That's* the type of lane discipline we need.

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

"Matthew Russotto" <russotto@wanda.pond.com> wrote in message
news:Nmci6.18230$JN5.162203@e420r-sjo3.usenetserver.com...
> In article <t8h45omq6pojb4@corp.supernews.com>,
> sanjian <spamfilter@readthesig.com> wrote:
> >
> >The Washington Post, also know as {G.G. Liddy voice} "Washington's quaint
> >alternative newspaper, the Washington -bleep-" {/G.G. Liddy voice}
>
> Is he still talking about the jamming rays emanating from the roof of
> their building?

No, that's a joke that's outlived it's time.  Can't keep them around
forever, otherwise they go stale.

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

"John Henry" <johnshenry@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A8837EF.7025776D@sprintmail.com...

> > Ok, as someone in Virginia, I can already see that it's a bad idea.  On
> > I-64, we already have too much traffic for the two lanes that the
interstate
> > bottlenecks into at the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel.  Taking one lane
out of
> > service for normal travel is only going to tie things up even more.
It's
> > not like we have too many options to get from the peninsula to the south
> > side anyways, and the other options add about 10 miles onto the drive.
> >
> > I'd be right pissed if I'm crawling at 30mph on the right lane, and the
left
> > is open.
> >
>
> > THEN USE IT TO PASS!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> My God!  WHERE are these people coming from?????!!!!!!!  This isn't rocket
> science folks!! It is a *passing* lane!!!!  How hard is that to
grasp?????!!!!
>
> Sorry for screaming, but I can't believe that some many people can get
into
> their thick heads that the lane is for PASSING!!!  If you are passing, USE
IT!!
> If not, move right!!  They aren't taking a lane away from anyone...
>
> Now they have to have legislation to spell out for people what 5 simple
words
> mean "Keep right except to pass".
>
> Shheesh, do we need Disney characters and crayons on the signs for you
people to
> figure this out!?!?!?!?
>
> <blood pressure is up>

Well, once you've fished your head out of your ass, maybe you can go and
actually read what I posted, and my points.  I've found my blood pressure
doesn't rise as much when I read things I disagree with in an objective
point of view.  I'm sure you'll disagree with me when you're done (as our
viewpoints obviously differ), but you can at least do so after actually
having read what I posted instead of looking for an excuse to whine.

--

sanjian@wido(you know the drill)maker.com
http://www.widomaker.com/~sanjain
President P.A.C.  Order of the Mallet
----------------------------------------------------------

Smile -- Ruka
Rythem -- Corvette
Dignaty -- Extra
Guts --  Layla
Tomadachi -- Parapu
Kokoro -- Shion
Believe in yourself -- Yuri

In article <t8h45omq6pojb4@corp.supernews.com>,
sanjian <spamfilter@readthesig.com> wrote:
>
>The Washington Post, also know as {G.G. Liddy voice} "Washington's quaint
>alternative newspaper, the Washington -bleep-" {/G.G. Liddy voice}

Is he still talking about the jamming rays emanating from the roof of
their building?
-- 
Matthew T. Russotto                                russotto@pond.com
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue." 

"Matthew Russotto" <russotto@wanda.pond.com> wrote in message
news:Nmci6.18230$JN5.162203@e420r-sjo3.usenetserver.com...
> In article <t8h45omq6pojb4@corp.supernews.com>,
> sanjian <spamfilter@readthesig.com> wrote:
> >
> >The Washington Post, also know as {G.G. Liddy voice} "Washington's quaint
> >alternative newspaper, the Washington -bleep-" {/G.G. Liddy voice}
>
> Is he still talking about the jamming rays emanating from the roof of
> their building?

Not lately!

Between (or is that "among") the election and new administration and his
recent trial he doesn't need much in the way of gimmicks.