In the past few weeks it seems speed on Broadway Extension is out of control. I was cruising along at 70mph but many drivers were exceeding 80 mph. Wild, wild west.

The posted 60MPH is incredibly too slow for that highway, but more times than not there are police there enforcing.

They must have thought they were on Lake Hefner Raceway

The posted 60MPH is incredibly too slow for that highway, but more times than not there are police there enforcing.

Exactly this. 60mph is a joke for this interstate, but the highway patrol makes tons of money off speeders.

The posted 60MPH is incredibly too slow for that highway, but more times than not there are police there enforcing.

You can almost count on an unmarked cop or motorcycle cop to be sitting in the inside shoulder near Britton.
That is one stretch of highway I never exceed limit on. Not heavy traffic except rush hour so they get people really easily

In the past few weeks it seems speed on Broadway Extension is out of control. I was cruising along at 70mph but many drivers were exceeding 80 mph. Wild, wild west.
I have noticed the same thing! I even mentioned it to my husband. I make that drive five days a week from 1-44 and in the past week people have decided that 80+ is the speed limit. I was doing 70ish in the middle lane and people were tailgating and passing me like crazy. What has changed?

I have noticed the same thing! I even mentioned it to my husband. I make that drive five days a week from 1-44 and in the past week people have decided that 80+ is the speed limit. I was doing 70ish in the middle lane and people were tailgating and passing me like crazy. What has changed?

I think with newer cars the faster speeds just don't seem that fast. And people always in a hurry. Why you see so many people blowing through yellow switching to red lights.

Why you see so many people blowing through yellow switching to red lights.

People run yellow/red lights in this city all the time because the number of lights along any given route from point A to point B is of the upmost ridiculousness. I've thought for many years the traffic planning, or lack thereof, in this entire metro is extremely conducive to road rage with an insane amount of traffic signals, slow speed limits, lack of right turn lanes, people not passing and just riding in the lanes in tandem holding up traffic behind them, etc.

Try I-35 south to Dallas.... I'm usually doing about 80 in the right lane and have people blow by me like I'm standing still.

What has changed?

Attitude mostly.

People run yellow/red lights in this city all the time because the number of lights along any given route from point A to point B is of the upmost ridiculousness. I've thought for many years the traffic planning, or lack thereof, in this entire metro is extremely conducive to road rage with an insane amount of traffic signals, slow speed limits, lack of right turn lanes, people not passing and just riding in the lanes in tandem holding up traffic behind them, etc.

I would be all for converting a large amount of intersections in the metro to roundabouts. Other than that I'm not sure how you could reduce the amount of traffic signals. 4 way stops maybe?

Attitude mostly.

There is a lot of study going on about what changed post Covid. One thing is speeding. I read a few studies on the average speed on the highway has gone up 10 MPH with about a 7 percent increase in car crashes. Everyone has noticed changes on the road. It is scary driving out there!

I would be all for converting a large amount of intersections in the metro to roundabouts. Other than that I'm not sure how you could reduce the amount of traffic signals. 4 way stops maybe?

With proper planning, you wouldn't necessarily have to reduce the number of traffic signals, but you could still make it seem like there are fewer.

When planned out well, traffic signals improve the flow of traffic. By communicating between signals, each major intersection should be able to predict the traffic level and adjust timings accordingly. It too often seems, however, that many of the signals here are set on pure timers once triggered (i.e., if a car (or cars) approaches intersection in Lane A, give Lane A a green light for 10 seconds starting in 5 seconds) instead of looking at the flow of traffic at nearby signals and finding a timeslot in which to switch signals while minimizing impact on traffic.

There was a time back in the 70s if you grove the speed limit (35) on Classen from the Classen Circle south to past 10th street you would make every green light except 1. I forget which one it was but I drove that and did it many times. We used to do it on purpose just to do it.

In the past few weeks it seems speed on Broadway Extension is out of control. I was cruising along at 70mph but many drivers were exceeding 80 mph. Wild, wild west.

As long as you stay out of the left lane, we won't have a problem.

I’m typically left in the dust when doing 75 or 80 on the Kilpatrick at peak times.

I’m typically left in the dust when doing 75 or 80 on the Kilpatrick at peak times.

That’s how I feel on hefner parkway. You can be going 10-15 over and there will be some guy in a big raised pickup flashing lights at you behind you to get out of their way

That’s how I feel on hefner parkway. You can be going 10-15 over and there will be some guy in a big raised pickup flashing lights at you behind you to get out of their way

If you're in the passing lane and not actively passing someone, you're not in the right in this situation.

If you're in the passing lane and not actively passing someone, you're not in the right in this situation.
Does not give rights to the speeders who try to intimidate others and insist they drive dangerously and against the law. It does not legalize tailgating at high speeds. The law isn’t designed to create a free runway for those that ignore traffic laws and common sense safety.

5. Upon a roadway which is divided into four or more lanes, a vehicle shall not impede the normal flow of traffic by driving in the left lane; provided, however, this paragraph shall not prohibit driving in a lane other than the right-hand lane when traffic conditions or flow, or both, or road configuration, such as the potential of merging traffic, require the use of lanes other than the right-hand lane to maintain safe traffic conditions.

Note that the law says nothing about the speeds of the vehicles involved. If someone comes up behind you doing 10,000 mph, you are legally obliged to move out of the way under this statute or you can get a ticket for impeding the speeder!

I mean... I am up for turning all inside lanes on interstates/highways with 3+ lanes into autobahn style lanes. For me, I commute between Yukon and Del City, having a no speed limit lane on the inside would be great and I wouldn't get caught up in all of the local traffic along I-40.

But if you want to make roads safer than build out fast and efficient mass transit and I will take the train. I say this as tongue in cheek as I know I will never see anything similar to the old Interurban lines we once had, which after reading up on some the history, I believe that system would be greatly appreciated if it were still operational today.

Note that the law says nothing about the speeds of the vehicles involved. If someone comes up behind you doing 10,000 mph, you are legally obliged to move out of the way under this statute or you can get a ticket for impeding the speeder!

Read - impede NORMAL flow of traffic.

Read - impede NORMAL flow of traffic.
It's not about right or wrong. Just get out of the way and you won't have any problems. It's really not that difficult, and unless you're in a police vehicle you are not a legal traffic enforcer. You're only bringing on possible road rage upon yourself and your family in your vehicle. There are some super crazy people out there that will screw with you especially on the roads. The left lane is for passing, it's law. Personally I find myself riding that left lane but as I see someone coming up I'll gladly move over, especially on rural interstates because generally that left lane can be smoother. And I do so well in advance before someone needs to start flashing their lights and what not. If someone wants to blow by me at 95 then so be it. I really don't care, heck they may be trying to get to the hospital or some other emergency. But nonetheless, I'm not an enforcer and I'm not going to risk trouble to me and my family. It's just the thing to do anyway.

It's not about right or wrong. Just get out of the way and you won't have any problems. It's really not that difficult, and unless you're in a police vehicle you are not a legal traffic enforcer. You're only bringing on possible road rage upon yourself and your family in your vehicle. There are some super crazy people out there that will screw with you especially on the roads. The left lane is for passing, it's law. Personally I find myself riding that left lane but as I see someone coming up I'll gladly move over, especially on rural interstates because generally that left lane can be smoother. And I do so well in advance before someone needs to start flashing their lights and what not. If someone wants to blow by me at 95 then so be it. I really don't care, heck they may be trying to get to the hospital or some other emergency. But nonetheless, I'm not an enforcer and I'm not going to risk trouble to me and my family. It's just the thing to do anyway.

Yep it’s not worth it. A friend of mine was killed last summer in a road rage accident. He was shot dead while driving his car home from work. I drive fast, but if someone wants to go faster I get over, too many whackos out there.

If you're in the passing lane and not actively passing someone, you're not in the right in this situation.

Correct, and while i do not disagree with the intent of what everyone is saying about what's legal, it's also not your job to sit in the left land to dictate what others should be doing. That causes an issue as well, that you have control over. If someone wants by, get out of the way. Let the officers handle if they get a ticket for their behavior or not. Drives me bonkers when, like many of you, i'm going 70-75 and someone rides my butt because they want to go 85. But it's not my job to get them all riled up and road ragey by not moving either.

And the signs say, do not impede left lane. There's no "normal" on them. Flow of traffic is considered by officers should they so choose. But if you're sitting there holding up a line of 5 cars, well your "being right" may earn YOU the ticket for creating the issue. So there's no high-horse there.

I set my cruise at 5-10 over on the interstate. I gladly move over to accomadate drivers wanting to go faster. I find them to be chum for the radar cops.

Because I'm old, I remember when the "new" section of Broadway Extension around Britton Road opened up. Maybe 1990ish? The Oklahoman had moved to their new office building on the east side of the Extension and E. L. Gaylord was still living. Seems like it was 4 lanes each direction for about 5 miles and people were having a great time racing up and down the road. Mr. Gaylord (or his minons) were so bothered by all the speeders that they ran front page stories every couple days about how out of control the scofflaws were and the risk to safety and society! I recall it wasn't a month before the road was narrowed to 3 lanes and we had a 30 foot shoulder on the left.

I stay out of the left lane most of the time. The only problem I do have is in fairly heavy traffic when I'm going 10 to 15 over and am in the left lane because I am passing other vehicles every few seconds. Then someone comes up behind me going 10 faster than I am. I have to find an opening in the lane to my right, move into it and slow down. Then move back and speed back up. That's inconveniencing me. Why does the fastest driver get to inconvenience me so they won't be inconvenienced? Also, in this scenario there's always a line of cars in the left lane going the speed I am. The faster guy isn't going to get past all of them.

As long as you stay out of the left lane, we won't have a problem.

I know the rules!

I stay out of the left lane most of the time. The only problem I do have is in fairly heavy traffic when I'm going 10 to 15 over and am in the left lane because I am passing other vehicles every few seconds. Then someone comes up behind me going 10 faster than I am. I have to find an opening in the lane to my right, move into it and slow down. Then move back and speed back up. That's inconveniencing me. Why does the fastest driver get to inconvenience me so they won't be inconvenienced? Also, in this scenario there's always a line of cars in the left lane going the speed I am. The faster guy isn't going to get past all of them.

It's mostly about safety. Passing on the right is more dangerous than passing on the left, so forcing faster cars to pass on the right is making the road less safe for everyone.

So, it's about relative speed, not speed limits. For example, in your scenario, you decided it's okay for you to speed by 10-15 mph, but not for someone to speed more than you. I'm not sure how one could write a statute guided by safety to consider that.

People exceed the limits for all kinds of reasons. Unfortunately, we can not poll them individually in real time as to their reasons, so it's best just to follow safety protocols, and the law, to allow them to pass on the left.

Read - impede NORMAL flow of traffic.

Yes, and "normal" has no definition in the law. Meaning the cop can construe it however they want to.

I could get a bug up my butt saying "well this guy is driving faster than the normal flow of traffic, and if a cop gives me a ticket, I'll take it to court and argue that the guy behind me wasn't part of the normal flow of traffic, and if the court rules against me I'll appeal, and..."

Or I could change lanes.

I know which one takes less time and effort.

Does not give rights to the speeders who try to intimidate others and insist they drive dangerously and against the law. It does not legalize tailgating at high speeds. The law isn’t designed to create a free runway for those that ignore traffic laws and common sense safety.

If someone wants around you and you are not actively passing someone else, why sit there and impede them? You are going to teach them a lesson? The law isn't designed to deputize random motorists to determine what a safe or unsafe speed on the interstate is.

It's mostly about safety. Passing on the right is more dangerous than passing on the left, so forcing faster cars to pass on the right is making the road less safe for everyone.

So, it's about relative speed, not speed limits. For example, in your scenario, you decided it's okay for you to speed by 10-15 mph, but not for someone to speed more than you. I'm not sure how one could write a statute guided by safety to consider that.

People exceed the limits for all kinds of reasons. Unfortunately, we can not poll them individually in real time as to their reasons, so it's best just to follow safety protocols, and the law, to allow them to pass on the left.I didn't intend to say or imply that in the scenario I was more okay than the faster driver. And I only used the speed limit as a point of reference.

In the past few weeks it seems speed on Broadway Extension is out of control. I was cruising along at 70mph but many drivers were exceeding 80 mph. Wild, wild west.
17841

If someone wants around you and you are not actively passing someone else, why sit there and impede them? You are going to teach them a lesson? The law isn't designed to deputize random motorists to determine what a safe or unsafe speed on the interstate is.

Nor is the law designed to approve a non regulated speeding lane that ignores speed limits and vIolation of safety regulations. It does not prioritize willful violators of the law, no matter how righteous they may believe they are.

It does not prioritize willful violators of the law, no matter how righteous they may believe they are.

This is correct. The law does not statutorily prioritize speeding, tailgating, or impediment.

The irony is that when someone impedes traffic in the left lane out of a sense of righteousness, they're slowing would be speeders down and are now the only one committing a violation.

The only truly righteous driver would be the one going the speed limit while allowing traffic to pass on the left, but those don't exist. lol

My comment ended up as the last one on the previous page, so it's not really seen now, but i think it still stands here.

1 - its not your job to decide if they are allowed to go faster than you.
2- the signs don't say "normal", they say move. Don't create an issue because you don't "like it". Move over, or deal with the road rage that comes from it.

I'm not on any high horse here, but we have just enough room in our traffic on a road like this, for people to get fast and angry, quickly. I44 in the afternoon, well there's no room to get pissy when everyone is going 40mph bumper to bumper and then stop-and-go. Something about the freedom to go fast, seems to entitle people to want to tell others how to drive. Leave that to the officers and keep yourself safe.

I stay out of the left lane most of the time. The only problem I do have is in fairly heavy traffic when I'm going 10 to 15 over and am in the left lane because I am passing other vehicles every few seconds. Then someone comes up behind me going 10 faster than I am. I have to find an opening in the lane to my right, move into it and slow down. Then move back and speed back up. That's inconveniencing me. Why does the fastest driver get to inconvenience me so they won't be inconvenienced? Also, in this scenario there's always a line of cars in the left lane going the speed I am. The faster guy isn't going to get past all of them.

In this scenario just stay in the left lane. You are actively passing people (using the left lane correctly.) Just because someone decides to drive 90 mph doesn't mean that every car in front of them traveling at a slower speed has to immediately jump out of their way so they never have to tap the brakes. People driving in heavy traffic may not be able to go exactly as fast as they want at all times. This happens to literally everyone driving in traffic. They will survive.

I didn't intend to say or imply that in the scenario I was more okay than the faster driver. And I only used the speed limit as a point of reference.

I just meant to say that it's relative, not absolute, and used your scenario as an example. Didn't intend it as a call out, but I can see how it'd be read that way. Sorry for the miscommunication.

In this scenario just stay in the left lane...

That is, until you can safely move to the right to let the faster traffic pass safely on the left.

That is, until you can safely move to the right to let the faster traffic pass safely on the left.

Yes, but I was talking about Bill squeezing himself back into the right lane between cars and being forced to slow down to let someone behind him pass on a crowded interstate. If you are actively overtaking cars in the right lane just keep on cruising in the left. The speed the person wants to go behind you is not your concern.

I can only assume the left lane speederistas must have excellent radar detectors?

Of course, their goose is cooked if the cops have Lidar.

This is correct. The law does not statutorily prioritize speeding, tailgating, or impediment.

The irony is that when someone impedes traffic in the left lane out of a sense of righteousness, they're slowing would be speeders down and are now the only one committing a violation.

The only truly righteous driver would be the one going the speed limit while allowing traffic to pass on the left, but those don't exist. lol

The law does not MAKE people go above the speed limit, it PROHIBITs it. If someone is in the left lane and is going the speed LIMIT, and they are doing so passing slower traffic in the right lane, they are under NO OBLIGATION to accommodate violators who think they have the right to willfully ignore the rules. If they are not going faster than the traffic in the right lane and are not going at or very near the speed limit, they are violating any law. Those who speed and then try to pass on the right are VIOLATING the law. For some reason, arrogant speeders just presume it is their RIGHT to speed and to make all other make it convenient for them to do so. All these comments are from those more interested in BREAKING THE LAW by trying to intimidate other drivers than ENFORCING A LEGITIMATE law aimed at enabling safety, not abetting law breakers. It is amazing how many on here are trying to demonize people observing the law while justifying those breaking the law. It is just arrogance. Drivers that BULLY are BULLIES. Tailgating at high speeds is BULLYING with a LETHAL WEAPON.

The law does not MAKE people go above the speed limit, it PROHIBITs it. If someone is in the left lane and is going the speed LIMIT, and they are doing so passing slower traffic in the right lane, they are under NO OBLIGATION to accommodate violators who think they have the right to willfully ignore the rules. If they are not going faster than the traffic in the right lane and are not going at or very near the speed limit, they are violating any law. Those who speed and then try to pass on the right are VIOLATING the law. For some reason, arrogant speeders just presume it is their RIGHT to speed and to make all other make it convenient for them to do so. All these comments are from those more interested in BREAKING THE LAW by trying to intimidate other drivers than ENFORCING A LEGITIMATE law aimed at enabling safety, not abetting law breakers. It is amazing how many on here are trying to demonize people observing the law while justifying those breaking the law. It is just arrogance. Drivers that BULLY are BULLIES. Tailgating at high speeds is BULLYING with a LETHAL WEAPON.

Yeah man, stand your ground at all cost! LOL. You seem like a prime candidate to be the recipient of some road rage! Okay, so joking aside, I hope you don't end up a victim of one of these whacko drivers and getting slammed into a center median or shot at point blank by one of these many gun-toting drivers because you were doing what you believe was morally right. We see this stuff in the news all to many times. I don't think people on here are condoning road rage, I think they're just saying it's not worth being drawn into a road rage incident because you think you're somehow swallowing your pride in moving over to allow someone to pass you. That is true arrogance.

You speak the truth that tailgating at high speeds is bullying with a lethal weapon. But the fact of the matter is, is that it's not worth it to engage with some crazed driver that's willing to tailgate you at those speeds. They're already putting you and all other vehicles around you in danger when they do that so why escalate it unless you're some sort of crazy, too. You'll only instigate more rage and allow yourself or other occupants in vehicles around you to get hurt or killed in the reaction when sure, you weren't the cause of it, but you're just as guilty in it as a catalyst that could have backed down and defused a real problem.....all by just getting over. That's the real hero in my book.

I don't ever engage. It's just not worth it.

Just went through a thing on the way back from lunch. I44 southbound between NW Exp and I40 where it's 4 lanes. I was in lane 3 getting about 70. The left lane was going closer to 80 and there was a long line of cars going that speed in the left lane (lane 4). A big black truck came up behind the line of cars going approximately 90. They couldn't all move to the right. So he missed my front bumper by inches and started weaving between all 4 lanes to get through. This is a case where the one guy just needs to chill out.

The law does not MAKE people go above the speed limit, it PROHIBITs it. If someone is in the left lane and is going the speed LIMIT, and they are doing so passing slower traffic in the right lane, they are under NO OBLIGATION to accommodate violators who think they have the right to willfully ignore the rules. If they are not going faster than the traffic in the right lane and are not going at or very near the speed limit, they are violating any law. Those who speed and then try to pass on the right are VIOLATING the law. For some reason, arrogant speeders just presume it is their RIGHT to speed and to make all other make it convenient for them to do so. All these comments are from those more interested in BREAKING THE LAW by trying to intimidate other drivers than ENFORCING A LEGITIMATE law aimed at enabling safety, not abetting law breakers. It is amazing how many on here are trying to demonize people observing the law while justifying those breaking the law. It is just arrogance. Drivers that BULLY are BULLIES. Tailgating at high speeds is BULLYING with a LETHAL WEAPON.

that is not the way the law is written or the intent of the law ..

that is not the way the law is written or the intent of the law ..I don't think the intent of the law is that one, repeat one, guy wanting to go 90 gets to control how the thousand other cars on a stretch of highway have to drive to accommodate him.

The law does not MAKE people go above the speed limit, it PROHIBITs it. If someone is in the left lane and is going the speed LIMIT, and they are doing so passing slower traffic in the right lane, they are under NO OBLIGATION to accommodate violators who think they have the right to willfully ignore the rules. If they are not going faster than the traffic in the right lane and are not going at or very near the speed limit, they are violating any law. Those who speed and then try to pass on the right are VIOLATING the law. For some reason, arrogant speeders just presume it is their RIGHT to speed and to make all other make it convenient for them to do so. All these comments are from those more interested in BREAKING THE LAW by trying to intimidate other drivers than ENFORCING A LEGITIMATE law aimed at enabling safety, not abetting law breakers. It is amazing how many on here are trying to demonize people observing the law while justifying those breaking the law. It is just arrogance. Drivers that BULLY are BULLIES. Tailgating at high speeds is BULLYING with a LETHAL WEAPON.

No one is trying to demonize people observing the law while justifying those breaking the law. If you really want to get technical about the law, driving in the left lane except when passing is breaking the law, but clearly that's hard to always enforce, especially on an urban stretch of freeway like the one we're discussing.

Left-lane driving ban now the law (https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/politics/state/2017/11/01/left-lane-driving-ban-now-the-law/60564942007/)


That means left-lane driving is now illegal even if a motorist approaches from behind while exceeding the speed limit, [Trooper Dwight] Durant said.

"You are obligated to obey the state law," Durant said. "That is not your responsibility to worry about that other person."

That's why the signs say "Slower Traffic Keep Right" with no reference to the speed limit.

But, regardless of the law, allowing faster traffic to pass on the left is the safest option, which is what should guide driving decisions. Those who make driving decisions based on contempt for other drivers are just putting everyone, including themselves, at greater risk.

I don't think the intent of the law is that one, repeat one, guy wanting to go 90 gets to control how the thousand other cars on a stretch of highway have to drive to accommodate him.

Correct. Because it is not based on accommodation. It's based on safety. Forcing the 90 mph jackass to make more lane changes puts those thousands of other cars on that stretch of highway at greater risk than just simply letting him pass on the left. The laws exist to protect everyone else from the jackass.

Well written BDP, yes. This exactly. Thank you.

No one is trying to demonize people observing the law while justifying those breaking the law. If you really want to get technical about the law, driving in the left lane except when passing is breaking the law, but clearly that's hard to always enforce, especially on a freeway like the one we're discussing.

Left-lane driving ban now the law (https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/politics/state/2017/11/01/left-lane-driving-ban-now-the-law/60564942007/)



That's why the signs say "Slower Traffic Keep Right" with no reference to the speed limit.

But, regardless of the law, allowing faster traffic to pass on the left is the safest option, which is what should guide driving decisions. Those who make driving decisions based on contempt for other drivers are just putting everyone, including themselves, at greater risk.

If I'm driving in the left lane and passing people on the right and I happen to be blocking someone behind me who wants to be going 90 it's not out of contempt or me wanting to "teach anyone a lesson". I couldn't care less what that person does and I haven't thought about them at all. Maybe the reason why road rage is so bad is people taking every other driver's actions as a personal attack.

If I'm driving in the left lane and passing people on the right and I happen to be blocking someone behind me who wants to be going 90 it's not out of contempt or me wanting to "teach anyone a lesson". I couldn't care less what that person does and I haven't thought about them at all. Maybe the reason why road rage is so bad is people taking every other driver's actions as a personal attack.

Right. And if you can safely change lanes to allow the 90 mph driver to go, you obviously do. That's why it's illegal to stay in the left lane when not actively passing. It's not personal, it's just safe driving.

Correct. Because it is not based on accommodation. It's based on safety. Forcing the 90 mph jackass to make more lane changes puts those thousands of other cars on that stretch of highway at greater risk than just simply letting him pass on the left. The laws exist to protect everyone else from the jackass.
But there isn't room or time for everyone to move over for said jackass. The fault lies on the jackass. There is no defense for one person out of a thousand putting the thousand at risk.,

But there isn't room or time for everyone to move over for said jackass. The fault lies on the jackass. There is no defense for one person out of a thousand putting the thousand at risk.,

You could not have said it better. You sir are spot on.

Correct. Because it is not based on accommodation. It's based on safety. Forcing the 90 mph jackass to make more lane changes puts those thousands of other cars on that stretch of highway at greater risk than just simply letting him pass on the left. The laws exist to protect everyone else from the jackass.

No one is' "forcing" the person wanting to drive 90 mph to do anything. If he wants to drive recklessly and put lives in danger that is on them and them alone.

But there isn't room or time for everyone to move over for said jackass. The fault lies on the jackass. There is no defense for one person out of a thousand putting the thousand at risk.,

I don't think anyone is defending the jackass. Everyone hates that person. And, of course, there's no way for everyone to get over at the same time. That's not what the law is instructing. Logically, this happens in succession.

As for fault, two things can be true at the same time, especially as far as the law is concerned. Especially when both cars are speeding. It is entirely possible to be cited for speeding and impeding traffic. If someone is going 70 in a 60 in the left lane while not passing, they're technically committing two violations.

I'm just saying what is safer and what the law says according the state trooper in the article above, which is: left-lane driving is illegal even if a motorist approaches from behind while exceeding the speed limit. And that's simply because it's safer to let them pass on the left. This is regardless of how fast either car is going relative to the speed limit.

Obviously, we could parse specific scenarios ad nauseam, but the law says what it says and just because someone is passing someone else in the left lane it does not establish them as the pace car for the left lane until further notice. Yes, the speeding jackass is endangering other drivers, but impeding them is compounding that risk and letting them use the left lane to pass is mitigating it.

I don't think anyone is defending the jackass. Everyone hates that person. And, of course, there's no way for everyone to get over at the same time. That's not what the law is instructing. Logically, this happens in succession.

As for fault, two things can be true at the same time, especially as far as the law is concerned. Especially when both cars are speeding. It is entirely possible to be cited for speeding and impeding traffic. If someone is going 70 in a 60 in the left lane while not passing, they're technically committing two violations.

I'm just saying what is safer and what the law says according the state trooper in the article above, which is: left-lane driving is illegal even if a motorist approaches from behind while exceeding the speed limit. And that's simply because it's safer to let them pass on the left. This is regardless of how fast either car is going relative to the speed limit.

Obviously, we could parse specific scenarios ad nauseam, but the law says what it says and just because someone is passing someone else in the left lane it does not establish them as the pace car for the left lane until further notice. Yes, the speeding jack ass is endangering other drivers, but impeding them is compounding that risk and letting them use the left lane to pass is mitigating it.With all due respect your posts really seem to try to justify the jackasses and put the blame on everyone else.

No one is' "forcing" the person wanting to drive 90 mph to do anything. If he wants to drive recklessly and put lives in danger that is on them and them alone.

Wow. Okay.

I guess it just boils down to "if someone else is breaking the law and driving reckless, I can, too."

Wow. Okay.

I guess it just boils down to "if someone else is breaking the law and driving reckless, I can, too."Actually GoGators is exactly right.

With all due respect your posts really seem to try to justify the jackasses and put the blame on everyone else.

With equal respect, do you think the state Trooper's statement does the same? If not, how is his comment on the left lane driving law different than what I've posted on the topic?

Honestly, my position is based on the safety of everyone else. If someone is driving erratically, i.e. 30+ over the speed limit, wouldn't the best advice be to GTF out of their way? I don't see how impeding them improves the situation. Maybe that's what I'm missing: how does actively impeding a speeding car make the road safer for everyone else? In other words: why does the law regarding left lane driving make us less safe and do you advocate changing it and to what?