Six-State Trooper Project Targets Move Over/Slow Down Law

[jamil]

Did you play 20 questions with him?

Just the usual couple of questions. Where you headed? Anything illegal in the vehicle? And then the lecture about signaling lane changes. Oh, and he asked me to promise that I would signal in the future and seemed to make that contingent on me getting off with a warning.

 

[KLB]

Just the usual couple of questions. Where you headed? Anything illegal in the vehicle? And then the lecture about signaling lane changes. Oh, and he asked me to promise that I would signal in the future and seemed to make that contingent on me getting off with a warning.

Mine stopped when I asked why he wanted to know where I was going at 7AM on Sunday morning. He was just "making conversation".

 

[foszoe]

I'm going to have to call

Do tell how a signal would save a life in that situation. It is more likely to cause someone to speed up to try to stop you from changing lanes than what it should do. If a driver doesn't see a car in the next lane, using a turn signal is not going to do much.

Then explain how in my situation it could possibly save a life? I was on US30 for 1/4 mile. Traffic behind me on 30 was stopped at a light. In fact, I am pretty certain I did signal. I did on my turn onto 30. I did moving into the left turn lane. I did to turn left. My signal will blink three times for a lane change. He probably missed it. It was a pure fishing expedition. I guess I should have just turned into the far lane directly.

Sure.

Fast moving ( faster than you) motorcycle coming up in the left lane. AFter all, he didn't see the car in a rearview.....I would maintain motorcycle would be even harder.

I am not sure I understand your example. I read it as you were on US 30 but then you turned on US 30.

I will say this. why would anyone argue against using a turn signal for a turn/lane change?

A turn signal can even save someone when you don't see them. I was coming onto the interstate in Denver from a Clover leaf on my Goose and a turn signal on a car let me know that the car right beside me wanted to exit. The fact the light was getting closer clued me in that they didn't see me and allowed me to take evasive action.

 

[KLB]

Sure.

Fast moving ( faster than you) motorcycle coming up in the left lane. AFter all, he didn't see the car in a rearview.....I would maintain motorcycle would be even harder.

I am not sure I understand your example. I read it as you were on US 30 but then you turned on US 30.

I will say this. why would anyone argue against using a turn signal for a turn/lane change?

A turn signal can even save someone when you don't see them. I was coming onto the interstate in Denver from a Clover leaf on my Goose and a turn signal on a car let me know that the car right beside me wanted to exit. The fact the light was getting closer clued me in that they didn't see me and allowed me to take evasive action.

No one is arguing against using them. I usually do. It's actually habit, so I don't usually even put thought into it.

Your premise though is apparently that the turn signal will make the person in the left lane suddenly slow down to let someone with a turn signal move over, thus avoiding an accident. In the real world that is not what happens a lot of the time. Awareness is much more important for both drivers than a turn signal.

As for my example. I turned right onto US30 while light was green into the right lane.
Moved to the left lane(when the officer said I did not signal.
Moved into a left turn lane to turn at a second light 1/4 mile from the one I made my first turn at.
Turned left and was pulled over as I did.

Deputy was sitting at the red light where I turned right.

 

[foszoe]

No one is arguing against using them. I usually do. It's actually habit, so I don't usually even put thought into it.

Your premise though is apparently that the turn signal will make the person in the left lane suddenly slow down to let someone with a turn signal move over, thus avoiding an accident. In the real world that is not what happens a lot of the time. Awareness is much more important for both drivers than a turn signal.

As for my example. I turned right onto US30 while light was green into the right lane.
Moved to the left lane(when the officer said I did not signal.
Moved into a left turn lane to turn at a second light 1/4 mile from the one I made my first turn at.
Turned left and was pulled over as I did.

Deputy was sitting at the red light where I turned right.

I would correct the premise statement to will more likely than not. Its more about minimizing rather than eliminating risk.

Nothing in safety is automatic.

Have you heard the ole swiss cheese slice model?

There are multiple pieces of swiss cheese (active and passive safety protocols) between you and an unwanted outcome. If all the holes in the slices line up correctly, an undesirable outcome occurs.

For a simplified example of slices in our traffic scenarios, seeing (signals, headlights, etc), hearing (motor sounds, horns), stuff like that.

 

[JettaKnight]

Someone should educate drivers that it is "move over or slow down" not "move over and slow down". Interesting that slow down is only 10 under, haven't seen that before.

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, they will have to stop more people for another reason to enforce this too.

 

[JettaKnight]

How about getting people out of the left lane also?

I had a coworker get cited for that.

The rest of us were like:

 

[churchmouse]

I thought the law was a pretty good idea back when it was first added. But having seen it cause some pretty unsafe behavior I think it could use some tweaking. As mentioned I’ve had several close calls where people cut in front of me while slamming on their breaks. I’ve seen people in the right lane just slam on their breaks as soon as they see a cop on the side of the road. That’s not making it safer overall. I wish just having a law, don’t be stupid, could work.

Not the law my friend but the idiots that need to observe it.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I know when I'm stuck on the side of the road I want people to drive faster and closer to me--No One Ever

 

[jamil]

I know when I'm stuck on the side of the road I want people to drive faster and closer to me--No One Ever

I know when I'm in the lane to the left and there's an emergency vehicle on the side of the road, I want people in the right lane to freak out and cut in front of me, while breaking hard because they were speeding and I wasn't--No One Ever

Not always, but sometimes in busy traffic this law causes some pretty dangerous situations. I'm not saying the law should go away. But enforcement should also make a priority for slowing down/moving over *safely* as it does moving over/slowing down.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I know when I'm in the lane to the left and there's an emergency vehicle on the side of the road, I want people in the right lane to freak out and cut in front of me, while breaking hard because they were speeding and I wasn't--No One Ever

Not always, but sometimes in busy traffic this law causes some pretty dangerous situations. I'm not saying the law should go away. But enforcement should also make a priority for slowing down/moving over *safely* as it does moving over/slowing down.

Actual IC code addresses this:

(2) proceeding with due caution, reduce the speed of the vehicle to a speed at least ten (10) miles per hour less than the posted speed limit, maintaining a safe speed for road conditions, if changing lanes would be impossible or unsafe.

If you can't react to the car in front of you slowing by 10mph, you are following too closely. If they change lanes unsafely, they are not following this law or any other law. If they slow to walking speed on the interstate, they are not following this law or any other law.

 

[Ingomike]

I know when I'm stuck on the side of the road I want people to drive faster and closer to me--No One Ever

Had a left side flat on a tri-ax RV trailer on I94 S north of Indiana in a 5-6 lane stretch of 70 mph highway. The berm was bad and I got as far over as I could (obviously) but still was on the lane paint changing the tire. (Thank god for preparedness, Dewalt impact and floor jack and wood pieces.)

The cars would not get over even though I had LED flashers, old school flares burning. The waive got a red blanket out and would charge at the cars as they got closer like a bull fighter and they usually moved over some. Sure it would have made a hilarious video, but job was completed safely...

 

[jamil]

Actual IC code addresses this:


If you can't react to the car in front of you slowing by 10mph, you are following too closely. If they change lanes unsafely, they are not following this law or any other law. If they slow to walking speed on the interstate, they are not following this law or any other law.

This doesn't really address my concern as I stated it.

But enforcement should also make a priority for slowing down/moving over *safely* as it does moving over/slowing down.

Okay, both are against the law. If ISP puts an emphasis on enforcing the move over law, I want to see some of those assholes get ticketed for their unsafe reaction to emergency vehicles too.

About following too close. I try to keep two seconds between me and the car in front. That's nearly impossible on a crowded interstate. That two seconds is constantly filled by other drivers taking up that space. On a crowded interstate one person slamming their breaks causes the accordion effect. And that's a really unsafe condition.

---

Incidentally, I pissed off my wife last night. There were work crews on the Sherman Minton bridge as we were crossing, and I told my wife she needed to slow down or move over according to the move over law.

her: "There aren't any emergency vehicles."

me: "Yes, there are work crews and vehicles with flashing yellow lights. That counts."

her: "No it doesn't."

me: "Yes, it does."

her: "Well I'm only going 50."

me: "50 is the posted speed limit on the bridge. You need to reduce speed to 10 mph under the posted speed limit. That means 40"

her:

me:

her:

me:

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If ISP puts an emphasis on enforcing the move over law, I want to see some of those assholes get ticketed for their unsafe reaction to emergency vehicles too

"Emphasis" is like DUI checkpoints or the notices "more Troopers will be out this Labor Day" messages. It's a PR/media campaign to draw attention to the issue. It's not that they will ignore other violations.

 

[jamil]

"Emphasis" is like DUI checkpoints or the notices "more Troopers will be out this Labor Day" messages. It's a PR/media campaign to draw attention to the issue. It's not that they will ignore other violations.

Okay. In the message, the emphasis appears to be more on the slowing down/getting over part and not a whole lot on the "safely" part, or what that even means. Maybe in the messaging "safely" could be better explained. There are two classes of problems. One is the people who just whiz by without consideration. The other is overracting and causing a dangerous situation. We want cops to be safe. But also we don't want the reaction to cause a worse situation than there was.

Actually neither are really all that well enforced anyway, and it's just a hard thing to enforce. I see people speeding by emergency vehicles in the right lane very often. Most people do try to slow down (rarely 10mph below posted, but at least slowing down maybe 10MPH from their previous speed). I don't think I've ever seen a cop pull someone over for the move over law. If you have someone pulled over, will you drop that to go chase down the person who didn't move over or slow down? Maybe if it was a very close call you might. And you're probably not gonna drop the ticket book to go after someone who broke too hard or cut someone off in the other lane.

This is a thing where "traffic" is the collective behavior of individuals. I understand that the message is the real emphasis. But I'd like to see karma make its way to the assholes more than it does.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If you have someone pulled over, will you drop that to go chase down the person who didn't move over or slow down?

Maybe twice in my career. It's got to be a clipped/nearly clipped by the mirror sort of thing. One reason I quickly developed a preference for the passenger side approach. Then my attention doesn't have to be as divided, either.

I'm sure the messaging could be better. I'm sure brevity and marketability were heavily emphasized.