Brake checking a cop

[alkemyst]

brake checking is about asserting one's power over another driver with the fear being you will let them hit you. Most don't pull this off good enough to scare a seasoned driver.

I hate having to pass on the right. It's a very dangerous thing to do on a 3 lane or larger highway.

Driver's will at times insist on not yielding to the right. This also creates a huge traffic back up most of the time.

Another brake check reason is when you are buried in a lane and the guy behind you insists on tail gating or worse flashing his brights as if you can move the 10 cars in front of you. They also tend to drive 'darty' moving left to right (as if they will try to pass on the shoulder at times) causing more timid drivers to start slowing/braking themselves. Further causing a backup.

 

[JulesMaximus]

That cop was driving in an unsafe manner.
IMO, the van driver did not do anything wrong.

You mean other than driving in the left lane and brake checking a police officer?

 

[destrekor]

brake checking is about asserting one's power over another driver with the fear being you will let them hit you. Most don't pull this off good enough to scare a seasoned driver.

I hate having to pass on the right. It's a very dangerous thing to do on a 3 lane or larger highway.

Driver's will at times insist on not yielding to the right. This also creates a huge traffic back up most of the time.

Another brake check reason is when you are buried in a lane and the guy behind you insists on tail gating or worse flashing his brights as if you can move the 10 cars in front of you. They also tend to drive 'darty' moving left to right (as if they will try to pass on the shoulder at times) causing more timid drivers to start slowing/braking themselves. Further causing a backup.

I'll do a little drifting/darting in the left lane (minimal), and flash brights, ONLY when I am the lead car in a long line waiting for an idiot to merge into a different lane (as in, they aren't behind slower drivers too)
Depending on traffic, I have done it even when I am alone and the person ahead has plenty of room to move.
Like you said, I'd prefer to not pass on the right. Some people seem to think it is perfectly normal to hover in the left lane, even with nobody in the right lane, and force people to pass on the right if they do indeed wish to pass.

But I remain a mild-mannered driver when stuck in a long line waiting for a slow moron who believes that a) they can travel in left lane all they want, or b) they have the right to pass everyone THEY wish to pass before moving back over, even if they are "passing" a thousand cars moving approx. 2mph faster than the right lane. Ugh.
I've always hated the people who get my on ass when I am in the left lane behind slower traffic, waiting for them to move. If it's obvious there are a lot of people "waiting", I don't get right up on the driver ahead of me.

 

[Insomniator]

Van needs to move the **** over. Shouldn't be in that lane in the first place. Idiots.

 

[RPD]

I do it often*.

The * is to denote that there's a reason - generally speaking the right lane is usually in far worse condition than the left lane. Mind you, I haven't lived in New York for about 4 years now, but winter sucks, and spring is actually even worse. Winters generally tear up the roads in NY, which is why there's actually only two seasons up there - Winter and Construction Season.

Thing is, just about any state I've driven in has similar issues - the difference being the farther south you go, the less often the roads are resurfaced. That means a lot of times pretty significant ruts in the road simply from travel, all the way to huge potholes. At best, they fill the potholes every year, but the surface is still horrible to drive on until they do a full resurface. The left lane is usually in far better condition.

Another thing is the pitch - down south with the generally heavier rain, the pitch of the right lane is far steeper than that of the left lane to facilitate water runoff. At these points I prefer to be in the left lane because I of a combination of the above - the water runs off to the right lane and usually pools in the ruts that have been left making controlling a vehicle in those lanes a far greater challenge, even at low speeds.

The main difference with me - I will move over if I know I'm not travelling at speed and it's safe to do so. I don't do it to be an asshole... I do it for my own safety.

Another reason to stay on the left is the big trucks don't typically drive there and the road is not as tore up either. I also hate drivers that never drive the same damn speed. Just yesterday I drove up and back to Sacramento from Fresno and some lady driving a beat up mini-van going below the speed limit in the left lane, I have to pass her on the right. I get pass her for awhile, get into the middle lane and go a few over the speed limit. 10-15minutes go by and then she goes zooming by in the left lane. 10-15minutues later she's still in the left lane but now going slow again!! WTF DIAF pick a GD speed and stick with it.

 

[SunnyD]

Another reason to stay on the left is the big trucks don't typically drive there and the road is not as tore up either. I also hate drivers that never drive the same damn speed. Just yesterday I drove up and back to Sacramento from Fresno and some lady driving a beat up mini-van going below the speed limit in the left lane, I have to pass her on the right. I get pass her for awhile, get into the middle lane and go a few over the speed limit. 10-15minutes go by and then she goes zooming by in the left lane. 10-15minutues later she's still in the left lane but now going slow again!! WTF DIAF pick a GD speed and stick with it.

I should point out that if I'm not going at speed (or >= the speed limit if conditions allow), I'm not in the left lane - again, unless road conditions dictate otherwise.

Let me ask all of you this - how many of you have been involved in a wreck that was caused by hydroplaning? Or even in an incident where control of the vehicle was lost due to hydroplaning even if no one was hurt or nothing was damaged?

We've lived in similar areas, and I don't think the roads around here are that bad.

Although, I grew up in rural Pennsylvania where we had plenty of dirt roads. I don't know if you've had the pleasure of driving on them as well, but dirt roads tend to be awful after a particularly nasty winter. Some of the nastiest potholes that I've found around here are pretty much minor compared to the ones I've seen on dirt roads.

Not all of them, no... but Wall-Triana out by the intermodal is pretty bad and I drive that daily. There's parts of 72 up in Madison where the ruts are at least 3" deep - but with all the new construction out there a lot of 72 is getting new surface anyway. I'm not talking about 565 or anything like that, those roads are in great condition.

 

[Phoenix86]

yo bro. Breath a bit. My first comment was in regards that 'traffic law' has no reasoning. That is not true at all.

Of course it has reasoning, exactly what destrekor, the law's limits are what is written in the books. I linked you the law on books to show you were talking out of your ass again.

Also it's great you can google and reference a Florida code section, but it's obvious you lack any fucking understanding of what you are looking at.

In Florida, warnings can only be given up to 4mph over the limit.

Please calm down and think first, post second.

Show me where "Here in Florida, up to 4mph the most they can give you is a warning." based on the law I linked. Here's a clue it ain't there and they can give you a ticket for going 1 mph over the limit. Again, I'm sure it may be customary for officers to issue warnings for that small of an infraction but it sure as hell isn't mandatory.

I also like how you change "most they can give" to "warning can be given up to". That completely changes the meaning from "an officer can only give warnings from 1-4 mph over" to "an officer cannot give warnings for 5+".

 

[GoSharks]

If you are from California, you are officially dubbed another ignorant fool:

VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 21650-21664

21650. Upon all highways, a vehicle shall be driven upon the right
half of the roadway, except as follows:
(a) When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the
same direction under the rules governing that movement.
(b) When placing a vehicle in a lawful position for, and when the
vehicle is lawfully making, a left turn.
(c) When the right half of a roadway is closed to traffic under
construction or repair.
(d) Upon a roadway restricted to one-way traffic.
(e) When the roadway is not of sufficient width.
(f) When the vehicle is necessarily traveling so slowly as to
impede the normal movement of traffic, that portion of the highway
adjacent to the right edge of the roadway may be utilized temporarily
when in a condition permitting safe operation.
(g) This section does not prohibit the operation of bicycles on
any shoulder of a highway, on any sidewalk, on any bicycle path
within a highway, or along any crosswalk or bicycle path crossing,
where the operation is not otherwise prohibited by this code or local
ordinance.

You do realize that the section you quoted has nothing to do with traveling in the left lane? This code is talking about traveling on the right half of the roadway, ie on the right side of the dividing line (if there is one, otherwise (d) would apply.)

 

[Phoenix86]

You do realize that the section you quoted has nothing to do with traveling in the left lane? This code is talking about traveling on the right half of the roadway, ie on the right side of the dividing line (if there is one, otherwise (d) would apply.)

Actually, it's talking about the right half of the divider. Section a applies to passing, meaning you should be in the right half of the roadway unless passing, then use the left half. Unless you think people should pass on the other side of the dividing line.

I assume California uses "half" instead of "lane" due to the number of lanes in one direction exceeding 6 in places.

 

[alkemyst]

Of course it has reasoning, exactly what destrekor, the law's limits are what is written in the books. I linked you the law on books to show you were talking out of your ass again.


Show me where "Here in Florida, up to 4mph the most they can give you is a warning." based on the law I linked. Here's a clue it ain't there and they can give you a ticket for going 1 mph over the limit. Again, I'm sure it may be customary for officers to issue warnings for that small of an infraction but it sure as hell isn't mandatory.

I also like how you change "most they can give" to "warning can be given up to". That completely changes the meaning from "an officer can only give warnings from 1-4 mph over" to "an officer cannot give warnings for 5+".

Are you trying to be ignorant?

In Florida, for any speed over the limit up to 5MPH they cannot give you a SPEEDING ticket, nor do any points occur. After 5MPH the officer can write a ticket, or give you a warning. I thought it was 4MPH, but it's actually 5MPH.

Here is a link where you can see there is not even a category for 1-5MPH
http://www.dmvflorida.org/speeding-ticket.shtml

here is something more clear with that speed category OBVIOUSLY (well obvious to everyone but perhaps you), http://www.hillsclerk.com/publicweb/Traffic_Fees_Fines.aspx

You are out of your league on this. Stick with google from your armchair.

 

[alkemyst]

You do realize that the section you quoted has nothing to do with traveling in the left lane? This code is talking about traveling on the right half of the roadway, ie on the right side of the dividing line (if there is one, otherwise (d) would apply.)

Why don't you go talk to MIT that has that section referenced for the law on this matter?

You are not correct.

 

[GoSharks]

Actually, it's talking about the right half of the divider. Section a applies to passing, meaning you should be in the right half of the roadway unless passing, then use the left half. Unless you think people should pass on the other side of the dividing line.

I assume California uses "half" instead of "lane" due to the number of lanes in one direction exceeding 6 in places.

No it isn't. See next post.

People pass on the other side of the dividing line all the time.

 

[GoSharks]

Why don't you go talk to MIT that has that section referenced for the law on this matter?

You are not correct.

Why am I not correct?

21651. (a) Whenever a highway has been divided into two or more
roadways by means of intermittent barriers or by means of a dividing
section of not less than two feet in width, either unpaved or
delineated by curbs, double-parallel lines, or other markings on the
roadway, it is unlawful to do either of the following:
(1) To drive any vehicle over, upon, or across the dividing
section.
(2) To make any left, semicircular, or U-turn with the vehicle on
the divided highway, except through an opening in the barrier
designated and intended by public authorities for the use of vehicles
or through a plainly marked opening in the dividing section.
(b) It is unlawful to drive any vehicle upon a highway, except to
the right of an intermittent barrier or a dividing section which
separates two or more opposing lanes of traffic. Except as otherwise
provided in subdivision (c), a violation of this subdivision is a
misdemeanor.

This is the specific case you are looking for. No mention of lanes.


A roadway is not defined to be one particular section/direction of road:

Roadway

530. A "roadway" is that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel.
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d01/vc530.htm

BTW, MIT had nothing to do with that site, other than being the host.

 

[alkemyst]

I made a bad paste above, 21654 is the code that I wanted to paste

21654. (a) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any
vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be
driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable
to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing
another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing
for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or
driveway.
(b) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is
not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as
practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima
facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation
of subdivision (a) of this section.
(c) The Department of Transportation, with respect to state
highways, and local authorities, with respect to highways under their
jurisdiction, may place and maintain upon highways official signs
directing slow-moving traffic to use the right-hand traffic lane
except when overtaking and passing another vehicle or preparing for a
left turn.

 

[Fayd]

If you are from California, you are officially dubbed another ignorant fool:

to be fair, i was meeting or exceeding the normal flow of traffic the whole time...

 

[alkemyst]

to be fair, i was meeting or exceeding the normal flow of traffic the whole time...

If you were not causing a slow down behind you then it's really not an issue. Most that think they were going the 'speed limit' are.