The Left Lane/Right Lane Thunderdome Thread

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

When I posted about passing on the right, Jiri's reply was 'safely' passing on the right - can you not see the inherent judgement in that? (vs discussing a system)

How in blue hell is safety not a factor in that?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No, I am not being hypocritical.



I have been debating this left lane issue ever since I moved out west 30 years ago (because it is worse here than anywhere else I have ever been).

It still seems pretty hypocritical for me. You're both making judgements, yours is just based on a made-up system which doesn't exist here. I get that you want it to exist.

30 years debating the same thing huh? That's stamina, but should also tell you something about the futility of your position.

The main issue is that it really isn't an issue. There is no left lane issue. There are not monumental collapses of the transportation system being Alberta doesn't adhere to "Keep right except to pass." We also tend to look at it in a very stupid way. The mere existence of someone in the left lane isn't an issue, the only issue is when there is a purposeful lack of respect.

Move if it you can, don't if it doesn't make sense to, obey the posted law, don't expect special treatment if you don't.

I think 4x4 and Cliff both had great takes on it. You don't cater to the lowest common denominator, whether they're going far too fast or too slow. It's up to those people to cater to the flow of traffic.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The second is some variation of a congestion argument. But congestion usually exists because someone screwed up and didn't get over, causing a backlog in the left lane. (Yes, there are times when there is simply too much congestion and both lanes bog down - that does not have any baring on the discussion though).

Here's the thing (again): it works everywhere else. And it works just fine in many places that have heavier traffic flows than Alberta does. That is the elephant in the room that the apologists never address.

When I posted about passing on the right, Jiri's reply was 'safely' passing on the right - can you not see the inherent judgement in that? (vs discussing a system)

Please describe how best cars should behave passing a semi on a road nearing or at capacity. The backlog exists because you move two lanes of traffic into one lane of traffic while going around a slow moving right lane vehicle.

I would also argue that outside of these times when the highway approaches its capacity that the consequence of poor left lane behaviour is actually quite low and is much less common then the outrage in this thread warrants.

Its also incredibly naïve to thing the always move right if you are not passing is correct in all situations in terms of maximizing traffic flow. And in fact is the incorrect behaviour as a road approaches capacity when maximizing lane usage is required.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

I drove Stoney East/West across the city in the north a few times this week including yesterday.

I actually think 99% of people don't know why there are 3 lanes. It is almost prohibitive. Two lanes really would be better in a lot of ways.

No one uses the right lane. All traffic stays in the middle lane. I saw cars merge and frantically change into the middle lane cutting right in front of much faster traffic. Causes too many cars to use the left lane. Ends up being an empty right lane, busy middle and left lanes. The only cars I saw using the right lane were frustrated speeders who were tired of the left lane being clogged because the middle lane was barely at 100.

Not to mention other idiotic stuff. I had a guy merge behind me, speed up and cut me off then slam on the brakes. I saw cars just cruising in the left lane doing 100. Cars in the middle lane cruising at 80. People joining Stoney in their own lane, not a merge, just a whole new lane to themselves and they cut into traffic like their lane was ending in 20 feet at a cliff, cars merging doing 30 under the speed limit.

While I'm not defending this I can see why some drivers do it. Take EB Stoney as it approaches and then passes Deerfoot int he north. Stoney is three lanes here but reduces to two lanes just after the Deerfoot exit. The right hand lane ends so if you are staying on Stoney and properly using the right hand lane you need to change lanes anyhow at this point so I see many people who are going to be staying on Stoney drive in the middle lane to avoid this. Stoney narrows to two lanes at Deerfoot as mentioned above so you need to get into the middle lane to now be in the right hand lane. As you come to the next interchange (Metis) the right hand lane becomes a mandatory exit onto Metis so you need to change lanes again in order to keep going straight.

So in the space of about a mile the right hand lanes ends twice meaning two lane changes are in order simply to keep going on the road you are on any not making any turns. People want to avoid this by simply getting into the lane that will take them all the way to their exit. And that is the middle or even inside lane in this case.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I'm pretty sure this scenario has never happened in the history of automobile transportation.

4x4 is right. This happens all the damn time. It actually annoys me, because I hate having someone follow me literally from Calgary to Edmonton.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The mere existence of someone in the left lane isn't an issue, the only issue is when there is a purposeful lack of respect.

Many people consider left lane hogging to be a purposeful lack of respect.

So... there an issue.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

4x4 is right. This happens all the damn time. It actually annoys me, because I hate having someone follow me literally from Calgary to Edmonton.

Really? I like it when I find a speeding buddy. Even better when there's 3-4. You know you've got a good speeding buddy when you take turns leading and risking the ticket.
Being at the back also has it's risks. I've twice seen the rear guy get nailed, shortly after passing an on ramp.

[Wormius]

Aren't you more likely to get pulled over if you are in the rear? Seems like it would be safer for the police.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Really? I like it when I find a speeding buddy. Even better when there's 3-4. You know you've got a good speeding buddy when you take turns leading and risking the ticket.
Being at the back also has it's risks. I've twice seen the rear guy get nailed, shortly after passing an on ramp.

Or you can have a cop pass you and get behind your speeding buddy, and while pulling him over motion with his hand out the window for you to pull over as well so you both get ticketed. I learned to give a healthy follow distance for my "blocker" after that

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Aren't you more likely to get pulled over if you are in the rear? Seems like it would be safer for the police.

Not if the cop is hiding up ahead. A lot of places they like to sit in the divided highway ditch, or on the side ditch, and nail the front guy.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Or you can have a cop pass you and get behind your speeding buddy, and while pulling him over motion with his hand out the window for you to pull over as well so you both get ticketed. I learned to give a healthy follow distance for my "blocker" after that

I've personally never seen that, but it does not surprise me. I have seen some weird stuff. I got a ticket about 15 years ago on the highway between Sylvan Lake and Rocky Mountain House becasue of a freaking airplane cop. My buddy (I was in shotgun) got nailed by a cop standing on an overpass bridge with a laser, and radioing up ahead to a waiting cruiser, and about the weirdest one was in the states, where about 10 cops suddenly swarmed the highway from an on ramp and busted about 5 cars at once.

[polak]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I've personally never seen that, but it does not surprise me. I have seen some weird stuff. I got a ticket about 15 years ago on the highway between Sylvan Lake and Rocky Mountain House becasue of a freaking airplane cop. My buddy (I was in shotgun) got nailed by a cop standing on an overpass bridge with a laser, and radioing up ahead to a waiting cruiser, and about the weirdest one was in the states, where about 10 cops suddenly swarmed the highway from an on ramp and busted about 5 cars at once.

I've had it happen to me on Deerfoot. Cop called the other guy my "racing buddy" (even though it was only 20 over, pfft what kind of lame race is that) but didn't give me any crap. Just gave me the ticket and sent me on my way.

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Or you can have a cop pass you and get behind your speeding buddy, and while pulling him over motion with his hand out the window for you to pull over as well so you both get ticketed. I learned to give a healthy follow distance for my "blocker" after that

Lol, why would you pull over for that? I'd keep driving. Make the cop choose between getting the leader or the follower. He's gonna take the leader every time.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

Lol, why would you pull over for that? I'd keep driving. Make the cop choose between getting the leader or the follower. He's gonna take the leader every time.

Most people slow down when they see the cop, so the cop gets on the ass of the guy he chooses originally until he pulls over and then goes after the second guy who is usually not far away.

It'd take some balls to run away from the cop if they do it like that.

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by polak

Usually whoever the cop isn't pulling over originally slows down, cop gets on the ass of the guy he chooses originally until he pulls over and then goes after the second guy.

How does he ticket them both? If I stop 500m down the road from the leader, does he run over and ticket him too?

[polak]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

How does he ticket them both? If I stop 500m down the road from the leader, does he run over and ticket him too?

Tried to explain it better with a ninja edit. He waved the guy up.

I'm assuming they only try to get both if they're close together and the situation works out but it does happen.

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by polak

Tried to explain it better with a ninja edit. He waved the guy up.

I'm assuming they only try to get both if they're close together and the situation works out but it does happen.

ah, I suppose it is possible, but it seems really unlikely.

I asked because, I've been in this situation a couple times (love finding a 'rabbit' to follow through Saskatchewan). I'm always slowed down by the time the cop gets onto the road, and he never has any interest in me. He's radar/lasered the first guy, so he pulls over the first guy.

He can't use that reading against both of us so there doesn't seem to be much of a reason to pull me over?

[Fuzz]

I discovered if you don't pull over they ignore you. As long as they get one.

*results may vary.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

ah, I suppose it is possible, but it seems really unlikely.

I asked because, I've been in this situation a couple times (love finding a 'rabbit' to follow through Saskatchewan). I'm always slowed down by the time the cop gets onto the road, and he never has any interest in me. He's radar/lasered the first guy, so he pulls over the first guy.

He can't use that reading against both of us so there doesn't seem to be much of a reason to pull me over?

Oh in my situation we were driving down Deerfoot and he was behind us so it would've been different if it was a speed trap or a laser from the other side for sure.

I've had a cop ignore me and go after a leader too. He was going WAY faster than me though at that point (he sped up to at least 160 after we crossed into Alberta from BC) but I've seen both ends.

[Wormius]

I just thought the practice might be unsafe, depending how fast the leader is speeding, and that it might result in a rear-end collision. I guess results may vary. I figured it would be the guy in the back taking the fall.