In Maryland, Too Slow, Left Lane Hoggers get TICKETS!

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Laurel-Maryland-Ticket-Driving-Too-Slow-197285901.html

I want to shake this police officer's hand.

As for the driver, who is quoted as saying,

"Sometimes when it's dangerous, you have to do what you can to stay safe,"

On this particular stretch of I-95, which I drive at least once per week, there are no fewer than four (4) travel lanes. If you want to "stay safe", and drive slowly, there are appropriate travel lanes for you to do so. The left-most one is not one of them.

Bet she wins though.

Maryland does not ticket left lane hoggers, that's why this one is so novel and entertaining.

Now if they had more restrictions for the "passing" lane like if you travel more than 1 mile than I think the case would be more in favor of the law enforcement.

The Peoples Republic of Maryland just likes writing tickets, no more, no less. Move along nothing to see here folks.

HappyAndy wrote: The Peoples Republic of Maryland just likes writing tickets, no more, no less. Move along nothing to see here folks.

Oh I dunno about that. This one is a novel ticket for Maryland, and if she loses her court case, it could start a bit of a snowball.

Though with AAA raising a fuss on her behalf, and no legal restriction on riding the left lane, I think the whole thing will fold.

Left lane hoggers should be shot, so she got off easy. Pay the ticket, keep right and shut up.

Bravo for the cop. Of course no good deed goes unpunished...

HappyAndy wrote: The Peoples Republic of Maryland just likes writing tickets, no more, no less. Move along nothing to see here folks.

Ding ding ding

I assumed the left lane is for passing is a federal rule. Impeding traffic is also a legitimate citation.

I hope, for Maryland's sake, that this gets that law on the books if it isn't already.

you think if she gets charged, it will raise her insurance rate because its a moving violation?

yeah, I know, probably not, being her first offense, ever.

I would expect nothing less from an insurance company though. no offense to those in the industry.

Left lane is for passing used to be a nationwide law and was enforced when possible/traffic permitted. As a member of AAA, I may decide to let my membership lapse when it comes up for renewal.

As someone who drives I-95 in Va. and I-64 and I-81 also, I wish Va. police would enforce a rule like this. In my experience, Va. drivers are 10 times worse at lane hogging (or would that be 10 times BETTER?) than Md. drivers.

Through my fairly frequent visits to Maryland, I have found them to be the most infuriating drivers I have ever driven with (including Bostonians during rush hour). They're massive four lane highways are a smorgasbord of drivers of all different speeds and motivations. Ultimately, faster traffic ends up moving through slower traffic like water through a class IV rapids. The appauling lack of lane discipline is downright dangerous and leads to tailgating and frequent undertaking maneuvers. Many states have a keep right law but the police can seldom be bothered to enforce it.

@integraguy: given that failing to use a turn signal and/or driving 15mph over the "speed limit" is a felony in Virginia (3 months in prison) they probably consider themselves "better."

I'm with foxtrapper on this one. Maryland does not have a keep right law. I found out about this shortly after I moved to MD from PA in 1966. I was riding with my state trooper neighbor and asked him why he wasn't pulling over the people clogging up the left lane.

There is a rather vague statue regarding impeding traffic but I don't think the judge would uphold it in this case if her speed was as quoted in the article.

I have to be careful when I drive in other states. Because there is no keep right law here my driving style would probably get me arrested for reckless drivng elsewhere,

In reply to Hal:

Actually there IS a keep right law on the books in MD.

§ 21-301. Driving on right side of roadway; exceptions.

(a) General rule.- On every roadway that is wide enough, a vehicle shall be driven on the right half of the roadway, except:

[snip]

(3) On a roadway that is divided into three or more clearly marked lanes for vehicular traffic, subject to the rules applicable to these roadways;

[snip]

(b) Special rule for slow-moving traffic.- On every roadway, except while overtaking and passing another vehicle going in the same direction or when preparing for a lawful left turn, any vehicle going 10 miles an hour or more below the applicable maximum speed limit OR, if any existing conditions reasonably require a speed below that of the applicable maximum, at less than the normal speed of traffic under these conditions, shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway. "

The last half of that last one is what got her.

I like Adam's concept on Top Gear US of branding these people.

I thought this was a given in MD? I always stay right and manage to travel much faster that way.

Combine that with all the speed traps that focus on the left lane, it only makes sense to stay right in MD.

neckromacr wrote: I thought this was a given in MD? I always stay right and manage to travel much faster that way. Combine that with all the speed traps that focus on the left lane, it only makes sense to stay right in MD.

You're absolutely right, I swear by driving in the right lane to avoid speed traps. It's almost like the police just don't bother checking the right lane.

even thought I speed, I try to get back in the right lane as quickly as I can ... it sometimes seems to help when the po-po are using instant on ( like they don't see me) if it's constant radar then the Val 1 gives me plenty of warning

If people are driving under the speed limit then yeah, that needs to happen more often.

Chris_V wrote: The last half of that last one is what got her.

That's her defense actually. 62 in a 65. She was well within the 10 mph difference and therefore not legally impeding traffic.

Most of the law you cited is a standard drive on the right hand side of the yellow stripes stuff. It is not an explicit drive in the right hand lane unless overtaking traffic.

In fact Maryland now has an explicit drive in the left lane law now. Overtaking a cop on the side of the road. You must move over one lane, unless. Is impossible or excessively dangerous (vague wording).

NC has the same law ... asked a NCSHP one time about the slow down thing ... he couldn't/wouldn't give me a hard and fast number...

MA$$hole wrote: I like Adam's concept on Top Gear US of branding these people.

Yeah, that was funny. I'm very much for that.

wbjones wrote: even thought I speed, I try to get back in the right lane as quickly as I can ... it sometimes seems to help when the po-po are using instant on ( like they don't see me) if it's constant radar then the Val 1 gives me plenty of warning

Here in New Jersey you'll often encounter middle lane morons (MLMs) more so than you're typical left lane hogs (LLHs). Unfortunately, it is very illegal to pass the MLMs on the right (under most circumstances, it's complicated). However, given the choice between changing two lanes to the left and then changing back two lanes to the right or just simply undertaking the MLM on the right, I usually do the former. Although this is technically illegal, I think that I stand a much lower chance of being nicked for speeding and I think that it is much safer than performing four (nearly) sequential lane changes.

thank goodness right lane passing is legal in NC ... seems to be legal in SC, Ga and Fl, since I see it done all the time on my trips to Daytona ( I 26, & I 95 )

most of the time if I'm coming up on a left lane hog I don't sit behind them hoping they wake the berkeley up, I usually just slide calmly over to the right lane and ease past them ... no high beams, or horn, or tailgating ... no drama, just ease by and go on about my business ( + no eye contact .. cuts down on the angst and possible road rage situations )

foxtrapper wrote:

Chris_V wrote: The last half of that last one is what got her.

That's her defense actually. 62 in a 65. She was well within the 10 mph difference and therefore not legally impeding traffic.

No, that's the FIRST half. The SECOND half is this section:

"OR, if any existing conditions reasonably require a speed below that of the applicable maximum, at less than the normal speed of traffic under these conditions, shall be driven in the right-hand lane"

Her statement was that the CONDITIONS required her to travel below the applicable maximum, at less than the normal speed of traffic. So she should have been in the right hand lane.