Double Yellow Lines - Legal to pass?

[mkeen]

Turns out you can legally pass another vehicle in Vermont and Pennsylvania where the road is marked with a double yellow line as long as there is no signage specifically prohibiting it. The pavement markings are apparently more of a recommendation than anything else. Seems unnecessarily dangerous, if for no other reason than it violates the de facto standard.

[conklin]

"mkeen" <ink...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:27e8fe24-b87f-42a2...@googlegroups.com...

=================

The same is true in MO.

[Nate Nagel]

Makes sense at least in PA as there are a a lot of Amish in some areas,
better to safely pass a horse/buggy when you can rather than stay behind
it waiting for a legal passing zone.

Of course this requires intelligence and discretion on the part of the
motorist...

nate

[richard]

In practically every state, when slow moving vehicles are in your lane, and
you know by their nature they can't match the posted speed limit, then you
have the legal right to pass when there is a no passing zone present.

[Arif Khokar]

On 8/8/2013 9:33 AM, Evan Platt wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 21:30:42 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com>
> wrote:
>
>> In practically every state, when slow moving vehicles are in your lane, and
>> you know by their nature they can't match the posted speed limit, then you
>> have the legal right to pass when there is a no passing zone present.
>

> Really? Please cite this.

People cross the double yellow all the time to pass me while I'm riding
in Virginia. IIRC, state law requires that cars give at least 2 feet of
clearance when passing a cyclist. If the lane isn't at least 5 feet
wider than the car, then it's not possible for the car to pass without
crossing the dividing line.

[richard]

On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 06:33:14 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 21:30:42 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com>
> wrote:
>

>>In practically every state, when slow moving vehicles are in your lane, and
>>you know by their nature they can't match the posted speed limit, then you
>>have the legal right to pass when there is a no passing zone present.
>

> Really? Please cite this.

Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.
He's doing a whopping 10 mph.
You are in a no passing zone and there are no other vehicles in site.
You have the legal right to pass.

When I was a trucker and came across this, I always flipped the flashers on
as I passed because now I'm in a lane I'm not supposed to be in.

[Larry Sheldon]

http://roadwarrior.blogs.pressdemocrat.com/12648/mailbag-crossing-the-double-yellow-line/

--
Idioten aangeboden. Gratis af te halen.
h/t Dagelijkse Standaard

[T.J. Higgins]

In article <m7nugtv2pw6x.1u...@40tude.net>, richard wrote:
>A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

So why doesn't said farmer just pull the trigger?

--
TJH
tjhiggin.at.hiwaay.dot.net

[Free Lunch]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 08:40:31 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com> wrote
in misc.transport.road:

>On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 06:33:14 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 21:30:42 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In practically every state, when slow moving vehicles are in your lane, and
>>>you know by their nature they can't match the posted speed limit, then you
>>>have the legal right to pass when there is a no passing zone present.
>>
>> Really? Please cite this.
>
>Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.
>A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.
>He's doing a whopping 10 mph.

Columbines don't grow that fast.

[Sancho Panza]

Would that hold true on a two-lane road going up a steep grade behind a
53-foot semi?

[Free Lunch]

On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 07:23:22 -0700, Evan Platt
<ev...@theobvious.espphotography.com.invalid> wrote in

misc.transport.road:

>On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 08:40:31 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com>

>wrote:

>
>>Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.
>

>Please cite.

>
>>A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.
>

>Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL

>
>>He's doing a whopping 10 mph.
>>You are in a no passing zone and there are no other vehicles in site.
>>You have the legal right to pass.
>

>You have the legal right to pass only if the appropriate vehicle code
>says you have the right to pass.
>
>If no such vehicle code exists, you do not have the legal right to

>pass.
>
>>When I was a trucker and came across this, I always flipped the flashers on
>>as I passed because now I'm in a lane I'm not supposed to be in.
>

>Oh well since you did it, that means it was legal, right?

Under the law of the jungle.

That works until there's another trucker acting like an entitled fool.

[H.B. Elkins]

In article <gdt9095bsvk8igura...@4ax.com>, Evan Platt says...
>How does a farmer move a columbine?

He digs it up, digs a new hole for it, and transplants it. It helps to water the
flower once it's placed in its new hole. :-p


--
To reply by e-mail, remove the "restrictorplate"

[Larry Sheldon]

On 8/9/2013 8:59 AM, Evan Platt wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 14:01:59 -0500,
> ernest.p...@vernal.equinox.edu (T.J. Higgins) wrote:
>
>> In article <m7nugtv2pw6x.1u...@40tude.net>, richard wrote:
>>> A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.
>>
>> So why doesn't said farmer just pull the trigger?
>

> How does a farmer move a columbine?

Been wondering that too. Save the seeds and plant them somewhere else?
Dig it up and transplant it?

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

California law says that you can't pass on a hill unless you can go at least 10MPH (16 km/h) more that the vehicle that you are passing and can complete the pass within a quater mile (400 m).

Although I doubt you would be cited for it and if cited, the defense of "necessity" might come into play if you took it to court, passing safely by driving your entire vehicle to the left of a double yellow line when the "open dash" is not on your side doesn't appear to be legal in California.

[Arif Khokar]

On 8/9/2013 10:23 AM, Evan Platt wrote:

> You have the legal right to pass only if the appropriate vehicle code
> says you have the right to pass.
>

> If no such vehicle code exists, you do not have the legal right to
> pass.

That really doesn't correlate with whether it's safe to pass. When
passing a vehicle going at a speed substantially lower than the normal
speed of traffic, it takes less time and distance to pass them.
Therefore, there are more safe opportunities to pass (regardless of the
presence of a legal passing zone).

In any case, there are states that have prima facie speed limits where
it's legal to exceed the speed limit if it's safe to do so. There are
probably similar laws regarding passing zones in certain states, but I
don't have time to search for them at present.

[Harry K]

I suspect some if not all of those laws have a "catch" to them. I know Washington does:

It is legal to 'exceed speed limit while passing' BUT only if the vehicle being passed is moving at less than the speed limit.

FWIW I got a "exceeding speed limit while passing" in British Columbia but the officer claimed that vehicle was at the speed limit (I had been trying to get around that camper for 5 miles).

Harry K

[Andrew M. Saucci, Jr.]

I notice that no one has quoted even one actual law in even one
actual state. It wouldn't be really hard to find such a thing on Internet if
it actually exists and copy and paste it into a newsgroup post. Meanwhile,
I'm inclined to think that if one crosses a double-yellow line to pass, he'd
better have all his ducks in a row. If anything at all goes wrong, such a
motorist could be held to account.

"Evan Platt" <ev...@theobvious.espphotography.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:6g77095r05btpkjgs...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 21:30:42 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com>
> wrote:
>

>>In practically every state, when slow moving vehicles are in your lane,
>>and
>>you know by their nature they can't match the posted speed limit, then
>>you
>>have the legal right to pass when there is a no passing zone present.
>

> Really? Please cite this.
> --
> To reply via e-mail, remove The Obvious and .invalid from my e-mail
> address.

[jgar the jorrible]

I think if any LEO saw you doing that he would be upset and would cite you on the spot. They've all seen the results of a bad pass.

And the judges have heard it all too, you better have video of a landslide coming after you for a necessity defense.

And as much as I'll rail against some of what I've seen LEO's and judges do, and bitch and moan about places where engineers changed a passing zone into a no-passing zone, I think they are right here. Jeez, it's stupid. They usually make it a no-passing zone because it's a bad place to pass!

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
Because they clean up shit like this: http://www.10news.com/news/1-dead-in-sr-67-head-on-collision

[richard]

On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 07:23:22 -0700, Evan Platt wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 08:40:31 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com>
> wrote:
>

>>Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.
>

> Please cite.

>
>>A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.
>

> Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL
>

>>He's doing a whopping 10 mph.
>>You are in a no passing zone and there are no other vehicles in site.
>>You have the legal right to pass.
>

> You have the legal right to pass only if the appropriate vehicle code
> says you have the right to pass.
>

> If no such vehicle code exists, you do not have the legal right to

> pass.
>
>>When I was a trucker and came across this, I always flipped the flashers on
>>as I passed because now I'm in a lane I'm not supposed to be in.
>

> Oh well since you did it, that means it was legal, right?

don't know why I said columbine, but it should be "combine".

[Free Lunch]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:22:02 -0700, richard <nor...@example.com> wrote
in misc.transport.road:

We know, but it was entertaining to comment on it.

It is generally a moving violation to pass a farm implement when in a
no-passing zone. Sure, jerks do it all the time, but they will be
ticketed.

[Harry K]

So if you come on a vehicle stalled in the lane you have to stay there until it is removed? There is no difference between a stalled vehicle and one that is moving way below the posted - both are "obsstructions".

As to to cops getting their panties in a bunch over it? Nope. Not unless the pass itself is made unsafely. I researched Washington. Legal to pass an "obstruction" but they don't mention double yellow or define what an obstruction is. Found one legal site that gives advice. Guy wrote in that his sone was ticketed for passing in a double yeallow. legal begal suggested using the "obstruction" reference. Oddly the actual ticket mentioned "unsafe speed" but legal beagal didn't even address that.

Harry K

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

The kind of situation that I am talking about here where you would not likely be cited and where the defense of necessity might be used is in passing a vehicle that is traveling SO slowly that what you are doing might be better referred to as "avoiding an obstacle" than "overtaking and passing" -- One where it takes less that 4 times the length of your vehicle to get around. But, as I have said, passing another vehicle by driving your entire vehicle to the left of a double yellow line where the dash isn't on your side, has no codified exception in California.

[Harry K]

The few states I checked, including Washington, also had no codification for it. I would suppose that all states, like Washington, have a provision somewhere for allowing passing an 'obstruction'. Of course defining "obstruction" is probably left up to the judge to determine :)

Harry K

[jgar the jorrible]

(What the heck is with that quoting?)

I agree with you, but keep in mind things like 07.D.06 in http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/curriculum/Unit%207.pdf I think Ravera making an equivalency between a slow moving vehicle and an obstruction would blow back in your face; the difference being between an objective obstruction and merely hindering your progress. This would translate in the real world to how much of a dick the LEO is. There's quite a size variance there, I know I've been surprised when they've been reasonable - "I changed lanes quickly when the car in front of me slammed on the brakes because I knew I could stop my Corvette much faster than the VW van following me too closely," "Our motorcycles were too light to set off the signal detector in the turn lane in front of the police station" are two that I got away with - reasonable explanations accepted by reasonable LEOs. Oftentimes they just care that you're not drunk or aggressive.

This weekend, a group of bicyclists spread out on a narrow winding rural road, some riding two abreast, no shoulder. Cars in front of me too a-scared to go over the double line. We just had to wait until they got to a wider spot in the road for the cars to pass. I went over the double yellow to pass a few, more to give them some space and not scare the shit out of them then anything else. I was thinking a cop going the other way seeing this might not be happy. Some bicyclists in this area are real assholes, but these just seemed clueless weekenders. The road in question used to have a single broken line, but there were too many accidents. One of them was my neighbor, totaled his cherry '62 356 Porsche he had since 1964.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.

http://www.cbs8.com/story/23105648/man-dies-in-motorcycle-crash-in-oceanside

[Sancho Panza]

So will you or won't you guarantee to pay whatever fines and surcharges
I incur in such a situation?

[Andrew M. Saucci, Jr.]

That's the real problem, you never know whether you're going to come
across a reasonable officer or someone who is just looking to throw his
weight around. And the guy you pass on a slow-moving tractor just might be
the sherriff's brother...

Bottom line is that if you cross the double-yellow line you are
liable for at least a ticket, regardless of whether you felt justified or
were just impatient. If that bothers anyone, the solution is to stay off
two-lane roads with double-yellow lines. By the way, I have found that the
drivers of most really slow-moving vehicles will do their best to help clear
the way for anyone who wants to pass.

"jgar the jorrible" <joel-...@home.com> wrote in message
news:4aa8d2b8-b77f-46aa...@googlegroups.com...

[jgar the jorrible]

On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 6:46:20 PM UTC-7, Andrew M. Saucci, Jr. wrote:
> That's the real problem, you never know whether you're going to come
>
> across a reasonable officer or someone who is just looking to throw his
>
> weight around. And the guy you pass on a slow-moving tractor just might be
>
> the sherriff's brother...
>
>
>
> Bottom line is that if you cross the double-yellow line you are
>
> liable for at least a ticket, regardless of whether you felt justified or
>
> were just impatient. If that bothers anyone, the solution is to stay off
>
> two-lane roads with double-yellow lines. By the way, I have found that the
>
> drivers of most really slow-moving vehicles will do their best to help clear
>
> the way for anyone who wants to pass.
>

Perhaps it's just that the problems are easier to note and remember, but I have not found that at all. (insert lazy white-trash or ethnic stereotype here) just seem to dully keep driving with a line of cars behind them.

Saying just keep off some roads is like saying "if you don't like diesel exhaust, stop breathing." Good luck with that.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.

Where's my flying car?

[Paul D. DeRocco]

> On 8/7/2013 9:30 PM, richard wrote:
>
> In practically every state, when slow moving vehicles are in your lane, and
> you know by their nature they can't match the posted speed limit, then you
> have the legal right to pass when there is a no passing zone present.

Is that "you know by their nature" actually part of the law anywhere?
That is, if you're behind a sightseer in a Corvette stubbornly going
30mph below the speed limit, are you not allowed to pass because he
_could_ easily speed up?

--

Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
Paul mailto:pder...@ix.netcom.com

[Chairman Obama]

"Nate Nagel" <njn...@roosters.net> wrote in message
news:kttmo...@news4.newsguy.com...

> On 8/5/2013 10:37 PM, mkeen wrote:
>> Turns out you can legally pass another vehicle in Vermont and
>> Pennsylvania where the road is marked with a double yellow line as
>> long as there is no signage specifically prohibiting it. The
>> pavement markings are apparently more of a recommendation than
>> anything else. Seems unnecessarily dangerous, if for no other reason
>> than it violates the de facto standard.
>>
>
> Makes sense at least in PA as there are a a lot of Amish in some areas,
> better to safely pass a horse/buggy when you can rather than stay behind
> it waiting for a legal passing zone.

Amish (and other similar) buggies should be banned from state highways.
Their freedom of religion does not trump my right to be safe, and these
buggies are highly dangerous.

[John Levine]

>Amish (and other similar) buggies should be banned from state highways.
>Their freedom of religion does not trump my right to be safe, and these
>buggies are highly dangerous.

There are plenty of Amish around here, and passing their buggies is
simple enough if you don't insist on doing it at 75 mph.

In rural areas, there are frequently no alternatives to the state
highway, and I expect most people would find their freedom to travel
trumps your right not to have to slow down.



--
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 9:01:15 AM UTC-7, jgar the jorrible wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 7:44:16 AM UTC-7, Harry K wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 4:20:54 AM UTC-7, Michael Angelo Ravera wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 12, 2013 8:44:53 AM UTC-7, jgar the jorrible wrote:
> > > > On Friday, August 9, 2013 8:41:01 PM UTC-7, Michael Angelo Ravera wrote:
> > > > > Although I doubt you would be cited for it and if cited, the defense of "necessity" might come into play if you took it to court, passing safely by driving your entire vehicle to the left of a double yellow line when the "open dash" is not on your side doesn't appear to be legal in California.
> > > > I think if any LEO saw you doing that he would be upset and would cite you on the spot. They've all seen the results of a bad pass.
> > > > And the judges have heard it all too, you better have video of a landslide coming after you for a necessity defense.
> > > > And as much as I'll rail against some of what I've seen LEO's and judges do, and bitch and moan about places where engineers changed a passing zone into a no-passing zone, I think they are right here. Jeez, it's stupid. They usually make it a no-passing zone because it's a bad place to pass!
> > > The kind of situation that I am talking about here where you would not likely be cited and where the defense of necessity might be used is in passing a vehicle that is traveling SO slowly that what you are doing might be better referred to as "avoiding an obstacle" than "overtaking and passing" -- One where it takes less that 4 times the length of your vehicle to get around. But, as I have said, passing another vehicle by driving your entire vehicle to the left of a double yellow line where the dash isn't on your side, has no codified exception in California.
> > The few states I checked, including Washington, also had no codification for it. I would suppose that all states, like Washington, have a provision somewhere for allowing passing an 'obstruction'. Of course defining "obstruction" is probably left up to the judge to determine :)

> I agree with you, but keep in mind things like 07.D.06 in http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/curriculum/Unit%207.pdf I think Ravera making an equivalency between a slow moving vehicle and an obstruction would blow back in your face; the difference being between an objective obstruction and merely hindering your progress. This would translate in the real world to how much of a dick the LEO is. There's quite a size variance there, I know I've been surprised when they've been reasonable - "I changed lanes quickly when the car in front of me slammed on the brakes because I knew I could stop my Corvette much faster than the VW van following me too closely," "Our motorcycles were too light to set off the signal detector in the turn lane in front of the police station" are two that I got away with - reasonable explanations accepted by reasonable LEOs. Oftentimes they just care that you're not drunk or aggressive.
> This weekend, a group of bicyclists spread out on a narrow winding rural road, some riding two abreast, no shoulder. Cars in front of me too a-scared to go over the double line. We just had to wait until they got to a wider spot in the road for the cars to pass. I went over the double yellow to pass a few, more to give them some space and not scare the shit out of them then anything else. I was thinking a cop going the other way seeing this might not be happy. Some bicyclists in this area are real assholes, but these just seemed clueless weekenders. The road in question used to have a single broken line, but there were too many accidents. One of them was my neighbor, totaled his cherry '62 356 Porsche he had since 1964.

My point is only if you can "pass them like they are standing still", then your situation is more of "avoiding an obstruction" that of a "passing a vehicle".

... And I repeat "No codified exception in California".

[jgar the jorrible]

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 7:18:16 PM UTC-7, Michael Angelo Ravera wrote:

>
> My point is only if you can "pass them like they are standing still", then your situation is more of "avoiding an obstruction" that of a "passing a vehicle".
>
>
>
> ... And I repeat "No codified exception in California".

So, change the law to make sense. The judge won't change the law for you.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.

Jeez, same model, year and color as my car. http://www.sandiegojack.com/story/23182595/car-hits-sycuan-casino-bus-head-on-3-hurt

[Nate Nagel]

On 8/12/2013 11:44 AM, jgar the jorrible wrote:

>>
>> Although I doubt you would be cited for it and if cited, the
>> defense of "necessity" might come into play if you took it to
>> court, passing safely by driving your entire vehicle to the left of
>> a double yellow line when the "open dash" is not on your side
>> doesn't appear to be legal in California.
>
> I think if any LEO saw you doing that he would be upset and would
> cite you on the spot. They've all seen the results of a bad pass.
>
> And the judges have heard it all too, you better have video of a
> landslide coming after you for a necessity defense.
>
> And as much as I'll rail against some of what I've seen LEO's and
> judges do, and bitch and moan about places where engineers changed a
> passing zone into a no-passing zone, I think they are right here.
> Jeez, it's stupid. They usually make it a no-passing zone because
> it's a bad place to pass!
>
> jg

Actually a no-passing zone seems to be the default mode on two lane
roads around here, and even when passing is allowed, the zones are so
rare that motorists seem to act like they've never seen a passing zone
before. Granted your average NoVA driver shouldn't even be on the road
much less attempting to pass other drivers...

nate

[Nate Nagel]

Got nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with freedom
to travel. Are you going to ban bicycles too? I for one won't be
voting for you.

nate

[Larry Sheldon]

On 8/21/2013 7:44 PM, Nate Nagel wrote:

>> Amish (and other similar) buggies should be banned from state highways.
>> Their freedom of religion does not trump my right to be safe, and these
>> buggies are highly dangerous.
>>
>
> Got nothing to do with their religion and everything to do with freedom
> to travel. Are you going to ban bicycles too? I for one won't be
> voting for you.

And skate boards. And Pedestrians.

Most of the Amish-on-the-move I have ever seen were when I was driving
big trucks, and most of them were on roads where the buggies ran on the
shoulder or just off the shoulder. And most of them were passing me.

I remember one--wish even yet I knew the whole story--young girl hauling
a.....going faster than I would have expected. Looked agitated. Late
getting home? I have no idea. But I bet her daddy or hubby had
something to say about the horse being run that hard.

[Nate Nagel]

Story I heard was at least around Lancaster a lot of the Amish horses
that aren't draft horses are actually thoroughbreds that didn't quite
make it as race horses. I have seen a few that make me think there
might be something to that story.

nate

[Larry Sheldon]

Interesting--had never thought about that but know that you mention it I
don't remember ever seeing a horse in a buggy rig that looked like it
would be at home in front of a plow or wagon.

[frustrate...@gmail.com]

On Monday, August 5, 2013 at 10:37:45 PM UTC-4, mkeen wrote:
> Turns out you can legally pass another vehicle in Vermont and Pennsylvania where the road is marked with a double yellow line as long as there is no signage specifically prohibiting it. The pavement markings are apparently more of a recommendation than anything else. Seems unnecessarily dangerous, if for no other reason than it violates the de facto standard.

It's plain that you have never driven in Vermont. Other than the two interstates there are no passing zones due to the way the roads follow the mountain valleys and the rivers.

[Harry K]

Just to add another aspect to it.

I recently got a warning for doing a U-turn on mainstreet in town. As it was a warning I just went on my way. Had it been a ticket I would have mildly objected by pointing out that it was alegal turn in Washington "if safe" unless the town has an ordinance against it (that town doesn't) Washington code does not address U-turns. The closest it comes is that one can legally cross a double yellow as long it as it can be done safely.

I doubt if a one could use that portion to defend passing in a double yellow.