# Personal GPS vs. Police Radar



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Shaun Malone's parents say the GPS shows the teen was driving at the 45 mph speed limit when he was pulled over in 2007. Their lawyer argues that something may have interfered with the radar gun to give a wrong reading, possibly a passing truck.
> 
> Savano said he believes Malone was driving more than 60 mph and slowed when he saw police. The radar clocked him at 62.


http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/09/11/Speeding-ticket-fight-Radar-vs-GPS/UPI-92441252726248/

I don't know how accurate personal GPS devices are, but police radar is (supposed to be) calibrated regularly. I can see how GPS would be able to measure and record approximate speed over a distance based on time from point to point, but how would a GPS register a temporary increase in speed as accurately as a certified and calibrated radar gun?


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

My GPS has the ability to show my current speed at all times. Whenever I've used that screen to test it, it's pretty much been right on the money of what my speedometer shows.


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

The speedometer in my jeep liberty used to work on and off. Somedays it would be fine, the next day it wouldn't move at all. On those days that it didn't move, i used to use my GPS as a speedometer and it worked like a charm!


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

spartanstew said:


> My GPS has the ability to show my current speed at all times. Whenever I've used that screen to test it, it's pretty much been right on the money of what my speedometer shows.


A few years ago, Mrs. Fluffybear and I were driving through Des Moines, Iowa when a plane passed overhead. I looked down at our GPS for a moment and it claimed that we would be in Kansas City in little over an hour and that our maximum speed was over 500+ MPH (do not recall exact number). A GPS device in no way is 100% accurate.

Radar Guns are suppose to be calibrated regularly every few months and Officers re-certified (I believe it is yearly) but some police departments do not have the budget to go through this process and on occasion choose to skip this step.
The last time I was stopped for speeding, I requested the both the calibration report for the gun and certification certificate for the officer. Sadly for me, both were up to date. I did however win the case as the officer claimed my car was green when in fact it is midnight blue. I pointed out that if the officer could not tell a blue car from a green one then how could we be sure he stopped the right car.


----------



## FHSPSU67 (Jan 12, 2007)

spartanstew said:


> My GPS has the ability to show my current speed at all times. Whenever I've used that screen to test it, it's pretty much been right on the money of what my speedometer shows.


Yep, right on for me, too.


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

I don't have a navigation system, but I have a Passport 9500i with GPS that will display my speed and I've never had an issue with it. I've checked it by manually timing travel between mile markers and it's dead on.

As for police radar, if the unit is properly calibrated _and_ properly operated, it is accurate. However, just because the calibration and officer's training was recently certified does not mean it was properly operated and calibrated at the moment of use. One thing that commonly occurs in traffic is that the officer will ping one vehicle, but pull over another, either by accident or simply "choice".

Personally, I despise speed traps because they serve only one purpose, which is to generate revenue for the police department. Most radar and all laser devices are used in this manner. Officers and police departments that truly care about motorist safety will actually drive in traffic. This gives them the opportunity to observer motorist behavior and it generally causes drivers to be more cautious as few people will pass a patrol car.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, the article does not mention it, but this was not just a dashboard GPS unit, but one installed by his parents that is made to track the car at all times and email them if it goes over a certain speed as well as log all the locations and speeds of the car for later downloading. His father is an ex-sheriff deputy.

I don;t know if this box is any more accurate than a standard dash or OEM built-in model or not. In the original case, the prosecution's expert witness said the unit was not accurate and the kid lost. He and his parents appealed and this time, the same guy actually stated under oath that the unit in question was accurate to within a couple of meters and to within 1 MPH, so the state allowed themselves to be screwed here.

http://gizmodo.com/tag/shaun-malone/

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/07/18/gps-data-exonerates.html

This has the best overal info I could find. http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0911/p02s01-usgn.html


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

I just bought a car that I will pass onto my granddaughter when she turns 16 in a little over a year. I fully intend to put a similar GPS tracking device into the car. It's not that I don't trust her (I have no reason not to), but today's roads are different than when I was a teen. Not only do I want to know that she is driving safely, I also want to be able to track the car just in case something were to happen. If she were to be ticketed and the device shows differently, I'd be doing exactly the same thing as this parent. While I understand that GPS is not perfect, neither are the human police offers and their electronic devices. Given that our justice system is supposed to treat defendants as "innocent until proven guilty" and proof is to be "beyond a reasonable doubt," I do not see how a real court (i.e. not a "traffic court", which is usually a joke) could uphold this ruling. To say that "GPS is imperfect, therefore there is no reasonable doubt" is a logical fallacy.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I believe this is coming down to a test of newer technology vs. an accepted measurement device. But there's also a chain of evidence issue. On a traditional personal GPS/navigational device, can one even get a printout of the vehicle's speed at any given point? If so, can that be be altered/edited in any way? If so, it is invalid as proof to a court. What about the type of GPS tracking/recording device in this case? Can the data dump from it be altered/edited by the subscriber?

This is going to come down to what is admissable as proof in court.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

rudeney said:


> I just bought a car that I will pass onto my granddaughter when she turns 16 in a little over a year. I fully intend to put a similar GPS tracking device into the car. It's not that I don't trust her (I have no reason not to), but today's roads are different than when I was a teen. Not only do I want to know that she is driving safely, I also want to be able to track the car just in case something were to happen.


I guess I am going to get bashed with this, but I think with today's technology, don't track the car, track the child. If I had kids I would chip them under the skin until they were 18 and could have it removed at there own legal advisement. Or are we not there yet?


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

SayWhat? said:


> I believe this is coming down to a test of newer technology vs. an accepted measurement device. But there's also a chain of evidence issue. On a traditional personal GPS/navigational device, can one even get a printout of the vehicle's speed at any given point? If so, can that be be altered/edited in any way? If so, it is invalid as proof to a court. What about the type of GPS tracking/recording device in this case? Can the data dump from it be altered/edited by the subscriber?
> 
> This is going to come down to what is admissable as proof in court.


You are totally right. In this case, teh representative from the GPS company is evidently helping them as they want publicity.

However, the key is the testimonyu of hte prosecution expert. Once he said it was that accurate, they were doomed. Now the prosecution will have to get him to try to clarify his statements without looking like a wishy washy purjerer and also probably bring in another expert to examine the device in detail.


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

armophob said:


> I guess I am going to get bashed with this, but I think with today's technology, don't track the car, track the child. If I had kids I would chip them under the skin until they were 18 and could have it removed at there own legal advisement. Or are we not there yet?


:uglyhamme Consider yourself bashed! :lol:

Seriously, I don't think I'd do that. i don't mind tracking the car and how it's driven because it's my property. A person is not "property" and chipping an individual just seems a little too "Big Brother" for me. Of course if anything bad ever happens, I'd be wishing I had done that, but I'd put that in the same category of thinking as, "I should never have let her leave the house." At some point, we have to learn to trust our children and believe that they have listened to some of the things we've taught them. I survived, so did our daughter, and now we hope the granddaughter will continue that tradition.


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

SayWhat? said:


> I believe this is coming down to a test of newer technology vs. an accepted measurement device. But there's also a chain of evidence issue. On a traditional personal GPS/navigational device, can one even get a printout of the vehicle's speed at any given point? If so, can that be be altered/edited in any way? If so, it is invalid as proof to a court. What about the type of GPS tracking/recording device in this case? Can the data dump from it be altered/edited by the subscriber?
> 
> This is going to come down to what is admissable as proof in court.


It looks like the product in question (The RMT Rover) has been discontinued, but I was able to find this:

http://www.rmtracking.com/blog/2008/06/30/the-rmt-rover/



> The information about the vehicles location and driving habits are relayed to a website through a cell phone tower. The information that is collected is not accessible from the vehicle itself. If you are interested in tracking employee habits, then the employees doing the driving cannot alter the information before it reaches you. They can, of course, change their driving habits, but they cannot access the information that is only available to you on the website.


This isn't really a battle or test of technology. It is the same argument that our criminal justice system addresses daily, which guilt or not based on the testimony of witnesses, accusers and defendants plus the evaluation of evidence. In this case, we have two pieces of technology, both having their own faults and capabilities. We also have two witnesses - the defendant driver and the officer. Our justice system has a vested interest in maintaining the integrity of our police officers. Having an officer judged to be a mistaken or incapable witness or even falsifying his testimony is a larger problem than one teenager's traffic ticket.

Assuming that the Rover provided accurate location information, I don't see how its speed information could be very wrong. As I said before, the real problem here is that the defense has introduced reasonable doubt and that is all that should be needed in this case for a not guilty verdict. If we do want to make this a battle of technology, then consider the two devices. Both can be influenced by internal defects and environmental conditions. However, the Rover is fully automated, yet the police radar requires a human intervention and its readings can therefor be influenced by human error.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

The ironic thing here is if the teen in question were to have actually been speeding and been involved in an accident, the prosecution would have subpeonaed the data from that recorder and if that data showed he was speeding, it would have been forefront in their case.

They can't have it both ways.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

fluffybear said:


> Radar Guns are suppose to be calibrated regularly every few months and Officers re-certified (I believe it is yearly) but some police departments do not have the budget to go through this process and on occasion choose to skip this step.


Officers are required to be recertified anywhere from ever year to every 3 years depending on requirements of their state. Radar guns are re-calibrated every 6 months and a notarized copy is provided to the department, along with the serial numbers of the tuning forks that were used to calibrate the gun. Every shift before using the radar gun, the officer needs to calibrate it using the specific tuning forks the manufacturer used. The tuning forks emulate two different speeds. The officer will then calibrate the radar against their cruiser speedometer, if they are going to be using the radar while moving. In the latter case, they will also have the certification about their speedometer. After each vehicle is stopped, the officer should retest the calibration of the radar gun and also perform a retest at the end of their shift. Similar testing is done in the same manner if an officer is using a LIDAR gun (Laser RADAR).

When in court, the officer needs to be able to provide the original copy of the radar calibration that shows it was tested within six months of the issue of the speeding ticket. If needed to be submitted as evidence, the officer then provides a notarized copy of the original for submission (so the original is not used).



rudeney said:


> As for police radar, if the unit is properly calibrated _and_ properly operated, it is accurate. However, just because the calibration and officer's training was recently certified does not mean it was properly operated and calibrated at the moment of use. One thing that commonly occurs in traffic is that the officer will ping one vehicle, but pull over another, either by accident or simply "choice".
> 
> Personally, I despise speed traps because they serve only one purpose, which is to generate revenue for the police department. Most radar and all laser devices are used in this manner. Officers and police departments that truly care about motorist safety will actually drive in traffic. This gives them the opportunity to observer motorist behavior and it generally causes drivers to be more cautious as few people will pass a patrol car.


While RADAR is not vehicle specific,the officer's training and observations are used to determine which vehile is traveling the speed displayed on the gun and in most cases it is fairly obvious. Officers are also trained in speed recognition and are trained to estimate the speed of a vehicle prior to looking at the RADAR gun to see what speed the vehicle is traveling. With RADAR, there is also a audible tone that should mirror the speed of the vehicle. It's very rare that an officer is going to stop the wrong vehicle.

LIDAR, on the other hand, is vehicle specific. You aim at a specific vehicle and you know that is the vehicle that the speed on the LIDAR is referring to.

As for speed traps, in many cases they are very essential and help with motorist safety. Think of residential areas where vehicles drive up and down at twice the speed limit. The only real way an officer is going to catch those speeders is to set up stationary RADAR or LIDAR and get them coming down the street. And while yes, people don't like to pass a police car, when sitting stationary you get to see a greater amount of vehicles in an area than when you are driving around.

- Merg


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

The Merg said:


> While RADAR is not vehicle specific,the officer's training and observations are used to determine which vehile is traveling the speed displayed on the gun and in most cases it is fairly obvious. Officers are also trained in speed recognition and are trained to estimate the speed of a vehicle prior to looking at the RADAR gun to see what speed the vehicle is traveling. With RADAR, there is also a audible tone that should mirror the speed of the vehicle. It's very rare that an officer is going to stop the wrong vehicle.


This may be true on city streets and secondary roads, but not on high-speed Interstates with three to eight lanes of traffic moving in the same direction at 60-80mph. Of course if there was one car going much faster than other traffic, then yes, but that is rare. Still, I see our local and state police picking people off the Interstates daily. I've been through it myself. I was taking a minivan full of kids to a football game and got pulled over and cited for driving 85mph in a 60mph zone. I was maybe doing 65mph and being passed by a lot of other vehicles, one of which I am sure was the actual target of the officer's radar. He even admitted that he could not tell which vehicle was speeding, but said we were all "obviously" going the same speed. I got out of the ticket, but the officer even lied in court and claimed he did not say that. I wish I had a tape recorder.



> LIDAR, on the other hand, is vehicle specific. You aim at a specific vehicle and you know that is the vehicle that the speed on the LIDAR is referring to


Yes, many of the LIDAR guns today are also video cameras that capture the image of the driver, front tag (if applicable) plus the CCD even picks up the LIDAR reflection. Except in a few situations where it can misreport the speed based on humidity conditions or the operator being in motion (even slightly), this is extremely accurate and nearly irrefutable.



> As for speed traps, in many cases they are very essential and help with motorist safety. Think of residential areas where vehicles drive up and down at twice the speed limit.


OK, I agree. While I hate speed traps and love to drive fast on the open highways, I usually drive slower than the posted limit in residential areas where children may be. Parking lots are another place where I am overly cautious. And yes, I only wish that I could get our local police to setup in our neighborhood as we have people who drive too fast and run stop signs. I actually got on to setup once, and he caught a neighbor running a stop sign. He wrote her a warning. Ten minutes alter, she went back out and ran the stop sign again. He wrote her another warning. Yet on the open highway outside the neighborhood, they writ tickets left and right for exceeding the 35mph limit, where there are almost no cross streets, driveway, business, etc. (just a large cow pasture).



> The only real way an officer is going to catch those speeders is to set up stationary RADAR or LIDAR and get them coming down the street. And while yes, people don't like to pass a police car, when sitting stationary you get to see a greater amount of vehicles in an area than when you are driving around.


Again, that's residential. I'm talking more about highways. Our police are bad about hiding behind Interstate overpass posts or in grass in the median. What's worse, when they ping a speeder, they usually just light-up the bar and hit the gas, expecting motorists in the left lane to stop for them - on the 70mph Interstate! I've actually witnessed two bad wrecks caused by police pulling onto the Interstate like that.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

Police doppler radar has always had the problem of not being certain which vehicle's speed is being registered. For most guns even still today it is the moving object that creates the strongest return signal - usually the largest cross-section the beam hits. They cannot discriminate a target moving toward the gun versus one moving away so in some cases the target it's reading may be on the other side of a divided highway, etc. Some of the newest and more expensive radar guns can read the fastest moving vehicle but either way it comes down to the user being trained in more than just using a radar gun as others have mentioned. The problem is that humans make errors, all of us, so there is no doubt a sizable percentage of tickets issues in error - fighting them are usually futile and not worth you time or effort as the judge will take the officers word over anything you have to say.

As for speed traps, I agree the most effect ways to actually control the speed people are driving is to drive with them OR to be posted in a very visable location, this makes everyone drive the speed limit. Sitting around a sharp corner, using LIDAR, etc. are effective at generating revenue and penalizing speeders but are not effective in slowing the whole flow of traffic unless it's done in the same spot very often and those that drive the route know about it and slow done to avoid being ticketed. 
It does not slow down speeders going through the area that don't know about it, particularly when the officer is not there or when they already have someone else pulled over.

LIDAR guns can create erroneous readings if the user quickly moves the gun even just slightly so as to move the point of impact the infared beam strikes. This was discovered quickly when using them at NASCAR events; the beam would be aimed at the front bumper but when the driver hit the brakes and the front end dipped quickly the beam is now striking the windshield and would actual register the car was going suddenly faster, not slower. Experts have also shown in court cases that you could replicate this using the corner of a room, moving the device in the right manner would register a moving wall.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Where I work, there is actually a special residential speeding code section. If a road is designated as part of this area, then instead of regular speeding, the person is charged under a different code section that has a civil fine of $250. Generally, under speeding the person will receive a fine of $3/mph over the speed limit. The difference is that with the civil penalty code section, it is not considered a moving violation and thus DMV will not issue points for the violation.

I love it when I offer the person I stop which code section they'd like the ticket written under. It's amazing how many people pick the civil code section and will pony up $250 just like that to avoid a few points on the their license.

- Merg


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

The speedo in my '75 charger only goes to 100... it's circular and it will wrap around again... I once got stopped for 148 mph, I only stopped to collect the ticket for bragging rights. I told the officer I was making sure I was using all of the speedometer....... Unfortunately he did not think it was funny, neither did the judge or my insurance company.....


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

dodge boy said:


> The speedo in my '75 charger only goes to 100... it's circular and it will wrap around again... I once got stopped for 148 mph, I only stopped to collect the ticket for bragging rights. I told the officer I was making sure I was using all of the speedometer....... Unfortunately he did not think it was funny, neither did the judge or my insurance company.....


Didn't you argue that your speedometer said you were only going 48 mph? :lol:

- Merg


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

The Merg said:


> I love it when I offer the person I stop which code section they'd like the ticket written under. It's amazing how many people pick the civil code section and will pony up $250 just like that to avoid a few points on the their license.
> 
> - Merg


If it were just the money, I would probably get caught weekly. :eek2:

The points and insurance keep me within 10 of the posted limit because here in WV within 10 on an interstate is just a "warning". There is a fine, but no points. And most officers (state or county, all bets are off with local) won't pull you over within that.

Kansas recently enacted a Right Lane Law that allows officers to ticket drivers in the passing lane unless they are actually passing. WOW! What a concept. Let a few left lane hogs, or "keepers of the speed" get a few tickets then maybe they won't care if I want to drive faster than them.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The Merg said:


> LIDAR, on the other hand, is vehicle specific. You aim at a specific vehicle and you know that is the vehicle that the speed on the LIDAR is referring to.


LIDAR isn't so much "aimed" as it is pointed. I was tagged for travelling 96mph on a sport motorcycle when I was actually doing somewhere on the downside of 85. The officer was not trained to use the LIDAR but he testified that he had just calibrated the unit on a road sign.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Herdfan said:


> Kansas recently enacted a Right Lane Law that allows officers to ticket drivers in the passing lane unless they are actually passing.


Oregon recently enacted law that says that you have to move over into a left lanes when there are emergency or disabled vehicles standing on the shoulder.


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

armophob said:


> I guess I am going to get bashed with this, but I think with today's technology, don't track the car, track the child. If I had kids I would chip them under the skin until they were 18 and could have it removed at there own legal advisement. Or are we not there yet?


I say do it. I also demand the Government insure them and hold them accountable for anything they do wrong so it does not interfere with my personal being! :nono:

If technology can be used to prosecute, then it should be used to defend as well.


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

harsh said:


> Oregon recently enacted law that says that you have to move over into a left lanes when there are emergency or disabled vehicles standing on the shoulder.


Does it say you have to move over or does it suggest that you move over and if you cannot, slow down?


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

It's really a complex issue. Radar measures the component of the velocity in the direction of the beam. GPS measures the actual velocity vector in 3D space. Is GPS speed accurate while the vehicle is turning or transitioning from a slope to more level terrain? Or is there a delay while the GPS updates its state vector?

I would think that in most cases, an off axis measurement from RADAR or LIDAR works to the advantage of a driver. But, in no way, should one expect a GPS to instantaneously replicate the velocity measured by a radar type device.

That's my analysis.

--- CHAS


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

harsh said:


> LIDAR isn't so much "aimed" as it is pointed. I was tagged for travelling 96mph on a sport motorcycle when I was actually doing somewhere on the downside of 85. The officer was not trained to use the LIDAR but he testified that he had just calibrated the unit on a road sign.


No. You aim it. You look through a HUD and pinpoint onto the spot on the car you are targeting, preferably the front license plate if available. You pull the trigger and you get the speed displayed. You get an audible feedback if you acquired the target correctly.

As for the officer not being trained, I'm not sure why he would be using the LIDAR then. When calibrating it, you need to perform a HUD display test, internal systems test, speed differential test, and distance test. You could possibly use a street sign to perform all of the tests (except the internal systems test), but you would need to have two specific distances measured out from it.

- Merg


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

harsh said:


> Oregon recently enacted law that says that you have to move over into a left lanes when there are emergency or disabled vehicles standing on the shoulder.





Spanky_Partain said:


> Does it say you have to move over or does it suggest that you move over and if you cannot, slow down?


Virginia has the same law on the books. You need to move over a lane or slow down to a safe speed when emergency vehicles are on the shoulder.

As for the passing law, New Jersey has signs posted on the NJT that state the left lane is for passing only. If you are not passing someone, you can technically get a ticket for failing to obey a highway sign.

Virginia doesn't have something as strict, although it states that a vehicle must yield right-of-way to an overtaking vehicle upon an audible or visual signal. Guess how many people move out of the left lane after getting headlights flashed at them?

- Merg


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

HIPAR said:


> I would think that in most cases, an off axis measurement from RADAR or LIDAR works to the advantage of a driver. But, in no way, should one expect a GPS to instantaneously replicate the velocity measured by a radar type device.
> 
> That's my analysis.
> 
> --- CHAS


Very true. Unless the RADAR or LIDAR are being used directly in front of the vehicle, the actual speed displayed is usually about 1-3 mph less than what the vehicle is actually traveling.

- Merg


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Herdfan said:


> Kansas recently enacted a Right Lane Law that allows officers to ticket drivers in the passing lane unless they are actually passing.


Most states have that in one form or another, usually under the umbrella of "Improper Lane Usage" or "Failure to Yield". The left lane is never for cruising under normal circumstances.

The Move Over laws only require you to move over if the next lane is clear, otherwise you have to slow down.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

The Merg said:


> As for the passing law, New Jersey has signs posted on the NJT that state the left lane is for passing only. If you are not passing someone, you can technically get a ticket for failing to obey a highway sign.
> 
> Virginia doesn't have something as strict, although it states that a vehicle must yield right-of-way to an overtaking vehicle upon an audible or visual signal. Guess how many people move out of the left lane after getting headlights flashed at them?





SayWhat? said:


> Most states have that in one form or another, usually under the umbrella of "Improper Lane Usage" or "Failure to Yield". The left lane is never for cruising under normal circumstances.


So why in the Sam Hill is this law never enforced?  I can guarantee having Bubba in his pickup with bald tires jerking over in the right lane and racing past a left lane squatter only to jerk back right in front of him to "get his attention" is far more dangerous than me driving at 85 on an empty Interstate. But who gets the ticket?

The Kansas laws seems to point to requiring actual enforcement of laws already on the books.


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

Herdfan said:


> So why in the Sam Hill is this law never enforced?


The "keep right except to pass"rule is not enforced here in Alabama because it would require about 8 officers for every 10 cars on the road. Yes, people in Alabama believe it is their God-given right to drive slowly in the left lane. Excuses range from, "it's a smoother ride," to, "I do it to slow down those danged speeders!" I actually see care entering a 70mph Interstate on the right and move immediately into the left lane, crossing traffic without regard for right-of-way, and end up int he left lane before they are even up to 45mph. Like you, I wish the police would ticket those people instead of us that want to drive a little fast on an open highway.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

rudeney said:


> The "keep right except to pass"rule is not enforced here in Alabama because it would require about 8 officers for every 10 cars on the road. Yes, people in Alabama believe it is their God-given right to drive slowly in the left lane. Excuses range from, "it's a smoother ride," to, "I do it to slow down those danged speeders!" I actually see care entering a 70mph Interstate on the right and move immediately into the left lane, crossing traffic without regard for right-of-way, and end up int he left lane before they are even up to 45mph. Like you, I wish the police would ticket those people instead of us that want to drive a little fast on an open highway.


This is getting a bit OT but I agree with the left-lane bandit / rolling road-block enforcement issue. I think people actually passing on the left and then getting back over instead of sitting out there would create much safer highways. It also reminded me of the old "The Far Side" cartoon that showed hell with special doors for different things, one was "People Who Drive Too Slow in the Fast Lane" - classic stuff!


----------

