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" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:27e8fe24-b87f-42a2-99b6-***@googlegroups.com...
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.

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

The same is true in MO.

[Nate Nagel]

Post by 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.

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]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

[Evan Platt]

Post by 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.

Really? Please cite this.

[Arif Khokar]

Post by Evan Platt

Post by 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.

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.

[Larry Sheldon]

Post by Arif Khokar

Post by Evan Platt

Post by 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.

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.

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

[richard]

Post by Evan Platt

Post by 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.

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.

[T.J. Higgins]

Post by richard
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

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

[Evan Platt]

On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 14:01:59 -0500,

Post by T.J. Higgins

Post by richard
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?

[H.B. Elkins]

Post by Evan Platt
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

[Larry Sheldon]

Post by Evan Platt
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 14:01:59 -0500,

Post by T.J. Higgins

Post by richard
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?

[Free Lunch]

Post by richard

Post by Evan Platt

Post by 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.

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.

Post by richard
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.

[Evan Platt]

Post by richard
Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.

Please cite.

Post by richard
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL

Post by richard
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.

Post by richard
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?

[Free Lunch]

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

Post by Evan Platt

Post by richard
Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.

Please cite.

Post by richard
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL

Post by richard
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.

Post by richard
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.

[Arif Khokar]

Post by Evan Platt
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]

Post by Arif Khokar

Post by Evan Platt
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.

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

[richard]

Post by Evan Platt

Post by richard
Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.

Please cite.

Post by richard
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL

Post by richard
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.

Post by richard
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]

Post by richard

Post by Evan Platt

Post by richard
Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.

Please cite.

Post by richard
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL

Post by richard
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.

Post by richard
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".

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]

Post by Free Lunch

Post by richard

Post by Evan Platt

Post by richard
Oh please Evan, I'll bet even California has the law.

Please cite.

Post by richard
A farmer is moving his columbine from farm to farm using the local roads.

Does his columbine have a combustible engine? LOL

Post by richard
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.

Post by richard
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".

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.

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

[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.

Post by Evan Platt

Post by 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.

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

[Sancho Panza]

Post by richard

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

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

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

Post by Sancho Panza

Post by richard

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

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

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.

[jgar the jorrible]

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by Sancho Panza

Post by richard

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by Sancho Panza

Post by richard

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

[Harry K]

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by Sancho Panza

Post by richard

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

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

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.

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 :)

Harry K

[jgar the jorrible]

Post by Harry K

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera
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 :)
Harry K

(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

[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-b638-***@googlegroups.com...

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

[jgar the jorrible]

Post by 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.

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

[Michael Angelo Ravera]

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Harry K

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera
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]

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera
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

[Sancho Panza]

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera

Post by Sancho Panza

Post by richard

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

[Nate Nagel]

Post by jgar the jorrible

Post by Michael Angelo Ravera
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

[Paul D. DeRocco]

Post by 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.

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?

[Chairman Obama]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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]

Post by Chairman Obama
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.

[Nate Nagel]

Post by Chairman Obama

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by 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.

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.

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]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Chairman Obama
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]

Post by Larry Sheldon

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Chairman Obama
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.

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]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Larry Sheldon

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Chairman Obama
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.

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.

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.

[f***@gmail.com]

Post by 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.

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.