Sometimes, I think that cell phones have become the bane of society. People no longer think -- they just call. But recently, I've changed perspectives and decided that it's the automobile that is the real bane of society. What has the car done for us? It practially makes it so you never have to talk to your neighbors. You get in the car in the garage and drive away. And where do you go? To some Wal-Mart store far away where you can buy your tires, shoes, mp3 player, and tomatoes all at the same place? What happened to Mom and Pop's corner store that you could walk to? What happened to community comrodary and Neighborhood Watch? When did you have to ride the bus for an hour to get to school?
Of all the reasons for the downfall of the automobile, the one particularly on my mind lately is the fact that the drivers don't understand that changing lanes is not the same as merging.
Oddly, these two topics are barely even touched on in the Arizona Driver's Manual. So, let me enlighten you on a few of the finer points of driving. (The official Arizona State Traffic Laws are here: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=28)
Changing Lanes:
"Broken white lines separate lanes of
traffic going in the same direction.
These lines may be crossed with caution.
(Remember to signal your intention to
change lanes.)"
Solid white lines are used for turn
lanes and to prevent lane changes
near intersections. Arrows are
often used with the white lines to
indicate which turn may be made
from the lane." (Arizona Driver's Manual, 30)
"You should always signal before you: Change lanes..." (Arizona Driver's Manual, 32)
Those are the only things mentioned in the manual about changing lanes. Now, let's consider the following roadway, it's an actual example that I drive on my way home from work. There are three lanes of traffic that travel straight through an intersection, and two left turn lanes which open as you approach the intersection.
According to the Arizona Driver's Manual, you should not cross a solid white line. In fact, it's purpose is to prevent changing lanes near intersections. That means, in order to enter either of the left turn lanes, one must be in the left lane of through traffic before the solid white line begins. At this point, you would change lanes into either of the left turn lanes by appropriately signaling your intention. Once in the either left turn lane, you may change lanes into the other turn lane, but cannot leave the turn lane to return to the through traffic. That would require crossing the solid white line, which is prohibited.
So, what do you do if you couldn't get into the left turn lane? Or if you mistakenly got into the turn lane, and you didn't really want to turn there? You are required to maintain your lane and cross the intersection with the traffic in that lane. This may require you to pass through the intersection, do a U-Turn and come back to the intersection to take the appropriate course. It is not only rude to do otherwise, it is illegal.
Suppose for a moment, that we're on a normal, straight road, with only a single white broken line.
"A person shall drive a vehicle as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not move the vehicle from that lane until the driver has first ascertained that the movement can be made with safety." (A.R.S. 28-729)
Although vague, this is the most concise law respecting changing lanes and merging. While changing lanes and merging are not the same thing, many of the same laws apply to both.
Simply turning on your blinker to signal your lane change is not enough. It is the driver making the lane change who is responsible for ensuring that the lane of traffic is clear to move into (Arizona State Law: A.R.S. 28-729). In essence, through traffic always has the right of way, unless otherwise marked. Simply turning on your blinker does not give you the right of way. You must wait until there is a space large enough (and a little more) for your vehicle before making the lane change. You cannot simply stick the nose of your vehicle in the other lane of traffic and force other cars to make space for you. It is, however, illegal to purposely prevent another vehicle from changing lanes or merging. If you see a vehicle in an adjacent lane signal a lane change with enough advance notice that you are able to accomodate the lane change, you should do so. Remember though, that this requires the driver to turn on their blinker, and leave it active long enough for others to accomodate the change.
Nowhere will you find in the Arizona Driver's Manual that it says you cannot stop in a lane of traffic. This is quite common, for a number of reasons: Mechanical failures, traffic accidents, traffic jams, traffic signals or signs, pedestrians, left turns from 2 lane highways, ect. In fact, stopping is one of the best things someone can do in a dangerous situation, as long as it's done corectly. It is the responsibility of those behind the stopping vehicle to slow their speed as well. However, Arizona State Law (A.R.S. 28-704) makes it clear that you must maintain the flow of traffic, as long as it is safe to do so. This means that you cannot stop in a lane of traffic in order to change lanes.
"A person shall not drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when either of the following applies:
1. Reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.
2. The reasonable flow of traffic exceeds the maximum safe operating speed of the lawfully operated implement of husbandry." (A.R.S. 28-704)
Merging:
The major difference between merging and changing lanes is that merging happens when a lane ceases to exist. When changing lanes, both lanes continue to exist, or additional lanes have been created which can then be moved into. Sometimes a lane is closed due to construction, or maintenance or some other traffic hazard. This becomes a merge, not a lane change. Traffic which *changes lanes* before the obstruction or lane closure are participating in a lane change, not a merge. The merge applies to the first car in the lane before the obstruction occours.
Often during a merge, traffic cannot flow forward, so the ending traffic lane must stop. Ideally, traffic "zippers" together as the merge commences. This means that, when solid traffic exists in both lanes, cars from either lane alternate. However, this is not true when traffic is spaced as to allow more than one car from either lane through before another merge should happen. In this scenario, the merging traffic (ie: the traffic in the lane which is ending) must yeild to the through traffic (A.R.S. 28-729). It is the merging traffic's responsibility to wait until there is an opening for their car to safely move into. The through traffic is obligated to stop or slow down to let traffic in *only* when they've have a reasonable ability to do so. Failing to allow a reasonable merge to happen is considered agressive driving. It is the same as where a person purposefully attempts to prevent someone from merging or changing lanes where it would have otherwise been safe and legal (A.R.S. 28-695).
Moral Implications:
So, with all the talk of what is legal and what is not, how am I affected by this morally? My opinion is this:
It is my personal responsibility to first uphold the law, regardless of what is considered polite or customary. I should be polite to others when doing so does not require me to break the law.
Often, people feel the need to let someone in. I think that is rude and inconsiderate to everyone else behind you. In an effort to be polite to one person, you are being rude to several. Stopping in the lane of traffic is against the law, and will likely cause a traffic accident by attempting to let someone in. Besides, if you followed the law, traffic would flow better, and the person wouldn't have trouble getting in by themselves. However, obeying the law should be considered being polite. Has that changed?
Occasionally, people try to let themselves in. This is rude. This shows a deliberate disregard for the well-being of everyone around them. It is prideful... that they think they should be allowed to disobey the law because it is convienient for them. That they are more important than everyone else, and should be above the law.
A little bit of brains goes a long way. Let me take a single word from Thomas Watson, founder of IBM. "Think." If people would just think, there would be far less problems. Hang up the cell phone, and just drive. If you need to make a turn, and you don't know when it's coming up, get in the appropriate lane ahead of time. Use your blinker, it helps convey what's on your mind to everyone else around you.
I should not feel bad for obeying the law. I should not feel pressured to break the law. Going the speed limit is my perogative. Yet, I should let faster traffic pass me, even if they are disobeying the law by doing so. It is not my place to force others to obey the law. They must choose to do so by themselves. However, it is my responsibility to stand up for what is right; especially when the safety of my family is jepordized by another's failure to comply with the statues of the state. I do not need to be ashamed to inform people about the law. They have already agreed to abide by the state traffic laws by choosing to live here -- even if they don't have a driver's license.
3 comments:
well said.
Amen, brother. Preach it.
Although some of that stuff gets A LOT more complicated with the freeway access roads here in Texas. It's hard to describe what the problem is. We've been here almost 5 years and I'm still presented with situations with solid lined turn lanes with the access roads here where M and I can't decide what the right course of action is. UGH.
How do you feel about the situation where a merge is required and the merge lane is stopped but the main lane is steadily moving, but solid with traffic? It's rare, but I've seen it. Do cars stuck in the lane that is ending have to wait for hell to freeze over, or at some point is it ok for someone in the main lane who sees they will NEVER get in to slow down to a near stop and let them in?
Gretchen,
I posted a reply to your comment as a seperate blog. I realized that my last paragraph on merging was ill-explained, and I have modified it to clarify.
Post a Comment