The Curse of the Flashing Headlights and Passing Cars

Hey, anybody out there got a sharp wooden stake and a nice, heavy mallet?

How about an antique crucifix and a vial of holy water? Listen, we’d settle for a garlic necklace.

Because this cursed passing lane question just will . . . not . . . die.

It keeps lurching up out of the Street Smart mailbag in its rotting wool cloak, all fathomless black eyes and sharp-fanged leer, with blood on its breath.

And just when we were going to turn back to your important questions about nasty interchanges and misbegotten medians, this debate of the undead lunges for our throat and enslaves us to its will, forcing Street Smart to respond to argumentative letters like THIS:

****

Dear Street Smart:

Your discussion on the legality of flashing one’s lights when approaching slower traffic on freeway fast lanes (June 2) misses the important point:

Slower vehicles in the fast lane should move to the right and allow faster vehicles to pass. Not only is this the law (California Vehicle Code 21654 and “Slower Traffic Keep Right” signs), but it is courteous, responsible and safer.

How often have we all been stuck in a line of slow traffic in the left lane while the slow driver in front is either totally oblivious to cars stacking up behind or has stubbornly decided that all other traffic must go at his speed?

This driver often fails to understand or acknowledge responsibility for this dangerous situation, claiming, “I was going the speed limit, so I don’t have to move to the right for anyone.”

However, Vehicle Code 21654 states otherwise, obligating drivers to be aware of traffic behind and move to the right regardless of the speed limit if they are not keeping up with the normal flow of traffic.

Christopher L. Mahan, Newbury Park

*

Dear Reader:

By your letterhead, we see you are a lawyer. So, we are only going to answer this once. Carefully.

You cite a life example, compellingly. That thick block of slower-than-average traffic is often led by one cement-head firmly planted ahead of the fast lane, keeping perfect pace with other lane front-runners as if he rules the universe or has checked out of it entirely.

But so long as he is moving at the speed limit, he does not legally have to move to the right for anyone, CHP Officer Steve Reid says.

Now, Street Smart notes that this is yet another in a string of varying interpretations of Vehicle Code Section 21654. But Reid argues that the laws themselves--not drivers’ wants or speeding habits--must dictate.

“What supersedes all this is that we have a maximum speed limit [65, unless posted faster], which is absolute,” Reid said.

Yes, Section 21654 discusses the “normal flow of traffic” and requires slower vehicles to move to the right. But the maximum speed law overrules it, he says.

“Now, is it prudent for you to move over to avoid a complication with an aggressive driver? That’s probably the best way to go,” Reid advised.

If you are driving under the speed limit in the fast lane while surrounding traffic is faster, you can be ticketed for impeding the flow of traffic, Reid says. But he adds that the CHP is more likely to nail the irritated driver closing in at 67 than the one leading at 65 who forces him to do so.

****

Dear Street Smart:

Your June 2 column discussed when the law requires one to move over if the driver behind flashes his lights.

You and the letter writer missed the most important point. In my opinion, it is not what is legally required that is important, but what is the smart thing to do.

The guy behind may be in a legitimate hurry, or someone with a short fuse. By moving out of his way, if safe to do so, you may prevent a rash act on his part with possible dire consequences!

Robert A. Holt, Oxnard

*

Dear Reader:

But if people did the smart thing, body shop welders and certain plastic surgeons would be cashing monthly unemployment checks.

If people did the safe thing, we would not be whipsawed by the incessant debate over air bags--They save lives! They kill! They’re too strong! They’re too weak! They should be outlawed! They should be installed in car doors and roofs, too!--or be forced to buy tombstones for kids.

And frankly, Street Smart could give a flying . . . whether that turbocharged lunatic screaming up behind him is in a legitimate hurry or a homicidal rage. Street Smart only asks a few seconds to move out of the way--or at least a little understanding and following distance behind me when there is no room at rush hour to do so.

If more of you speed demons drove with common sense instead of your adrenal glands--like, try waiting the 20 seconds for the lane to clear instead of breathing down our rear bumper, flashing your lights, flipping us off and screeching around us to the right for five seconds each--there would be fewer lawyers and repairmen making money off you and your victims.

****

Dear Street Smart:

Some of your comments seem to place us faster drivers in an unfavorable light. (Well no, DUH . . . S.S.)

Most of us don’t have any untoward emotion or infantile intentions. We also don’t want to be unsafe. Fast and reckless aren’t always the same. It’s unfortunate to be characterized as a “zoomhound,” “maniac” or “idiot.” Many of us have the same rushed life on the road as off the road, and haven’t had a collision or close call in years.

Here’s the problem as I see it. Many drivers want to help “control” the behavior of those they perceive as unsafe, or may not want to see someone else get somewhere faster, so they act as junior cops.

It is frustrating to see someone leisurely driving at 55 or 60 in the No. 1 lane with 30 car lengths in front of them.

My vote? We should segment lanes by speed: No. 1, 75 mph; No. 2, 65 mph; No. 3, 55 mph, etc. This should also relieve the mix of speeds in a single lane.

Mike Hawkins, Camarillo

*

Dear Reader:

To paraphrase a witticism that probably hangs in every coffee break room in America (no, not “You want it WHEN???”): A rushed life on your part should not constitute acceptance of a flaming crash, lifetime paralysis and an early grave on our part.

Personally, Street Smart has about as much respect for fast-lane-blockers as he does for maniacal zoomhound idiots. Both are a menace to navigation.

As a former inveterate speeder who always signaled his lane changes, checked his blind spots and kept a safe following distance even at 92 mph, he also knows that there are safe speeders and unsafe speeders.

But CHP Officer Reid points out that speeders of any ilk are still breaking the law, and saving very little time while endangering other drivers around them.

“In reality, it’s a lot less stressful to be at about 65, have a nice space cushion around yourself so you don’t have to brake for slower cars,” he said. “In the long run, you’ll probably get better gas mileage. It’s not how fast you get there, it’s the fact that you get there at all.”

And with that, Street Smart will leave this particularly obsessed chat room, lock the door, shut out the lights and let the rest of you duke it out.

NEXT: The march of progress.