[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by scollins

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.428

RCW 46.61.428
Slow-moving vehicle driving on shoulders, when.


(1) The state department of transportation and local authorities are authorized to determine those portions of any two-lane highways under their respective jurisdictions on which drivers of slow-moving vehicles may safely drive onto improved shoulders for the purpose of allowing overtaking vehicles to pass and may by appropriate signs indicate the beginning and end of such zones.

(2) Where signs are in place to define a driving-on-shoulder zone as set forth in subsection (1) of this section, the driver of a slow-moving vehicle may drive onto and along the shoulder within the zone but only for the purpose of allowing overtaking vehicles to pass and then shall return to the roadway.

(3) Signs erected to define a driving-on-shoulder zone take precedence over pavement markings for the purpose of allowing the movements described in subsection (2) of this section.


So the RCW says that only slow moving vehicles may drive on the improved shoulder, and only in those places where it has been specifically authorized. Seems pretty clear to me....

This was in my previous post

"RCW 46.61.115
When overtaking on the right is permitted.


(1) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle only under the following conditions:

(a) When the vehicle overtaken is making or about to make a left turn;

(b) Upon a roadway with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles moving lawfully in the direction being traveled by the overtaking vehicle.

(2) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass another vehicle upon the right only under conditions permitting such movement in safety. Such movement shall not be made by driving off the roadway."

This does not mention anything about slow moving vehicles. The RCW DOES NOT mention that ONLY slow moving vehicles may use improved shoulders. Lets face it, there is no law that explicitly bans driving on shoulders. RCW gives examples of when vehicles may drive on the shoulder but it does not state that one cannot, or at least I have yet to see any statute saying otherwise.

[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by 98005xi

I gotta say....SLAP ME SILLY doh! I forgot the actual CA vehicle code, but it does address passing on both shoulders and that it is illegal at speed, unless directed to by police officer or performed by said police officer.

As far as WSP's concern, I gotta say that I'm hard pressed to argue with you. Good fact checking!

But I got some ???s:

1a) Last time I checked, there's really no place to make left turns on an interstate unless it's someplace rural. As far as city driving, I don't see anyone getting away with pleading this defense to a WSP, right?
1b) I can't recall ever seeing a shoulder wide enough for 2 lanes of traffic, unless it was freshly widened freeway sections that just have't been restriped yet.

I can't for the life of me wrap my head around MA tho. If it's rush hour and anyone can drive on the right shoulder, merging and even just plain driving must be just wreckless and insanely chaotic. Is it?

Fun topic to talk about, especially for this CA transplant (been in WA for 5 years now). Can anyone tell me why WSP angles their patrol cars diagonally when pulling over someone on the freeway? Is it to direct the vehicle away from car and officer if it gets rear-ended?

I am sure a lawyer could get this dismissed. However, from what I have learned, judges and attorneys don't really care about the facts of the case and would rather just hear the sound of money being deposited. I have passed on the left shoulder before, on 405 north passed Mill Creek because some old lady was doing 35 in the HOV lane with no one in front of her for miles (the other 3 lanes were jammed up with traffic)

Yeah, well MA drivers are known as Massholes for a reason lol. It was crazy when I saw it at first but I got used to it. And it wasn't as "dangerous" as I first thought. When you want to get off the highway, just make sure you are in the "shoulder" lane.

from wiki under "shoulder (road)"

Peak period use by all traffic

On specially signed sections of highway in the Boston Metro Area, cars are allowed to use the shoulder as they would a normal lane during morning and evening rush hours.

[scollins]

Originally Posted by TENCHI

This does not mention anything about slow moving vehicles. The RCW DOES NOT mention that ONLY slow moving vehicles may use improved shoulders. Lets face it, there is no law that explicitly bans driving on shoulders. RCW gives examples of when vehicles may drive on the shoulder but it does not state that one cannot, or at least I have yet to see any statute saying otherwise.

Since you seem hell-bent on this, go ahead and drive on the shoulders if you so desire! Just stay away from me please.

This seems more like you are looking for validation, which you aren't going to get. Since you are a lawyer and know the law so well. To me it is perfectly clear. You can only drive on the shoulder when it is clearly posted that you may, and only then as a slow moving vehicle. The corollary being that you CAN'T drive on the shoulder unless posted. It is not a lane of traffic, and cannot be treated as such so that you can pass on the right.

Regardless of the law, we all KNOW that it is unsafe and unwise to pass a car on the right by using the shoulder.

[scollins]

Originally Posted by TENCHI

I have passed on the left shoulder before, on 405 north passed Mill Creek because some old lady was doing 35 in the HOV lane with no one in front of her for miles (the other 3 lanes were jammed up with traffic)

Ok, now I know FOR SURE that I have no desire to be around you when you are driving.

[lpphreakx06]

Couldn't pass on the right bro?

[jacky822]

I think it will be nice if the law changes to left lane over take only.. in Hong kong you will get a ticket if you stay in the over take lane which is the leftest lane. Means slow cars move right~!

[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by scollins

Ok, now I know FOR SURE that I have no desire to be around you when you are driving.

thats ok, I wasn't the only one that did it. If you like being stuck behind some old lady thats fine with me.

Oh, and I am not the one hellbent on proving anything or trying to get validation. I am just saying that there is no law that says you can't. you are the one trying to prove to me that there is.

Originally Posted by TENCHI

well, I am not suggesting we all go out and do that....but to waste thousands of tax payer dollars on something that is not really illegal per current statutes seems wasteful.

[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by lpphreakx06

Couldn't pass on the right bro?

no, lanes were packed with evening rush hour people.


anyways......apologies if anyone got offended. DON'T PASS ON SHOULDER.

[v4voodoo]

Originally Posted by TENCHI

Oh, and I am not the one hellbent on proving anything or trying to get validation. I am just saying that there is no law that says you can't.

WA RCW defines roadway as excluding shoulder. That explicit enough for you?
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.04.500

Originally Posted by RCW

"Roadway" means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the sidewalk or shoulder even though such sidewalk or shoulder is used by persons riding bicycles. In the event a highway includes two or more separated roadways, the term "roadway" shall refer to any such roadway separately but shall not refer to all such roadways collectively.

And this RCW defines how you drive on a roadway laned for traffic:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.140

Originally Posted by RCW

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.

Clearly, not being in a single lane marked for traffic is violating RCW.

That said, it's fuckin annoying when they're spending money on monitoring I-5 via aircraft for speeding tickets while there is a car prowl a week in my block.

[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by v4voodoo

WA RCW defines roadway as excluding shoulder. That explicit enough for you?
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.04.500


And this RCW defines how you drive on a roadway laned for traffic:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.140


Clearly, not being in a single lane marked for traffic is violating RCW.

That said, it's fuckin annoying when they're spending money on monitoring I-5 via aircraft for speeding tickets while there is a car prowl a week in my block.

yes, thank you for pointing out what a roadway is. Now please refer back to original post where I ask for where it says EXPLICITLY that driving on the shoulder is illegal.


oh,

"And this RCW defines how you drive on a roadway laned for traffic:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.140"


read the last part

"...........and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety"

translation....stay in the roadway lane until the driver has first determined that he can deviate safely.










seriously, beating a dead horse here. No one can prove that it is illegal. Just posting up crap that doesn't explicitly say that is illegal is worth jack. Explaining what a roadway doesn't prove that you can't drive on a shoulder.

[v4voodoo]

Originally Posted by TENCHI

No one can prove that it is illegal. Just posting up crap that doesn't explicitly say that is illegal is worth jack. Explaining what a roadway doesn't prove that you can't drive on a shoulder.

The RCWs above do prove that it _is_ illegal. Is the shoulder a single lane marked for traffic? No it's not. Therefore it's illegal. I am not sure what exactly you don't understand about this. "Safely moving from the lane" here refers to a lane change, i.e. a change from one lane to another, not into the shoulder (which is not a lane by the definition above).

Someone already posted the RCW that states that cities can put signage marking such zones where shoulder driving is allowed, does it really take a genius to figure that it means in absence of such zones driving on the shoulder is indeed prohibited?
There are spots all over WA that say "Shoulder Driving OK" and "End Shoulder Driving", wouldn't end shoulder driving mean, I dunno, that shoulder driving is no longer legal past the sign until otherwise stated?

If it wasn't we wouldn't need zones and signs for where it's legal, would we?

Here is one more for you:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.100

Originally Posted by RCW

(1) Upon all roadways of sufficient width a vehicle shall be driven upon the right half of the roadway

If you honestly believe that all those laws do not mean shoulder driving is illegal, I'd love to see you drive on the shoulder to overtake in front of a WSP car. If you don't get stopped and get a ticket citing the exact RCW I'll gladly pay you $50.

[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by v4voodoo

The RCWs above do prove that it _is_ illegal. Is the shoulder a single lane marked for traffic? No it's not. Therefore it's illegal. I am not sure what exactly you don't understand about this. "Safely moving from the lane" here refers to a lane change, i.e. a change from one lane to another, not into the shoulder (which is not a lane by the definition above).

Someone already posted the RCW that states that cities can put signage marking such zones where shoulder driving is allowed, does it really take a genius to figure that it means in absence of such zones driving on the shoulder is indeed prohibited?
There are spots all over WA that say "Shoulder Driving OK" and "End Shoulder Driving", wouldn't end shoulder driving mean, I dunno, that shoulder driving is no longer legal past the sign until otherwise stated?

If it wasn't we wouldn't need zones and signs for where it's legal, would we?

Here is one more for you:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.100



If you honestly believe that all those laws do not mean shoulder driving is illegal, I'd love to see you drive on the shoulder to overtake in front of a WSP car. If you don't get stopped and get a ticket citing the exact RCW I'll gladly pay you $50.

you are still not posting anything that explicitly says no driving on the shoulder. You are only providing your interpretations of what the statutes say.

ok, so if there is no sign that says "u-turn ahead" is it illegal to make a u-turn?

I got a ticket awhile back because I made a u-turn and there was no sign that said that it could be done. I went in and fought it by bringing in pictures of the area that showed no signs whatsoever that said that it couldn't be done. guess what....I won.


anyways, say what you will...do what you will and if you were to add a zero on that $50 I might do it.

[v4voodoo]

No, it's not illegal to make U-turns by default, and the cop who gave you the ticket must have been ignorant. The RCW explicitly specifies "safety" and not being on a crest as the only requirements to legally doing a U-turn unless otherwise stated.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.295

Again, the shoulder is not the right half of the roadway, the RCW above states clearly that's where vehicles must be driven. If you're driving on the shoulder you're not on the right half of the roadway and therefore you're in violation of the RCW.

Why would I pay you $500 to do it when the ticket you get is likely to be less than that? I'll add a zero on the left if it makes a difference to you :P

[TENCHI]

Originally Posted by v4voodoo

No, it's not illegal to make U-turns by default, and the cop who gave you the ticket must have been ignorant. The RCW explicitly specifies "safety" and not being on a crest as the only requirements to legally doing a U-turn unless otherwise stated.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.295

Again, the shoulder is not the right half of the roadway, the RCW above states clearly that's where vehicles must be driven. If you're driving on the shoulder you're not on the right half of the roadway and therefore you're in violation of the RCW.

Why would I pay you $500 to do it when the ticket you get is likely to be less than that? I'll add a zero on the left if it makes a difference to you :P

$5? nah....gotta pay for gas. Anyways....I am not encouraging driving on the shoulders (unless absolutely needed) Back to my original response....I don't think its worth my tax money to chase ppl down in a plane for driving on the shoulder (and as I am sure you aren't gonna change your mind I am not gonna change my mind that the laws don't really say that you can't drive on the shoulders) Its a waste of money.


BUT!!!!!


to end this unending debate....I will bow out


ps.


if I ever do get a ticket for passing on the shoulder, I will let you guys know what the outcome is!

[lux.sh]

waste of tax dollars. the guy sounded like he just smoked a blunt. Nothing better to do with all that money? I mean I agree that those retards should be punished, but all that expensive equipment to catch a reckless driver? Go fetch REAL criminals.

[///M3NACE]

damn

[StahlBlau3]

Originally Posted by hun77777

WPS stands for world poker series, you must meant WSP for washington state patrol