New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

10 messages Options
Snowballs Snowballs
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

There's a new traffic law in New York that I thought the readers here especially out of staters should be made aware of to keep people safe and to avoid a traffic ticket. I post it here so more people will see it now that the format has changed.

http://www.spotlightnews.com/news/view_news.php?news_id=1294005862
Harvey Harvey
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

This was broadcast loud and clear on the drive down 87 this week. Big digital signs that, somehow, in a very few words, explained the change. Good law IMO. If I was a cop I'd want it.

I'll leave this hear and move it into OT after people have seen it. Thanks for the head ups.
"You just need to go at that shit wide open, hang on, and own it." —Camp
Chris Chris
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

"Under the new law, motorists must reduce speed and use caution when approaching a stopped emergency vehicle with its lights activated. On roadways with multiple lanes, drivers must also move from the lane adjacent from the emergency vehicle unless traffic or other conditions make it unsafe to do so."

Seems like this should have been in place long ago.  New York must be one of the last states to enforce this?
The day begins...  Your mountain awaits.
tBatt tBatt
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

They had a trap set up on the Northway between 15 and 16 today. They had a cop with a decoy pulled over, one cop sitting in the woods a little further down, and then another a bit after that with 3 cars pulled over. I'm guessing the car in the woods watched the first car, pulled over anyone who didn't move over, and left them with the third car to write the ticket or warning.
skimore skimore
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

You would hope they gave warnings with that setup. Plus there is a bit of grey area on being able to get safely in the other lane. You could see some driver afraid of getting a ticket stopping in lane due to not being able to get over causing more of a safety hazard. Kind of like the person who can't merge and stops on the onramp
Benny Profane Benny Profane
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

In reply to this post by Snowballs
"“This law really addresses the most dangerous environments that are faced by law enforcement,” he said. “It's really a common sense law.”"


Well, that's nice, but, how about some more "common sense laws" that are made and enforced to protect citizens, too. I could use a little help out there at times, too.
 This will just make it easier to avenge a stupid accident by punishing the driver of the vehicle who hit the officer or cars, which I guess was not a possibility before if the driver wasn't drunk.
I have a better idea. Make sure that, if one has to pull over a car on the shoulder, it's for a damn good reason to create such a hazard to other drivers, and not for ticketing a driver for doing 78 in a 65 zone. Stupid is stupid on both sides of the coin.

(Did you know that in NY, and, I'm guessing, many other states, it is impossible to file a lawsuit against a police officer who has created a very damaging or lethal situation by starting a high speed car chase? They are protected by law from doing something so stupid as inspiring another stupid idiot to drive 100 miles an hour through traffic and neighborhoods as they stupidly drive 100 miles an hour behind them attempting to catch them for whatever stupid reason they feel fit. Stupid.)
funny like a clown
adkskier adkskier
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

Thanks in advance for cooperating with this new law. This thread has gotten a bit side-tracked with some rants against law enforcement and speeding. I'm an avowed  lifelong speeder. I'm also one of those volunteers who gets out of bed to respond to auto accidents (and lot of other emergencies that most of you don't want to see). When I have any concerns about my crew's safety, I just shut down the road and let drivers wait while we complete treatment and rescue. If drivers behaved better we'd let them drive by while we work to save lives. This is a good law that makes expectations clear. It's not a law intended to create revenue (like artificially low speed limits). I would not expect to see traps run for this law.
I Think, Therefore I Ski
tBatt tBatt
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

In reply to this post by Benny Profane
Benny Profane wrote
 They are protected by law from doing something so stupid as inspiring another stupid idiot to drive 100 miles an hour through traffic and neighborhoods as they stupidly drive 100 miles an hour behind them attempting to catch them for whatever stupid reason they feel fit. Stupid.)
I'm pretty sure they're told NOT to chase you if you're doing over 100 (because it's considered a suicide attempt?)
Harvey Harvey
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

In reply to this post by adkskier
Driving (most of) the length of I-87, we see 5-10 traffic stops on each trip, unless there is a storm in progress.

Yesterday, we saw what I would call a very high level of compliance with the new law.
"You just need to go at that shit wide open, hang on, and own it." —Camp
Snowballs Snowballs
Reply |
Open this post in threaded view
 

Re: New traffic law for NY. Be informed.

Yea that's a good thing, Harv. I've always moved over for them, emergency lights on or not. When the other lanes are occupied at least slow down. We've all seen troopers and other personal standing a just few feet or so from 70+ mph cars flying by.

If a trooper does ever stop you, move as far over to the right of the berm as you can to give everybody the extra margin of safety. It's common courtesy. It's common sense.
Reply