Forum Discussion
- The rule in the departments I worked was "Use lights & sirens when responding. Always use lights when transporting a patient, but don't use sirens when transporting unless critical.
But, whenever using EITHER lights or sirens, expect that drivers will do all sorts of dumb things trying to get out of your way. Since the law requires them to pull to the curb and stop, driving in the left lane (unless turning) usually reduces accidents." Grit dog wrote:
Tvov wrote:
beemerphile1 wrote:
FWIW not exactly related but many people aren't aware that emergency vehicles like an ambulance are allowed to monopolize the left lane, lights on or not.
I have never heard of that - without lights and siren? Without emergency lights and siren turned on, "emergency" vehicles are the same as other vehicles on the road and must follow the same rules / laws - at least that has always been my understanding.
Lol^ ever need an ambulance? It’s not always like TV where the ambulance is speeding away to the trauma unit with critical injuries!
This forum never fails to provide the best entertainment!
I am not sure what you mean. In Connecticut, unless an emergency vehicle has emergency lights and sirens on, they have to obey all road laws. Even with lights and sirens on, they can only break road laws "with due regard", meaning the driver has to be aware of traffic and safety - you can't just go through a red light for instance with lights and sirens on, you have to slow down substantially or even stop and wait for traffic to clear if it is busy.
I am in the fire department, I work with ambulance and police all the time.Tvov wrote:
beemerphile1 wrote:
FWIW not exactly related but many people aren't aware that emergency vehicles like an ambulance are allowed to monopolize the left lane, lights on or not.
I have never heard of that - without lights and siren? Without emergency lights and siren turned on, "emergency" vehicles are the same as other vehicles on the road and must follow the same rules / laws - at least that has always been my understanding.
Lol^ ever need an ambulance? It’s not always like TV where the ambulance is speeding away to the trauma unit with critical injuries!
This forum never fails to provide the best entertainment!Tvov wrote:
valhalla360 wrote:
beemerphile1 wrote:
FWIW not exactly related but many people aren't aware that emergency vehicles like an ambulance are allowed to monopolize the left lane, lights on or not.
Pet peave of mine. Ambulance on a free-flowing road running right about at the speed limit with the lights on.
They aren't getting anywhere any quicker but they sure do mess up traffic.
Many times ambulances are trying to provide the smoothest ride they can for the EMT(s) working on a patient in the back while on the way to the hospital.
I would think to also let folks around them know they are transporting patient. It might not be emergency right then but if patient goes bad the ambulance might need to make emergency stop or suddenly speed off. Being peeved about EMTs caring for someone is downright epitome of "me-first."fj12ryder wrote:
Until then stay outta my way and we'll both be happy.
That's all well and good UNLESS......
All lanes are full and yet you insist on riding right up on my tail, even though there really isn't any place for me to GO......OR you come screaming past at a speed that nobody expects to see.
In my book, either of those things automatically qualifies you for "bad guy" status......and a ticket if I was a LEO.valhalla360 wrote:
beemerphile1 wrote:
FWIW not exactly related but many people aren't aware that emergency vehicles like an ambulance are allowed to monopolize the left lane, lights on or not.
Pet peave of mine. Ambulance on a free-flowing road running right about at the speed limit with the lights on.
They aren't getting anywhere any quicker but they sure do mess up traffic.
Many times ambulances are trying to provide the smoothest ride they can for the EMT(s) working on a patient in the back while on the way to the hospital.beemerphile1 wrote:
FWIW not exactly related but many people aren't aware that emergency vehicles like an ambulance are allowed to monopolize the left lane, lights on or not.
I have never heard of that - without lights and siren? Without emergency lights and siren turned on, "emergency" vehicles are the same as other vehicles on the road and must follow the same rules / laws - at least that has always been my understanding.valhalla360 wrote:
ken56 wrote:
What if everyone drove at the same speed on the E-way. What if everyone adhered to a safe following distance and was courteous to other drivers to let them change lanes when needed. What if....right. I am responsible for the safe operation of my vehicle at all times. I drive the speed I am comfortable with and feel is safe. I am sorry if you happen to get behind me but....too bad.
This is exactly why we use the 85th percentile. We are trying to get everyone going as close to the same speed as possible and this is the best way we've found to make that happen.
Likewise, staying in the right lane if you aren't passing is letting drivers change lanes when needed and passing in a predictable safe manner.
If it's an empty rural freeway, the risk of running a 55mph in a 70mph zone isn't too big of a deal. If you are in an urban area, look back and see a massive lineup behind you (even if running in the right lane), you are a danger even if you aren't technically in violation of the law.
Grand Pa was at one of the meetings about setting a standard 65mph speed limit on roads in 55. There were no interstates.
I can't quote now but the 85% rule had something to do with revenue from traffic tickets. Use to be in our County that if the Sheriff stopped you, you were going to jail no tickets it was Reckless driving.
State wrote tickets.
Reckless driving is one thing. A little faster than porch sitter likes is another. Imagine the Chief or Head man taking my Ancestors blanket or whatever, for "you were seen galloping to fast across a meadow yesterday.valhalla360 wrote:
pnichols wrote:
The above is baloney thinking.
How about more enforcement of speed limits and way stiffer fines for the caught speed law violators? Maybe more (expensive) law enforcement officers and their vehicles is not required. Maybe it's instead way cheaper and better to use license plate reading radar detectors installed all over the country to slow drivers down.
Enforcement doesn't work. Drivers (as a group) are very good at determining an appropriate speed and short of permanent ongoing enforcement, you won't have any impact on the long term average speed. It will go down while heavy enforcement is in place but as soon as you stop, it will go right back up.
Worse, those familiar with the heavy enforcement may slow down but those not familiar will try to continue at reasonable speeds.
The old slogan "speed kills" is flat out wrong. It's "differential speed kills". Heavy enforcement tends to increase differential speeds.
There were no speed limits in Tn until 1955 except in towns. it was changed because Porch Sitters complained cars were faster than a horse or a model T and too fast.I know of one sign that is still up that simply says resume safe speed.
And Montana, Wyoming Nevada etc no speed limits until Fords idiotic 55. Even after it was no sped limit in Montana until California flake and a cop decided he would designate his own safe peed and Montana lost to the California flake for no speed limit.
I know one Veyron driver in Utah or use to that had a pile of speed tickets but never an accident.naturist wrote:
GordonThree wrote:
How is driving the speed limit considered enforcing it?
Ever try to get past the rolling roadblock of two side-by-side vehicles cruising down the road? What would you call it?GordonThree wrote:
Why is everyone in such a darn hurry?
Now that's a really good question for which I have no answer. If you get one, please, please, please let us all know.
I69 is a perfect example of Semis rolling side by side talking to each other at their lower speed limit..
People have places to go and aren't being paid by the hour by anyone.
Indy adds an hour or more to a trip. I've been working on trying to find alternate routes but there aren't any good ones since 78.
I hope Indiana really enforces this law on I69.
