I believe the only time you're allowed to pass using the shoulder is the same circumstance when you're allowed to pass by crossing double yellow lines - when you are in obvious danger and need to get out of the way (i.e. avoiding a wreck).

Regardless, Brian's sister was breaking the law and got caught.

And don't give me the "then why did the judge throw it out?" defense. Traffic violations get thrown out all the time. It's because the fine is frequently less than it would cost to actually decide it in court.

The shoulder is not the roadway. Will you please shut up now? Thanks.

I don't know about other places, but in metropolitan southern California, "peace officer" is a profession for people who, in general, have no marketable skills, no advanced education, and no innate abilities or talents, but who want to make a lot of money ($60k/yr to start).

They usually end up being pricks.

Same thing goes for firemen. Most of them are meatheads.

Obviously, there are exceptions, but based on what I've seen, most of them are fairly useless people without the badge.

And security guards in most casinos in Vegas are fat lazy ill educated slobs that failed the police academy. (my apologies if anyone here is a Vegas casino security guard.)

edit: Now the Matrix looking dudes in Major Casino security may be a different story.

Can you tell the difference without pulling them over?

No offense, but you guys are morons. I already told you the judge dismissed the ticket because my sister is in the right.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.75.010

Here is the law, last updated in 2005 (not the 1977 law you cited).



So, the RCW has two definitions of the word "roadway" in it. Who's right? My original point stands -- the laws aren't as clear cut.

If I had more time, I'd dig up the specific RCW which was published AT THAT TIME which specifically stated that the roadway was defined solely as the paved portion of the road. Looks like it's been changed since then.

The shoulder is not the "proper driving portion" nor is it "ordinarily used"

I don't really want to get into the argument here, but Brian I'm fairly sure that Bill and Emon are right here.

Do any of you guys live in WA? If my sister was in the wrong, she would have been found guilty in court. She was not, the ticket was dismissed. Here's a third definition of "roadway" in the RCW: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=468-34-110



Passing on the right is apparently illegal in many states. It's not illegal here. If it was illegal, the first law I posted about when it's legal to pass on the right would make no sense whatsoever. Do you honestly think they make roads that are wide enough to put two cars side-by-side w/out crossing the white shoulder line? Because that's what you all are saying -- that it's okay as long as you can pass on the right w/out going over the white line. I've never seen a road that wide, ever. And no, it's not talking about having two lanes going in the same direction.

In the next few days I'll dig up the paperwork I found for my sister and put the exact law as it was at that time. Unfortunately, the WA RCW web site doesn't show changes to laws (or I can't figure out how to get them).

Didn't you read this?


And not just that, but because the act in question may be reasonable despite the law.

Also, one last thing -- driving on the shoulder in many, many instances is perfectly legal here. Emon, I'm directing this at you. They have many roads where they are signed to specifically ASK slower drivers to drive on shoulders during daylight hours. I know of at least six different highways where the signs are up within ~10 minutes of me. Next time I pass one, I'll get out of my car and take a picture (but you guys will probably argue that it doesn't actually mean you're allowed to).

Wouldn't that make it part of the road and not the shoulder?

Regardless, your sister was still driving like a moron and deserved to get cited.

And are we really using the "that law is older than a law that makes it seem like what she did was legal so it doesn't apply" defense?

That there are places where signage says it's okay to drive on shoulders at specific times is completely irrelevant.



Spoken like someone who is completely ignorant on the topic.

I did see one of those shoulders Brian speaks of on my way to Whidbey Island. Just before the Ferry, I think.

I don't know, Avenger. I've seen all kinds of movies and such about police officers and firemen. I think I've got a pretty good idea of what they're really like... and I agree with Steven. lulz

If that were the case, it wouldn't be such a competitive field. I'm not saying that there aren't aholes in either, but jackasses don't make it through their probationary period.

Clearly you've never seen Backdraft. The jackass saves the day at the end. I understand this is how all firehouses work.

Yes, because competition always means "quality" and not simply "quantity."

Spoken like someone who is trying to defend a career that is useless the vast majority of the time - which a certain someone happens to have a part in.

Also, it's bad manners to reply to a statement with nothing other than an insult and no attempt to formulate a legitimate response. It hurt my feelings.

Look, I'm sorry I said you guys were morons and I'm sorry I told you to shut up. That was wrong of me and I really am sorry.

My sister wasn't doing anything other than following the law. I'm not sure you even understand what I'm talking about because everyone around here passes on the right when a car is stopped in the road making a left turn.

You're also completely missing the point -- that the laws and thus the enforcement of the laws are so damn confusing there's no way to be "right" all the time. When the RCW has three different and contradictory definitions of the word "roadway" something is clearly amiss.

In addition, if I said she passed over the fog lines, I may have been wrong. Upon thinking of this specific stretch of road, it's entirely possible that there is no fog line at all. (many county roads around here are like that) And in such cases, even you should agree that it's within any of those three definitions of "roadway."

This whole thing is out of hand -- I've said my piece, disagree if you will. Sorry again for being rude. I'm done with this thread.

I accept that, Brian. I apologize for any rudeness as well. There's no sense in being nasty to each other about this.

To state that those in the fire service have no skills is bull. Despite what the job requirements state, it takes a minimum of a 2 year degree in fire science, and medical training, most likely paramedic level training, which is another 1000+ hours of class room and practical training.

Additionally, your statement that their skills are useless most of the time is further proof of ignorance. They don't sit at the station all day and do nothing. If not doing training (it's on going and never ends because there is so much more to the job than fighting fires and running medical calls) for hazmat, heavy rescue, extracations, wildland fire, high angle rescue, confined space rescue, swift water rescue, etc, there are fire inspections, public and community education and more. But hey, their skills are useless most of the time, until you call and need them.

I used to walk past the main station of the Columbus Fire Department every day on my way to work. Those guys were constantly working out and doing all kinds of drills and such... and I immediately filed them all on my do not **** with list. They're immensely scary individuals.

They also spent a great deal of time grilling. They called me over one day and I ate a burger with them.

I would like for you to indicate at what point I said that they have no skill. You, Avenger, tend to take things people say to a more extreme level than they originally intended.

Perhaps I was unclear, but my point was that the people who gravitate toward such areas are people who have no outstanding abilities when they begin. Most don't hold a degree. Most don't have any natural leadership ability, any particularly impressive talent or skill set, or even a particularly high level on intelligence. Those things aren't required for that type of work. Are they all stupid? No. Are they all slackers? No. They learn some things while they are there, sure, but they don't have anything when they walk in. A two year degree in fire science is hardly worth bragging about. I'm glad they're training while they're being paid at their job. That's no credit to them. Everyone works at work. I would at least expect that.

Our fire guys have it made - two day shifts, two night shifts (during which they sleep), then four days off. Much cooking, working out, and sleeping goes on.

It's like cake, but better. They have an opening now and encouraged me to apply...but I don't have any relevant certifications or anything.

Fire science? There's enough to say about fire to make a degree about it?

Sure. There are 4 year programs as well.

For the record, I just came in halfway to argue because one time a lady almost hit my by trying to make a right turn from the shoulder while I was making a right turn from the right turn lane.

Whoever that was trying to compare American drivers to European drivers has some really odd ideas of what kind of driving we do over here.

That was me, I wasn't saying they were similar drivers, I was saying driving is very different so it's tough to apply different traffic systems that work in Europe and necessarily imply that they'll work in the US. Unless you live in a city in the US that actually has a metro system, which isn't that many, cars are the only way to get to your destination. Suburbs are much greater occurrence in the US as well. Different congestion, different traffic patterns, different cars (good god I've seen so many SMART cars over in Europe), lots more bikes / trams to deal with, speed limits, and arguably I'd say much better drivers in Europe than the US (but that's a personal opinion. If you want the anti-example to the Drachten experiment, go on Youtube and look up videos of traffic in Naples, Italy). We also don't have extensive rail networks that we can rely on as being a cost-efficient solution for traveling across countries, hence greater reliability on cars in the US.