And god forbid you suggest that cars' maximum speeds should be set to 100. People come up with all sorts of fantasy scenarios in which they might need to go 110, all of which are certainly ridiculous

My favorite one is the "hospital rush" story. I encourage you to try driving 105 on a clear freeway in the middle of the day and see how safe you feel in your kia. Protip: your tires probably aren't rated for that speed!

I think Waugh's quote is on point with why them being explicit is relevant (and it's not about the prudish takes):

> “The format that they use that in is not the greatest,” Kick said. “It is in fact more distracting than it is actually getting the message across.”

How many speedsters are going to slow down because a sign says "fuck" vs how many drivers are going to point, laugh, grab pictures with their phones, anything besides actually slow down or pay attention to the road?

"Explicit" as used in the article doesn't mean what you think it does.

I love that verbiage, because IMO it really gets to the crux of the issue: many drivers think that if they're going the speed limit, it's OK to park out in the left lane.

The problem with that is nearly everywhere in the US the average rate of speed on highways is about 5 miles over the speed limit, so if you're doing the limit you are going to be one of the slower cars driving.

It really is about cars passing you. If you're not passing you need to move over.

> Unrelated rant: I once saw a US traffic sign online that said "If drivers are passing you on your right, you're doing it wrong".

One observation from a cop:

> “I stopped a guy one day for doing 100 [kph] [in the left lane] and there were cars passing on the right honking at him and giving him the finger,” Stratton said. “He said ‘I’m keeping people from speeding and doing your job for you.’ But he was keeping me from doing my job, which was to catch speeders and give them the ticket they deserve.”

* https://archive.is/https://www.theglobeandmail.com/drive/cul...

Ontario, Canada specifies to keep right:

> 147 (1) Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of the roadway. […]

* https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08#BK253

Quebec has similar stipulations.

I get that leaving the left lane clear for passing is the convention, but is it actually optimal? If everyone stuck to this, then the left lane would be rarely used and we'd be underutilizing the available space, right?

Where I live, there are signs saying "keep right except to pass" but they're neither obeyed nor enforced afaict. And it's never really bothered me tbh (I'm usually chilling in the right lane).

This is the law in Europe, passing on the inside is called 'undertaking' — in the UK if you get caught undertaking 4x in 3 years you lose your license!

It's a shock initially in the US but actually leads to a more relaxed kind of driving. US driving is more like going for a relaxed walk, in Europe it's more like running on a track.

I understand the desire to make things more logical like the German driving system. I wish we had an autobahn and autobah rules and highly trained drivers too, but this law always struck me as half-baked and frustratingly ambiguous.

Near where I live, we have multiple 3-digit interstates. That is, they are sections of interstate that defy the usual convention of odd-numbered north-south routes and east-west even-numbered routes. 3-digit interstate combine highways or circle around cities or take you to tunnels, etc. The result is lots of sections where traffic merges from the left, you have to exit from the left, or the interstate divides into two other interstates and the former left lane is now the right lane. In those very same sections, you have signs reminding you that the left lane is for passing, not cruising. The problem with this is that everyone takes the left lane as a license to go 80+ mph.

What if I my left exit is coming up in a mile? Do I "go with the flow of traffic" and risk being the rare car that gets a speed infraction that day, do I wait until the the very last few yards to get in the left and take my exit, do I get on the left and go at a speed I'm more comfortable doing within a mile of my exit(speed limit + only 15). It's all nonsense and feels arbitrarily enforced based on the whims of the state troopers that week.

Most of the time, the US drivers passing on the right in my region are speeding and driving erratically. I agree that slow drivers in the fast lane are dangerous. Driving in the slow lane like it's the fast lane isn't the solution.

I thought you can pass drivers on each side in the us?

In my state you can get pulled over for holding a cell-phone during driving. It looks like Colorado (the state in the article) is starting to enforce this in 2025. [1]

[1] https://www.codot.gov/news/2024/october/new-2025-law-bans-ho...

It's also unlikely to be seen by someone looking at their phone.

Also, missing a comma.

Colorado is bad, especially around Denver, but nowhere near the depths of California or several East Coast cities in my experience.

Skill issue.

20mph residential streets makes so much sense from literally every other perspective other than your own.

You could do 15 mph in 2nd gear, that would solve the issue for all and you’d be less likely to maim or kill a pedestrian, which is nice

> I can tell you that my gas usage is higher at 20pmh than at 25mph.

Thank you for your anecdote. We shall add it to the pile.

The more common a swear word is the more likely it has been semantically bleached to the point assumptions like this seem (ironically) nonsensical. Few people saying "you bastard" actually give a damn whether one is born of wedlock or not these days (many not even realizing that's what it ever meant in the first place) they just know and use it as "a general swear word you can shout in frustration". Same for bitch, it's certainly possible to use it in the original context and it is still done but it's most often used in a way equally interchangeable with how one would typically use "bastard".

Common swear words like bitch become so semantically bleached context is needed to even decide if it's being used in a negative way at all, let alone with a gendered intent. E.g. "that's bitching" -> is something awesome or not? Is something "shit" or "the shit"? Is it "fucking amazing!" or "fucking 'amazing'"?

When you think you're removing sexism, just to bring it back.

You must never have seen Breaking Bad