Move over law - Police Forums & Law Enforcement Forums @ Officer.com

barr151 · 11-24-2006, 08:32 PM

In Fl we have a law that mandates a driver on a 4 lane road to move over when passing emergency vehicles with the lights on that are on the side of the road; giving tickets. or to slow the vehicle speed 20mph below posted limit when unable to move over.

Question? how many LEO's in Fl actually pull someone over for it? Does any other state have a law along the same line?
Gas pumps through the state have a sticker that gives some info about what is expected from a driver. In my area we have started hitting on this violation pretty hard lately. FHP had a officer struck last weekend and locals have had some pretty close calls. when we can get two officers together one will pull someone for speeding and the other will sit back a little distance (both patrol cars having emergency lights on) and sure enough, without fail, someone will blow by with no reason not to get over. no other traffic, not on corners, just plain old straight aways. everyone I have pulled has stated that they did not know but can remember seeing the sticker at the gas pumps.

SRT936 · 11-25-2006, 12:07 AM

We have a similar law here in Wisconsin, and I for one enforce it every chance I get. Basically, I pull up behind another officer on a stop and after checking their status, I wait for someone to fail to move over. Take one look at the officer down pages and you realize how many of us are getting taken out by boneheaded drivers. The people I cite often claim ignorance, but that $249.00 is a nice tuition to the class.

soflacop · 11-25-2006, 06:01 PM

the florida law works in 2 lane roads aswell. <-- has been to court for writing one on a 2 lane road where the vehicle went by me at 40 mph(speed limit). person was found guilty cause he didnt slow down.

barr151 · 11-25-2006, 06:59 PM

yes I know about the two lane road and dropping the speed 20mph below posted. $123.50 is what it cost to learn the hard way in this county. the part that kills me is when someone has a whole lane to move into and just blow by. for the most part on two lane roads people slow down or move over when passing if the oncoming lane is open. not always but most.

ex401mp · 11-25-2006, 09:23 PM

Alot of us on my squad will sit back and pull over the people who violate the move over law. I also do it for ambulances, fire trucks and the guys responding to our calls to tow the cars from the scene.

SgtScott31 · 11-25-2006, 10:33 PM

With the death of several officers in TN the last couple of years, the move over law (newly enacted July 06) is starting to become strictly enforced. I gladly write people up for it. The last one I pulled over (for failure to slow down) had a suspended driver's license.

bps · 11-27-2006, 10:49 PM

The Iowa move over law sounds generally the same as the rest of the posts. We have information regarding the law at rest area's and on state web sites. Lately they have been doing a lot of commercials and radio/newspaper ads. So we usually hammer violators when we get the chance.

Rohan · 11-27-2006, 10:56 PM

We have one similar- arrestable misdemeanor. Never arrested anyone for it- but write for a few maybe 5 or 6 times. they are almost always from Ill who violate it- those drivers are the biggest horses asses ther are.

jwm1981 · 11-29-2006, 03:56 AM

Alabama just enacted their move over law. Personally, I havent stopped any for it. Wish I could have on numerous occasions, but usually if Im backup for a guy...im not leaving. Besides, I dont want to be the first in the department to write the citation for it and have admin come down on me hahaha.

Roosevelt50 · 12-01-2006, 12:53 AM

Just recently a Vehicle & Traffic Law was enacted, but doesn't require vehicles to move over. The law does require them to reduce speed when approaching any emergency vehicle. It too bad that they never made the law public because about 1% of the drivers actually slow down or show some type of regard for our saftey. I'm always looking for violators when another leo has a stop. It's my little way of educating the public one summons at a time.

11b101abn · 12-03-2006, 03:51 PM

Georgia has one as well and the state mandates the fine at $500.00 or so. I do the same as one of the other guys, I pull in near a squad that is out on a stop and wait. It usually doesn't take long to find a driver that tried to peel off the other officer's decals.

The statute in Ga, without quoting, says to change lanes or dramatically reduce speed if a lane change is not doable.

barr151 · 12-03-2006, 04:41 PM

11b101abn
Have you heard of a court ruling that a judge has set a certian speed resuction for any certian case?

MIDeputy · 12-07-2006, 09:30 PM

In Michigan, the Move Over Law is probably the same as most other states except it basically states that a driver proceeding in the same direction as the emergency vehicle shall move over one lane, or two vehicle widths from the emergency vehicle. It further states that if it is not safe or practicable to move over due to traffic flow, weather, or road conditions then the driver of such vehicle shall pass in a safe manner using "due care and caution."
Emergency vehicles in Michigan include: police, fire, ems, and tow trucks and road side assistance vehicles.

I personally haven't enforced the law because if I'm out on a stop I'm usually by myself, so I'm not going to break from one stop to go stop someone else. However, I wish Michigan advertised the law more with billboards or road signs to make driver's aware. I know other states such as Ohio really crackdown on the "Move Over Law". More states need to aggressively enforce this law so people get a clue, and start moving over automatically.

SgtCHP · 12-09-2006, 06:46 PM

Effective 1 Jan 2006, California will have a similar law; however, it addresses FREEWAYS only:

VC § 21809. (Added) Freeway traffic approaching a stationary emergency vehicle displaying emergency lights must change lanes if practicable or slow down to pass.

11b101abn · 12-09-2006, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barr151

11b101abn
Have you heard of a court ruling that a judge has set a certian speed resuction for any certian case?

No. the law is fairly new in its current form. If you are interested, I can research a little and try to find something.

barr151 · 12-11-2006, 08:13 PM

11b101abn,
Appreciate the offer. I was just curious what the courts in your neck of the woods thought would be acceptable.
For the most part we do not have the luxury of doubling up to enforce it but when we do we have no problem-finding drivers in violation. Like I mentioned before we only target vehicles that are on a four-lane road and no reason they cannot get over. We usually have 3 cars and just "leap frog". When the driver that is being informed of their mistake they will complain saying, "well why are you not stopping that car" (as another vehicle passes by in violation). We then with a smile, point out the patrol car stopping that car.

Blackdog F4i · 12-17-2006, 12:37 PM

I have written a couple. Usually I will conclude my business on a stop, then wait for one to rock my car before the suspect vehicle has pulled away.

I have tried to sit with another unit when they are on a stop, but for some reason if motorists see two of us they slow down and move over.

old_guy · 12-17-2006, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SRT936

We have a similar law here in Wisconsin, and I for one enforce it every chance I get. Basically, I pull up behind another officer on a stop and after checking their status, I wait for someone to fail to move over. .

I am old and retired, but unless local policy REQUIRES you to pull up BEHIND the operating officer, why not pull to the front? You can still check on the units' progress and safety, but you can easily, and safely launch on an offender. When you pull behind, you have good visual on the operating unit, but a **** poor launch position without causing an additional TH. Just a suggestion.....

SRT936 · 12-17-2006, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by old_guy

I am old and retired, but unless local policy REQUIRES you to pull up BEHIND the operating officer, why not pull to the front? You can still check on the units' progress and safety, but you can easily, and safely launch on an offender. When you pull behind, you have good visual on the operating unit, but a **** poor launch position without causing an additional TH. Just a suggestion.....

Couple of reasons for being behind instead of in front:

1) This allows me to capture the violation on video. Because of the fine size and the usual pleading of ignorance, these tend to end up in court.

2) It allows me to capture the violators speed on radar as well. Helps to show how dangerous the violation was as well.

3) If the other officer's stop that was going nicely suddenly turns to pot, the last place I want to be is in front of the bad guy in the kill zone.

As far as launch location, I'm usually several car lengths behind and angled out on the shoulder. Traffic is never real heavy around here so that's not an issue. I'm far enough back that I can move into the left lane to make my catch up (giving the other officer plenty of room.)

Motordawg · 12-24-2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SRT936

Couple of reasons for being behind instead of in front:

1) This allows me to capture the violation on video. Because of the fine size and the usual pleading of ignorance, these tend to end up in court.

2) It allows me to capture the violators speed on radar as well. Helps to show how dangerous the violation was as well.

3) If the other officer's stop that was going nicely suddenly turns to pot, the last place I want to be is in front of the bad guy in the kill zone.

As far as launch location, I'm usually several car lengths behind and angled out on the shoulder. Traffic is never real heavy around here so that's not an issue. I'm far enough back that I can move into the left lane to make my catch up (giving the other officer plenty of room.)

Exact same reasons why I pull behind the officer..

We had a little problem with our local Judge severely reducing the fines, and in a couple of cases, dismissing the traffic complaints totally. Until...
the Judge was shown a couple of videos of violators narrowly missing the officer/squad car if the officer was on the passenger side of the violator. And that seemed to take care of the problem.

Now, standard fines are being applied evenly to all those cited, and those of us who write them will bring to court the video evidence of the violation.

rook21 · 12-24-2006, 08:05 PM

You can be arrested for it in Virginia.

§ 46.2-921.1. Drivers to yield right-of-way or reduce speed when approaching stationary emergency vehicles on highways; penalties.

The driver of any motor vehicle, upon approaching a stationary emergency vehicle, as defined in § 46.2-920, that is displaying a flashing, blinking, or alternating emergency light or lights as provided in §§ 46.2-1022, 46.2-1023, and 46.2-1024, shall (i) on a highway having at least four lanes, at least two of which are intended for traffic proceeding as the approaching vehicle, proceed with caution and, if reasonable, with due regard for safety and traffic conditions, yield the right-of-way by making a lane change into a lane not adjacent to that occupied by the stationary emergency vehicle or (ii) if changing lanes would be unreasonable or unsafe, proceed with due caution and maintain a safe speed for highway conditions.

Violation of any provision of this section shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor. If the violation resulted in damage to property of another person, the court may, in addition, order the suspension of the driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for not more than one year. If the violation resulted in injury to another person, the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed, order the suspension of the driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for not more than two years. If the violation resulted in the death of another person, the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed, order the suspension of the driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for two years.

barr151 · 12-24-2006, 08:50 PM

"If the violation resulted in the death of another person, the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed, order the suspension of the driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for two years."

Glad to know if I become hood's ornament that the driver will loose his DL for two years.

rook21 · 12-24-2006, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barr151

"If the violation resulted in the death of another person, the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed, order the suspension of the driver's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for two years."

Glad to know if I become hood's ornament that the driver will loose his DL for two years.

better than nothing i suppose.

barr151 · 12-24-2006, 10:56 PM

I get a kick out of the way things are worded. Such as my post above. In my Policy at the sheriffs office. It stated that if the employee died in a work related incident then the EMPLOYEE would receive all of their sick leave. Now I do realize that the employee's family would receive the sick leave, just like the driver would have (HOPEFULLY) a more serious punishment coming down the line instead of needing to be concerned about a susp. DL.

t150vsuptpr · 12-25-2006, 01:48 AM

I sure wish it was "posted" somewhere, anywhere, in the Commonwealth.

It's not posted anywhere I've been and it's not received any publicity.

I don't know of any guys who enforce it, though most agree when the subject comes up that they would if only the motorist were put on notice (it's not universal, it is actually a fairly recent advent and not so wide spread). We can afford to post our seatbelt laws, or radar detector prohibition, our speed limits, no stopping on the interstates, and mucho no parking signs along the ramps where local business folk have complained of trucks parking at night, ...

... why not a few signs to educate the public on this?