Keep left on Gininderra Drive

JC 10 September 2013 119

On Gininderra Drive there are keep left unless over taking signs west bound going up the hill just before the intersection with Gungahlin Drive and east bound just past the intersection with Kingsford Smith Drive.

Under the road rules keep left unless overtaking applies on roads with a speed limit greater than 80km/h or where signs as described above are seen. In relation to the signs the road rules say that it applies:

Rule 130

(3) A keep left unless overtaking sign on a multi-lane road applies to the length of road beginning at the sign and ending at the nearest of the following:
(a) an end keep left unless overtaking sign on the road;
(b) a traffic sign or road marking on the road that indicates that the road is no longer a multi-lane road;
(c) if the road ends at a T–intersection or dead end — the end of the road.

So the way I read that keep left applies more or less between Kingsford Smith Drive and Moat Street. Now of course no one every obeys this rule, but I find it odd that the whole stretch is considered under the rules to be a keep left unless overtaking road zone, but it only has signs at each end. How are those that enter from the numerous sides roads meant to know.

ACT government should either remove the signs, or put up repeater signs after each intersection and of course enforce the rule is the latter was done.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
119 Responses to Keep left on Gininderra Drive
Filter
Order
JC JC 10:56 pm 12 Sep 13

RadioVK said :

FWIW, I don’t care if you do or don’t keep left, and as others have pointed out, you’re well within your rights to stay in the right hand lane. I was taught to keep left when I learned how to drive, for the reasons I’ve already given. I think that they’re good reasons, whether you agree or not is up to you.

I was taught the same reasons too, basically common sense and courtesy. Something many these days lack, as everything is about them and screw anyone else.

JC JC 10:54 pm 12 Sep 13

Aeek said :

If everyone should be in the left lane all the time, why do we need other lanes ? May as well give up the rest of the road to cyclists, buses, and emergency vehicles or just rip it up. Gee, duplicating the GDE was a pointless waste of money.

Simple answer for this one actually. In case you don’t realise the road traffic is not constant. So roads are designed to meet peak load, with a bit of acceptable congestion.

Outside of peak load, clearly not all lanes are needed to carry the traffic using them.

Another reason of course is not all vehicles drive at the same speed, so extra lanes help faster vehicles overtake slower vehicles.

As for the arguments about keeping left, if the law says to do so, ala Gininderra drive and any multi lane road with a speed limit greater than 80km/h then do as the law says. Of course there are some get out clauses such as congestion and of course overtaking.

On other roads though plenty of arguments why vehicles should keep left, but am yet to hear a good one why there is a need to drive in the right, except the road is there, which sounds like a silly argument to me.

JC JC 10:49 pm 12 Sep 13

Innovation said :

JC said :

Innovation said :

Mind you, I don’t think Canberra is any worse than elsewhere in the nation. For example, the F3 is a complete joke with all of the middle lane and right hand lane hogs. The resultant undertaking, on a three land road, is downright scary to watch and I’ve seen several near misses when two overtaking cars, on the left and right, then try to occupy the middle lane at the same time.

Whilst I agree with what your saying, driving in the middle lane on a 3 lane road is ok. If you ever look at the road rules for keep left unless overtaking it only talks about keeping out of the right lane, not driving in the left, so keeping left includes the middle lane.

You’re right. I haven’t checked. So does this mean that road signs instead should read “Stay out of the right lane unless overtaking”?

In theory yes!

Woody Mann-Caruso Woody Mann-Caruso 5:47 pm 12 Sep 13

FWIW, I don’t care if you do or don’t keep left, and as others have pointed out, you’re well within your rights to stay in the right hand lane. I was taught to keep left when I learned how to drive, for the reasons I’ve already given. I think that they’re good reasons, whether you agree or not is up to you.

I agree with everything in that paragraph.

RadioVK RadioVK 5:20 pm 12 Sep 13

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

That someone who has a very real, and very valid reason for needing to move through traffic at a speed greater than the speed limit can’t, because you are in the right hand lane.

That hypothetical person who’s literally going to die unless they speed, but for some reason isn’t in an ambulance or police car or whatever?

That non-existant fictional person who’s never actually existed?

You really are a numpty, aren’t you.

I was wondering when the name calling would start. This is Riot Act, after all…

RadioVK RadioVK 5:12 pm 12 Sep 13

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

The vehicle behind you just happens to be trying to transport someone with a serious, life threatening illness to hospital for potentially life saving treatment. You decide that you are not going to move into the left hand lane to let them past because, after all, you’re doing the speed limit, and nobody has any right to go any faster than you, do they?

The vehicle in front of you just happens to be driven by the only doctor who can save your friend. The doctor is driving to the hospital to start her shift. She doesn’t want to be delayed – for example, by the police – so she’s carefully following the speed limit. You decide that you are going to tailgate her because, after all, you’re entitled, and nobody has any right to go any slower than you, do they? Distracted, she moves into the left lane, into the path of another vehicle. She crashes and dies, and a few hours later, so does your friend.

Next week – why arguing about the real world using imaginary, ludicrously-marginal scenarios is f*cking useless unless you’re as smart as Geoffrey Robertson.

OK. I’ll admit that using a hypothetical may not have been the best way to illustrate the point. You’re not the first to point that out (hi Jim).

I still maintain that assuming that nobody should need to pass you if you’re doing the speed limit is a bad idea.

FWIW, I don’t care if you do or don’t keep left, and as others have pointed out, you’re well within your rights to stay in the right hand lane. I was taught to keep left when I learned how to drive, for the reasons I’ve already given. I think that they’re good reasons, whether you agree or not is up to you.

thebrownstreak69 thebrownstreak69 4:23 pm 12 Sep 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

MrBigEars said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

How am I being a cock if all I am doing is obeying the law?

Driving in the right hand land at 65 km/h in an 80 zone without a “Keep Left” sign isn’t breaking the law either. Legality does not exclude douchebaggery.

Who drives 65 kph in the right hand lane in a 80 zone?
I have only seem oldies or big trucks do this.

Plenty of people do 65 kph in the right lane, just as plenty do 95 kph.

I figure I’ll use the left lane when not overtaking or preparing to turn right. If I wanted to be a policeman I’d have gone to that college and gotten myself a funny blue hat.

poetix poetix 4:15 pm 12 Sep 13

A lot of this thread needs a person with a red flag walking in front of it, warning of slip isms. Which is what my computer made of my attempt to spell solipsisms, but which also sounds vaguely road related.

Aeek Aeek 4:04 pm 12 Sep 13

If everyone should be in the left lane all the time, why do we need other lanes ? May as well give up the rest of the road to cyclists, buses, and emergency vehicles or just rip it up. Gee, duplicating the GDE was a pointless waste of money.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 4:03 pm 12 Sep 13

MrBigEars said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

How am I being a cock if all I am doing is obeying the law?

Driving in the right hand land at 65 km/h in an 80 zone without a “Keep Left” sign isn’t breaking the law either. Legality does not exclude douchebaggery.

Who drives 65 kph in the right hand lane in a 80 zone?
I have only seem oldies or big trucks do this.

Woody Mann-Caruso Woody Mann-Caruso 3:58 pm 12 Sep 13

The vehicle behind you just happens to be trying to transport someone with a serious, life threatening illness to hospital for potentially life saving treatment. You decide that you are not going to move into the left hand lane to let them past because, after all, you’re doing the speed limit, and nobody has any right to go any faster than you, do they?

The vehicle in front of you just happens to be driven by the only doctor who can save your friend. The doctor is driving to the hospital to start her shift. She doesn’t want to be delayed – for example, by the police – so she’s carefully following the speed limit. You decide that you are going to tailgate her because, after all, you’re entitled, and nobody has any right to go any slower than you, do they? Distracted, she moves into the left lane, into the path of another vehicle. She crashes and dies, and a few hours later, so does your friend.

Next week – why arguing about the real world using imaginary, ludicrously-marginal scenarios is f*cking useless unless you’re as smart as Geoffrey Robertson.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 3:24 pm 12 Sep 13

RadioVK said :

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

The vehicle behind you just happens to be trying to transport someone with a serious, life threatening illness to hospital for potentially life saving treatment.

… but hypothetically, this person is also destined to be a fascist dictator responsible for the torture and murder of millions of innocent people.

So, hypothetically, he’s preventing future-crime!

Also, that hypothetical example was a whole buncha bollocks.

Do you actually have a real argument, or is that it?

What, a ‘real argument’ like: just assume that someone will DIE if they aren’t allowed to speed on the road and YOU’RE STOPPING THEM SPEEDING AND KILLING THEM!!!

Bwa aha ha hhahah ahaha … yeah, nice one Aristotle!

That would be a no then?

The purpose of the exercise is to demonstrate the potential consequences of a particular assumption. If you’re having trouble grasping that, I can’t help you.

Lol. Come on, please please pleaes give me another ‘hypothetical’ with a premise so ridiculous that it undermines your own *cough* argument *cough*.

How about … hypothetically, let’s assume that somone has discovered conclusive proof of a reptoid conspiracy to enslave the population of the earth, and is being chased by reptoid agents in a two-lane 80 zone on Hindmarsh Drive. Now, while there’s no legal requirement for everyone to stick to the left lane so that people can speed past them on the right-hand-lane, but in this instance, failure to do surely prevents this person evading the reptoid agents and revealing the truth to the world at large. Indeed, acting as an ‘obstacle’ by driving in the right-hand lane at the designated speed limit will actually significantly raise the chances of this person being caught and killed by the reptoids.

Therefore, we can conclusive assert that people who refuse to drive in the left-hand lane (regardless of the road regulations) are agents of the reptoid conspiracy.

I know you’re just being facetious, but the example you give is just as valid.

My point is that the assumption that nobody should have any valid reason to need to get past you if you are doing the speed limit in the right hand lane is wrong.

Your example, while deliberately ridiculous, still validates my point that making such an assumption is wrong.

I understand that keeping left is not the law, I’m just trying to demonstrate that it’s good practice not to occupy the right hand lane if you don’t need to.

Face it: your hypothetical scenario was so ridiculous as to paint your own supposed argument into absurdity.

The most you’ve done is given a few people a good chuckle.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 3:23 pm 12 Sep 13

RadioVK said :

That someone who has a very real, and very valid reason for needing to move through traffic at a speed greater than the speed limit can’t, because you are in the right hand lane.

That hypothetical person who’s literally going to die unless they speed, but for some reason isn’t in an ambulance or police car or whatever?

That non-existant fictional person who’s never actually existed?

You really are a numpty, aren’t you.

RadioVK RadioVK 2:47 pm 12 Sep 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

RadioVK said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

RadioVK said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

It’s not obstructing traffic if they are doing the speed limit. If you get upset because you want to speed and I’m in the right hand lane, bad luck. I’m not going to move over so you can break the law and endanger others

I’d just like to put a hypothetical to you and Woody Mann-Caruso.

The vehicle behind you just happens to be trying to transport someone with a serious, life threatening illness to hospital for potentially life saving treatment. You decide that you are not going to move into the left hand lane to let them past because, after all, you’re doing the speed limit, and nobody has any right to go any faster than you, do they?

Before you all start banging on about how “they should have called an ambulance” or whatever, assume that they may have made a bad decision, under pressure, not to wait for an ambulance. Or perhaps that was the instructions from the emergency operator, it has happened before.

My points are:
1. You are not privy to what is happening in the car behind you, or their reasons for speeding or trying to get past you. Just because you don’t see a good reason for their speed, doesn’t mean there isn’t one.
2. You are not the Police. Leave enforcing road rules to those who are trained and paid to do so.

Your attitude to keeping left just comes across as sheer bloody-mindedness.

Don’t make poor decisions. Call a ambulance.

I never said I am enforcing the law, it’s just some by product of my heroic actions.

I’ll take that argument (or lack thereof) as an admission that, in the context of this hypothetical at least, that you simply don’t care about the consequences of your actions.

Ummm, what exactly are the consequences of my actions?

That someone who has a very real, and very valid reason for needing to move through traffic at a speed greater than the speed limit can’t, because you are in the right hand lane.

As I’ve said in other posts, I’m not disputing that what you are doing is legal. I’m not even that worried if you do drive in the right hand lane. What I do take issue with is your justification that if you are doing the speed limit then nobody has any reason to need to go faster than you, or get past you.

Robertson Robertson 2:42 pm 12 Sep 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

How am I being a cock if all I am doing is obeying the law?

There’s no law against coming into my office and dropping your guts either.

RadioVK RadioVK 2:35 pm 12 Sep 13

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

Jim Jones said :

RadioVK said :

The vehicle behind you just happens to be trying to transport someone with a serious, life threatening illness to hospital for potentially life saving treatment.

… but hypothetically, this person is also destined to be a fascist dictator responsible for the torture and murder of millions of innocent people.

So, hypothetically, he’s preventing future-crime!

Also, that hypothetical example was a whole buncha bollocks.

Do you actually have a real argument, or is that it?

What, a ‘real argument’ like: just assume that someone will DIE if they aren’t allowed to speed on the road and YOU’RE STOPPING THEM SPEEDING AND KILLING THEM!!!

Bwa aha ha hhahah ahaha … yeah, nice one Aristotle!

That would be a no then?

The purpose of the exercise is to demonstrate the potential consequences of a particular assumption. If you’re having trouble grasping that, I can’t help you.

Lol. Come on, please please pleaes give me another ‘hypothetical’ with a premise so ridiculous that it undermines your own *cough* argument *cough*.

How about … hypothetically, let’s assume that somone has discovered conclusive proof of a reptoid conspiracy to enslave the population of the earth, and is being chased by reptoid agents in a two-lane 80 zone on Hindmarsh Drive. Now, while there’s no legal requirement for everyone to stick to the left lane so that people can speed past them on the right-hand-lane, but in this instance, failure to do surely prevents this person evading the reptoid agents and revealing the truth to the world at large. Indeed, acting as an ‘obstacle’ by driving in the right-hand lane at the designated speed limit will actually significantly raise the chances of this person being caught and killed by the reptoids.

Therefore, we can conclusive assert that people who refuse to drive in the left-hand lane (regardless of the road regulations) are agents of the reptoid conspiracy.

I know you’re just being facetious, but the example you give is just as valid.

My point is that the assumption that nobody should have any valid reason to need to get past you if you are doing the speed limit in the right hand lane is wrong.

Your example, while deliberately ridiculous, still validates my point that making such an assumption is wrong.

I understand that keeping left is not the law, I’m just trying to demonstrate that it’s good practice not to occupy the right hand lane if you don’t need to.

tuco tuco 1:45 pm 12 Sep 13

p1 said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

How am I being a cock if all I am doing is obeying the law?

There are many, many things which, while legal, are impolite (or, if you like, “being a cock”).

Some people like being impolite. Most people, on occasion, decide to be impolite as they have a need. Most people, on occasion, are impolite unintentionally due to not knowing or understanding accepted conventions.

Some people are cocks.

Moreso … “Some are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them.” Seems there’s something in that for all of us.

MrBigEars MrBigEars 1:43 pm 12 Sep 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

How am I being a cock if all I am doing is obeying the law?

Driving in the right hand land at 65 km/h in an 80 zone without a “Keep Left” sign isn’t breaking the law either. Legality does not exclude douchebaggery.

p1 p1 1:28 pm 12 Sep 13

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

How am I being a cock if all I am doing is obeying the law?

There are many, many things which, while legal, are impolite (or, if you like, “being a cock”).

Some people like being impolite. Most people, on occasion, decide to be impolite as they have a need. Most people, on occasion, are impolite unintentionally due to not knowing or understanding accepted conventions.

Some people are cocks.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 1:11 pm 12 Sep 13

voytek3 said :

Aeek said :

voytek3 said :

Here it is: Keep left on ALL roads unless overtaking or immediately before you have to make a turn. If you sit in the right lane you do not know how to drive and shouldn’t be on the road. If this was enforced at least four fifths of Canberra drivers would be off the roads.

Morons take heed.

So you stay in the left lane and cross at the last second on say Hindmarsh Drive which is 3 lane.
True, I’d have to be a moron to take heed of you.

Oh look. Its the exact type of moron that cant drive I referred to. Three whole lanes! Wow! This is Canberra. The parkway/Gininderra drive/any main artery in this town is hardly the Trocadero during peak hour. I could get from the left lane at 1730 on any of these roads to the right lane and make my turn driving a T-34 tank in reverse within a few hundred metres of the turn. Do me a favour and sell your car and start using public transport – you shouldnt be on the road.

voytek3 said :

Here it is: Keep left on ALL roads unless overtaking or immediately before you have to make a turn. If you sit in the right lane you do not know how to drive and shouldn’t be on the road. If this was enforced at least four fifths of Canberra drivers would be off the roads.

Morons take heed.

Aren’t you one of the ones who was saying that if the majority of drivers are speeding then speed-limits shouldn’t be enforced? Bloody hypocrites.

No. I’m just saying that if you automatically get into the right lane when you get behind the wheel you are a moron that cant drive and shouldn’t be on the road.

Actually, the fact they are in the right hand lane driving a car proves they can drive.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

 Top
Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site