Please define "slow down considerably". 10 mph under the speed limit? 20? 30? 40? Seems like a another revenue producer until we get clearly defined limits.

COMMENT: I would slow down enough to make it clear to any officer on the scene that you're making a good-faith effort to keep him or her safe. How much you should slow down depends on how fast you're going.

How are they actually enforcing this?

Will there be a police officer dispatched randomly with emergency vehicles?

Are they using dummy vehicles with flashing lights but no actual emergency?

If it is a police car that has its lights flashing, will it leave an emergency to chase the offender? If so, would the previous situation even be considered an "emergency" that required flashing lights?

I've always done this as a matter of common sense. However, based on the number of videos I've seen where officers were hit or almost hit, it seems too many people do not slow down or change lanes. I support the law. Poicing is a dangerous job, and this may help.

A very sensible law that would not be needed if drivers used their heads. That said, it appears that on even numbered days drivers are warned about distracted driving and on odd numbered days more signs are erected to distract those same drivers. I am certainly happy to hear that spokesman at SHA is concerned about distracting drivers with the overhead message boards, perhaps there will be less use of them for routine announcements.

agree with anonymous. it seems like a law that is ripe for abuse. what will be the proof of violating the law by emergency workers and what will be a way for drivers to show they complied?

I didn't ask how much I should slow down. I asked at what point will a ticket be issued based on the posted speed limit. Since the speed limit on 695 is 55 and most cars travel arount 75 if you slow down to the speed limit is that good enough? Or does a driver need to slow down to under the speed limit? In my opinion the law needs to be specific on when a ticket will issued to avoid abuse.

An officer told a friend of mine that the law is $110 and two points per emergency vehicle involved. An ambulance, a firetruck. and two police cars add up to $440 dollars and eight points. Such a severe penalty needs well defined parameters for enforcement.

This law is a disgrace, plain and simple.

The author mentioned that many states have some form of "Move Over" law, but managed to leave out that Maryland is one of fewer than 5 states to apply criminal charges to all violators, regardless of whether they contribute to an injury or accident. Virginia, about as close to a police state as you can get in the USA, actually changed its law this year to eliminate the criminal penalties for most violations. The author also curiously didn't mention the last time a police officer lost his life on Maryland roads due to a distracted driver (1991, I believe). You might think texting teenagers have caused a lot of vehicle-pedestrian deaths in the past decade; you'd be wrong. Pedestrian fatality rates have enjoyed a long steady decline.

As previous posters noted, the vague guidance to drive "a safe speed" when you can't move over safely is its own outrage. It means any cop who cites you can say "dangerous" in court so that a revenue-conscious judge can say "guilty" for no good reason. Many states such as Texas specify a reduction of 20 mph below the posted speed, obviously too low and probably dangerously so, but at least it requires the police to prove the charges they want to make.

The lack of signage is laughable too. Nobody knows about this law because it doesn't make sense. To divert your attention from the side of the road (you have to look away to check your side mirrors to get over), especially in moderate to heavy traffic, makes the situation more, not less, dangerous. So intuitively, a safety-conscious driver wouldn't follow this law without knowing about it, yet the law was passed anyway far in advance of the signs. Mr. SHA in the article conveys his feelings about getting signs out fast. Well, you're already several weeks late, and if safety was a priority, you could've put up slightly different signs (recommendations, or signs describing an upcoming law) months back when the law was passed. But fewer signs means more revenue, and the cynics are right again. Sure, Mr. SHA, your agency really cares.

Further, why doesn't the law apply to everyone? If a civilian's changing a tire on the side of the road, a cop, or anyone else, should show caution just the same as for a traffic stop. A police officer's life is valuable, but not much more than the average citizen's. Some of the protected vehicles, e.g. fire trucks, have much less of an issue with roadside safety, as they can park the truck properly, e.g. at an angle, and achieve the desired result without the use of this law.

I hope readers will notice the inherent bias of the author. He writes about traffic, and wants quotes and other assistance from law enforcement agencies to help his career. He returns the favor by publicizing the police's agenda, even when it is ethically questionable to do so, to angle for their continued cooperation. Note how ESPN can be reluctant to criticize star athletes, from whom they want interviews. The Stockholm Syndrome.

Hey Mark....The last time a Maryland Law Enforcement officer was killed was on May 9, 2004 when a Maryland State Trooper was struck and killed on Route 50 in Bowie while on the scene of an accident.
What difference does it make how long ago it was ? The fact of the matter is that it happens and people need to be more aware of police and fire and maintnence workers on the roadways.

Joe, What are you talking about? I didn't anything about not slowing down or wondering how long ago a trooper was killed. The company I work just had a traffic killed by a reckless driver this week. I take this stuff serious. If the law said slow down to 10 mph I wouldn't argue. The only problem I have is the law doesn't have set parameters.

I don't get what the sense of this law is without applying it to every vehicle on the road that's in an emergency situation.

How come the safety of a mom changing a tire on I-95 is not as valuable as a cop's? In the last 20 years there's been two police officers in Maryland killed in a roadside stop, out of perhaps hundreds of thousands of traffic stops in the state. Policing isn't even one of the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. Three times as many truckers are killed in a year than are cops.

Next they'll be telling us we have to bow to them when they walk past us.

I just recd a tkt in New York state in a very small town-up to $150 plus 3 points, this is ridiculous -feedback is the police are relentless with this law.......I was traveling the speed limit but was on the 390 and had difficulty moving over and was from out of state, it was certainly a trap and should have just received a warning

The law went into effect Oct. 1 2010, signs first appeared on Feb. 1 2011 as far as I can tell.

It took four months for signs to appear for a "vital" law. Meanwhile revenue was collected.

Whenever these kinds of laws are passed, there is a lot of data published about fatalities that occur in construction zones, or emergency workers injured/killed by passing motorists. But we never hear any data that gets to whether driver error is at fault, or whether it's inattentive workers. No one wants to blame the victim. But to me, that's an essential question to answer in determining whether these laws are necessary. What if we change the law and it has NO impact on fatalities? Do we lower the speed limit further?

If there are studies showing that construction/emergency worker fatalities and injuries decrease with speed, I'd be supportive. But we never get this information. I would think that would be one important aspect of reporting on these laws.