http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016721/Slow-drivers...
Going slower? Possible, depends on how much slower.
People complain about bad usage of the left lane but my gripe is people being in the right lanes but are not exiting. On a daily basis it is often the source of almost half the congestion I see on the road.
The rest is from the "me first!" crowd that probably advocate this left lane is only for passing in all cases nonsense.
This is not generally the case.
Don't piss people off unnecessarily for no reason other than to prove a point.
Move to the right.
This is different than "the left lane...is for passing. Unless you are passing you should NOT be in this lane". Under this rule, it would be perfectly acceptable to be in the left lane if you aren't passing and also aren't obstructing faster traffic. However, this rule has traffic management problems similar to those with the left-is-reserved-for-passing-rule (which is probably why its even rarer in law than the left-is-reserved-for-passing-rule, though a couple states do have something like it).
The more common legal rule -- and there are good reasons for this rule to be preferred -- is that you have to use the rightmost lane if you are moving slower than the normal speed on the road (independent of the legal limit); this is different than a reserved for passing rule and also different than a move-right-for-faster traffic rule, and is superior to either for traffic management, since with a simple move-right-for-faster-traffic rule, a very small number of drivers wishing to drive at excessive speed could oblige significantly greater congestion in the other lanes with drivers forced to yield to them (and, of course, a strict reserved-for-passing rule has a similar effect). The move-right-if-slower-than-normal rule is pretty much the best rule for traffic management.
It might be straight-forward and sensible (that, particularly the latter, is particularly subjective), but its very distant conceptually from the rules commonly used elsewhere that form the basis for the categorization and thus is, in context, weird.
They are much more likely to be highly aware of how they interact with traffic than they are a dangerous, oblivious obstruction.
Except when a special designation is made (common on, e.g., two lane highways that have a stretch where a third lane is added to one or the other side expressly for passing), no such thing exists in many US jurisdictions. There are some US jurisdictions where the leftmost lane is by default reserved for passing (or passing and allowing traffic to merge in the other lane), but that is the exception, not the general rule.
No, its not. Except where it is. This varies from place to place -- differences in law represent different decisions about whether or not this is true by different communities.
> If you are one of those people that set the cruise control and doesn't move over when people are behind you
There is a difference between the left lane being reserved for passing and a convention of slower traffic being expected to move right. The reserved for passing rule is much less common -- either as law or social convention -- than some form of slow-traffic-move-right rule.