In the Moscow region on June 26, a group of drivers blocked a roadside to confront others trying to bypass slowdowns. Video footage released on the 12RUS YouTube channel shows Denis coordinating several ordinary vehicles and a truck via radio to lead the effort.
To prevent the so-called “Obochechnik” from slipping away along the shoulder, the group formed a single, protective column. Some members pulled toward the road edge, passing the line of traffic and braking suddenly. The driver in a long-wheelbase Lada Niva was unexpectedly nudged off the road from behind the truck, triggering a collision with a Mazda CX-5.
Various unofficial channels run by community members focus on guarding road shoulders from violations. They regularly stage impromptu raids and film skirmishes with other drivers. From the commenters’ words, the action seems to be motivated by a desire for social media attention and views rather than genuine road safety outcomes.
“The raid is progressing as it always does — you can tell there is a first crash,” observes the videographer who captured the incident, the truck driver.
Beneath these videos, activists often share payment links for sponsor channels and debit card numbers to solicit donations.
Killed a dragon and became a dragon
Moving to the roadside to dodge congestion undermines road safety and reduces capacity, says Mikhail Blinkin, director of the HSE Institute for Transport Economics and Transport Policy.
“Driving along the shoulder is a form of roadside rudeness, comparable to behavior in a street or hallway. From the traffic flow perspective, it creates turbulence and introduces risk because it stems from human error,” Blinkin notes.
These “turbulence spots” in otherwise smooth traffic often lead to accidents and slow down overall movement. When cars crawl without trying to merge properly, the result is a halt in flow, he adds.
Sergei Radko, a lawyer for the Freedom of Choice automobile group, argues that acts of roadside vigilantism are unlawful and ineffective in addressing the root problem. He points out that such actions sometimes trap innocent drivers in risky situations and cause additional crashes.
“This phenomenon is harmful, as illustrated by the StopHam episode that turned into a criminal case,” he says in an interview. Radko contends that these efforts do not deter violations; they simply provoke conflict to boost attention.
Radko reviews the activists’ videos and notes violations such as abrupt lane changes without signaling, pushing others out of lanes, violating traffic rules, and, of course, causing collisions.
To counter negative trends, the first step is to remove the conditions that foster them: areas where shoulder driving is common should be redesigned so that movement stays safe and congestion is minimized. He stresses the need for more cameras in high-risk spots to stabilize speeds and reduce dangerous overtaking when traffic is heavy, offering cameras and enforcement as part of the solution.
These bursts of roadside defiance typically surface in times of stress, and reacting with greater rudeness is not the answer, Radko adds.
He cites Yang Heitser, vice president of the National Automobile Association, arguing that if people have time and energy, they should be guided toward productive actions. Heitser suggests that video cameras and traffic police should play a role in curbing such obstacles, since they uphold law and order while not letting vigilantes take the law into their own hands. Citizens dealing with “Obochechnik” can still be asked to cooperate with authorities rather than escalate tensions.
Dodging roadside traffic jams is unpleasant and unsightly, especially in summer when vehicles pick up a layer of dust. Still, drivers’ choices under extreme pressure, such as delivering urgent medical care to a patient, can explain why some resort to shoulder routes.
It’s clear that some amateur activists aim to provoke conflicts to film dramatic footage and attract followers. The advice remains: if caught in a roadside confrontation, consider using a dash cam, backing away from the incident stream, and, if necessary, contacting the police for safety.
Heitser emphasizes that while he does not endorse either side, such actions are not acceptable substitutes for lawful enforcement.
When Socialbites.ca reached out to the Ministry of Internal Affairs for commentary on the legality of road-defender actions, no response was available at publication. A request for the video channel creators to explain their motives remained unanswered.