Re: If You Won't GIVE Me Courtesy, Then I'll Just TAKE It From You!
Daniel W. Rouse Jr.
news:nm9id5h9n8ti9llvh...@4ax.com...
> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan. The Audi has matched speeds with
> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
> without so much as a turn signal. Fortunately, the other driver was
> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision. Aside from
> mine, these were the only two cars in sight. I guess speeding up to
> merge in ahead or slowing down to merge in behind would have been too
> much work.
Was your gap large enough for the Audi to merge in behind the other car and
in front of you? If not, the situation was forced, the Audi had no choice
but to merge in front of the other vehicle or be run off the road by two
vehicles.
Brent
> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan. The Audi has matched speeds with
> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
> without so much as a turn signal. Fortunately, the other driver was
> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision. Aside from
> mine, these were the only two cars in sight. I guess speeding up to
> merge in ahead or slowing down to merge in behind would have been too
> much work.
I've noticed something about driving recently. There are a large number
of people who can't be bothered with the responsibilities of the task
and they expect everyone else to take on extra to make up for them. I
think this applies to many other things as well.
The Real Bev
Elections, for one thing...
--
Cheers, Bev
=====================================================
Election 2010:
There's never been a better time to vote libertarian.
Alexander Rogge
> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan. The Audi has matched speeds with
> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
> without so much as a turn signal.
Why must these idiots match speeds with the vehicle on the roadway, even
when that vehicle is a slow bus or truck, when there is a big space in
front of that other vehicle? It's like the game of an LLB playing
Duckling, except done on the merge lane.
> Fortunately, the other driver was
> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision.
I've seen that a few times before too. One such merger deliberately
matched speeds with the driver on the roadway, braked until it was
driving directly next to him, waited until the merge lane ended, and
then tried to crash into the other vehicle. I was at least 150 m
behind, and only going about 100. Why can't they speed up or go behind
the other vehicle?
I had another drive ruined today, and it wasn't caused by a driver at
all. Two pedestrians were crossing the street properly, going in the
opposite direction. They seemed to be walking together. My light was
green, as was the pedestrian signal. As they were approaching the end
of the crosswalk, the person on the outside of the intersection walked
in front of the person to her right. Both pedestrians then started
walking diagonally out of the crosswalk and into my path, clearly
against a red signal.
The person who was cut off stopped and tried to return to the crosswalk,
but the other person seemed to start pulling her into the intersection
and telling her to keep walking. The driver in front of me almost hit
her and I did a panic-stop, and then the green signal expired. The
driver in front of me went through the red to get out of the
intersection, but I was forced to wait through another light cycle.
I was so frustrated that I actually made a serious error at the next
intersection after that, but was fortunately awake enough to stop before
causing a crash. These MFFY fools are driving me to insanity!
Pedestrians only have right-of-way in the direction of the green signal!
They may not walk against a red signal and hope that everybody stops
for them!
Alan Baker
Scott in SoCal <scotte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan. The Audi has matched speeds with
> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
> without so much as a turn signal. Fortunately, the other driver was
> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision. Aside from
> mine, these were the only two cars in sight. I guess speeding up to
> merge in ahead or slowing down to merge in behind would have been too
> much work.
And if he'd braked because he was running out of acceleration lane and
left himself and you stranded waiting for a gap big enough for you to
use from a standstill...
...you'd be bitching about that.
This fantasy that all one as to do is obey the rules of the road and
that no one else's behaviour would then matter is getting old.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
<http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
Nate Nagel
> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan. The Audi has matched speeds with
> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
> without so much as a turn signal. Fortunately, the other driver was
> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision. Aside from
> mine, these were the only two cars in sight. I guess speeding up to
> merge in ahead or slowing down to merge in behind would have been too
> much work.
I had the opposite happen to me yesterday. Was merging onto a highway
and found myself coming down the ramp at the same speed as, but roughly
parallel with a car in the rightmost lane. I think his front bumper
would have ended up about even with my front door had we both held our
speed. So, not being willing to accelerate to a higher speed (tons of
cops around) I lifted off to merge in behind him. But he lifted off as
well, so we both slowed at about the same rate. Eventually I'm running
out of ramp at about 45 MPH and this car is still beside me. So I paste
it and merge in in front of him.
I don't need "help" merging, dammit!
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Nate Nagel
> Brent wrote:
>
>> On 2009-10-17, Scott in SoCal <scotte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
>>> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan. The Audi has matched speeds with
>>> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
>>> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
>>> without so much as a turn signal. Fortunately, the other driver was
>>> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision. Aside from
>>> mine, these were the only two cars in sight. I guess speeding up to
>>> merge in ahead or slowing down to merge in behind would have been too
>>> much work.
>>
>> I've noticed something about driving recently. There are a large number
>> of people who can't be bothered with the responsibilities of the task
>> and they expect everyone else to take on extra to make up for them. I
>> think this applies to many other things as well.
>
> Elections, for one thing...
>
It's OK, I voted twice for you :)
John David Galt
> I had another drive ruined today, and it wasn't caused by a driver at
> all. Two pedestrians were crossing the street properly, going in the
> opposite direction. They seemed to be walking together. My light was
> green, as was the pedestrian signal. As they were approaching the end
> of the crosswalk, the person on the outside of the intersection walked
> in front of the person to her right. Both pedestrians then started
> walking diagonally out of the crosswalk and into my path, clearly
> against a red signal.
>
> The person who was cut off stopped and tried to return to the crosswalk,
> but the other person seemed to start pulling her into the intersection
> and telling her to keep walking. The driver in front of me almost hit
> her and I did a panic-stop, and then the green signal expired. The
> driver in front of me went through the red to get out of the
> intersection, but I was forced to wait through another light cycle.
>
> I was so frustrated that I actually made a serious error at the next
> intersection after that, but was fortunately awake enough to stop before
> causing a crash. These MFFY fools are driving me to insanity!
> Pedestrians only have right-of-way in the direction of the green signal!
> They may not walk against a red signal and hope that everybody stops
> for them!
Morally you're right. Unfortunately the law in many places disagrees.
Here in California, a ped in a crosswalk has right-of-way even if he's
disobeying a signal, and I've seen them do it in front of a cop with no
consequences.
D. Stussy
news:o4adnXDz6dEOp0TX...@nethere.com...
Or to slow down and let the two vehicles pass then merge.
A vehicle on the highway has right of way over a vehicle merging from an
onramp.
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >A vehicle on the highway has right of way over a vehicle merging from an
> >onramp.
>
> vehicles.
Can't argue with that.
Daniel W. Rouse Jr.
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
>>onramp.
>
> vehicles.
Along the same lines of thought, a MFFY (believes he) has the right to
overtake and always be in front of another vehicle at all times, even one
that is positionally in front of another and in the process of merging. (In
the mind of the MFFY, running them off the road onto the shoulder or forcing
them to stop to avoid a collision with a guard rail or K-rail is the mergers
problem).
Right of way, of course, means that if the merging vehicle is slower than
thru traffic they can't just cut in front of another vehicle when they feel
like it, but *someone* eventually has to let them in as the merge lane ends
into the thru traffic lane.
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >onramp.
>
> vehicles.
Can't argue with that.
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >onramp.
>
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >onramp.
>
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >onramp.
>
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >onramp.
>
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "D. Stussy"
> <spam+ne...@bde-arc.ampr.org> said:
>
> >onramp.
>
gpsman
> While getting onto the freeway, I'm in the acceleration lane a few
> carlengths behind a black Audi sedan.
Following too closely as usual, huh?
> The Audi has matched speeds with
> another car in the rightmost through lane. After waiting a few moments
> for the other guy to "let" him in, the Audi driver simply merges over
> without so much as a turn signal.
The Audi driver "waited".
For all you know, and per your report, the driver could have been
distracted and completely oblivious to surrounding traffic.
> Fortunately, the other driver was
> alert and swerved out of the way, avoiding a collision. Aside from
> mine, these were the only two cars in sight. I guess speeding up to
> merge in ahead or slowing down to merge in behind would have been too
> much work.
I guess that shoots the shit out of drivers as "perfectly safe".
-----
- gpsman
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."
> maintain a predictable course and speed so that the mergeer can
> effectively PLAN a safe merge, whether that be in front of me or
> behind me. I will not alter course or speed in order to block another
> driver, but I'm under no obligation to alter course or speed to ASSIST
> another driver, either. "Courtesy," which some people define as "the
> driver in the through lane slows down and let's the other guy merge in
> front of him" is a recipe for chaos, especially when different drivers
> have different ideas of what "Courtesy" actually is.
>
> In most cses, the best course of action is to follow the rules of the
> road. This makes your movements more predictable and therefore safer.
I shall add to that: If I have to step on the brake, then the other driver
MFFY'ed.
D. Stussy
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net>
> said:
> >I had the opposite happen to me yesterday. Was merging onto a highway
> >and found myself coming down the ramp at the same speed as, but roughly
> >parallel with a car in the rightmost lane. I think his front bumper
> >would have ended up about even with my front door had we both held our
> >speed. So, not being willing to accelerate to a higher speed (tons of
> >cops around) I lifted off to merge in behind him. But he lifted off as
> >well, so we both slowed at about the same rate. Eventually I'm running
> >out of ramp at about 45 MPH and this car is still beside me. So I paste
> >it and merge in in front of him.
> >
> >I don't need "help" merging, dammit!
>
> Enabler Explains," Message-ID:
> <64bdd59i8aje4706s...@4ax.com>), many drivers view
> merging as a "shall we dance?" type of request. One partner in the
> dance is expected to "ask permission" to merge, and the other gives
> permission by slowing down and allowing the partner to merge in frnot
> of them. This is clearly what Mr. Audi expected when he pulled up next
> to the other car on an otherwise empty segment of road.
Which is exactly what's NOT supposed to happen.
Timothy J. Lee
John David Galt <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:
>Here in California, a ped in a crosswalk has right-of-way even if he's
>disobeying a signal, and I've seen them do it in front of a cop with no
>consequences.
While drivers must yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk, a pedestrian
must not start crossing against a red light, or enter the roadway
(including in a crosswalk) in a dangerous manner. In other words, the
police officer in your example could have cited the pedestrian for one
or possibly two violations, but did not for whatever reason (not too
surprising, since vehicle drivers also are commonly not cited by police
officers for various illegal driving).
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
Nate Nagel
> In article <hbcuhv$ca4$1...@blue.rahul.net>,
> John David Galt <j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:
>> Here in California, a ped in a crosswalk has right-of-way even if he's
>> disobeying a signal, and I've seen them do it in front of a cop with no
>> consequences.
>
> While drivers must yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk, a pedestrian
> must not start crossing against a red light, or enter the roadway
> (including in a crosswalk) in a dangerous manner. In other words, the
> police officer in your example could have cited the pedestrian for one
> or possibly two violations, but did not for whatever reason (not too
> surprising, since vehicle drivers also are commonly not cited by police
> officers for various illegal driving).
>
In some places in MD the cops will cross whenever they feel like it, and
then cite you if you don't stop quickly enough. They'll call it a "sting."
and this is why I don't drive in Montgomery County unless I absolutely
have to.
Alexander Rogge
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Alexander Rogge <a_r...@yahoo.com>
> said:
>
>> Why can't they speed up or go behind
>> the other vehicle?
>
> Because MFFYs (think they) always have the right-of-way.
Then why don't they speed up and cut in front? Maybe because they are
oblivious and lazy!
>> Pedestrians only have right-of-way in the direction of the green signal!
>> They may not walk against a red signal and hope that everybody stops
>> for them!
>
> In California, drivers must always yield the right-of-way to a
> pedestrian in a crosswalk; this particular section of the law makes no
> mention of the color of the traffic signal.
Maybe it's time to update your traffic laws. I don't understand how it
could possibly be the driver's fault for not guessing that a pedestrian
would walk out in front of his car when the driver is facing a green
signal. I won't deliberately run over a foolish pedestrian, but that's
more the same consideration that I give to all other animals,
particularly animals that weigh more than people.
This example of absolving pedestrians of personal responsibility
wouldn't have helped the foolish pedestrians that I saw, because they
had exited their crosswalk and were about 4 m from the crosswalk in the
adjacent direction, and the traffic signal in that direction was red.
It was an obvious violation of right-of-way. Why couldn't they simply
walk to the corner and then walk behind me when the signal turned green?
No, they were going to walk in front of everybody, hope that the
traffic stopped for them, and then walk Slothily across the street.
I have another example from last week about the lack of personal
responsibility. There have been a few MFFY Sloths and oblivious LLBs,
but the one incident that really infuriated me was some idiot on a
bicycle that was riding against the direction of traffic, and then
zoomed into the crosswalk as I was slowing to make a right-turn.
Bicycles are not pedestrians, and a bicyclist must follow the same
traffic laws as other drivers. No, riding on the wrong side of the
street is illegal, and then make it worse by forcing me to choose
between stopping halfway into my turn or crashing into you! I suppose
that I could've continued driving in front of him and dented my car, but
then he could've tried to claim that he was really walking his bicycle
across the street when I turned in front of him.
Other than that, driving has been rather pleasant lately. Drivers have
been following KRETP surprisingly-well, there have been no
merge-impaired incidents, traffic at intersections has been moving
forward at the same time when the signals turn green, red-light running
has decreased, and traffic jams have been minimal. I can assume that
this return to normalcy will not be permanent.
Brent
> That's a different kind of MFFY: the "Powerless MFFY." These are the
> guys who hold bottom-rung menial jobs (if they hold a job at all).
> They are not supervisors, they have nobody to boss around, and
> generally have ZERO power in their regular lives. Their ONE
> opportunity to exercise control over another person is to get in their
> way and make them wait. This is why they move S-O-O-O-O
> S-L-O-O-O-W-L-Y - they are savoring every moment, and spooging inside
> their baggy jeans at the thought of you waiting for them.
Motivations aside, but it's a wonder to see people RUN to get to the
point where they'll be in front of you and then start going SLOW. I
pretend not to see them then stop just short of them. I've seen this
from all sorts of people.
As to motivations, I would consider general disrespect to peds being
one. With the way some people drive I wouldn't mind doing a S-L-O-W
crossing in front of them. I haven't because I can't tell which ones are
going to be deserving until after the fact.
I walk at a rather fast pace and go to a couple of places on foot
instead of biking or driving. One particular sidewalk has a driveway to
a strip mall that crosses it. Drivers both leaving and entering often
have no regard for people walking. On the way out they block the
sidewalk or even just go without stopping at all. On the way in they
often don't even look where they are turning.
I don't sit there and wait for the people turning in to get a gap in
traffic and turn. I have right of way and my path is clear so I just
keep walking. Sometimes they get their gap as I'm crossing and become
enraged that I had not stood there waiting for them to get a gap and
finish their turns. One old man after nearly hitting me got out of
his car then thought twice about starting a fight with someone less
than half his age, several inches taller, and in better shape than
him.
Other times they are on their way out and get upset that I went around
their blocking of the side walk in front of their cars instead of behind
them. Or that my presence didn't allow for them to run the stop sign as
they had intended. I'm already past half way, there's a stop sign, they
need to stop before the sidewalk, but I'm in the wrong from their POV.
jgar the jorrible
> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Alexander Rogge <a_ro...@yahoo.com>
> said:
>
>
> >This example of absolving pedestrians of personal responsibility
> >wouldn't have helped the foolish pedestrians that I saw, because they
> >had exited their crosswalk and were about 4 m from the crosswalk in the
> >adjacent direction, and the traffic signal in that direction was red.
> >It was an obvious violation of right-of-way. Why couldn't they simply
> >walk to the corner and then walk behind me when the signal turned green?
> > No, they were going to walk in front of everybody, hope that the
> >traffic stopped for them, and then walk Slothily across the street.
>
> That's a different kind of MFFY: the "Powerless MFFY." These are the
> guys who hold bottom-rung menial jobs (if they hold a job at all).
> They are not supervisors, they have nobody to boss around, and
> generally have ZERO power in their regular lives. Their ONE
> opportunity to exercise control over another person is to get in their
> way and make them wait. This is why they move S-O-O-O-O
> S-L-O-O-O-W-L-Y - they are savoring every moment, and spooging inside
> their baggy jeans at the thought of you waiting for them.
>
> >I have another example from last week about the lack of personal
> >responsibility. There have been a few MFFY Sloths and oblivious LLBs,
> >but the one incident that really infuriated me was some idiot on a
> >bicycle that was riding against the direction of traffic, and then
> >zoomed into the crosswalk as I was slowing to make a right-turn.
> >Bicycles are not pedestrians, and a bicyclist must follow the same
> >traffic laws as other drivers. No, riding on the wrong side of the
> >street is illegal, and then make it worse by forcing me to choose
> >between stopping halfway into my turn or crashing into you! I suppose
> >that I could've continued driving in front of him and dented my car, but
> >then he could've tried to claim that he was really walking his bicycle
> >across the street when I turned in front of him.
>
> I see this a lot. Judging from their clothing, most of the
> perpetrators are wetback busboys heading to/from work. SoCal has ample
> bike lanes, but these pussies are too scared to use them; they ride on
> the sidewalk and through the crosswalk, and they expect vehicles to
> yield to them like they were pedestrians. The only thing stopping me
> from hitting one of these assholes is the thought of messing up my
> nice car.
>
One was riding his bike through parked cars in parking lot, rode into
front left of my wife's moving Murano. Small scratch on car, effed up
his bike. He declined offer of transport to hospital.
Oh holy Traffic Cone of Guadalupé, forgive these MFFY's for they are
too stupid to know they are the dumbest sons of bitches in the
valley: http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/oct/27/residents-revere-their-cone-comfort/?uniontrib
(Isn't that a looper tube?)
jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
papel higiénico del muerte:
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/oct/27/classmates-mourn-teen-killed-crash/?uniontrib
They may have been TPing someones house
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/oct/26/teen-riding-new-driver-dies-crash/