tailgating
n...@juno.com
can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket was
given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate any
advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
not browse internet too frequently.
regards/nick
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Walt Horning
n...@juno.com wrote:
>can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
>Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
>front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
>tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket was
>given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
>quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate any
>advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
>not browse internet too frequently.
Go to court and ask the cop how he assessed the actual distance
between your car and his. He will probably have to say he looked in
his rear-view mirror. In a 25 mph zone, using the standard rule in any
drivers manual, for 1 car length per 10 mph, you only have to be 2.5
car lengths back.
If the cop does say he assessed the distance looking in his rear view
mirror, then tell the judge what you think the distance was. If your
assessment happens to be closer to 2.5 car lengths, because you were
in a much better position to assess your distance than a cop looking
in a mirror, the judge may give you the benefit of the doubt and let
you off the hook completely.
And even if you were a bit too close, the cop was not in that good a
position to assess the distance looking in a mirror, so his
"judgement" was essentially impaired. Because it was impaired, its
causes reasonable doubt. And reasonable doubt is the same thing as not
guilty, since evidence must show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Point this out to the judge, politely!!! The judge may be inclined to
agree.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer. Consult a lawyer if you want legal
advise. I offer such advise only as a friend. I also do *not*
encourage lying.
Osman Ullah
|| And even if you were a bit too close, the cop was not in that good a
|| position to assess the distance looking in a mirror, so his
|| "judgement" was essentially impaired. Because it was impaired, its
|| causes reasonable doubt. And reasonable doubt is the same thing as not
|| guilty, since evidence must show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
|| Point this out to the judge, politely!!! The judge may be inclined to
|| agree.
Especially when they are driving those boats around.
Osman Ullah
|=------------------------------------------=|
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte213f
P.J. Hartman
n...@juno.com wrote:
>can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
>Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
>front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
>tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him.
From your description of events (25mph, 1.5 car lengths) you *were*
tailgating.
--
P.J. Hartman mailto:har...@tconl.com
Corvette, Talon, MGB, ZX-11, GS450LX, and Neon
http://www.tconl.com/~hartman
John A. Limpert
On Sat, 28 Feb 1998 12:12:14 -0600, n...@juno.com wrote:
>can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
>Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
>front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
>tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket was
>given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
>quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate any
>advise as soon as possible.
Pay the ticket. At 25 mph you should have been ~73 feet behind his car
based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
should be even farther behind the car in front of you.
--
John A. Limpert Kook Bait: Archimedes Plutonium Riboflavin
jo...@Radix.Net
ken$...@clark.net
Pay the ticket and thank the nice man for making the road a bit safer.
Seven-tenths of a second headway is tailgating.
In dc.driving n...@juno.com wrote:
: can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
: Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
: front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
: tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket was
: given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
: quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate any
: advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
: not browse internet too frequently.
: regards/nick
: -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
: http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
--
Kenneth T. Cornelius
ken...@clark.net
David P. Head
n...@juno.com wrote:
>
> can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him.
Not a bs ticket. 1.5 carlengths = about 30 feet. Old standard taught
in drivers ed was 1 car length for each 10 mph, so you should have been
2.5 car lengths behind, or better. New standard is 2 seconds behind.
25 mph is 36 2/3 feet per second, so at 30 feet behind, you were less
than a second behind the officer. Had he slammed on the brakes for
something, he'd have had a new trunklid decoration, and you a new hood
ornament. No one can react that fast without prior warning that
something is coming - not you, not AJ Foyt, not Chuck Yeager.
Pay the ticket, and give people more room the next time.
DPH
Gordon LeRoux
n...@juno.com wrote:
>
> can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
> quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate any
> advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
> not browse internet too frequently.
>
> regards/nick
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
First of all you are a loser. In many ways. If you had an average IQ you
wouldn't be following closely behind a police vehicle, especially if you
lived out of state.
A good percentage of auto accidents are caused by tailgating. I'm glad
you got a ticket and hope you get more tickets if you continue to
tailgate. At higher speeds, these types of accidents become fatalities.
And you are the one to blame!
I have crossposted this to New Jersey General. I want the citizens and
cops in New Jersey to see how you received a ticket, then posted this on
DC groups for answers to beat your ticket.
Pay the fine and quit whining......
Gordon LeRoux
Paul Ivanauskas
It _is_ Me wrote:
>
> Gordon LeRoux <ler...@netmail.com> wrote in article
> <34F8B8...@netmail.com>...
> 25 miles per hour. What is wrong with posting information on groups? He
> did not state a town so he not bashing a particular town.
Some people just like to feel full of themselves by putting other people
down...that's all....*sigh*.....It was a legitimate question which
started this......just takes all kinds I guess...a shame....
Toe Jam
E. Faubion wrote:
> 25 mph = 36.6 feet per second.
> avg. car length = 15 feet
> 1.5 car lengths = 22.5 feet.
>
> This means there is a 6/10ths second interval between you and the
> police unit you were following. Research has shown that the averge
> driver's reaction time is about 1.6 seconds (hence why the 2 second
> following distance rule is taught in Drivers Ed) and even if you are
> above average it is extremely unlikely your time would be the .6
> seconds necessary to avoid a collision in the event the vehicle in
> front of you makes an emergency stop.
I may be wrong, but it seems to me like this explanation assumes theleading
vehicle is able to come to an absolute stop in 0 feet. In real
life, it would seem that during the 1.6 seconds of perception/reaction
time, the trailing vehicle would not be catching up to the lead vehicle
at 36.6 fps, since the lead vehicle (although slowing down) is still
moving. I believe that needs to be accounted for.
mp...@tidalwave.com
On Sat, 28 Feb 1998 12:12:14 -0600, n...@juno.com wrote:
>can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
>Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
>front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
>tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket was
>given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
>quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate any
>advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
>not browse internet too frequently.
>
>regards/nick
>
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
sorry....but you're a dumbass for tailgating a cop
even you didnt know the 10mph/car lenght rule or whatever
shit.....following a testosrone pumped male who's been given the
authority to ticket you that close is real stupid
It _is_ Me
Gordon LeRoux <ler...@netmail.com> wrote in article
<34F8B8...@netmail.com>...
> n...@juno.com wrote:
> >
> > can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> > Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going
in
> > front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> > tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The
ticket was
> > given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil
ticket
> > quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly
appreciate any
> > advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for
I do
> > not browse internet too frequently.
> >
> > regards/nick
> >
> > -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion
==-----
> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based
newsreading
>
E. Faubion
>n...@juno.com wrote:
> can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him.
My advice is to pay the ticket. Why? Because your own math convicts
you. Here's why:
25 mph = 36.6 feet per second.
avg. car length = 15 feet
1.5 car lengths = 22.5 feet.
This means there is a 6/10ths second interval between you and the
police unit you were following. Research has shown that the averge
driver's reaction time is about 1.6 seconds (hence why the 2 second
following distance rule is taught in Drivers Ed) and even if you are
above average it is extremely unlikely your time would be the .6
seconds necessary to avoid a collision in the event the vehicle in
front of you makes an emergency stop.
>The ticket was given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed
>to fulfil ticket quota).
Which, if true, you made easy by tailgating him.
ef
* fix the net to email *
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/6123/
Osman Ullah
|| This means there is a 6/10ths second interval between you and the
|| police unit you were following. Research has shown that the averge
|| driver's reaction time is about 1.6 seconds (hence why the 2 second
1.6? I was almost in a head on because someone was cutting a sharp
blind turn...I was going about 25. I think I was STOPPED by about 2
seconds...one-one thousand-two is a rather large amount of reaction
time in that kind of situation...
Osman Ullah
After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
they aren't...
el...@spam.free.at.last
In article <34f9ef5a...@news.gatech.edu>,
Osman Ullah <os...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
>After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
>actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
>they aren't...
But isn't it delicious that that moron was tailgating a COP?!? (I guess
that's what you have to do to get ticketed for tailgating... Sure as
hell, nobody ever got ticketed for tailgating ME.)
Tony Wang
John A. Limpert wrote:
> Pay the ticket. At 25 mph you should have been ~73 feet behind his car
> based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
> about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
> should be even farther behind the car in front of you.
Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
"you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
--
Tony Wang
http://www.geocities.com/colosseum/2544
Remove the nospam from my name to send me mail
E. Faubion
os...@cc.gatech.edu (Osman Ullah) wrote:
>1.6?
Yes. The 1.6 second figure includes the total time to perceive and
react and is based on extensive research done in the mid-1980's at the
University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.
>I was almost in a head on because someone was cutting a sharp
>blind turn...I was going about 25. I think I was STOPPED by about 2
>seconds...
The total time to perceive, react and stop at that speed is closer to
three seconds In a stressful situation the concentration is on
doing, not timing.
>one-one thousand-two is a rather large amount of reaction
>time in that kind of situation...
Not really. 1.6 seconds plus another 1.5 to stop from that speed
(assuming a dry road) equals about 3 seconds. That's pretty normal.
The 1.6 seconds is actually a rather liberal figure based on some of
the research I've seen in recent years.
John A. Limpert
On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 05:17:54 GMT, os...@cc.gatech.edu (Osman Ullah)
wrote:
>After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
>actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
>they aren't...
The people that really scare me are the ones I see driving 5-10 feet
behind the preceding car at 65 mph. They are usually the same people who
weave through traffic. There are some incredibly dangerous drivers on
the roads.
John A. Limpert
On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 01:26:04 -0500, Tony Wang
<ton...@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote:
>Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
>"you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
>
>Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
I drive on the Beltway and have never had any major difficulty with
staying 2 seconds behind the car in front of me. If someone cuts in
front of me I just gradually back off until I am at a safe distance
again.
George Tatem
John A. Limpert wrote:
>
> On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 01:26:04 -0500, Tony Wang
> <ton...@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote:
>
> >Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
> >"you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
> >
> >Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
>
> I drive on the Beltway and have never had any major difficulty with
> staying 2 seconds behind the car in front of me. If someone cuts in
> front of me I just gradually back off until I am at a safe distance
> again.
>
> --
> John A. Limpert
You are missing the point - pay attention:
Understand now?
George
George Tatem
> >After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
> >actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
> >they aren't...
>
> that's what you have to do to get ticketed for tailgating... Sure as
> hell, nobody ever got ticketed for tailgating ME.)
It certainly wasn't very bright. Especially in New Jersey. The police
and troopers are very strict in that state.
George
George Tatem
Tony Wang wrote:
>
> John A. Limpert wrote:
>
> > Pay the ticket. At 25 mph you should have been ~73 feet behind his car
> > based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
> > about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
>
> Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
> "you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
>
> Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
>
I know what you mean. I'm surprised we don't have more accidents, than
we do!
George
Bob Scheurle
>> Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
>> "you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
Yeah, but in the real world, you don't tailgate police cars!
--
Bob Scheurle
sche...@z-eclipse-z.net
sche...@z-avionics-z.itt.com
NJ Transit schedules at http://www.nj.com/njtransit/
Shalmaneser the First
I cannot believe the idiocy of supporting tailgating, at high speeds
I consider your tailgating the equivalent of trying to kill me, and
I have opted lately to try to correct this on my own, it is good
to see at least one police unit doing something about it, most of them
do not.
Mr. "real world", try aiming your couple of tons of gun at me
at high speed and you may find yourself in the nearest ditch.
Fool, you proport that where ever you are going or whatever you
are doing is important enough to risk my life (yours I care not about),
in your "real world".
--
The Just Man,
Though He die early,
Shall be at rest.
MrKablooey©
Tony Wang wrote in message <34F8FF7B...@prodigy.net.nospam>...
>> Pay the ticket. At 25 mph you should have been ~73 feet behind his car
>> based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
>> about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
>> should be even farther behind the car in front of you.
>
theoretical
>"you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
Not really. The real world dictates that we should drive safely, not
however one pleases. If the guy was driving too close, he was too close.
He should pay the fine. If 1 car length per 10mph is safe, then that's how
you should drive. Don't make up your own rules along the way.
>Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
Enjoy eating glass, Mr Wang.
lcbmandg
Shalmaneser, this is not about supporting tailgating, it is about the fact
that the 2 second rule is not practical today, (try any major beltway or
parkway in a big city just before or just after the rush hour), and that
cops, (at least the one in this instance), was quick to issue a ticket when
HE is being tailgated, but not so when citizens are being tailgated.
Neither of these things support tailgating or any other driving violation,
but they do point out that there is a major problem with the way cops do
their job.
Tigress
In article <34F8FF7B...@prodigy.net.nospam>, Tony Wang
<ton...@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote:
> John A. Limpert wrote:
>
> > Pay the ticket. At 25 mph you should have been ~73 feet behind his car
> > based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
> > about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
> > should be even farther behind the car in front of you.
>
> Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some
theoretical
> "you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
>
> Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
No way. I hate tailgating, and I wish cops would give more tickets for it.
There is no excuse for tailgating (specially at 70 mph).
Yeah, he was only going 25, but the guy behind me hit me when I stopped at
that speed, he was probably 1 car to 1.5 car lengths behind me.
Tigress
--
Lover of all that is Lamborghini, Defender of Porsches:
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gt3220a
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-' gt3...@prism.gatech.edu
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat drawn by Felix Lee
Walt Horning
jo...@Radix.Net (John A. Limpert) wrote:
>On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 05:17:54 GMT, os...@cc.gatech.edu (Osman Ullah)
>wrote:
>
>>After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
>>actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
>>they aren't...
>
>The people that really scare me are the ones I see driving 5-10 feet
>behind the preceding car at 65 mph.
Where I commute, 90% of drivers drive about 10 foot a part constantly.
>They are usually the same people who
>weave through traffic.
90% of drivers do not weave through traffic. "Weavers" are certainly
no more than 1% and probably more like .1 to .01%.
You have a techical error, therefore, in your statement.
Scott M. Kozel
Bob Scheurle <sche...@z-eclipse-z.net> wrote:
>
> >> Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
> >> "you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
>
A few years ago, this happened on a Maryland urban interstate highway.
This shows the dangers of speeding, tailgating, and reckless driving.
A motorist was tailgating other motorists, and flashing his lights, to
bulldoze them out of the way. Witnesses saw no sign of any emergency.
Another motorist was in the left lane of a six-lane (3 each way)
expressway, passing a line of cars, going at or just above the speed
limit, according to witnesses. The tailgater lost his patience, and
zoomed around on the right. He decided to express his road rage by
cutting in across the front of the guy he had been tailgating. He cut it
too close, and the rear bumper of his Chevy Lumina clipped the front
bumper of the Chevrolet Caprice. His car spun out of control into the
median, rolled over the guardrail into the oncoming lanes of traffic,
and was broadside when he hit a large pickup truck head-on (or
head-side, whatever). He had two unfortunate passengers with him.
The car was torn into three major pieces, and many minor pieces, and
their bodies were strewn in pieces along the highway. The Caprice
driver was not injured, and the pickup driver was moderately injured.
Very tragic, the motorist's impatience and reckless driving cost him his
life and the lives of his two passengers. They had to be shoveled up.
He collided with two other cars in the process, and created a ten-mile
long traffic jam.
--
Scott M. Kozel koz...@richmond.infi.net
Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington D.C. http://www.richmond.infi.net/~kozelsm
PHL area http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Campus/5961/pennways.html
David P. Head
...And none of the above relieves the "left lane bandit" from at least
partial responsibility for the resultant carnage. He should have gotten
out of the way. There was no positive way for him to know that the
insistent passer did _not_ have a life and death emergency, nor did he
have any reasonable exception from the law requiring slower traffic to
keep right. Sure the tailgater/reckless driver bears most of the blame,
but not all of it.
Dave Head
David P. Head
Tigress wrote:
>
> In article <34F8FF7B...@prodigy.net.nospam>, Tony Wang
> <ton...@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote:
>
> > John A. Limpert wrote:
> >
> > > Pay the ticket. At 25 mph you should have been ~73 feet behind his car
> > > based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
> > > about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
> > > should be even farther behind the car in front of you.
> >
> theoretical
> > "you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
> >
>
> No way. I hate tailgating, and I wish cops would give more tickets for it.
Exactly. The laws of physics and the limitation of humans in general
don't change with the traffic density. Richard Petty may be able to get
away with following a little closer than the rest of us due to highly
conditioned reflexes, but he is also capable of getting too close.
Ticket tailgaters repeatedly and often.
Dave Head
E. Faubion
"lcbmandg" <lcbm...@vermontel.com> wrote:
>Shalmaneser, this is not about supporting tailgating, it is about the fact
>that the 2 second rule is not practical today,
What we face is a dilemma between driving at a reasonable following
distance and not crashing into the car in front of us when things
unexpected go bad. We win far more often than we lose... but when we
lose we do it in grand style!
>parkway in a big city just before or just after the rush hour), and that
>cops, (at least the one in this instance), was quick to issue a ticket when
>HE is being tailgated, but not so when citizens are being tailgated.
>Neither of these things support tailgating or any other driving violation,
>but they do point out that there is a major problem with the way cops do
>their job.
Some cops love nothing better than to cite tailgaters. I know one
who prefers them over all other violators yet he'll be the first to
acknowledge they are some of the more difficult tickets on which to
win convictions in court unless an accident was involved. Unlike a
speeding ticket where a specific figure can be given (speed versus the
speed limit) the tailgating ticket usually involves data that is
subject to interpretation. What the officer says is 2 car lengths
may be interpreted by the offending driver as 4 car lengths.... etc.
etc.
lcbmandg
Agreed wholeheartedly, David! I heard a head-up-ass bit of advice last week
dispensed by AAA, of all people. They advised that to discourage or avoid
"road rage" on the part of another motorist, never make eye contact with
them, and just hold a steady course. That's insane. Ignoring someone on the
road who wants your attention guarantees an escalation. If the tailgated
motorist wants to diffuse the rage, they need to immediately get out of the
way of the heavy-footed motorist. Just pull over, and the sphincter will
pass by smoother than owl snot. Too many people have some childish
competition issue inside that prevents them from taking advantage of the
obvious solution.
Oscar Voss
David P. Head wrote:
>
> Scott M. Kozel wrote:
> >
> > A motorist was tailgating other motorists, and flashing his lights, to
> > bulldoze them out of the way. Witnesses saw no sign of any emergency.
> > Another motorist was in the left lane of a six-lane (3 each way)
> > expressway, passing a line of cars, going at or just above the speed
> > limit, according to witnesses. The tailgater lost his patience, and
> > zoomed around on the right. He decided to express his road rage by
> > cutting in across the front of the guy he had been tailgating. He cut it
> > too close, and the rear bumper of his Chevy Lumina clipped the front
> > bumper of the Chevrolet Caprice. His car spun out of control into the
> > median, rolled over the guardrail into the oncoming lanes of traffic,
> > and was broadside when he hit a large pickup truck head-on (or
> > head-side, whatever). He had two unfortunate passengers with him.
> >
> partial responsibility for the resultant carnage. He should have gotten
> out of the way. There was no positive way for him to know that the
> insistent passer did _not_ have a life and death emergency, nor did he
> have any reasonable exception from the law requiring slower traffic to
> keep right. Sure the tailgater/reckless driver bears most of the blame,
> but not all of it.
>
right lanes. Even people who obey the speed limit have a right to do
that, without hassles from those of us who like to go faster. FWIW, the
"left lane bandit" was probably complying with any applicable "slower
traffic keep right/keep right except to pass" law, too.
Now maybe the "left lane bandit" could have ducked into the center lane
to get out of the way of the overtaking car. Of course, he might have
figured that the guy behind him was going to move into the center lane
first, taking away that spot, without signalling -- not an unreasonable
concern, that kind of stupid manuever happens often enough. Or he might
have figured that there wasn't enough room in the center lane to move
there and leave a safe distance between the cars ahead and behind in the
center lane. (Of course, the tailgater did find a way to get into that
space, and -- almost -- get back out of it. But considering the end
result of that manuever, that's not really persuasive evidence that the
guy he was tailgating could've safely moved over.)
--
Oscar Voss, Arlington, Virginia
ov...@erols.com
Mike Gandolf
In article <34F9AB...@richmond.infi.net> "Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@richmond.infi.net> writes:
>Very tragic, the motorist's impatience and reckless driving cost him his
>life and the lives of his two passengers. They had to be shoveled up.
>He collided with two other cars in the process, and created a ten-mile
>long traffic jam.
Very tragic, because if the other driver had simply kept to the right, which
is the law here in NJ and most other states, the whole incident would have
been avoided.
What bothers me is that when self-righteous idiots pontificate about "road
rage", they usually leave out the main cause of the problem in the first
place.
I've been a commuter for ten years now, an hour each way, two hours a day. And
I can tell you the "boy racers" are no problem, just pull over and let them
pass.
But there is a kind of driver that just can't let that happen, and they go out
of their way to obstruct these guys, block their way, cut them off. They think
they're doing the public a favor by "preserving the speed limit" when in
reality they're pulling the pin on a hand grenade.
These are the guys that cause road rage in the first place, and they deserve
at least part of the blame for the damage caused.
So if someone is tailgating, flashing their lights, trying to pass on the
right - say whatever you want but for everyone's sake LET HIM PASS.
You aren't acomplishing anything by holding him back except to increase his
anger and make him even more desperate to get around you.
If he breaks the speed limit, that's for the Police to handle. Just let him by
and stay out of the passing lane unless you're actually passing.
You can be sanctimonious and smug about your good driving skills later, but
only if you survive.
David P. Head
You may have a point here. It is somewhat confusing - if the left lane
bandit is passing slower cars, how did the bozo get around on the
right? Still, if one is sitting in the left lane, _slowly_ passing
someone or a line of cars, and there is a person behind who ie either A)
in a desparate hurry to get to a hospital to get attention for someone
who has passed out in the back seat from loss of blood and is still
bleeding OR B) absolutely certifiably insane and about to do something
with an attached risk that is all out of proportion to the gain, then
either way, it would seem at least fairly wise to get the heck over or
otherwise out of the path of the overtaking missle.
> Now maybe the "left lane bandit" could have ducked into the center lane
> to get out of the way of the overtaking car. Of course, he might have
> figured that the guy behind him was going to move into the center lane
> first, taking away that spot, without signalling -- not an unreasonable
> concern, that kind of stupid manuever happens often enough. Or he might
> have figured that there wasn't enough room in the center lane to move
> there and leave a safe distance between the cars ahead and behind in the
> center lane. (Of course, the tailgater did find a way to get into that
> space, and -- almost -- get back out of it. But considering the end
> result of that manuever, that's not really persuasive evidence that the
> guy he was tailgating could've safely moved over.)
Lotsa stuff he could have done. Personally, I buy fast cars, and if
someone that appears to be really burning up the road behind, and I have
no opportunity to move right immediately, that fellow behind me is going
to have to catch me first (before he can run into me). Just another
option... <G>
Dave Head
David P. Head
Randolf Pitchford wrote:
>
> "David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
> >and there is a person behind who ie either A)
> >in a desparate hurry to get to a hospital to get attention for someone
> >who has passed out in the back seat from loss of blood and is still
> >bleeding
1) It isn't, and
2) even if it was, there are a thousand other reasons for occasionally
needing to run real quick.
> No one has the right to put the gneral public at risk.
Now _that's_ BS. A little hieghtened risk for several hundred, as
opposed to near-certain-death for 1 is a good trade. Chances are good
that the several hundred will be unharmed _if_ one uses some moderate
driving skill while making some time.
This is _not_ saying the sort of driving that was in the example is
acceptable. It is saying that if someone can be saved by doing 100 MPH
to get to the hospital, and 55 MPH means they almost certainly die, then
its OK to drive 100 MPH where feasible. (straight roads, etc.)
> If the injury
> was that serious, he or she should have left it in the hands of a
> trained and properly equipped professional.
Yeah, and the trained and properly equipped people are _at the
hospital_. If Princess Di had been transported to the hospital
immediately, instead of 1) waiting for an ambulance crew and 2) having
the ambulance crew attempt to stabilize her rather than transport her,
doctors there think she might have lived.
>
> By driving like an idiot, that person not only put his "loved ones"
> life at even MORE risk, but put everyone ELSE on the road at the time
> at risk.
Hell, he executed his loved ones, and there apparently was no life and
death situation that could have been aided by driving fast. This guy
was just a jerk.
>
> There is absolutely no excuse for that kind of action...
Well, not when there's nothing to gain, anyway.
DPH
David P. Head
Randolf Pitchford wrote:
>
> mgan...@usenet.net (Mike Gandolf) wrote:
> >Very tragic, because if the other driver had simply kept to the right, which
> >is the law here in NJ and most other states, the whole incident would have
> >been avoided.
>
> >What bothers me is that when self-righteous idiots pontificate about "road
> >rage", they usually leave out the main cause of the problem in the first
> >place.
>
> >I've been a commuter for ten years now, an hour each way, two hours a day. And
> >I can tell you the "boy racers" are no problem, just pull over and let them
> >pass.
>
> >But there is a kind of driver that just can't let that happen, and they go out
> >of their way to obstruct these guys, block their way, cut them off. They think
> >they're doing the public a favor by "preserving the speed limit" when in
> >reality they're pulling the pin on a hand grenade.
>
> >These are the guys that cause road rage in the first place, and they deserve
> >at least part of the blame for the damage caused.
>
> >So if someone is tailgating, flashing their lights, trying to pass on the
> >right - say whatever you want but for everyone's sake LET HIM PASS.
> >You aren't acomplishing anything by holding him back except to increase his
> >anger and make him even more desperate to get around you.
>
> >If he breaks the speed limit, that's for the Police to handle. Just let him by
> >and stay out of the passing lane unless you're actually passing.
>
> >You can be sanctimonious and smug about your good driving skills later, but
> >only if you survive.
>
> fault. It's ALWAYS the fault of the "other guy or gal".
Its both their fault - 90% rager, 10% left lane bandit (or thereabouts).
DPH
MACK The DADDY
MrKablooeyŠ wrote:
>
> Tony Wang wrote in message <34F8FF7B...@prodigy.net.nospam>...
> >> based on the 2 second rule. 1.5 car lengths is ~25 feet, giving you
> >> about 0.7 seconds to react to an emergency. If the road is wet you
> >> should be even farther behind the car in front of you.
> >
> >Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some
> theoretical
> >"you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
>
> however one pleases. If the guy was driving too close, he was too close.
> He should pay the fine. If 1 car length per 10mph is safe, then that's how
> you should drive. Don't make up your own rules along the way.
>
>
HOW i handle tailgaters I put my brakes on(not on on). If they hit you,
there at fault + you get your car remolded free. Wahoo
Applejax
> Where I commute, 90% of drivers drive about 10 foot a part constantly.
>
> >They are usually the same people who
> >weave through traffic.
>
> 90% of drivers do not weave through traffic. "Weavers" are certainly
> no more than 1% and probably more like .1 to .01%.
>
> You have a techical error, therefore, in your statement.
Being objective to both sides, where are you getting your figures?
--
--
[Don't hit reply, blah blah blah...use email link below]
--Applejax
----------------
mailto:appl...@jersey.net
http://www.jersey.net/~applejax
----------------------------------------------------
My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
>> -- Ashleigh Brilliant
John Whiteside
n...@juno.com wrote:
>can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
>Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
>front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
>tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him.
That's way too close. Pay the fine.
---
John Whiteside
Arlington, VA
whiteside at mindspring dot com
Randolf Pitchford
What you "rage" apologists always fail to acknowledge is that we're
not talking about folks driving a little faster than most and just
trying to get on down the road.
You blame the good drivers out there for the blood bath. I say it's
the folks who refuse to put the blame where it belongs.
Regards,
Randolf Pitchford
( the artist formerly known as "Cactus Jack" )
Randolf Pitchford
"David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>and there is a person behind who ie either A)
>in a desparate hurry to get to a hospital to get attention for someone
>who has passed out in the back seat from loss of blood and is still
>bleeding
That is a totally bogus argument.
was that serious, he or she should have left it in the hands of a
trained and properly equipped professional.
By driving like an idiot, that person not only put his "loved ones"
life at even MORE risk, but put everyone ELSE on the road at the time
at risk.
There is absolutely no excuse for that kind of action...
Randolf Pitchford
>immediately, instead of 1) waiting for an ambulance crew and 2) having
>the ambulance crew attempt to stabilize her rather than transport her,
>doctors there think she might have lived.
I find it extremely interesting that an apologist for Road Ragers
would have so little shame as to use the tragedy of Princes Di as an
excuse to justify excessive speed and dangerous driving.
Did it ever occur to you that if she had NOT been in a vehicle going
like a bat outa hell, she wouldn't have NEEDED the medical attention
in the First place and she would have FOR SURE rather than "might"
have survived the night?
Some folks have no shame at all, I guess.
Tigress
> ...And none of the above relieves the "left lane bandit" from at least
> partial responsibility for the resultant carnage. He should have gotten
> out of the way. There was no positive way for him to know that the
> insistent passer did _not_ have a life and death emergency, nor did he
> have any reasonable exception from the law requiring slower traffic to
> keep right. Sure the tailgater/reckless driver bears most of the blame,
> but not all of it.
ok, the left lane bandit was being an asshole, but he wasn't the one who
decided to do the really dangerous stunt. just cause some people can't
control their temper does not mean the person they got mad at was at
fault. It is the person who chose to m ake the stupid mistake of
tailgating and cutting off's fault. yes, I hate left lane bandits, but I
hate this attitude of blame some one else when it was that person's choice
to do what he did. The left lane bandit did not force the guy to tailgate
or cut him off, that was the tailgater's choice. Therefore, the tailgater
is the idiot in this instance. Yes, the guy shouldn't be going slow in the
left lane, but no, he is not at fault cause some other asshole can't keep
his temper. And I feel no sorrow for the tailgater (but for the
passengers). The tailgater got what he deserved.
John Whiteside
"lcbmandg" <lcbm...@vermontel.com> wrote:
>Shalmaneser, this is not about supporting tailgating, it is about the fact
>that the 2 second rule is not practical today, (try any major beltway or
>parkway in a big city just before or just after the rush hour)
which is not where the ticket was given, so your point is......
John Whiteside
mgan...@usenet.net (Mike Gandolf) wrote:
>So if someone is tailgating, flashing their lights, trying to pass on the
>right - say whatever you want but for everyone's sake LET HIM PASS.
What if they're doing this while you're going faster than the traffic
to your right -- and going the same speed as the car in front of you?
I always wonder where these people think they're going to get when
they try to bulldoze you out of the way while traffic is going 25 mph
on I-66.
David P. Head
Tigress wrote:
>
> In article <34F9AE...@crosslink.net>, rall...@crosslink.net wrote:
>
> > ...And none of the above relieves the "left lane bandit" from at least
> > partial responsibility for the resultant carnage. He should have gotten
> > out of the way. There was no positive way for him to know that the
> > insistent passer did _not_ have a life and death emergency, nor did he
> > have any reasonable exception from the law requiring slower traffic to
> > keep right. Sure the tailgater/reckless driver bears most of the blame,
> > but not all of it.
>
> ok, the left lane bandit was being an asshole, but he wasn't the one who
> decided to do the really dangerous stunt. just cause some people can't
> control their temper does not mean the person they got mad at was at
> fault. It is the person who chose to m ake the stupid mistake of
> tailgating and cutting off's fault. yes, I hate left lane bandits, but I
> hate this attitude of blame some one else when it was that person's choice
> to do what he did. The left lane bandit did not force the guy to tailgate
> or cut him off, that was the tailgater's choice. Therefore, the tailgater
> is the idiot in this instance. Yes, the guy shouldn't be going slow in the
> left lane, but no, he is not at fault cause some other asshole can't keep
> his temper. And I feel no sorrow for the tailgater (but for the
> passengers). The tailgater got what he deserved.
>
Yes, you're quite correct. I'm just saying that the left lane bandit
isn't entirely guiltless in the example.
DPH
David P. Head
Randolf Pitchford wrote:
>
> "David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
> > If Princess Di had been transported to the hospital
> >immediately, instead of 1) waiting for an ambulance crew and 2) having
> >the ambulance crew attempt to stabilize her rather than transport her,
> >doctors there think she might have lived.
>
> I find it extremely interesting that an apologist for Road Ragers
> would have so little shame as to use the tragedy of Princes Di as an
> excuse to justify excessive speed and dangerous driving.
I am not an apoligist for road ragers, and any similar example chosen to
illustrate the point would have been equally tragic. I'm just saying
that there _is_ sometimes good reason to drive really fast. If there
weren't, then all the police cars would be lead sleds with diesel
engines and not have to worry about "handling packages", etc.
I'm just saying that the left lane bandit is not _totally_ guiltless in
the example. If he'd gotten out of the way, the whole thing might not
have happened.
DPH
Scott M. Kozel
> > I find it extremely interesting that an apologist for Road Ragers
> > would have so little shame as to use the tragedy of Princes Di as an
> > excuse to justify excessive speed and dangerous driving.
>
> I am not an apoligist for road ragers, and any similar example chosen to
> illustrate the point would have been equally tragic. I'm just saying
> that there _is_ sometimes good reason to drive really fast. If there
> weren't, then all the police cars would be lead sleds with diesel
> engines and not have to worry about "handling packages", etc.
>
> I'm just saying that the left lane bandit is not _totally_ guiltless in
> the example. If he'd gotten out of the way, the whole thing might not
> have happened.
Why do you keep calling him a "left lane bandit"?
From the article:
"Witnesses saw no sign of any emergency".
"Motorist [being tailgated] was ... passing a line of cars, going at or
just above the speed limit, according to witnesses".
Sounds like the only idiot here was the tailgater.
His death was social Darwinism at work, the shame was that he took
others with him.
lcbmandg
So the point is the 2 second rule is not practical
Mike Gandolf
In article <6dd28i$g...@camel12.mindspring.com> bishp@mindspring+com (Randolf Pitchford) writes:
>No one has the right to put the gneral public at risk. If the injury
>was that serious, he or she should have left it in the hands of a
>trained and properly equipped professional.
>By driving like an idiot, that person not only put his "loved ones"
>life at even MORE risk, but put everyone ELSE on the road at the time
>at risk.
I agree, but there are two people here who could have taken action to prevent
the action, therefor there are two people who put the public at risk.
If the slower driver had kept to the right and allowed the faster driver to
pass, the accident never would have happened.
And since, at least in NJ, there is a law requiring one to keep to the right
except when passing, we have two law breakers, and two people who share
responsibility.
The main cause of road rage is ignorant and arrogant drivers who don't feel
the need to show common curtesy to other drivers.
It's a simple thing to keep right, keep alert and use your turn signals. If
you don't do that, you're as much a part of the problem as the guy with the
lead foot.
em...@yahoo.com
In article <6d9k1f$sj5$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
n...@juno.com wrote:
>
> can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
was
> given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
> quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate
any
> advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
> not browse internet too frequently.
>
> regards/nick
I am really sorry for all you morons who gave such cold responces to this poor
person. The question you should all be asking yourselves: what was the speed
that local cop was travelling that day - was it 5 mph or was it 2 mph. If that
was the case, that NL had all the right to be behind 1.5 car lenths or so.
I have seen many cases of police entrapment for local and out-of-state driver
just to increase local budget, while poor drivers would suffer 5 points
increase on the records. All of you "well-wishers" must realize by now that
this moronic attitude- " just pay the ticket, and forget it" leads to the fact
that cops behave like they own the roads and can do whatever the hell they
feel like. It is also obvious to me that NL may also be right about ticket
quota for that day. I would like to see, how many tailgating tickets that cop
wrote that day or any other last day of the month. My suggestion to NL, go to
court and fight this ticket, for I am sure that he has a good chance. Do not
pay this ticket NL, go to court and fight it!!! The best of luck to you!!
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Brandon Sommerville
lcbmandg wrote:
>So the point is the 2 second rule is not practical
That's completely wrong. IF you are in a situation where it isn't
practical, then deal with it as required. However, that doesn't mean
that under normal circumstances you shouldn't try and maximize your
following distances.
Brandon
All generalizations are false.
el...@spam.free.at.last
In article <6demi9$kt5$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <em...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <6d9k1f$sj5$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> n...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
>> Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
>> front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
>> tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket
>was
>> given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
>> quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate
>any
>> advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
>> not browse internet too frequently.
>>
>> regards/nick
>
>
>I am really sorry for all you morons who gave such cold responces to this poor
>person. The question you should all be asking yourselves: what was the speed
>that local cop was travelling that day - was it 5 mph or was it 2 mph. If that
>was the case, that NL had all the right to be behind 1.5 car lenths or so.
True, we don't know the speed at which the cop was driving. But we do
know that the tailgater was doing 25mph. (Or at least that's what he
very strongly implies.) If he was doing 25mph and the cop 1.5 car lengths in
front of him was doing 2mph or 5mph, then (a)he must have been tailgating for
a VERY SHORT TIME, and (b)he should have been ticketed for reckless
driving and a few other things.
I don't think you should be so cavalier about calling people 'morons'. And,
since you think it's perfectly ok to drive 25mph 1.5 car lengths behind
someone driving 2mph, I don't think you should even be driving.
em...@yahoo.com
In article <34F8B8...@netmail.com>,
ler...@netmail.com wrote:
>
> n...@juno.com wrote:
> >
> > can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> > Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> > front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> > tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket
was
> > given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
> > quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate
any
> > advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I
do
> > not browse internet too frequently.
> >
> > regards/nick
> >
> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
> wouldn't be following closely behind a police vehicle, especially if you
> lived out of state.
>
> A good percentage of auto accidents are caused by tailgating. I'm glad
> you got a ticket and hope you get more tickets if you continue to
> tailgate. At higher speeds, these types of accidents become fatalities.
> And you are the one to blame!
>
> I have crossposted this to New Jersey General. I want the citizens and
> cops in New Jersey to see how you received a ticket, then posted this on
> DC groups for answers to beat your ticket.
>
> Pay the fine and quit whining......
>
> Gordon LeRoux
>
because of morons like you with an attitude "pay-and-forget", cops lost public
control over them, and this country is becoming a cop controlled nazi state.I
hope ( in fact I pray to God that you do!!) that one day you receive a ticket
like NL- absolutely unjustified because you local law agent need extra money.
My hopes go with NL, not with you!
your
em...@yahoo.com
In article <6datsm$hk9$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
el...@spam.free.at.last wrote:
>
> In article <34f9ef5a...@news.gatech.edu>,
> Osman Ullah <os...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> >After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
> >actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
> >they aren't...
>
> But isn't it delicious that that moron was tailgating a COP?!? (I guess
> that's what you have to do to get ticketed for tailgating... Sure as
> hell, nobody ever got ticketed for tailgating ME.)
the only moron in this case is you!!! Don't come back to this site next time,
when you get unjustified ticket! In fact, I pray to get many in the next
several month, you cold hearted imbecile!
em...@yahoo.com
In article <34F926...@ix.netcom.com>,
ta...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> el...@spam.free.at.last wrote:
> >
> > In article <34f9ef5a...@news.gatech.edu>,
> > Osman Ullah <os...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> > >After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
> > >actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
> > >they aren't...
> >
> > But isn't it delicious that that moron was tailgating a COP?!? (I guess
> > that's what you have to do to get ticketed for tailgating... Sure as
> > hell, nobody ever got ticketed for tailgating ME.)
>
> and troopers are very strict in that state.
>
> George
>
it is not a question of being strict, but being fair and objective. There goes
a big difference. Think about next time when you drive trough New Jersey.
em...@yahoo.com
In article <34fa0428...@news.mindspring.com>,
John...@aol.com.SPAM.THIS wrote:
>
> n...@juno.com wrote:
>
> >can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> >Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> >front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> >tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him.
>
>
> John Whiteside
> Arlington, VA
Distance is determined by the speed of the first car. If the cop's speed was
25 mph (which is never true), then NL is liable. But if his speed was below 25
mph, then 1.5 is more than enough. The average lenth of a car is 16 feet, thus
NL was a least 25 feet behind him, and if the cop was driving at 10 mph, the
distance was perfect. I strongly suggest to NL to fight this one!!
> whiteside at mindspring dot com
>
Steve Stevers! Coile
lcbmandg (lcbm...@vermontel.com) wrote:
>Shalmaneser, this is not about supporting tailgating, it is about the
>beltway or parkway in a big city just before or just after the rush
>issue a ticket when HE is being tailgated, but not so when citizens are
>being tailgated. Neither of these things support tailgating or any
>other driving violation, but they do point out that there is a major
>problem with the way cops do their job.
Need I point out that if one is willing to tailgate *A COP*, one is
quite likely to tailgate (or worse) every other driver on the road.
Everybody violates traffic laws. It is impractical and sometimes even
unsafe to obey them *all the time*. But there are times when it is
imperative that we obey them, or demonstrate our ability and
willingness to obey them. Those who fail to obey the law in the most
obvious situations lack entirely too much regard for the law to be on
the road at all.
--
Steve Coile
sco...@gmu.edu
E. Faubion
Toe Jam <better.watch.out@we're.cops.and.you're.not> wrote:
>> 25 mph = 36.6 feet per second.
>> avg. car length = 15 feet
>> 1.5 car lengths = 22.5 feet.
>I may be wrong, but it seems to me like this explanation assumes theleading
>vehicle is able to come to an absolute stop in 0 feet.
No. It's the 1.6 second average reaction time that's in question
here. The lead driver has already used his 1.6 seconds in making his
decision unbeknownst to the following driver who will also need that
1.6 seconds on average to perceive and make his decision on what to do
and with a following gap of .6 seconds he hasn't the necessary time
under normal conditions... he's robbed himself of that. Now if the
guy in front doesn't slam on his brakes or makes only normal stops the
tailgater will have time to respond, but in an emergency situation he
will not and it's those kinds of situations that create crashes.
>In real
>life, it would seem that during the 1.6 seconds of perception/reaction
>time, the trailing vehicle would not be catching up to the lead vehicle
>at 36.6 fps, since the lead vehicle (although slowing down) is still
>moving. I believe that needs to be accounted for.
I know what you mean, the closure rate won't be at the full 25 mph
however it will still close enough to involve the vehicles making
contact. This scenario involves the two drivers having equal response
times. In real life that won't always be the case so there will be
some variations of course.
ef
* fix the net to email *
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/6123/
Jonny Hodgson
On Mon, 2 Mar 1998 em...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Distance is determined by the speed of the first car. If the cop's speed was
> 25 mph (which is never true), then NL is liable. But if his speed was below 25
> mph, then 1.5 is more than enough. The average lenth of a car is 16 feet, thus
> NL was a least 25 feet behind him, and if the cop was driving at 10 mph, the
> distance was perfect. I strongly suggest to NL to fight this one!!
No, distance is determined by the requirement for the *following* car to
stop and hence the speed of *that* vehicle. And if the cop is driving
"at 10mph" with the tailgater doing "speed 25mph" then the cop's going
to get hit rather hard in 1.5 car lengths' time...
Jonny
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jonathan Hodgson | TTech Predator |
| Better to lose by two inches | MEng Auto Eng @ Lufbra |
| than win by two laps | LSU Archery Club and Orchestra |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Lukens
em...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Distance is determined by the speed of the first car. If the cop's speed was
> 25 mph (which is never true), then NL is liable. But if his speed was below 25
> mph, then 1.5 is more than enough.
NL already said in his initial post that the speed they were traveling was 25 mph.
Guilty. Pay the fine.
David P. Head
Scott M. Kozel wrote:
>
> "David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
> >
> > Randolf Pitchford wrote:
> > > I find it extremely interesting that an apologist for Road Ragers
> > > would have so little shame as to use the tragedy of Princes Di as an
> > > excuse to justify excessive speed and dangerous driving.
> >
> > I am not an apoligist for road ragers, and any similar example chosen to
> > illustrate the point would have been equally tragic. I'm just saying
> > that there _is_ sometimes good reason to drive really fast. If there
> > weren't, then all the police cars would be lead sleds with diesel
> > engines and not have to worry about "handling packages", etc.
> >
> > I'm just saying that the left lane bandit is not _totally_ guiltless in
> > the example. If he'd gotten out of the way, the whole thing might not
> > have happened.
>
> Why do you keep calling him a "left lane bandit"?
>
> From the article:
> "Witnesses saw no sign of any emergency".
> "Motorist [being tailgated] was ... passing a line of cars, going at or
> just above the speed limit, according to witnesses".
He's a left lane bandit because he's sitting there, going "at or just
above the speed limit", with total disregard for the other person's
obvious wish to go much faster. He had no way of knowing whether or not
there was some valid emergency that the tailgater was trying to solve.
It's just not polite, wise, or right to totally disregard someone like
that. Sure, the tailgater had a 99.9% chance of being a jerk, but if
one has an valid emergency, they might drive just like that - flashing
lights, honking horn, etc.
>
> Sounds like the only idiot here was the tailgater.
>
Yep, but his responsibility for the entire outcome lies just a bit short
of 100%. The left lane bandit was being a prick, too.
> His death was social Darwinism at work, the shame was that he took
> others with him.
Yep.
DPH
Brian
> >
> > n...@juno.com wrote:
> > >
> > > can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> > > Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> > > front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> was
> > > given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
> > > quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate
> any
> > > advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I
> do
> > > not browse internet too frequently.
> > >
> > > regards/nick
> > >
> > > http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
> >
> > wouldn't be following closely behind a police vehicle, especially if you
> > lived out of state.
> >
> > A good percentage of auto accidents are caused by tailgating. I'm glad
> > you got a ticket and hope you get more tickets if you continue to
> > tailgate. At higher speeds, these types of accidents become fatalities.
> > And you are the one to blame!
> >
> > I have crossposted this to New Jersey General. I want the citizens and
> > cops in New Jersey to see how you received a ticket, then posted this on
> > DC groups for answers to beat your ticket.
> >
> > Pay the fine and quit whining......
> >
> > Gordon LeRoux
> >
> because of morons like you with an attitude "pay-and-forget", cops lost public
> control over them, and this country is becoming a cop controlled nazi state.I
> hope ( in fact I pray to God that you do!!) that one day you receive a ticket
> like NL- absolutely unjustified because you local law agent need extra money.
> My hopes go with NL, not with you!
>
> your
>
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
So you really think this guy's ticket was unjustified? You are an idiot.
Cops don't hand out tickets for the fun of it!
Sheesh!
Brian
Brian
> >
> > can anybody suggest the best defense againt bs ticket for tailgating.
> > Situation: NJ residential area. speed 25 mph. local cop's car is going in
> > front of me. All of the sudden, he stops me, and gives me a ticket for
> > tailgating, even though I was a least 1.5 car lenth behind him. The ticket
> was
> > given on Feb28 (last day of the month-I guess he needed to fulfil ticket
> > quota). This is an obvous bs ticket situation. I would greatly appreciate
> any
> > advise as soon as possible.Please reply to my E-mail address only, for I do
> > not browse internet too frequently.
> >
> > regards/nick
> I am really sorry for all you morons who gave such cold responces to this poor
> person. The question you should all be asking yourselves: what was the speed
> that local cop was travelling that day - was it 5 mph or was it 2 mph. If that
> was the case, that NL had all the right to be behind 1.5 car lenths or so.
> I have seen many cases of police entrapment for local and out-of-state driver
> just to increase local budget, while poor drivers would suffer 5 points
> increase on the records. All of you "well-wishers" must realize by now that
> this moronic attitude- " just pay the ticket, and forget it" leads to the fact
> that cops behave like they own the roads and can do whatever the hell they
> feel like. It is also obvious to me that NL may also be right about ticket
> quota for that day. I would like to see, how many tailgating tickets that cop
> wrote that day or any other last day of the month. My suggestion to NL, go to
> court and fight this ticket, for I am sure that he has a good chance. Do not
> pay this ticket NL, go to court and fight it!!! The best of luck to you!!
>
> >
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> > http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
> >
You are calling "US" morons? He's the idiot who went to New Jersey and
tailgated a police officer! And you think WE are morons?
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Jerk!
Brian
David P. Head
John Whiteside wrote:
>
> "David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>
> >He's a left lane bandit because he's sitting there, going "at or just
> >above the speed limit", with total disregard for the other person's
> >obvious wish to go much faster.
>
> despite the robber's obvious desire to rob the bank, a "bank lobby
> bandit?"
<G> I dunno. Lets talk about cars.
>
> I agree that provoking assholes is usually a bad idea, but I have
> trouble with the idea that someone is at fault when they are the ones
> following the law. Is it a good idea to get out of the way when
> someone wants to pass you? Of course. Does that excuse a speeder who
> causes an accident? Not in any way.
Looking real close at everthing I've written so far one cannot come to
the conclusion that I want to excuse the road rager. I just want to put
a tiny little amount of the blame on the boob that plugs up the left
lane when someone else obviously wants to go a lot faster. Said boob
has _no_ way to know whether or not the faster driver is really in
trouble and actually _needs_ to drive fast. Said boob is being an
asshole. Said boob is endangering his own life. Said boob might have
saved several people by being courteous or prudent or wise or in some
places even legal by getting out of the way.
DPH
David P. Head
> >needing to run real quick.
>
> There are actually very few reasons which justify putting other
> drivers in danger.
But the left lane bandit doesn't _know_ that the faster driver isn't
experiencing one of them, and should get over for the welfare of all
concerned (including himself).
Medical emergencies come to mind, whether saving oneself or someone
else. Getting chased by armed and dangerous criminals would be
another. Yeah, I'd really have problems finding a thousand, so I guess
it might have been an exaggeration, or it might be that I just can't
think of all of 'em.
> About the only one I can think of is getting to a
> hospital in a medical emergency, and frankly, I doubt that's what the
> folks I see careening from lane to lane on the Beltway talking on
> their cell phones are doing.
Roger that! <G>
DPH
David P. Head
Jadwick wrote:
>
> David P. Head <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote in article
> <34F9AF...@crosslink.net>...
> >
> >
> > Ticket tailgaters repeatedly and often.
> >
> > Dave Head
> >
> You seem to be contradicting yourself. In another thread on this subject,
> you argued
> that it was alright to tailgate (and flash lights, etc.) at someone you
> felt was going
> slower than you happened to want to go. So which is it? Ticket tailgaters
> or
> "rage" at "left lane bandits?"
>
> P.
Both. Read it again - I never said that the road rager was right. I
just said that the left lane bandit was also wrong.
Execption to this is in a life and death emergency, it is OK to honk the
horn, flash the lights, and, yes (gasp) speed and otherwise increase
everybody's risk a little to have a chance to save a life.
Dave Head
John Whiteside
"lcbmandg" <lcbm...@vermontel.com> wrote:
>So the point is the 2 second rule is not practical
Your argument goes like this:
Because the 2-second rule is not practical on a crowded freeway, it's
unreasonable to follow it on a quiet residential street.
That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
---
John Whiteside
Arlington, VA
John Whiteside
em...@yahoo.com wrote:
>I am really sorry for all you morons who gave such cold responces to this poor
>person. The question you should all be asking yourselves: what was the speed
>that local cop was travelling that day - was it 5 mph or was it 2 mph.
The tailgater already told us it was 25 mph. Do try to pay attention.
John Whiteside
"David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>2) even if it was, there are a thousand other reasons for occasionally
>needing to run real quick.
There are actually very few reasons which justify putting other
drivers in danger. About the only one I can think of is getting to a
hospital in a medical emergency, and frankly, I doubt that's what the
folks I see careening from lane to lane on the Beltway talking on
their cell phones are doing.
There are a thousand reasons people do break the law; but they aren't
particularly good ones. You're late to work? You're going to miss your
movie? You have to pee? Sorry, I don't think that's a good reason for
someone to endanger me.
John Whiteside
"David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>He's a left lane bandit because he's sitting there, going "at or just
>above the speed limit", with total disregard for the other person's
>obvious wish to go much faster.
So is someone who calls the cops because a bank is being robbed,
despite the robber's obvious desire to rob the bank, a "bank lobby
bandit?"
I agree that provoking assholes is usually a bad idea, but I have
trouble with the idea that someone is at fault when they are the ones
following the law. Is it a good idea to get out of the way when
someone wants to pass you? Of course. Does that excuse a speeder who
causes an accident? Not in any way.
Jadwick
Jadwick
Osman Ullah <os...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote in article
<34f9ef5a...@news.gatech.edu>...
> After reading all the responses ot this post, its kinda scary
> actually...you know, the thought that some people tailgate and think
> they aren't...
>
Here's my sincere request -- please stop tailgating on Maryland Rt. 32
where
there are only two lanes. The posted speed limit is 55 mph. I don't care
to
drive faster than 60 mph on that piece of road (having come upon a few
fatal accidents
recently). What's the hurry? Slow down -- relax -- enjoy your drive
home/to work.
And while we're at it, I don't really care how upset people get behind me
on my street (posted 35 mph) -- I refuse to go any faster because of all
the young children who live there (12 in one block). So just honk, flash
lights, whatever -- won't
make me go any faster.
Marc
"Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@richmond.infi.net> wrote:
>Bob Scheurle <sche...@z-eclipse-z.net> wrote:
>> >> Give me a break, guys. This is the real world we drive in, not some theoretical
>> >> "you should be at least 1 car length per 10 mph" world.
>> Yeah, but in the real world, you don't tailgate police cars!
>A few years ago, this happened on a Maryland urban interstate highway.
>This shows the dangers of speeding, tailgating, and reckless driving.
Hmmm. I seem to remember something similar that wasn't quite what you
described.
[TG = tailgater, LLB = left lane blocker]
It is the same up to the impact, which didn't happen then. The LLB
then sped up and caught the TG. They then played freeway tag for a
number of miles. They were seen by a number of motorists, and even
reported to the police somewhere in that time, as I seem to recall.
It ended up where the LLB was back in the left lane and the TG was
passing on the right when he swerved to avoid rearending someone he
clipped the LLB's car and the rest is how you gave it.
Is this the one you were refering to, or is this another one?
Marc
For email, remove second "y" from Gum...@ticnet.com
Brandon Sommerville
John Whiteside wrote:
Following the law? What about "slower traffic keep right"?
And the number of accidents caused by speeders isn't that high,
particularly on Interstates, where the real high speeds occur.
Marc
whit...@mindspring.com.SPAM.THIS (John Whiteside) wrote:
>"David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>>He's a left lane bandit because he's sitting there, going "at or just
>>above the speed limit", with total disregard for the other person's
>>obvious wish to go much faster.
>So is someone who calls the cops because a bank is being robbed,
>despite the robber's obvious desire to rob the bank, a "bank lobby
>bandit?"
The person presumably allows the robery to take place without
interference. They do, however inform the police of a broken law
while distancing them from the dangerous criminal.
The parallel in driving would be pulling over and allowing the pass at
the first sign of tailgating or unsafe driving, and then allowing the
person to pass without trying to get in their way at all, and then
informing someone who does have the legal power to stop it.
The bank parallel for the display on the road (interfering with
someone that is committing a "crime" and presumably going to commit
another) is more along the lines of seeing a bank robery in progress
and running in to the bank and telling the robbers to stop because
they shouldn't be doing things like that. Neither is illegal, and
neither is a course of action I'd recommend.
>I agree that provoking assholes is usually a bad idea, but I have
>trouble with the idea that someone is at fault when they are the ones
>following the law. Is it a good idea to get out of the way when
>someone wants to pass you? Of course. Does that excuse a speeder who
>causes an accident? Not in any way.
If someone knows that a bank robery is in progress but runs in the
bank anyway, tells the robbers that they are all stupid and will be
caught anyway and that he's just waiting for them to leave so he can
call the cops and give them descriptions of them to help catch the
criminals, and then the robbers shoot him, would you think that he was
an upstanding citizen doing his robery blocking duty, or would you
think that he is an example of natural selection in action (or
somewhere in between)? (boy that's a long run-on, I'm proud :-)
Tony Wang
Scott M. Kozel wrote:
> A motorist was tailgating other motorists, and flashing his lights, to
> bulldoze them out of the way. Witnesses saw no sign of any emergency.
> Another motorist was in the left lane of a six-lane (3 each way)
> expressway, passing a line of cars, going at or just above the speed
> limit, according to witnesses. The tailgater lost his patience, and
> zoomed around on the right. He decided to express his road rage by
> cutting in across the front of the guy he had been tailgating.
All these politically correct terms such as road rage and such to describe what is just
an act of stupidity.
I mean, yeah, I pass people on the right, and I zoom on by and move over. So what? I do
it with care and do it without trying to prove a point.
Let's call a spade a spade here. Road rage is just stupidity, immaturity, and bad
judgement. Let's not give those who do stupid things an excuse.
--
Tony Wang
http://www.geocities.com/colosseum/2544
Remove the nospam from my name to send me mail
Tony Wang
Mike Gandolf wrote:
> So if someone is tailgating, flashing their lights, trying to pass on the
> right - say whatever you want but for everyone's sake LET HIM PASS.
> You aren't acomplishing anything by holding him back except to increase his
> anger and make him even more desperate to get around you.
>
> If he breaks the speed limit, that's for the Police to handle. Just let him by
> and stay out of the passing lane unless you're actually passing.
Ain't that the truth. Unfortunately, we have some self appointed speed crusaders out there, who
don't want anyone driving faster than them. Hell, Dale Earnhardt could get on the road with his race
car and they wouldn't let him pass.
Of course, he's so used to driving with so little room for error he'd probably find a way to squeeze
by. But that's why he gets millions of dollars to drive and we don't.
Tony Wang
Randolf Pitchford wrote:
> What you "rage" apologists always fail to acknowledge is that we're
> not talking about folks driving a little faster than most and just
> trying to get on down the road.
>
> You blame the good drivers out there for the blood bath. I say it's
> the folks who refuse to put the blame where it belongs.
Good driving would be to get the hell out of the way of a guy who's stupid and hell
bent on going at warp speed.
Why bother to try and slow them down unless you're a cop?
Sure, he's wrong, but do you want to risk your safety to prove the point?
Tony Wang
Scott M. Kozel wrote:
> From the article:
> "Witnesses saw no sign of any emergency".
> "Motorist [being tailgated] was ... passing a line of cars, going at or
> just above the speed limit, according to witnesses".
>
> Sounds like the only idiot here was the tailgater.
Scott, come on now. You and I all know that if you're going at or just above
the speed limit, you really don't belong in the left lane.
Come on, man, you go 65 on the Beltway, and there are still people whipping by
you. Pretty much everyone's exceeding the speed limit -- even in the far
right lane.
I'm not saying that the guy who caused the wreck wasn't an idiot. Just that
if you're going at or slightly above the limit, you should be in the right
lane.
Tony Wang
John A. Limpert wrote:
> I drive on the Beltway and have never had any major difficulty with
> staying 2 seconds behind the car in front of me. If someone cuts in
> front of me I just gradually back off until I am at a safe distance
> again.
Well, good for you. I don't even bother. Why bother? Someone's just going to cut
into my nice six car cushion.
It's too much of a pain in the ass. Besides, I'm usually passing people anyway.
Tony Wang
George Tatem wrote:
> Understand now?
I understood you the first time George. But you are quoting ivory tower spacing, and
I'm telling you that it doesn't work that way in the real world.
It would be wonderful if we could put three seconds between us and the next driver.
However, with people changing lanes, merging, and so on, it's not going to happen.
Tony Wang
Shalmaneser the First wrote:
> Mr. "real world", try aiming your couple of tons of gun at me
> at high speed and you may find yourself in the nearest ditch.
> Fool, you proport that where ever you are going or whatever you
> are doing is important enough to risk my life (yours I care not about),
> in your "real world".
Hey, a question for you.
Did you know that what you just described is considered vehicular
manslaughter if you succeed? Because the odds are good that if you force
someone into a ditch at highway speeds, he's going to die.
You know, come to think of it, they might be able to get your ass for
second degree murder.
So, how would you like to be squealing like a pig for the next 10 years?
And don't be an idiot. I'm just saying that if you give someone a gap,
someone will cut into it. I'm happy if I can manage to get a two car
length cushion. Of course, I'd like to have the full six car lengths, but
I know that's not going to happen.
Tony Wang
MrKablooeyŠ wrote:
> >Sheesh, if I get two car lengths on the Beltway, I'm happy.
>
> Enjoy eating glass, Mr Wang.
If I give someone more room, it quickly disappears. You know it, I know it, it
happens. I'm not going to ride on someone's bumper. But I know that it's a
rare day when I can get all of the distance between me and the car in front of
me that I'd like.
Tony Wang
Ken M. wrote:
> You are wasting your breath. Some people are in such a hurry they have
> developed a very bad habit of tailgating. I'll bet most of them have
> terrible driving records, too.
>
> Whenver possible, I just pull over and let them go, hoping there is a
> cop with radar ahead. I would hate to pay their insurance premiums!
Well........hate to burst your bubble, but.........
While I technically tailgate, according to the ivory tower definition of one car
length per 10 mph, my driving record is squeaky clean.
No tickets or accidents in the last five years.
There's a big difference between what I consider technical tailgating and real
tailgating. Those that do the latter are those who ride your bumper, driving
five feet from your bumper at 80 mph.
Those that do the former are people like me who would love to have more space
between them and the car in front of them, but can't do that without constantly
slowing down in order to allow someone who cut in to proceed to what is
considered a safe distance.
Paul Hansen
In article <34FBB1EC...@prodigy.net.nospam>, Tony Wang
<ton...@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote:
> Mike Gandolf wrote:
> > If he breaks the speed limit, that's for the Police to handle. Just
let him by
> > and stay out of the passing lane unless you're actually passing.
>
> Ain't that the truth. Unfortunately, we have some self appointed speed
crusaders out there, who
> don't want anyone driving faster than them. Hell, Dale Earnhardt could
get on the road with his race
> car and they wouldn't let him pass.
You know, something that occured to me, a passing thought you may say, is
the problem with speedometer error. The main problem, of course, is that
it exists. A good percentage of speedometers are accurate, but there's a
very good percentage that are off by up to 5mph, either way.
With that in mind, the "go faster than me, and I cellphone you to death"
crowd has a fundamental problem in that if their speedometer is
inaccurate, they really don't know how fast they are going. People could
be passing them at the limit, but they rightous ones have *no* idea of
that, and therebye are actually impeding traffic, while spitting all over
the inside of their car while their weaving around waving their arms in
the air at the police on their cellphone, probably on 911, therebye tying
up the emergency lines so that while somebody's dying out there, *they*
get to vent their rage at some operator who *should* be doing better
things than listening to them spread spittle across the phone.
Which was my whole problem, really, with the I-am-a-saint-crowd stating
that to speed is evil, because, really, nobody, except the few people that
have gone and gotten their speedometer calibrated regularly (many dozens
of them in the U.S., I'm sure), really know *exactly* what speed they are
going. They are within the limits of decent driving, though, which is why
cops usually don't ticket for 5mph over.
In all honesty, their are some real bad drivers that speed, cut across 3
lanes at a time, tailgate, and other nefarious actions, but they are very
easy to spot, because they aren't going 10-15mph over the "limit", they
are going 30-40. In fact, in Washington state, it's very hard to get a
ticket for simple speeding at 80mph, since the limit is 75mph, for cars on
the interstate. A very reasonable limit, that has cut down on speeding
*tremendously*, because a great majority of people are comfortable at that
speed, that's why they had been driving at that speed in the first place.
Paul Hansen
--
Japan Sports Car - enthusiasts information for japan's domestic market only sports cars
http//:www2.gol.com/users/polarbr/sportscar/car_index.htm
lcbmandg
Steve "Stevers" Coile wrote
<<Everybody violates traffic laws. It is impractical and sometimes even
unsafe to obey them *all the time*. But there are times when it is
imperative that we obey them, or demonstrate our ability and
willingness to obey them. Those who fail to obey the law in the most
obvious situations lack entirely too much regard for the law to be on
the road at all.>>
I like your thought, but how many cops are willing and ready to employ such
empathetic thinking? They stand to gain everything by ticketing.
David Chen
Good suggestion Mr. Wang. When people are flying up my rear and tailgate
me, I usually just shift to the right lane and let him/her pass. I know a
lot of people would probably just ignore whoever's behind them, or
actually slows down to piss them off. That will only make the matter
worse. Especially when the driver behinds you pull out a gun and starts
shooting. That's exactly what happened in the George Washington Parkway
accident last year. And it resulted in a 4-car collision with many
deaths.
On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Tony Wang wrote:
>
>
> Randolf Pitchford wrote:
>
> > What you "rage" apologists always fail to acknowledge is that we're
> > not talking about folks driving a little faster than most and just
> > trying to get on down the road.
> >
> > You blame the good drivers out there for the blood bath. I say it's
> > the folks who refuse to put the blame where it belongs.
>
> Good driving would be to get the hell out of the way of a guy who's stupid and hell
> bent on going at warp speed.
>
> Why bother to try and slow them down unless you're a cop?
>
> Sure, he's wrong, but do you want to risk your safety to prove the point?
>
Bentley
Tony Wang (ton...@prodigy.net.nospam) said something like:
: > I drive on the Beltway and have never had any major difficulty with
: > staying 2 seconds behind the car in front of me. If someone cuts in
: > front of me I just gradually back off until I am at a safe distance
: > again.
:
: Well, good for you. I don't even bother. Why bother? Someone's just going to cut
: into my nice six car cushion.
I gotta go with Tony on this one; if I were to "back off" to maintain my
cushion ad infinitum, very soon I'd be stopped on the Beltway. Which is my
major gripe against the SUV/minivan explosion; in the 'old days' I could
generally see the brake lights of the car two vehicles ahead of me, which
allowed me to follow cloesly but still (somewhat) safely. No more.
--
> B E N T L E Y < ben...@access.digex.net@cyberpromo.com
A long frisbee throw from the pungent and lovely Potomac River
[remove @cyberpromo.com for correspondence]
Marc
efau...@oklahoma.ten (E. Faubion) wrote:
>Toe Jam <better.watch.out@we're.cops.and.you're.not> wrote:
>>> 25 mph = 36.6 feet per second.
>>> avg. car length = 15 feet
>>> 1.5 car lengths = 22.5 feet.
>>I may be wrong, but it seems to me like this explanation assumes theleading
>>vehicle is able to come to an absolute stop in 0 feet.
>No. It's the 1.6 second average reaction time that's in question
>here. The lead driver has already used his 1.6 seconds in making his
>decision unbeknownst to the following driver who will also need that
>1.6 seconds on average to perceive and make his decision on what to do
>and with a following gap of .6 seconds he hasn't the necessary time
>under normal conditions... he's robbed himself of that. Now if the
>guy in front doesn't slam on his brakes or makes only normal stops the
>tailgater will have time to respond, but in an emergency situation he
>will not and it's those kinds of situations that create crashes.
Then you get into a question of when the second driver becomes aware
of the danger. I've started stopping before the person in front of me
on multiple occasions. I'll see the stopped traffic before the person
in front of me, or I'll notice the car that is creeping up to the
cross street that looks like they are going to try and make it.
If you work under the assumption that no driver sees anything other
than the car in front of them, then your numbers are closer to
correct, but I don't know of a single driver that claims not to at
least try to see what is going on ahead of the car directly in front
of them.
el...@spam.free.at.last
In article <34fe340...@NEWS.TICNET.COM>, Marc <Gum...@ticnet.com> wrote:
<snip>
>If you work under the assumption that no driver sees anything other
>than the car in front of them, then your numbers are closer to
>correct, but I don't know of a single driver that claims not to at
>least try to see what is going on ahead of the car directly in front
>of them.
Good point -- we should all be looking ahead, trying to anticipate what
the driver ahead will (or should) do. But there are times when that won't
help -- e.g. when the driver ahead has a blowout or breaks an axle or
a million other things. It's at those times we need that reaction time +
stopping time.
Furthermore, I realize it's very fashionable here to just proclaim 'I'm
great, everyone else should be great too!' -- but in fact the greatest
driver will have (hopefully tiny and rare) lapses of attention or have
his/her attention focused on something else (like 'Is that a deer's eyes
I see in those bushes?', 'Is that idiot on my right going to cut in front
of me?', 'Is that funny sound me or some other car?', etc) when something
happens in front of us that we didn't anticipate. (I'm not saying I'm
always 2 seconds or more behind -- but I do try... :-) )
David P. Head
David Chen wrote:
>
> Good suggestion Mr. Wang. When people are flying up my rear and tailgate
> me, I usually just shift to the right lane and let him/her pass. I know a
> lot of people would probably just ignore whoever's behind them, or
> actually slows down to piss them off.
Hmmm... in any given face-to-face street situation, a person acting in a
manner that is designed or likely to cause another to want to beat his
head in would probably be cited by any officer present for "disorderly
conduct". This would happen even if the person were breaking no other
law. Maybe we could urge a disorderly conduct citation for such people
who do essentially the same thing but in a car in the left lane of a
busy highway?
DPH
Lupine
In article <34ff4f12...@news.mindspring.com>,
whit...@mindspring.com.SPAM.THIS wrote:
> "David P. Head" <rall...@crosslink.net> wrote:
>
> >He's a left lane bandit because he's sitting there, going "at or just
> >above the speed limit", with total disregard for the other person's
> >obvious wish to go much faster.
>
> So is someone who calls the cops because a bank is being robbed,
> despite the robber's obvious desire to rob the bank, a "bank lobby
> bandit?"
>
> I agree that provoking assholes is usually a bad idea, but I have
> trouble with the idea that someone is at fault when they are the ones
> following the law.
Um.. "fault" is not necessarily determined by who is following the law.
I'ld say in this case, one is a passive accomplish ( thru inaction ) and
the toher an active one.
Lupine
It takes two to tango..
For every visible "ragist", there is the silent one.
The "left lane bandit" is just as bad, just as objectionable
and just as dangerious. Those that drive around with a chip
on their shoulder.. who are going to "teach the punk kid a
lesson".. those are the one's more often who are the most
dangeriuos on the road.. as you don't notice them till its too
late.
It doesn't matter if you are driving too fast, or too slow. All
that it matters is that you allow your emotions to cloud your
judgement; and you drive with a vandetta.
Vernon Wright
On Tue, 03 Mar 1998 02:46:25 -0500 Tony Wang
<ton...@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote --
>...
>If I give someone more room, it quickly disappears. You know it, I know it, it
>happens. I'm not going to ride on someone's bumper. But I know that it's a
>rare day when I can get all of the distance between me and the car in front of
>me that I'd like.
Perhaps, Tony, you should try measuring the time you save by
preventing people from filling that gap (i.e. the time your journey
takes when you keep closed up as against the time it takes when you
fall back and allow those that would to enter your cushion gap).
I suspect you would have trouble eating a banana in the time saved.
Best regards,
Vernon
(If replying by eMail, substitute the usual
punctuation for the uncial German words; then
delete the spurious tail.)
klaatu
Tony Wang wrote:
>
> George Tatem wrote:
>
> > Understand now?
>
> I understood you the first time George. But you are quoting ivory tower spacing, and
> I'm telling you that it doesn't work that way in the real world.
That's really very sad. I think that if we can we should all go out of our way
to try to make the "real world" conform to what the world "should be". If we
all only accept that our best efforts are doomed to failure, so are we. If we
all only strive to make the world better for everyone, _even though it is
inconvenient for ourselves_ then everyone de-stresses, they probably work more
efficiently and thoughtfully, and almost certainly everyone lives longer.
To accept that "things are not that way in the real world" is to accept that
only mindlessly animalistic competition is worthy. It's not - people rose to
primacy on thie world more through cooperation than through competition.
Okay, so I'm taking to extremes a little matter of driving nicely. But one
must start somewhere.
>
> It would be wonderful if we could put three seconds between us and the next driver.
> However, with people changing lanes, merging, and so on, it's not going to happen.
Just try. Try doing it if only for exactly ten minutes a day. Maybe not in
rush hour, but if you can drive nice without impeding traffic, do it! You may
be amazed at how much your blood pressure approaches what it should be.
>
> --
> Tony Wang
> http://www.geocities.com/colosseum/2544
>
> Remove the nospam from my name to send me mail
--
Be kind to your neighbors, | "When the going gets weird the weird turn pro."
even though they be | http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/home.html
transgenic chimerae. | Now. Chock full of uninteresting links.
--------- Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth ----------------
Non-UseNet re-transmission of this news article is a willful violation of US
Copyright Law and the Berne Convention. Statutory damages are $250,000.00
Re-transmission of this e-mail expressly prohibited.
The e-mail addresses for the FCC Commissioners include
rhu...@fcc.gov, jqu...@fcc.gov, sn...@fcc.gov, rch...@fcc.gov
Srecko
John Whiteside wrote:
>
> em...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >I am really sorry for all you morons who gave such cold responces to this poor
> >person. The question you should all be asking yourselves: what was the speed
> >that local cop was travelling that day - was it 5 mph or was it 2 mph.
>
> The tailgater already told us it was 25 mph. Do try to pay attention.
>
> ---
> John Whiteside
> Arlington, VA
> whiteside at mindspring dot com
John, here's a newsflash for you: ever heard of sarcasm?
Anyways, I believe ALL tickets should be fought, this one included. The
defendant should look up what the drivers' manual for the state in
question says about tailgating distances.
Srexx