 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / April 2005Scaredy drivers
I notice so many scared drivers on the road. They are so unsure of their abilities that they endanger everyone else. You know them, they: - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though they have right of way - brake before they enter an acceleration lane to give their brain time to shift from street to highway driving - put their blinker on 3000 feet before a turn - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and hope someone will let them in - give up their right of way just to be nice, causing drivers behind them to brake unexpectedly - brake inappropriately when someone crosses their path with no chance they will hit them - incessantly look in their rear-view mirror worrying about people behind them following too closely - wait for several minutes before they pull out into traffic because they're afraid to cut someone off - drive under the speed limit BTW, I've seen these behaviors displayed across all genders and ages. > I notice so many scared drivers on the road. They are so unsure of their > abilities that they endanger everyone else. You know them, they: > > - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though they > have right of way I don't know about braking *hard* but if someone is already merging into my lane, I don't run into the back of them; right of way or not. > - brake before they enter an acceleration lane to give their brain time to > shift from street to highway driving [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and > hope someone will let them in It's the drivers who won't let them in who are the problem.. > - give up their right of way just to be nice, causing drivers behind them to > brake unexpectedly Sounds like you're a tailgater... > - brake inappropriately when someone crosses their path with no chance they > will hit them ..yup. Definitely a tailgater. > - incessantly look in their rear-view mirror worrying about people behind > them following too closely Maybe if you were a proper following distance behind... > - wait for several minutes before they pull out into traffic because they're > afraid to cut someone off > > - drive under the speed limit > > BTW, I've seen these behaviors displayed across all genders and ages. Just remember: when you think you're surrounded by a.sholes all the time, chances are good that *you* are the problem.  SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." >> - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and >> hope someone will let them in > >It's the drivers who won't let them in who are the problem.. WRONG. Fact #1: THEY must yield to vehicles already in the lane that they want to merge into. A lack of planning on their part does not constitute an emergency on my part. Fact #2: Unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper, only incompetent drivers have trouble finding an existing gap into which they can smoothly merge without requiring anyone else to modify their speed. Bottom line, if they can't plan ahead and take advantage of existing gaps in traffic to position themselves in the correct lane well in advance of their turn, then they're too incompetent to be driving. >> - give up their right of way just to be nice, causing drivers behind them to >> brake unexpectedly > >Sounds like you're a tailgater... Sounds like you're a Scaredy Driver. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ > >> - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and > >> hope someone will let them in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > want to merge into. A lack of planning on their part does not > constitute an emergency on my part. Which doesn't give them the right to follow at such close following distances that effectively block lane changes. Of course, more aggressive/speed driver/road bully type drivers would obviously disagree. So, yes, it still remains that the drivers that won't let them in are an equal part of the problem. > Fact #2: Unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper, only incompetent drivers > have trouble finding an existing gap into which they can smoothly > merge without requiring anyone else to modify their speed. Again, that gap should be large enough such that the lane changing driver can merge in without cutting off the car behind and without tailgating the car in front. In reality, that gap is never readily available if there is any significant traffic, even if it's not bumper to bumper. So again, it remains that the drivers that won't let them in are an equal part of the problem. > Bottom line, if they can't plan ahead and take advantage of existing > gaps in traffic to position themselves in the correct lane well in > advance of their turn, then they're too incompetent to be driving. Bottom line, the aggressive drivers that close gaps because :gasp: someone might actually change lanes in front of them are MORE of a problem than the so-called scaredy drivers. If everyone followed at a 2 to 3 seconds following distance, this entire discussion would be moot. But, the aggressive/speed driver/road bully type drivers just continue to drive in a MFFY manner while complaining that any driver that doesn't drive their way is, interestingly enough, a MFFY driver. > Again, that gap should be large enough such that the lane changing driver > can merge in without cutting off the car behind and without tailgating the > car in front. > > In reality, that gap is never readily available if there is any significant > traffic, even if it's not bumper to bumper. Bullcrap. I rutinely find gaps that satisify the 2-headlamps-in-the-center-mirror rule of thumb in heavy traffic. Even bumper to bumper / stop and go. It's not that hard. I usually pick out a sloth or a truck and time it when they will leave a gap because of their lack of acceleration. > Bottom line, the aggressive drivers that close gaps because :gasp: someone > might actually change lanes in front of them are MORE of a problem than the > so-called scaredy drivers. I hope a 17 year old cuts you off and slams on the brakes then. The valuable lesson I learned, is not to brake, but hold study course. Let them hit you in the side. They might do something stupid and then you get screwed. See, insurance rules are hit in the side, their fault, if they successfully get in front of you and the collision still occurs, well, you better have witnesses. So, they can hit me in side. If there is not sufficent space in front of me and it will force me to brake to allow someone over, I will close the gap to prevent the unsafe move. >> >> - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and >> >> hope someone will let them in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Which doesn't give them the right to follow at such close following >distances that effectively block lane changes. Of course it does. The law does not require me to let you merge in front of me. If you're a Sloth and you're trying to merge into my lane, I'm going to maintain a following distance that doesn't leave enough room for you to get in front of me and slow me down. There's plenty of room behind me for you to merge in. >Of course, more >aggressive/speed driver/road bully type drivers would obviously disagree. Here's the problem with Sloth Mergers: instead of maintaining the common speed of traffic, finding a gap, and merging smoothly into it, they 1) SLOW DOWN, 2) flip on their turn signal, and 3) continue driving slowly until someone "lets them in." This is needlessly disruptive to the flow of traffic, especially for all those poor drivers who are stuck in the lane behind the Sloth Merger. Give me one good reason why I should support this behavior. >So, yes, it still remains that the drivers that won't let them in are an >equal part of the problem. Sure, blame the victim. >> Fact #2: Unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper, only incompetent drivers >> have trouble finding an existing gap into which they can smoothly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >can merge in without cutting off the car behind and without tailgating the >car in front. And if it isn't, the merger should find one that is, not hold up traffic while they wait for some "courteous" person to create one especially for them. >In reality, that gap is never readily available My experience contradicts your assertion. I *never* have problems merging unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper and stopped. I think there are a few others here whose experience echoes mine. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ > >> >> - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and > >> >> hope someone will let them in [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > enough room for you to get in front of me and slow me down. There's > plenty of room behind me for you to merge in. No it doesn't--that only means you can maintain your current speed of travel, but it doesn't mean that you can block traffic with a too-close following distance for others to merge into. Maintaining a too close following distance with the clear intent to prevent anyone merging is offensive driving. > >Of course, more > >aggressive/speed driver/road bully type drivers would obviously disagree. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > traffic while they wait for some "courteous" person to create one > especially for them. And if there isn't one, it's because of MFFY drivers who just can't stand to have anyone in front of them at any time. > >In reality, that gap is never readily available > > My experience contradicts your assertion. I *never* have problems > merging unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper and stopped. I think there > are a few others here whose experience echoes mine. I'm talking about free-flowing traffic and yet all the lanes are quite full of cars. One either has to accelerate or brake at a significant magnitude to jockey for position to find that gap, assuming that an offensive driver doesn't also move to block a potential lane change. With PROPER following distances, only mild acceleration or letting of the gas pedal for a bit would allow a proper lane change. >> Of course it does. The law does not require me to let you merge in >> front of me. If you're a Sloth and you're trying to merge into my [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > travel, but it doesn't mean that you can block traffic with a too-close > following distance for others to merge into. If the following distance is large enough for the idiot to squeeze into, he often will. This means you have TWO unsafe conditions, little following distance AND an idiot who's making an unsafe lane change in fron of you. > Maintaining a too close following distance with the clear intent to prevent > anyone merging is offensive driving. Sorry, sometimes it's the lesser of two evils to block out an unsafe lane change. My smashed torqueless wonder car is evidence enough to me to block these people out as much as possible. If you think otherwise, may your vehicle and only your vehicle become damaged in the same manner that occured to the TW car. > I'm talking about free-flowing traffic and yet all the lanes are quite full > of cars. One either has to accelerate or brake at a significant magnitude to > jockey for position to find that gap, assuming that an offensive driver > doesn't also move to block a potential lane change. With PROPER following > distances, only mild acceleration or letting of the gas pedal for a bit > would allow a proper lane change. I just don't have a problem. I don't require people yield to me in order to make a lane change. > >Again, that gap should be large enough such that the lane changing driver > >can merge in without cutting off the car behind and without tailgating the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > merging unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper and stopped. I think there > are a few others here whose experience echoes mine. Mine certainly does. OTOH, in a bumper-to-bumper merge, drivers may be more inclined to allow a bit more room to a real-steel battered pickup that might hurt them than to something that looks fragile enough to bleed. SignatureCheers, Bev *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* It is just a bicycle. It is not dedication and bugs in your teeth and dust and rain and mud. It is not madness and harmony and glory and rhythm. It is not muscle and flesh and sweat and lycra and wind. It is just a bicycle. -- Bianchi *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* >> >In reality, that gap is never readily available >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >inclined to allow a bit more room to a real-steel battered pickup that might >hurt them than to something that looks fragile enough to bleed. In b-t-b traffic, I'm happy to open up a gap and let someone in. Clearly no matter how good a driver you are it's almost impossible to find an existing gap(*). It also helps me maintain a positive balance in my Karma account over at Wells Swarga. (*) The exception to this is the morons who fail to accelerate as quickly as the cars in front of them, leaving a huge gap in front of their car once the wave of braking passes. It's trivial to merge in front of these dorks. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ >>> >In reality, that gap is never readily available >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > their car once the wave of braking passes. It's trivial to merge in > front of these dorks. How about the schmucks who,when you open up a gap for them to merge,don't do it right away,but dawdle and take their sweet ol time? (waiting for what, I don't know) I close the gap I opened back up if they don't react promptly. You snooze,you lose. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > Of course it does. The law does not require me to let you merge in > front of me. If you're a Sloth and you're trying to merge into my [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > drivers who are stuck in the lane behind the Sloth Merger. Give me one > good reason why I should support this behavior. It is pretty difficult to change lane without disruption if the lane you're changing to is going slower than the one you're currently in. You have to either match speed with the slower lane, or dive into it and then brake. (Of course you should have planned ahead and gotten into the lane sooner). In fact the best thing to do is to find a creeper or an enabler, and dive in ahead of them. They were disrupting the flow anyway so you haven't really made things much worse. The correct technique for changing into a faster lane is to leave a little gap in front of you (say 5 - 7 metres), so that when a gap comes along in the other lane you can accelerate and match speed with the gap, before moving into it. >It is pretty difficult to change lane without disruption if >the lane you're changing to is going slower than the one [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >disrupting the flow anyway so you haven't really made things >much worse. As long as you don't force the guy you're merging in front of to brake, you've done your job well. The fact that HE is obstructing traffic is not your fault. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ >Here's the problem with Sloth Mergers: instead of maintaining the >common speed of traffic, finding a gap, and merging smoothly into it, >they 1) SLOW DOWN, 2) flip on their turn signal, and 3) continue >driving slowly until someone "lets them in." That's not how they usually act. They just cut into gaps while moving at a speed much slower than traffic already in the right lane (i.e. not waiting for someone to "let them in" but just forcing their way in). So the right lane driver behind them has to slow down or make an emergency lane change to avoid rear ending them. Obviously, this creates congestion near every on-ramp. Some drivers tailgate in the right lane to prevent this, but that (a) is more dangerous, and (b) contributes to the on-ramp congestion even more, since even someone who is trying to merge properly at the speed of right lane traffic will have to "force his/her way in" when the right lane tailgaters leave no reasonable gaps to merge into. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Timothy J. Lee Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. No warranty of any kind is provided with this message. >>Here's the problem with Sloth Mergers: instead of maintaining the >>common speed of traffic, finding a gap, and merging smoothly into it, >>they 1) SLOW DOWN, 2) flip on their turn signal, and 3) continue >>driving slowly until someone "lets them in." > >That's not how they usually act. I see it every day. >They just cut into gaps while >moving at a speed much slower than traffic already in the right >lane I guess I must intimidate them too much, because the Sloths don't usually do that to me. They just sit there, blinking pathetically, waiting for me to let them in. Usually I don't, but every once ina while they catch me in a weak moment, and I slow down for them. Then the fucktards STILL don't merge! Every time this happens, it reminds me why my rule is to never let them in. Then I'm an "a.shole" again for another six months. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ > My experience contradicts your assertion. I *never* have problems > merging unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper and stopped. I think there > are a few others here whose experience echoes mine. Scott is right on all counts, with one minor exception: In southern California, the typical driver can get in front of you even if you tailgate, simply by inserting his front fender into a tiny gap and following it in, thus forcing you to brake (a maneuver which I call an "LA lane change"). But even this is only a problem in the very worst congested areas (I-405 near LAX, for instance), because the "sloth mergers" he's concerned about aren't competent enough to try it or to succeed if they did. > >> - when changing lanes, put their blinker on before they see an opening and > >> hope someone will let them in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > want to merge into. A lack of planning on their part does not > constitute an emergency on my part. Except in needn't *be* a lack of planning that causes it. > Fact #2: Unless traffic is bumper-to-bumper, only incompetent drivers > have trouble finding an existing gap into which they can smoothly > merge without requiring anyone else to modify their speed. Traffic is *often* bumper-to-bumper in this situation. > Bottom line, if they can't plan ahead and take advantage of existing > gaps in traffic to position themselves in the correct lane well in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Sounds like you're a Scaredy Driver. Sorry, Scott, but you're wrong on this. We *want* people to signal their intentions with a proper amount of advance warning. When people use the fact that someone is signaling to close them out, they discourage a safe behaviour in favour of an unsafe one. Driving is an activity where the maxim "do unto others..." should definitely be observed. SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." >> Fact #1: THEY must yield to vehicles already in the lane that they >> want to merge into. A lack of planning on their part does not >> constitute an emergency on my part. > >Except in needn't *be* a lack of planning that causes it. That's the exception, not the rule. And it doesn't change the law. >We *want* people to signal their intentions with a proper amount of >advance warning. When people use the fact that someone is signaling to >close them out, they discourage a safe behaviour in favour of an unsafe >one. I *always* signal, and yet somehow this *never* happens to me. If I can merge without making anyone slow down and "let me in," why can't you? >Driving is an activity where the maxim "do unto others..." should >definitely be observed. The Golden Rule of Driving is the rule I live by. My version of it reads: "I will stay out of your way just as I would have you stay out of mine." In other words, I won't make you slow down unnecessarily, and I expect the same from you. If a pathetic mope is sitting there with her blinker on waiting for someone to slow down and let her in, she can wait until I'm past and merge in behind me. If I let this idiot in front of me, I'll not only have to slow down to let her in, but I'll be forced to drive slow for the entire time I am stuck behind her. No, thanks. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ >>> Fact #1: THEY must yield to vehicles already in the lane that they >>> want to merge into. A lack of planning on their part does not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That's the exception, not the rule. And it doesn't change the law. Yesterday, I am in the left lane stuck behind sloth. In the right hand lane there is a minivan (also sloth). The driver of the minivan flicks on his left signal expecting me to yield to him. I don't. He gives up, accelerates, changes lanes in front of the sloth and comfortably makes the left turn lane he was aiming for. The alternative action that occured, was one where he got where he wanted to go without any negative impact on the rest of traffic. >Yesterday, I am in the left lane stuck behind sloth. In the right hand >lane there is a minivan (also sloth). The driver of the minivan flicks on >his left signal expecting me to yield to him. I don't. He gives up, >accelerates, changes lanes in front of the sloth and comfortably makes >the left turn lane he was aiming for. Yeah, I see this sh.t all the time. I just roll my eyes - why can't these morons just accelerate and merge into that gap in the first place? Where do they get the idea that they are entitled to merge wherever they please and that the rest of us should slow down and accommodate them? That was a rhetorical question. :) SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ >>> Fact #1: THEY must yield to vehicles already in the lane that they >>> want to merge into. A lack of planning on their part does not [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > If I can merge without making anyone slow down and "let me in," why > can't you? It must be a Northeast Corridor thing. Often times you get heavy traffic with vehicles in all lanes going about the same speed and often following too closely. Try to get out of your lane (so you can make a turn or exit a mile up the road) and often times flipping the signal on will just make people in the following lane close the gaps just enough so you can't merge. Now, a lot of times people have this coming to them because they try to do this at the last minute, but if traffic is heavy enough, it doesn't seem to matter how early you try to prepare to change lanes, a turn signal blinking and actually giving some warning of what you are trying to do will seemingly be taken as a threat against the blocking driver's manhood or something. >>Driving is an activity where the maxim "do unto others..." should >>definitely be observed. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > be forced to drive slow for the entire time I am stuck behind her. No, > thanks. >> - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though they >> have right of way > I don't know about braking *hard* but if someone is already merging into > my lane, I don't run into the back of them; right of way or not. The last time I eased off as someone acted to cut me off, he slammed on the brakes in front of me. He moved into my lane doing 15mph slower to begin with. > It's the drivers who won't let them in who are the problem.. There is no 'let in'. You have to find a gap. I don't make others 'let me in'. I find a gap. I plan ahead. It's not difficult. >> - give up their right of way just to be nice, causing drivers behind them to >> brake unexpectedly > Sounds like you're a tailgater... Yesterday, I had drivers do this and it forced me to brake. My vehicle? Cannondale R600. (that's a _bicycle_) There's no way I can go fast enough to tailgate with a bicycle on flat arterial streets, but when someone hits the brakes to let someone else in I have to brake too. >> - brake inappropriately when someone crosses their path with no chance they >> will hit them > ..yup. Definitely a tailgater. I see people brake for all sorts of nonsensical things every day. Including turns that no braking is required for. Sometimes I'm a block away. > Just remember: when you think you're surrounded by a.sholes all the > time, chances are good that *you* are the problem. Yeah... it's my fault they can't accelerate or turn faster with their motor vehicles than I can with a _bicycle_. > >> - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though > >> they [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > There is no 'let in'. You have to find a gap. I don't make others 'let me > in'. I find a gap. I plan ahead. It's not difficult. And so you advocate the last minute, single flash of the turn signals, lane change? That is unsafe behaviour and it should be discouraged by a little driving *courtesy*. > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > enough to tailgate with a bicycle on flat arterial streets, but when > someone hits the brakes to let someone else in I have to brake too. If you were close enough that you had to brake suddenly then you were close enough that you had to brake suddenly. If it put you in danger of a collision, you were too close. Period. > >> - brake inappropriately when someone crosses their path with no chance > >> they [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Including turns that no braking is required for. Sometimes I'm a block > away. If it put you in danger of a collision, you were too close. Period. > > Just remember: when you think you're surrounded by a.sholes all the > > time, chances are good that *you* are the problem. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Both of the issues you replied about were about *braking*, sunshine. SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." >> >> - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though >> >> they [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > lane change? That is unsafe behaviour and it should be discouraged by a > little driving *courtesy*. Unfortunately, I find that sometimes neccessary myself. I don't like to do it and will try at least once the proper way before reserving to it, but sometimes you get stuck around people who are genuine a.sholes (like LLBs) who will do whatever to keep you from passing them, and so it is sometimes neccessary. Again, it's not something I like to do, but in some of the more heavily-populated areas (i.e. the entire Northeast corridor), it is neccessary to do that from to time to have any chance of moving over. >> >> - give up their right of way just to be nice, causing drivers behind >> >> them [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Both of the issues you replied about were about *braking*, sunshine. >> > I don't know about braking *hard* but if someone is already merging into >> > my lane, I don't run into the back of them; right of way or not. >> >> The last time I eased off as someone acted to cut me off, he slammed on >> the brakes in front of me. He moved into my lane doing 15mph slower to >> begin with. >> > It's the drivers who won't let them in who are the problem.. >> There is no 'let in'. You have to find a gap. I don't make others 'let me >> in'. I find a gap. I plan ahead. It's not difficult. > > And so you advocate the last minute, single flash of the turn signals, > lane change? That is unsafe behaviour and it should be discouraged by a > little driving *courtesy*. And so you adovcate all out war with the greys because of their habbit of anal probing humans and cutting up cattle? You want to go on like this? I can make up totally absurd arguements for you. I signal normally, and usually travel a hundreds of feet at normal speeds before making the lane change. The signal is on for more than enough time. several seconds. And yes, some a.sholes try to close the gap, for them, I may let them, or I may just make my move the moment I see them accelerating to block. Or I may just punch it and make my move. >> Yesterday, I had drivers do this and it forced me to brake. My vehicle? >> Cannondale R600. (that's a _bicycle_) There's no way I can go fast >> enough to tailgate with a bicycle on flat arterial streets, but when >> someone hits the brakes to let someone else in I have to brake too. > If you were close enough that you had to brake suddenly then you were > close enough that you had to brake suddenly. If it put you in danger of > a collision, you were too close. Period. Huh? so you have what? A 5 mile following distance? Not too familiar with the urban environment are you? Here's a rutine drivers do to me when I am on bicycle, stop sign 100 ft ahead, they pass me and then slam on the brakes. Of course to you, this is some how my fault. >> I see people brake for all sorts of nonsensical things every day. >> Including turns that no braking is required for. Sometimes I'm a block >> away. > If it put you in danger of a collision, you were too close. Period. Who sad it did? I really hope now that someone cuts you off and slams on the brakes causing only vehicle damage. Then maybe you'll understand this after the front end of your car is mashed. >> > Just remember: when you think you're surrounded by a.sholes all the >> > time, chances are good that *you* are the problem. >> Yeah... it's my fault they can't accelerate or turn faster with their >> motor vehicles than I can with a _bicycle_. > Both of the issues you replied about were about *braking*, sunshine. Pay attention to the entire thread. >> >> - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though >> >> they [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >And so you advocate the last minute, single flash of the turn signals, >lane change? No, I advocate a quick, decisive, three-flash lane change into an empty space large enough to safely accommodate your car. And if you have to speed up to position your car next to one, then that's what you do. You NEVER slow down if you can avoid it, because when you slow down needlessly, you force every car behind you to slow down, also. >That is unsafe behaviour and it should be discouraged by a >little driving *courtesy*. Let's see: should I show you "courtesy" by slowing down to accommodate your incompetent lane change, even though that would show DIScourtesy to the 20 other drivers in the lane behind me by forcing them to slow down unnecessarily? Only a MFFY would expect me to do that... No, if anyone is being discourteous, it's the person who slows down, flips on their blinker, and waits for someone to let them in. If they weren't afraid of using their gas pedals (along with a modicum of planning) they wouldn't need "courtesy" at all. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ >>> - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though they >>> have right of way [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the brakes in front of me. He moved into my lane doing 15mph slower to > begin with. That's unfortunately a very common practice. But I have a feeling that if Midnight Dad is genuine and not just another troll he is no stranger to rearending people in front of him. Chris > I notice so many scared drivers on the road. They are so unsure of their > abilities that they endanger everyone else. You know them, they: > > - drive under the speed limit Make up your mind, loonybird. You're always claiming that "everybody speeds" as your justification for why you break the law. >> I notice so many scared drivers on the road. They are so unsure of > their [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Make up your mind, loonybird. You're always claiming that "everybody > speeds" as your justification for why you break the law. Your moniker is set to some delusional conspiracy theory and I'm the loonybird? Of course! This is Xeton2001@yahoo.com's world, and we're all figments of it's deluded perception of reality. That's why we're all criminals and idiots! You don't think any of the following was written by anyone that has a reasonable grasp on reality, do you? -- Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend (Xeton2001@yahoo.com)'s words of wisdom, love, and respect (spelling and grammatical errors left intact) Fork you, beyatch. I'm the greatest troll that ever lived!!!! I'm the world's champ at infuriating all these pschopathic car loonies. HAHAHA http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/msg/8316b755126bd447 Screw driver training and courtesy. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/d4aaae4439d8c383 The Federal Reserve is not a branch of the govt; it's a group of private banks and borrowing from them means the taxpayers have to pay the interest to the banks. This has been going on for nearly a hundred years and it's just stealing from the public and giving to the bankers. JUST PRINT THE DAMN MONEY. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/f15b1f7d7ea0dfe2 I'm not talking about increasing the money supply; just replacing borrowed money with printed money. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/760bbaea47e5f5f9 I know what you mean, dood. I did 5 years in the can myself for beating the crap out of a half-dozen faggot gun loonies i caught raping a collie and I couldn't handle the food either. Goddam beets with every meal. Ended up eating nothing but cans of tuna i bought at the commy. http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0411242021.7b529c17%40posting.google.com I don't think knife bans will ever happen, since knives are so damn easy to make. I remember when i was in prison for beating up a dozen gun loonies and we used to melt down a thousand or so aspirin tablets into a thick goo and then let it harden into a knife shape which we sharpened against the concrete floor. Anybody can make a knife anywhere out of anything. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.rush-limbaugh/msg/018c5bbd64dd19ac Hey dood. I've been a US senator since 98! You mean you didn't know that??? http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/2f1dd067aa0af690 I never voted in my life, you lying whore. All elections are rigged. The globalists rigged this one by paying kerry not to attack bush. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/87a31e73cec1db38 GODDAMMIT - STOP SENDING MESSAGES TO MORE THAN FIVE GROUPS Google won't allow more than five. It's not my job to delete excessive group listings but i seem to spend half my life doing that. OBEY THE RULES, YOU BUTTHOLES!!!! http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/c3d2661d3c6734ed I am not paid to delete the excessive newsgroups you clowns are posting to. Obey the rules or GTF out of here!!!! http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/f5c7a53c81f28cdf Tires don't blow out anymore. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/9a619fee7f463fc2 LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/b9727d351b4be64a There's not a shred of evidence that the jerries murdered anything close to 7 million jooz. Another monstrous lie just like the 9-11 official story. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/3650866dc7ecbadc Bush is dictator and that means he has to take the blame for everything. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/msg/a2d35f67fd7b6003 Has he killed as many people as Laura Bush? http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.flame.niggers/msg/c2ff1fca08982a38 You don't know what you're talking about, dood. AIDS is an american bioweapon developed by americans so that blacks would be esp susceptible to it. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.sport.baseball/msg/cd9d112311697712 She knows it won't matter. Blake is white so the media will insist on a not guilty verdict. :http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/59c74805c56a5747 YOu stupid lying shithead. All bush has accomplished in AFG is to make it the world's leading heroin supplier. And BTW it wasn't a war. It was a massacre against a defenseless nation that never did anything to us. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.bush/msg/29a86842abe0d9d6 She's just damn lucky the press is owned by the GOP and doesn't crucify her for vehicular manslaughter like they've done to ted kennedy for 35 years. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.republicans/msg/cac630fd8aec9a63 You're crazy. There will be a draft. Bush is gonna stage another 9-11 type event and then say we have no choice but to go to war against every muslim nation. And democrats will say nothing. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/b4a8ea8427fdf968 I'm saying that bush obviously doesn't want to catch OBL. Not now that the election is over, anyway. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/46a00a246987524f You're crazy, dood. Google is a super rw org and they censor liberals. RW posters here get away with everything while libs have to be choir boys. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.prophecies.nostradamus/msg/ca35950242741f13 That's why so many legal scholars think republicans should be banned from juries. Anyone who'd vote for a man who lied us into war is too dumb to sit on a jury. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/4dc8560247663014 Wouldn't have mattered if hitty had one. He took his orders from the same organization that roosevelt did and bush does today. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/cd58ee450b438b19 You can't even lie any good. No where in the country are cops issued crown victorias. http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0410112125.4b572994%40posting.google.com i'm sure jeffrey dahmer also objects to big daddy govt telling him he can't kill people anymore. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1665104637d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=o ff&edition=us&selm=780ea958.0410311919.5f4893f4%40posting.google.com At first i thought the tars had been slashed but no, the tars were fine http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0410311926.d89b941%40posting.google.com I hate cell phone drivers but at least this gal had the sense to drive slowly while yakking. http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0411231910.47c6ceb7%40posting.google.com The issue is the psychopath doing 60 mph OVER THE LIMIT!!!!!!!!. This guy is a murderer and i want him locked up anyway they can do it. Three cheers for the cops. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=780ea958.0411162236.1a4d23a5%40posting.goog le.com Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5 years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open stretch could be 25, i thought. Turns out the cop was right. No complaints from me then. I should have known the law. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.autos/msg/b140009050c624a9 > I notice so many scared drivers on the road. They are so unsure of their > abilities that they endanger everyone else. You know them, they: > > - brake hard when someone else is merging into their lane, even though they > have right of way I also brake when someone is merging into my lane in a way that makes a collision likely. That's not fear but intelligence. Intentionally causing or failing to avoid an accident just because you have the right of way is (sometimes terminally) stupid and highly illegal to boot. Chris > I also brake when someone is merging into my lane in a way that makes a > collision likely. That's not fear but intelligence. Intentionally causing > or failing to avoid an accident just because you have the right of way is > (sometimes terminally) stupid and highly illegal to boot. And if you cannot manage to avoid it, they'll still fault you. So, given the rules of fault as I now know it, they can hit me in the side. > I also brake when someone is merging into my lane in a way that makes a > collision likely. That's not fear but intelligence. Intentionally causing > or failing to avoid an accident just because you have the right of way is > (sometimes terminally) stupid and highly illegal to boot. That law is completely stupid and wrong. But since it's there, it's all the more reason to do things like tailgate, so that anyone who would take advantage of it to steal your right-of-way never gets the opportunity. >> I also brake when someone is merging into my lane in a way that makes a >> collision likely. That's not fear but intelligence. Intentionally causing >> or failing to avoid an accident just because you have the right of way is >> (sometimes terminally) stupid and highly illegal to boot. > > That law is completely stupid and wrong. No, it is not. Stupid is to cause an accident if you can avoid it. > But since it's there, it's all > the more reason to do things like tailgate, so that anyone who would take > advantage of it to steal your right-of-way never gets the opportunity. I can only hope you are joking. If not, please do all of us a favor and return your driver's license. Chris >I notice so many scared drivers on the road. They are so unsure of their >abilities that they endanger everyone else. You know them, they: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > >BTW, I've seen these behaviors displayed across all genders and ages. But not by yourself, right? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.