 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / June 2006Would you speed to get out of the way of a cop?
Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, say, 10-15 mph. A cop car, travelling much faster than any 'civilian' vehicle, quickly approaches from the rear and starts tailgating you. Is it a good idea to turn on your right blinker and speed up so as to move right as quickly as possible, even if it means exceed the speed limit by 20-25 mph? The logic is that the cop could have already pulled you over for speeding, but what he really wants is for you to get out of his way. Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and make him pull you over for speeding. > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > of his way. Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and > make him pull you over for speeding. I will NEVER speed up in this situation. Was actually pulled over and cited for speeding for getting out of the way of a cop who was hauling a.s, even though I wasn't speeding, the cop lied (I was actually behind a LLBer doing 5 under until a few seconds before the cop caught up to me). It's sad that I have to be like this but he can damned well wait until I'm good and done passing traffic to my right. In traffic court, I found that this was a habit of his; fly up behind people in "sporty" cars and then ticket them when they sped up to move over. Apparently most of the people he cited actually did exceed the speed limit (briefly,) but IMHO it's a fair bet he was "guesstimating" their speed and not actually pacing them for the required 1/3 mile or whatever as he told me he did when he wrote me the ticket. Were it not for one a-hole cop, I wouldn't feel the need to be so rude to my fellow motorists... I will get out of the way of anyone not appearing to be a cop however. I might get out of the way of the cop if I can do so by slowing down, but never by speeding up. nate > > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > nate That "speeding while passing" was addressed in the Spokane driving guru article today. He says that Wa law allows speeding while passing. I haven't checked that but I am taking it with a grain of salt until I do. Harry K > That "speeding while passing" was addressed in the Spokane driving guru > article today. He says that Wa law allows speeding while passing. I > haven't checked that but I am taking it with a grain of salt until I > do. It's true: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.425 FloydR > > That "speeding while passing" was addressed in the Spokane driving guru > > article today. He says that Wa law allows speeding while passing. I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > FloydR It was interesting to note the entire first sentence: "No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law:" I would take that to mean that you can't block traffic, but you can if you are already at the maximum speed limit, since that is then in compliance with the law. While that interpretation would not sit well with many in this ng who choose to ignore that particular aspect of the law, if my interpretation is correct it at least removes the possibility in that state of getting a ticket for speeding at the same time as a ticket for impeding traffic... Laywers and legislators, ya gotta hate em or love em. > Floyd Rogers wrote: >> > That "speeding while passing" was addressed in the Spokane driving guru [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > you are already at the maximum speed limit, since that is then in > compliance with the law. Except that WA is a KRETP state, so you may not. Additionally, that statement is there to tie in with "too fast for conditions", not the speed limit. > While that interpretation would not sit well with many in this ng who > choose to ignore that particular aspect of the law, if my > interpretation is correct it at least removes the possibility in that > state of getting a ticket for speeding at the same time as a ticket for > impeding traffic... Laywers and legislators, ya gotta hate em or love > em. > > Floyd Rogers wrote: > >> > That "speeding while passing" was addressed in the Spokane driving guru [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > impeding traffic... Laywers and legislators, ya gotta hate em or love > > em. But there are a lot of 2 lane (1 each direction) highways and roads in this state where you can't KRETP. I have taken to cruising in my F150 at 50 mph on one and pulling over onto the shoulder to let normal taffic pass when someone catches up. Waiting to see if they will ticket that as there are signs "do not drive on shoulder". Harry K 223rem wrote: > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > move right as quickly as possible, even if it means exceed the speed > limit by 20-25 mph? No. Slow and drop *back* until you can move right. I wouldn't do this to any regular driver, but cops live by the speed limit, so let 'em "die" by it too. > 223rem wrote: > > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I wouldn't do this to any regular driver, but cops live by the speed > limit, so let 'em "die" by it too. Only if they don't have their emergency lights on. I've had them come up behind me with their lights flashing and the only hole in traffic was ahead of me, so I sped up, pulled to the right and let them by (there was actually a couple of them).  SignaturePaul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes." (If you can read this, you're overeducated.) 223rem asked: >Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and >make him pull you over for speeding. I never had to think about this one before. Interesting. If the red lights aren't going in circles, I doubt that I would speed up, for the reasons you mention. If I were 10-15 over the limit (not bloody likely, except by accident once, and the cop was there, and he got me), I'd have to assume he was after ME, and was just checking the license over the radio, etc., before he turned on the lights. Speeding up would only make things worse for me. If I was not speeding, I wouldn't speed up, though I'd look for a way to move over. The cop might have a reason to hurry, but I'd not be safe from a ticket unless he had his lights on. Once he hit the lights, I think I would be safe if I had to goose it a bit. > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > of his way. Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and > make him pull you over for speeding. It depends. If I am in the left lane of an interstate I'll move over before he can tailgate me. Otherwise, I slow down. > It depends. If I am in the left lane of an interstate I'll move over > before he can tailgate me. Otherwise, I slow down. Let me add that in moving over I do not increase speed. There are too many a.shole cops out there to make things easy for them. > In article <1148243026.982544.154790@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > 223rem wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I always get out of the way of police;they may be on a "no-alert" emergency dispatch.If they stop ME,I'll tell them that is what I thought,and why I sped to get out of their way. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >> It depends. If I am in the left lane of an interstate I'll move over >> before he can tailgate me. Otherwise, I slow down. > I always get out of the way of police;they may be on a "no-alert" emergency > dispatch.If they stop ME,I'll tell them that is what I thought,and why I > sped to get out of their way. I did that once and ended up with a warning. He was driving one of the ISP civilian plated camaros at night. So I accelerated to get out of his way thinking it was an ordinary driver that had been screwing around with me for about 5 miles, and I wanted him to just pass. Turns out he was trying to get me to do something. I'm so tired of hypocrite cops, if by avoiding their roadside taxation and harrassment scheme by slowing them down on a surface street or the right lanes of a limited access highway all the better. It makes me understand the sick joy that carl and judy get when they LLB and do their other nonsense. I had one follow me at 10 under for a couple miles the other night ;) When I was doing 5 under because it's revenue night, he makes a u-turn behind me, so I decided to slow another 5. The look he gave me when he finally passed me.... zooms by accelerating to about 15 over and then I see him coming back the other way at about 15 over. >Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, >and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, >say, 10-15 mph. A cop car, travelling much faster than any 'civilian' >vehicle, quickly approaches from the rear and starts tailgating you. This would never happen to me. I would check my rear view mirror before beginning my pass and, if I spotted faster traffic approaching from the rear, I would delay the onset of my pass until the faster traffic cleared UNLESS I was POSITIVE I could complete my pass before the faster traffic caught up. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, >>and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > traffic cleared UNLESS I was POSITIVE I could complete my pass before > the faster traffic caught up. I've been caught in the left lane before by cops, they really do drive that fast around here, they can catch you before you can plan your move over. Spotted a MD state trooper doing about 90 MPH on US-50 this AM (I was going maybe 75 and he hauled right by me. At *least* 85) ironically enough not two minutes after he passed me I saw a trooper on the left shoulder shooting radar. Not sure if it was the same one or not, he was out of my sight by that point. I think it was the same one though because he wasn't really set up, just leaning over the trunk holding the gun. That wins extra hypocritical a.shole points in my book. This isn't unusual, Friday on my way home from work I got passed by an Arlington cop on the Dulles toll road doing about 75-80ish, that's "reckless driving" to us civvies. It's a rare cop that I see that isn't doing at least 20 over. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel This would never happen to me. -------------------------------- It can happen to anyone when passing a long convoy of semis or other slow vehicles. >This would never happen to me. > >-------------------------------- > >It can happen to anyone when passing a long convoy of semis or other >slow vehicles. Hasn't happened to me yet in over 25 years of driving. If it does happen one day, that will be one of the signs that I'm losing my eyesight and/or ability to judge speed, and that it will be time for me to hang up my car keys soon. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>This would never happen to me. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Hasn't happened to me yet in over 25 years of driving. You must drive on empty roads then. Quite often I overtake with *nothing* in my rear view mirror, just to have the usual BMW man tailgating me a minute later. As to the original question, no. There have been stories of people being prosecuted for going through a red light to get out of the way of an ambulance. And of course there is the story of the Ambulance car taking a donor heart for transplant and the driver was prosecuted for speeding. >>>It can happen to anyone when passing a long convoy of semis or other >>>slow vehicles. >> >> Hasn't happened to me yet in over 25 years of driving. > >You must drive on empty roads then. IN LA? BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!! The roads around here are NEVER empty - even at 3AM there are cars on the freeways. >Quite often I overtake with *nothing* in >my rear view mirror, just to have the usual BMW man tailgating me a minute >later. Then you are passing way too slowly. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>>>It can happen to anyone when passing a long convoy of semis or other >>>>slow vehicles. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Then you are passing way too slowly. I'm overtaking at or above the speed limit. If I did not overtake I'd be stuck behind the latest truck, the BMW man behind me can wait a wee while. >>>Quite often I overtake with *nothing* in >>>my rear view mirror, just to have the usual BMW man tailgating me a minute [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >I'm overtaking at or above the speed limit. That's a common newbie driver mistake. The "slower" in "Slower Traffic Keep Right" refers to other vehicles in close proximity on the road, not to the speed limit. If any vehicles behind you are travelling faster than you are, you need to get out of their way. >If I did not overtake I'd be stuck behind the latest truck Only momentarily; if the guy behind is travelling as fast as you say, he'll be past you in about 3 seconds. Then you can pass at whatever pace is comfortable for you. Alternatively, you can speed up temporarily in order to complete your pass more quickly. I personally do both all the time. >the BMW man behind me can wait a wee while. Typical MFFY attitude. My goal is to ensure that NOBODY has to wait if I can possibly help it. However, if one of us *has* to be delayed, I would rather slow down slightly and wait for Roger Ramjet to fly past than whip out in front of him and hope he can stop in time. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > That's a common newbie driver mistake. The "slower" in "Slower Traffic > Keep Right" refers to other vehicles in close proximity on the road, > not to the speed limit. If any vehicles behind you are travelling > faster than you are, you need to get out of their way. Wrong. I keep left unless I'm overtaking, I'm overtaking if I'm going faster than the traffic in the left lane, the speed of the traffic to my right is irrelevant, as long as I'm going faster than the traffic I'm overtaking. The speed limit is not relevant here. > Only momentarily; if the guy behind is travelling as fast as you say, > he'll be past you in about 3 seconds. Then you can pass at whatever > pace is comfortable for you. Alternatively, you can speed up > temporarily in order to complete your pass more quickly. I personally > do both all the time. Or you can get out of the way quickly, I can see we aren't really in disagreement here. > Typical MFFY attitude. My goal is to ensure that NOBODY has to wait if > I can possibly help it. However, if one of us *has* to be delayed, I > would rather slow down slightly and wait for Roger Ramjet to fly past > than whip out in front of him and hope he can stop in time. Sure, of course. What I'm saying is that if you are overtaking a long line of trucks, and trust me I've often seen lines of them streching on for miles. In which case it's not possible to overtake them without someone appearing behind you, they could have been several miles back when you start your overtake. >> That's a common newbie driver mistake. The "slower" in "Slower Traffic >> Keep Right" refers to other vehicles in close proximity on the road, >> not to the speed limit. If any vehicles behind you are travelling >> faster than you are, you need to get out of their way. > >Wrong. MFFY. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>> That's a common newbie driver mistake. The "slower" in "Slower Traffic >>> Keep Right" refers to other vehicles in close proximity on the road, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > MFFY. Better check the headers, Scott... Organization: University of Newcastle upon Tyne You're not wrong, and there aren't any MFFYs here as far as I can tell; You guys are arguing the same point from opposite sides of the road. :) Signature~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. ******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant." (pgp@v6stang.com for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) >>>> That's a common newbie driver mistake. The "slower" in "Slower Traffic >>>> Keep Right" refers to other vehicles in close proximity on the road, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >You're not wrong, and there aren't any MFFYs here as far as I can tell; >You guys are arguing the same point from opposite sides of the road. :) Those bloody Brits think the world revolves around them. Wasn't it obvious that I was talking about a country where the signs say "Slower Traffic Keep Right?" Sheesh! :) SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > Those bloody Brits think the world revolves around them. Wasn't it > obvious that I was talking about a country where the signs say "Slower > Traffic Keep Right?" > > Sheesh! :) Those bloody Yanks think the world revolves around them. Wasn't it obvious that I was talking about a country where the law says "Slower Traffic Keep Left?" Sheesh! :) >> Those bloody Brits think the world revolves around them. Wasn't it >> obvious that I was talking about a country where the signs say "Slower [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >that I was talking about a country where the law says "Slower Traffic Keep >Left?" Hey, *I* started the subthread regarding KRETP - if some bloody Brit with a short attention span posts a non-sequitur response, that's beyond my control. :) SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave It happened to me very recently. Two weeks ago, I was returning from Chicago on I65. I was doing 90 in the left lane keeping about 1/4 mile behind a speeding Explorer (I figured that radar detector + the SUV in front of me was enough to protect me from cops). There was no point in moving right, because the SUV (my radar shield) kept to the left lane, and there was nobody behind me anyway. At some point I noticed, far behind in the left lane, a car quickly gaining on me---to my horror, I soon saw it was a cop car (an Impala). I moved right, and it turned out that it was a convoy of state police cars doing clearly more than 100 mph. They had no interest in me or in the SUV I was following. My point is that it can happen to be caught in the left lane by a vehicle travelling significantly faster than you. >Two weeks ago, I was returning from Chicago on I65. I was doing 90 in >the left lane keeping about 1/4 mile behind a speeding Explorer (I >figured that radar detector + the SUV in front of me was enough to >protect me from cops). There was no point in moving right, because the >SUV (my radar shield) kept to the left lane, and there was nobody >behind me anyway. Did it never occur to you that you could have continued to pace the Exploder from the right lane and been just as safe from cops? And been using the lanes properly, to boot? <wagging finger> >At some point I noticed, far behind in the left lane, a car quickly >gaining on me---to my horror, I soon saw it was a cop car (an Impala). >I moved right Why did you wait so long to move right? It's bad enough you were not KRETP - at the very least you should have returned to the right lane the moment you saw approaching traffic, not waited so long that you could identify what kind of vehicle it was. >My point is that it can happen to be caught in the left lane by a >vehicle travelling significantly faster than you. But in the situation you described, you were LLBing, not passing. Since I never LLB, always KRETP, always pass quickly and efficiently, and always check my mirrors before initating a pass, I never have this problem. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave You're right. But when the right lane is clogged with semis, constantly ducking right into the gaps between them to only move left seconds later gets tiresome, especially when you're doing 90 and semis are doing 70. And I was not LLB-ing, since I moved right to let the car behind me pass without forcing him to brake. > You're right. But when the right lane is clogged with semis, constantly > ducking right into the gaps between them to only move left seconds > later gets tiresome, especially when you're doing 90 and semis are > doing 70. Keeps me awake, gives me something to do. Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. >Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. Do you radar detector users consciously take turns leading the pack and acting as a radar shield for your fellow motorists? I've never used a radar detector, so I don't know anything about the culture; however, my natural inclination when someone is pacing me is to shake the duckling loose, not to stick with them and take turns running point for the pack. It's also hard to imagine this kind of cooperative activity among a driving population heavily peppered with MFFYs. How common is this really? SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > >Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > What the heck, I'll play too. > - Dave I can remember one night driving to Pittsburgh from Cleveland, I tucked in behind, of all things, a white Lincoln Town Car with a hideous green vinyl roof. The driver was obviously possessed of a Clue(tm) and was only going 2-3 MPH faster than my comfortable speed by myself, so I tucked in behind at a good distance (10 car lengths or so.) We traded places 2-3x over the trip, and would do things like block LLBers to let the other driver around on the right, etc. Wanted to send her a thank-you card by the time I got to Pittsburgh, was the fastest I'd ever made that trip and least stressful. nate I've never used a radar detector --------------------------------------------- That's because CA cops are MUCH more lax on speed enforcement than the Midwest or East coast cops are. >I've never used a radar detector > >--------------------------------------------- > >That's because CA cops are MUCH more lax on speed enforcement >than the Midwest or East coast cops are. While that's probably true, don't forget I spent the first 3/5 of my driving career in IL, and never used a RD there, either. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. > > Do you radar detector users consciously take turns leading the pack > and acting as a radar shield for your fellow motorists? I don't have one. All I know is being out in front looking for cops gets draining, so when I want a rest I simply let up a bit and someone passes me and takes a turn. That is of course when I am in a group of fast drivers. > It's also hard to imagine this kind of cooperative activity among a > driving population heavily peppered with MFFYs. How common is this > really? I usually I can find another fast driver or three when I am driving rural interstate out in the middle of vast farms with little traffic that understands the concept. > >>Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > interstate out in the middle of vast farms with little traffic that > understands the concept. Isn't it amazing how well that works? I benefited greatly on several road trips I've made due to this "phenomena." No one in "the pack" actively speaks to anyone else in the pack, but everyone knows their roll and takes their turns. Cooperation can be a beautiful thing. >>Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >driving population heavily peppered with MFFYs. How common is this >really? All you need to know about radar detectors is that the users are deadly psychopaths who thinks it's cool to terrorize other drivers with their criminal speeding. Total insanity that RDs are legal. > All you need to know about radar detectors is that the users are > deadly psychopaths who thinks it's cool to terrorize other drivers > with their criminal speeding. We're not speeding, we're "experimenting." ROTFLMAO. Just like you're doing when you're driving 60mph in a 55mph zone. > Total insanity Nice .sig, sh.t for brains. You finally got something right! Total insanity that moe people AREN'T KILLING PIGS DEATH TO TRAFFIC COPS > Total insanity that moe people AREN'T KILLING PIGS > > DEATH TO TRAFFIC COPS URANIDIOT. Traffic cops are the only good cops there are. > > Total insanity that moe people AREN'T KILLING PIGS > > > > DEATH TO TRAFFIC COPS > > URANIDIOT. Traffic cops are the only good cops there are. Yeah, that certainly explains why they do the speed limit, don't run traffic signals, and issue traffic signals legally! ROTFLMAO. THINK, moron, if you can. > Total insanity that moe people AREN'T KILLING PIGS > > DEATH TO TRAFFIC COPS No comment. But traffic cops are insane. Question to LBKHB: how safe is driving 90 in a 55 zone? Because I not only see chp doing that with their lights off but they weave in and out of traffic at that speed. Even worse, on the 5, they sit behind bushes FACING traffic with their radar gone. They then rush into the freeway doing a big U TURN (the speed limit here is 70) to give people tickets. > Total insanity that RDs are legal. total insanity that traffic pigs are allowed to harass people. >>Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >driving population heavily peppered with MFFYs. How common is this >really? I don't think its very common. I haven't used one since moving to Virginia, where they are illegal, 10 years ago. But before then, it was mostly a matter of me finding someone that's going really quick, and then dropping back about 1/4 mile and listening for the radar detector to go off. When it does, i slow way down, the cop doesn't get a reading on _me_ who was way out of his radar range when he got the guy in front of me, and I just watch while he stops the car I was following. Dave Head >>Plus it allows for taking turns 'pushing point' for radar. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >driving population heavily peppered with MFFYs. How common is this >really? Hmmm! The whole point in using a RD is get someone else to be a trip wire. Ideally, an SUV on the left lane, preferrably using a cell phone. Given the amount of junk detectors on the market that create needless falses, one really does not want to be close to another. The V1 does a great job of filtering the Ka noise, but it is far better to be behind a high profile LL hog. Just stay on the right lane about 200-300 metres back. >a cell phone. Given the amount of junk detectors on the market >that create needless falses, one really does not want to be >close to another. The V1 does a great job of filtering the Ka >noise, but it is far better to be behind a high profile LL hog. I've given up on my V1. It did not save me the two times I got tagged by laser, and it beeps all the time for K-band door openers, GM SUV taillights, etc. I may mount it up again if I'm going on a long road trip (along with the CB radio) but not in Georgia. -- Email reply: please remove one letter from each side of "@" Spammers are Scammers. Exterminate them. >I've given up on my V1. It did not save me the two times I got tagged >by laser, and it beeps all the time for K-band door openers, GM SUV >taillights, etc. You know, this may be a USENET first: a radar detector user honestly admitting that his RD is useless. The natural tendency for someone who has wasted $400 on an electronic placebo is to rationalize their huge expenditure in their own minds by using even the slimmest of evidence to claim that their RD saved their a.s. It takes a real man to stand up and admit, not only to himself, but to the entire world, that his $400 investment was wasted. Your honesty is refreshing, Doug - my hat is off to you. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>I've given up on my V1. It did not save me the two times I got tagged >>by laser, and it beeps all the time for K-band door openers, GM SUV >>taillights, etc. > >You know, this may be a USENET first: a radar detector user honestly >admitting that his RD is useless. Naw, I did it a long time ago. With instant on radar, it's just good for letting you know that you've been had. Only execption is that if you can find someone that's really smokin' down the road, you can follow 'em about 1/4 mile back and hear the radar cop get the rabbit, while you slow down and cruise on by. >The natural tendency for someone who has wasted $400 on an electronic >placebo is to rationalize their huge expenditure in their own minds by >using even the slimmest of evidence to claim that their RD saved their >a.s. It takes a real man to stand up and admit, not only to himself, >but to the entire world, that his $400 investment was wasted. Your >honesty is refreshing, Doug - my hat is off to you. Or for people to keep it under their hat, and sell it on eBay while the secret of its uselessness does not lower the value of the electronic slug. Dave Head >You know, this may be a USENET first: a radar detector user honestly >admitting that his RD is useless. Laser has done them in. Still, I've used RD's since the first Fuzzbuster, and they've all paid for themselves many times over. Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. One thing they've done is help me develop a talent for spotting police taxation points by pointing them out over the years. -- Email reply: please remove one letter from each side of "@" Spammers are Scammers. Exterminate them. > Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on > top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. Fortunately, cops are often too lazy to do that. They just leave their radar turned on. >> Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on >> top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. > >Fortunately, cops are often too lazy to do that. They just leave their >radar turned on. They weren't even doing that in Indiana when I left there 10 years ago - have they all become stupid over the last 10 years? The thing is, you can't really go _really_ fast any more, mostly, 'cuz of the traffic and the cops. Mostly, the traffic makes it too much of a chore to be passing on the left, then passing on the right, and trying to weave your way thru traffic that's doing 75 when you really wanna do 88. Plus, door-to-door speed is really done with consistency, anyway. Keeping moving on a long trip will get you destinated better than wearing yourself out trying to zip thru traffic. Stay +7 - +8 of the SL, don't eat at sit-down restaurants, don't drink so much they you're spending 3 minutes every 75 miles in the rest area getting rid of it, and basically just keep moving, and you'll get there as soon as you would if you were doing 88 and stopping for this and that every 100 miles. Just stop for gas and a couple drive-thrus per day - that's how to get a long trip over with and not get nailed for roadside tax. As for speeding on short trips just 'cuz it feels good... well, you can't really do that any more, not even with radar detectors and CB radios. Dave Head > >> Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on > >> top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > that every 100 miles. Just stop for gas and a couple drive-thrus per day - > that's how to get a long trip over with and not get nailed for roadside tax. <snip> > Dave Head That has always been my technique when I don't have passengers. Posted plus 10% is usually safe except in speed trap areas. Reminds me of the trip I made back in the early 60s, NY to WA. Second day out leaving Chicago I was passed by a car doing way over, near 90 by estimate. A few hours later the same car passed me again. This repeated all day. IIRC I was passed by that same car 4 or 5 times. At least that guy "thought" he was really covering ground. He was, however, at least adding some interest to keep him awake through some boring flat land country. Harry K >>> Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on >>> top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >They weren't even doing that in Indiana when I left there 10 years ago - have >they all become stupid over the last 10 years? It's not a question of stupid or smart. Most police officers using radar can make their quota without the added effort of instant-on. SignatureJohn Carr (jfc@mit.edu) >>Fortunately, cops are often too lazy to do that. They just leave their >>radar turned on. > They weren't even doing that in Indiana when I left there 10 years ago - have > they all become stupid over the last 10 years? In certain parts of Virginia, they still are that stupid. > The thing is, you can't really go _really_ fast any more, mostly, 'cuz of the > traffic and the cops. It depends on where you drive. If I'm relatively close to home, I drive much faster as compared to when I'm far from home (occasionally as fast as 120 mph). This is because I'm much more familiar with the area (where the police patrol and so on). If I'm far from home, I rarely go more than 85 mph in 65 mph zones or 80 mph in 55 mph zones. If there's not much traffic ahead of me, then I don't drive more than 5 to 7 mph over the limit. >> Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on >> top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. > >Fortunately, cops are often too lazy to do that. They just leave their >radar turned on. Maybe in poor backwaters like Indiana, where cops cannot afford the latest equipment. Around here the cops all have LIDAR guns - even if they leave the gun on all the time (which is impossible, AFAIK) it still wouldn't help you unless the dot of light happens to hit the sensor on your RD. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>You know, this may be a USENET first: a radar detector user honestly >>admitting that his RD is useless. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on >top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. BINGO. Yes, the window of opportunity might still be slightly ajar, as some of the poorer police departments continue to use outdated equipment to measure speed, but eventually they will all upgrade to instant-on or laser or VASCAR and that window will be closed forever. >One thing they've done is help me develop a talent for spotting police >taxation points by pointing them out over the years. Hmm... But it also showed you where a lot of automatic door openers and burglar alarms were, also. ;) SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >>You know, this may be a USENET first: a radar detector user honestly >>admitting that his RD is useless. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Unfortunately, they're useless when the cops wait til you're right on >top of them and then zap you with instant-on radar or a beam of light. Curiosly, the use of LIDAR seems to have gone down in my part of the world. One theory is that it takes too much trouble to operate: aim, etc., compared to leaving a radar gun and blipping it. Whatever the reason, I am getting a lot of useful mileage out of my V1 even now. It's realy usefulness is within the city at known traps -- and it is within the city that most time is saved. Of course, when this becomes all LIDAR territory, I am done. > >I've given up on my V1. It did not save me the two times I got tagged > >by laser, and it beeps all the time for K-band door openers, GM SUV > >taillights, etc. > > You know, this may be a USENET first: a radar detector user honestly > admitting that his RD is useless. It's just another tool, certainly not a ticket eliminator. My V1s *inability* to detect "pop" radar payed off for me recently. If I hadn't been using it, I could have assumed that I was accurately clocked and might have considered paying the $200. (lol...fat chance!) The fact that there was _no_ warning, even when I was 20 feet off the troopers front bumper, (as he continued to flag down motorists) got me thinking. Fast-forward 9 months to court: I was able to successfully present to the court that there was not an accurate estimate of my speed, nor was there a tracking history established. The trooper was not present, his representative was flummoxed by my line of questioning, and the magistrate liked my presentation. The finding: "Not Responsible". In this case, a radar detectors uselessness, was useful. ;) The sad part is that there were quite a few caught up in this particular "ticket mill". The trooper would "clock" and flag down a car before he finished the one he was working on. If even half those who were written-up paid the ticket, then it was a profitable Sunday mornin' for the governor. -- John C. ("not responsible" going on 15 years now) >You're right. But when the right lane is clogged with semis, constantly >ducking right into the gaps between them to only move left seconds >later gets tiresome Isn't that kinda like saying "turning my steering wheel gets tiresome" or "using my turn signal gets tiresome?" Lane changes are a natural part of proper driving, not some optional activity that can be ignored when one doesn't feel like doing it. >especially when you're doing 90 and semis are doing 70. Actually, many semis seem to be doing a speed-governed 62 MPH - a most asinine practice. The companies that do this to their trucks should be sued into bankruptcy. But that's another rant for another day. :) >And I was not LLB-ing, since I moved right to let the car behind me >pass without forcing him to brake. If you had room to immediately move right whenever someone came up from behind, you had room to simply drive there in the first place. Keep Right Except To Pass, and don't worry: your steering heel and turn signal stalk won't wear out. ;) SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > >You're right. But when the right lane is clogged with semis, constantly > >ducking right into the gaps between them to only move left seconds > >later gets tiresome > > Isn't that kinda like saying "turning my steering wheel gets tiresome" > or "using my turn signal gets tiresome?" No, you idiot, it isn't. It makes no sense to move R after a pass only to need to move L again a few seconds later to initiate another pass when there are no faster vehicles to your rear. ----- - gpsman May I suggesst that you're used to the multi-lane freeways in CA and it's been a while since you drove on a congested 2lane per direction interstate? > May I suggesst that you're used to the multi-lane freeways in CA and > it's been > a while since you drove on a congested 2lane per direction interstate? I regularly drive on congested 2 lane per direction interstates, and the methods Scott suggests work well there. >May I suggesst that you're used to the multi-lane freeways in CA and >it's been >a while since you drove on a congested 2lane per direction interstate? I-10 in AZ between Casa Grande and Marana is precisely such an Interstate, and I have driven that route regularly for several years. In that case, I have had cars "catch up" to me because my forward passing progress was being blocked by LLBs (usually a long conga line led by a speed-governed a.shole Trucker). I am, of course, going as fast as I possibly can under the circumstances, but ultimately I am a slave to the whims of the drivers in front. As I have said many times, I will try to never block the passage of others when I can avoid it; in a case like this, it's unavoidable. OTOH, if there is no traffic in front of you, then there is no excuse for blocking faster traffic - you can adjust your timing or your speed (or both) to avoid nearly all blockage. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > On 23 May 2006 08:30:48 -0700, "223rem" <223remi@gmail.com> wrote: >>May I suggesst that you're used to the multi-lane freeways in CA and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I-10 in AZ between Casa Grande and Marana is precisely such an > Interstate, and I have driven that route regularly for several years. Actually, I5 from Sacramento down the San Joaquin valley towards LA is one of the most crowded 2-lane freeways in existence. So "CA" and "multi-lane" form a non-sequitur. FloydR > My point is that it can happen to be caught in the left lane by a > vehicle travelling significantly faster than you. Only because you were hanging out in the left lane for no good reason. > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, > say, 10-15 mph. A cop car, travelling much faster than any 'civilian' > vehicle, quickly approaches from the rear and starts tailgating you. If I notice a faster car approaching during a pass, I immediately accelerate and move over. > Is it a good idea to turn on your right blinker and speed up so as to > move right as quickly as possible, even if it means exceed the speed > limit by 20-25 mph? The logic is that the cop could have already pulled > you over for speeding, but what he really wants is for you to get out > of his way. Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and > make him pull you over for speeding. This isn't part of the driving process. I concentrate on maximising road efficiency and safety. Slowing down in the passing lane can cause a braking wave, resulting in a traffic jam and unsafe conditions. > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > of his way. Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and > make him pull you over for speeding. If it was me, I would just move to the right. If moving to the right lane could not be done, then I would speed only if the cop had his emergency indicators (siren and lights) on. That way, if the cop was trying to nail me for speeding and increase his ticket quota, I would have a defense about what I was speeding. > Lets say you're in the left lane, passing vehicles in the right lane, > and exceeding the speed limit by a moderate but significant amount, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > of his way. Slowing down to the speed limit will only irritate him and > make him pull you over for speeding. It's up to him to steer clear of that situation, not you. Next question, please. |
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.