Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / February 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Road Rage Futility

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
C. E. White - 15 Feb 2007 12:31 GMT
I was a peripheral participant in an interesting little drama on the
way to work this morning.

The scene - Wade Ave., Raleigh, NC at the I-440 Beltline.
The players - Me, a Scion xA, a Tractor-Trailer, and a 4 axle dump
truck.

There are a series of stop light before and at the I-440 intersection.
For traffic exiting I-440 from the south, planning to head west on
Wade avenue there is a long straight ramp with a light at the bottom.

I was heading west on Wade, more or less trapped behind a Scion xA
that was driving at just below the speed limit. As we approached the
I-440 stop light, it turned green. However, a semi-truck was in the
intersection. I can't say for sure that he ran the light, but he was
certainly in the intersection after it had turned green for us.
Amazingly the idiot in the Scion who had been poking along, floored it
at this point. What happened next almost got the idiot killed. Not
only was the semi in the intersection, a huge four axle dump truck was
right on his tail, and clearly, no doubt about it, ran the light. The
idiot in the Scion almost rammed the dump truck, and laid on the horn.
I don't mean a short toot, I mean he laid on it for all it was worth.
He got right on the dump truck's rear and also started flashing lights
his lights. The Scion briefly pulled on the shoulder on the left and
continued to flash lights and honk the horn. As the dump truck
signaled his intention to move to the right lane, the Scion whipped
around the truck on the right and drove along side the truck still
honking the horn. He prevented the truck from getting in the right
lane for a considerable distance before the truck driver slowed enough
to fall in behind the Scion. The dump truck then took the next exit
ramp. By the way, as is often the case, the dump truck was dropping
rocks all over the road - so I had backed off from the unfolding
drama.. After the dump truck exited, the Scion slowed back down and
started clogging up the road again- but at least he was now trapped in
the right lane, so I managed to escape this mad man (and it was a
man).

Clearly the dump truck driver was at fault for running the stop light.
However, I think the xA driver was also at fault. If he had continued
at his original sedate pace, the dump truck would never have
interfered with him (except for the rocks he was dropping). Instead
the xA driver sped up  to confront the dump truck. To me this was just
lunacy, particularly the move to cut off the driver by going around
him on the right. The dump truck could have crushed the xA like a bug.
I don't know whether the dump truck driver deliberately blew the
light, or if he under estimated the braking required (it is a high
speed down hill ramp to the light and the truck appeared to be
loaded), or if he didn't see the light change because he was
tailgating the semi. Any of these are a possible explanation of why he
ran the light. I go through this light on a daily basis, I and know
better than to crowd it. This is not the first time I've seen vehicles
run the light. I would bet the xA driver was local as well. I could
understand him being irate at the trucks running the light. However,
his response was insane. Particularly the way he sped up to confront
the dump truck (and I mean he floored it to catch up to the truck),
and the way he tried to prevent the truck from moving to the right
lane. It was just crazy. I assume this was a case of road rage.
However, it was like bringing a pea shooter to a gun fight.

Ed
Brent P - 15 Feb 2007 13:42 GMT
> Clearly the dump truck driver was at fault for running the stop light.
> However, I think the xA driver was also at fault. If he had continued
> at his original sedate pace, the dump truck would never have
> interfered with him (except for the rocks he was dropping). Instead
> the xA driver sped up  to confront the dump truck.

He was defending his right of way against the dump truck driver's
bullying.

> To me this was just  lunacy, particularly the move to cut off the
> driver by going around
> him on the right. The dump truck could have crushed the xA like a bug.

Enabling through might-makes-right is what leads many a driver to be such
arseholes in the first place.

Having held my ground many a time with nothing more than a bicycle, I can
say the risk of homicidal behavior on the part of the trucker was minimal.
Like most bullies, all one needs to do is stand up to a road bully.
Harry K - 15 Feb 2007 15:34 GMT
On Feb 15, 5:42 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:
> > Clearly the dump truck driver was at fault for running the stop light.
> > However, I think the xA driver was also at fault. If he had continued
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> say the risk of homicidal behavior on the part of the trucker was minimal.
> Like most bullies, all one needs to do is stand up to a road bully.

Per the OP, the dump truck didn't encroach on the ROW.  Only after he
'floored' it did ROW come into play.

Harry K
Brent P - 15 Feb 2007 15:56 GMT
> On Feb 15, 5:42 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> Per the OP, the dump truck didn't encroach on the ROW.  Only after he
> 'floored' it did ROW come into play.

Truck had a red signal, car had a green. Right of way was the entire
issue. Or are you saying that it is acceptable to run red lights if you
can get through the intersection before you *think* someone else can?
Harry K - 16 Feb 2007 03:13 GMT
On Feb 15, 7:56 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote:
> In article <1171553646.208588.319...@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Harry K wrote:
> > On Feb 15, 5:42 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Not at all.  In the sense that the truck was causing him no problems -
until he floored it- he didn't interfere with his ROW.

Technically yes, he violated ROW just as technically he would have if
there had been no traffic at all.  Not the point though.

Harry K
Brent P - 16 Feb 2007 06:27 GMT
> Not at all.  In the sense that the truck was causing him no problems -
> until he floored it- he didn't interfere with his ROW.

> Technically yes, he violated ROW just as technically he would have if
> there had been no traffic at all.  Not the point though.

Personally, I am sick of enablers holding up traffic so arseholes can run
red signals. When you're driving the 6th or more vehicle back and you
have to wait an extra cycle because because the lead driver didn't have
the balls to confront a red light running arsehole, but sat there while
three of them went through the red day in and day out it causes one to
see this sort of thing differently.

In this me first, f.ck you society part of being the lead driver in queue
at a red signal is getting out there and defending the right of way to
stop the conga-line red light running. The conga-line-red-light-runners
see it the way you do, counting on sluggish sloth like reaction times and
outright enabling by the lead drivers for the cross traffic. They think
they can beat them through the intersection and no harm no foul. They will
continue until either someone gets a turn in the conga-line who doesn't
play that game or the lead driver for cross traffic just goes. The
problem is, there is harm because the lead drivers are often too timid to
get out there quick and put an end to the nonsense. And that harm is felt
by the drivers further back in the queue who are stuck for another cycle if
they don't run the red signal themselves.  

With regards to reacting quickly and getting on the go pedal to stop the
conga line nonsense the driver the OP witnessed did the right thing IMO.
(neglecting the later actions) He got out there and stopped the conga
line. IME if the lead driver sits there, 1-3 more vehicles *AFTER* the
dump truck also go through.

If one fails to defend his right of way, someone will take it from him.
And even though this guy drove slower than most, it's red signals that
dominate travel time over shorter distances, not speed. So there isn't
and inconsistancy in behavior as I see it. Nothing drove home how traffic
signals can dominate travel time as my commute to my previous job. My
bicycling and driving times were within a minute or two of each other
most of the time.
gpsman - 16 Feb 2007 14:44 GMT
On Feb 16, 1:27 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
wrote: <brevity snip>

> In this me first, f.ck you society part of being the lead driver in queue
> at a red signal is getting out there and defending the right of way to
> stop the conga-line red light running.

Why, aren't they just "optimizing throughput"?

It's more than a little ironic you think the drivers to your front
should risk their vehicles and safety, and perhaps a shitload of their
time, to save you a light cycle.
-----

- gpsman
C. E. White - 15 Feb 2007 16:19 GMT
> Per the OP, the dump truck didn't encroach on the ROW.  Only after
> he
> 'floored' it did ROW come into play.

The dump truck clearly ran the red light. It wasn't even close. The
semi before the dump truck may have been in the intersection before
the light turned red on his side (even that is debatable), but the
dump truck didn't even enter the intersection until the light had been
green on my side for a perceptible time.

I was very unhappy about the dump truck running the light. I hate
being behind those guys. They accelerate poorly and drop rocks all
over the road. And, once they are up to speed, they don't mind trying
to run you down from behind at speeds well over the posted limit. In
this particular case, the dump truck was taking the second exit after
he ran the light (only a short distance), so ignoring him would have
been a reasonable thing to do. Under no circumstance would I have
acted like the xA driver. At a minimum the xA driver created a
dangerous situation by weaving back and forth and then deliberately
cutting the truck off. As far as I can see all his antics got him
nothing. The truck driver still went where he wanted and the xA driver
went back to clogging up traffic (but at least I got in front of him).

One more thing - none of the big dump trucks around here have rear
license plates. NC only requires one plate, and the DMV enforcement
people allow dump trucks to put them on the front bumper. Supposedly
this is because they get damaged when dump trucks are backing up to a
pile to dump a load. I figure the drivers like them on the front so
you can't read them when they dump rocks on the road that hit your
car. I hate the signs on the back of the trucks that say "Stay Back
200 Feet" and/or "Not Responsible for Windshields." These are
particularly galling when the truck roars past you at 10 over the
limit and then cuts in front of you to squeeze into a line of traffic.
The only way to "Stay Back 200 Feet" would be to lock up the brakes.

Sorry about the anti-dump truck rant, but they are my least favorite
vehicles to deal with (second place is the wood chip trucks that spray
wood chips all over the road).

Ed
Studemania - 17 Feb 2007 00:40 GMT
On Feb 15, 8:19 am, "C. E. White" <cewhi...@removemindspring.com>
wrote:

> > Per the OP, the dump truck didn't encroach on the ROW.  Only after
> > he
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> Ed

I lived in Massachusetts way back and liked one law that they had.
Any truck (vehicle?) used for business needed to have the company
name and telephone number clearly painted on it.

That might help.
Fred G. Mackey - 17 Feb 2007 06:14 GMT
> I lived in Massachusetts way back and liked one law that they had.
> Any truck (vehicle?) used for business needed to have the company
>  name and telephone number clearly painted on it.
>
> That might help.

Yeah - like today on the way to work, I felt like complaining about the
LLB 18-wheeler in front of me that had trouble maintaining his lane and
kept going onto the shoulder and sending up showers of gravel on my car.
 He finally moved to the right and I passed him.  How safe would have
been for me to have written the phone number down while I was passing
him at 70 mph?
 
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.