Do you know what the word “impede” means?
Might I suggest(unless the OP wishes otherwise) that we stick to U.S. laws, just to keep the confusion at a minimum?
You are describing behavior unapplicable to anything I would be
involved in. I never said I would hog the lane, or get into a sign
language conversation with another driver. What I meant to convey
was that I might change lanes in such a manner as to make the
moron slow down a bit, momentarily, “for a few seconds”. I really
doubt that doing so is any kind of a hazard.
What I was specifically objecting to as “ridiculous” was the other
member’s exaggeration of the peril:
[QUOTE=Vinyl Turnip]
may your life be long and happy (up to the point where it inevitably ends in a tragic road rage incident
[/QUOTE]
Getting a moron to slow down is a worthwhile “petty victory”,
and I’ll take my chances with the readership.
[Moderator Note]I said that we were past personal insults, and that includes referring to previous examples of the same.[/Moderator Note]
I don’t know what you are getting at here.
I can drive fine in any lane, but best in whichever lane I have the
greatest field of vision. Who could object to that?
I assume you mean right-lane hugging drivers.
I try to drive at the close to the prevailing speed. Consequently there
are not too many drivers to whom I would seem to be a speed demon.
Do you do any highway driving? On every highway I have ever driven
on I would say less than 10% of the drivers hold it to as slow as 5mph
over the speed limit, and less than 1% hold it to the speed limit itself.
I do not mind waiting behind slower drivers for a few seconds, so there
is no hypocricy involved on that count.
I have not referred to any member in derogatory terms.
Edit: Well, I guess “grow up” is derogatory, but “moron”
was not intended to refer to anyone except fast drivers.
No, but you continue to quote others that have referred to you in derogatory terms. I want that part of this conversation to end, which won’t happen if you keep putting it in the spotlight.
OK, but although I do not agree with any of the accusations
made against me I do not take them them to cross any kind
of a line either.
Drivers who wish to make efficient use of the road, and find you blocking their way and deliberately taking longer than necessary to do what you are supposed to (move right).
If you truly have perceptual shortcomings that make you unable to drive in the right lane with acceptable safety, then I suppose hanging in the left lane makes some sense. Causing deliberate and unnecessary delays to other drivers doesn’t.
The superior visibility usually available in the left lane
does not have anything to do with the issue of appropriate
lane changing.
I admit I sometimes read carelessly. In the passage above
you indicate you have not read all I have posted here with
full understanding. Please give it another try.
I disagree with your premise that driving over the speed limit
and then having to slow to a speed still over the limit constitues
an “unnecessary delay”. The only “unnecessary” activity is the
act of driving over the limit at all.
Moderator Note:
Dio, the topic of this thread is what you do about being stuck behind someone in the passing lane. From your cite, it’s evident that many more than six states have some variant of a law requiring motorists to yield for faster traffic when safe to do so. Moreover, in some cases the obligation of the slower driver is irrespective of the prima facie speed limit.
This isn’t about the ethics of exceeding the speed limit, or your *pronunciamenti * regarding the same.
Kindly keep to the thread topic, and don’t derail this thread again.
For the Straight Dope,
Spectre of Pithecanthropus
I missed something on the first read myself.
I now realize that you equate driving illegal driving habits
with “efficiency”.
Yeah, and I guess robbing a bank is an “efficient” way of
getting ahold of some extra spending money, as long as
you aren’t caught: few hundred dolla or even a few thou
for about 30 minutes work!
To me the idea of moving over is simple.
What’s more dangerous - a speeding driver, or an angry speeding driver?
Isn’t the answer self evident?
For those that throw up the argument of “speed limits”, when the local authorities start paying you to enforce speed limits, go right ahead and block the overtaking lane - until then, move the fuck over please
No. As long as you aren’t drunk it probably doesn’t matter.
By that logic no citizen has a right to impede any criminal act,
so maybe you should think it over a bit more.
And do you really think telling me do the f*** anything is going
to get you the results you want?
And perhaps not changing lanes randomly? The freeway I take back and forth to work is odd in that the left lanes are almost always slower than the right lanes. I have never figured out why this is, but my guess is that the very left lane is a car pool lane, and the slowness comes from people switching in and out of it, and causing the next leftmost lane to brake. Another possible cause is a car pooler going much more slowly than the regular flow of traffic, but I’m not sure about it.
Passing on the right is perfectly legal in California, but making someone switch lanes do keep up with the flow of traffic slows it down for everyone and poses a danger to the lane changer and others.
I don’t think it matters how I talk to you because I think you are such a self absorbed pratt that it doesn’t matter.
And one thing I can absolutely and irrefutably assure you of - an angry driver is, ceteris paribus, way more dangerous than a non angry driver.
Anybody that deliberately behaves on the road in a manner calcualted to piss others off is a menace. They make the road more dangerous for all of us.
And by the way…I wasn’t talking about ANY criminal act, I was talking about speeding, uless you think that because I am allowed to drink in a bar, my six year old should also be allowed to drink, and that because I am allowed to fuck my wife I should also be allowed to fuck a three year old.
That wasn’t the assertion I was responding to. The claim was made that it’s the law “in most states” that the “left lane is only for passing.” That is only the law in six states. Other stay right laws are irrelevant to that point, and since when is it against board rules to correct a factual assertion.
Incidentally, everybody in this thread is making “moral pronouncements,” and practically nobody is discussing what to do about getting behind slow drivers, so your singling out of me is senseless.
By the way, isn’t it against the rules to solicit advice on how to break the law?
On the contrary, you are required by law in most states to share the road in a couteous manner. So who really is the dickhead in this scenario: The faster or slower driver, regardless of the indicated speed or accuracy thereof?
The notion that droves of dangerous speeders threaten vehicular assault in an ongoing basis is patently absurd. Only a tiny fraction of the driving publc could ever hope to pull that off, practically speaking. You would need to be relatively wealthy with friends in the state and local judicial systems to afford insurance and keep your license very long.
In literallly every case it has been my displeasure to become personally aware of, the left lane cruiser is doing below the speed limit. Even if they are doing the limit which you seem to be basing your argument on, doesn’t matter - by law.
Attempted hijack or surreptitious subject changes aside, the only part I don’t get is how being just basically disagreeable after picking the wrong battle seems to remain so enthralling.