Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

backy · March 2013

In general I like roundabouts, even though most drivers seem to have no idea how they work. But the one big issue I see with them is hindering emergency vehicles.

One such roundabout was put down a couple of years ago at one of the busiest intersections in a neighboring town. It's very close to both a fire station and the police station. It's in an area with no other major through streets anywhere close. So fire trucks and police cars will need to use that intersection a lot, as well as ambulances traversing that part of town. Other major intersections in my area have the traffic signal overrides for use by emergency vehicles. No such thing with a traffic circle... the emergency vehicles WILL have to slow down to a crawl to navigate the circle.

Bad enough with one traffic circle, but some lame-brain city engineer designed a major street a few miles away with 3 traffic circles within 2 blocks. High density area, with stores, hotels, apartments (senior apartments at that). Maybe they were thinking, "Let's make it as difficult as possible for emergency vehicles to get through that street!" Fortunately, I'm not aware of any other case like that in my area.

fintail · March 2013

I think it is a fuel mixture problem. This morning I was behind an older A4 - late 90s, and it too was belching smoke on acceleration. This smoke had a gray tint to it, which to me could also suggest head gasket issues. But I have seen several later model cars with black smoke upon hard throttle. I would assume visible smoke on a modern car would be a problem at the testing station. I am glad my old car is too old to test :shades:

MB drivers tend to be pretty conservative and don't usually attract attention - even AMG cars seem to attract a more subdued driver than M and S/RS cars.

In my neighborhood, the annoying BMW people are those who drive aggressively, and never use signals.

andres3 · March 2013

In general I find all the anti-roundabouts arguments to be weak sauce:

1) Emergency vehicles - do we really want to design our roadways for the benefit of vehicles that use those roadways less than 1% of the time? Added to that, smart ambulance drivers don't "blow" through intersections anyway on reds. They come to a stop, and cross carefully.

2) Visually impaired pedestrians - see #1

3) Pedestrians in general - feel free to design sidewalks the way you want, but the roads are for cars.

4) Bicycles - they don't pay for road or highway construction costs/taxes/fees, so why consider them?

It's time we do things for the greater good.

backy · March 2013

Emergency vehicles - do we really want to design our roadways for the benefit of vehicles that use those roadways less than 1% of the time?

No, you're right. We certainly don't want to design roads to make it easier/faster for vehicles for which every second could mean the difference between life or death. We want to design them so folks like you can get to work/play/home a little sooner, even if it means emergency vehicles have to slow down.

How silly of me to think otherwise.

fintail · March 2013

I don't see these vehicles blowing through normal intersections either - if anything, ambulances and firetrucks in my town barely speed at all, maybe an overly hotheaded cop will speed. But my area probably isn't the best for roundabouts anyway, due to the high price of land, and stubborn unskilled drivers who will likely refuse to learn (I suppose that could be a general American problem).

If these road structures are OK with emergency responders in other first world locations, they should be OK here too.

elias · March 2013

nice levelheaded response to somewhat gratuitous comments, A3.

USA people please take note the word is ROTARIES not "roundabouts". (Roundabouts go in the opposite direction.)

years ago there were 3 rotaries within a mile at the bottom of the Rt 2 (state highway) hill.

amazing speeds were possible through there. one time years ago, a state cop was particularly impressed after chasing a local citizen up the hill after the rotaries.

locally the # of rotaries is increasing lately, with bigger/faster ones long-gone or being removed and smaller/slower ones replacing troublesome/smaller intersections.

a couple weeks ago, after getting lost in a wacky cow-path new-england city with roads blocked due to road-race, i drove around a rotary about 10 times while waiting for the GM-onstar to compute/tell me the directions ! considerate or inconsiderate?! *you* make the call!

stever · March 2013

Well, if you believe Wikipedia, "rotaries" are out of fashion and the "precise" term among the pros for new traffic circles is "modern roundabout" (meaning it's designed to meet currently accepted design criteria).

"Rotary" is mostly a NE thing.

fintail · March 2013

This morning saw a typical looking older driver in an Escalade pull right out in front of a DeLorean (!) that was cruising up a 35mph arterial. How did the [non-permissible content removed] not see a DeLorean? Luckily, the smaller car was enable to maneuver around the motorized obesity that should require a license endorsement to operate.

Also saw a young woman in a Tesla S with a phone to her ear - pretty sure those have Bluetooth standard. Should be a nice 4 figure fine for even the first offense. I bet that's not bootstrap wealth at play...

fintail · March 2013

Hey look kids, there's Big Ben, there's Parliament! :shades:

fintail · March 2013

Two winner yappers today - both late model (LED) Audis, one an A8, both execudrone drivers with phones to their ear. I know these cars have standard bluetooth. Should be 50x the normal fine - but of course, when the primary law is unenforced to begin with,that's moot.

Also saw a likely timid small middle aged woman in a previous gen Explorer Limited, 32-35 in a 40, following at maybe 5 car lengths, line of cars behind her, and every few seconds adding maybe a foot to that following distance. Bottleneck. Vehicular pylon, and another one who should not be allowed to drive something of that mass and sight-blocking size.

And the jerk. Infiniti FX with that horrible Nissan V6 drone, going about 50 in a 30.

Topped it off with more moronic negligent unjustifiable light sequencing. Those "engineers" sure earn their healthy incomes and nice pensions when they retire before the real working world.

andres3 · March 2013

I guess you don't believe in Utilitarianism.

Emergency vehicles will not be significantly impacted in my opinion, but 99% of cars will experience faster commute times.

Yes, we'll have to add a few pages to the DMV driver's training handbook, which by the way, needs to be re-written.

xwesx · March 2013

Hahaha; fin, I thought you said your E350 was mellowing you out? :P

fintail · March 2013

With the slow (physically and mentally) drivers around here, I think people running on foot in traffic lanes could get road rage :shades:

fintail · March 2013

Speaking of non-motorists being irritated, today I saw a guy on a bicycle being held up (and yelling, motioning) on a busy 4 lane 30mph arterial because the oldsters in a MPV in front of him randomly came to a stop to look at a building. Oblivious.

Other winners - TX plated S40 with a woman I won't describe more, phone to her ear, right turn from a straight only lane. Also saw a couple of douchemobiles (Evo, blacked out E38 7er) get into a revving war at a red light - I don't think either car had emissions equipment.

fintail · March 2013

Honked twice within a minute today: first at a Mary Kay Malibu. The "driver" appeared to be writing with a pen and paper on the steering wheel hub (seriously!) and was weaving all over the place,and going 5-10 under in the left lane of a 35mph 4 lane arterial. Then on a fast 30mph 4 laner where traffic usually flows at 35-40, got behind a greybeard in a Chevy truck who slowed to a halt, started turning,then hit the signal, and started to take the corner at ~4mph - no worries about myself and pack of others right behind him moving at a normal speed. Oblivious.

keystonecarfan · April 2013

backy: No, you're right. We certainly don't want to design roads to make it easier/faster for vehicles for which every second could mean the difference between life or death. We want to design them so folks like you can get to work/play/home a little sooner, even if it means emergency vehicles have to slow down.

Today's ambulances provide treatment to the patient while on the road to the hospital. That is one reason why ambulances are based on Econoline or heavy-duty F-series chassis. They need to be big enough to carry the paramedics and equipment necessary to provide immediate treatment to the accident victim.

The "scoop 'em up and run" method - where the main goal was to get the victim to the hospital before he or she died, so that treatment could begin - is about 30 years out of date.

backy · April 2013

Doesn't the ambulance need to reach the victim first to render aid?

Doesn't the fire engine need to reach the fire to put it out?

keystonecarfan · April 2013

A few seconds or minutes - which is what we are talking about here, not an hour or even 15 minutes - will not make a difference as to whether someone dies or the fire is successfully extinguished or consumes the entire building.

You've raised a non-issue, much like worrying about people driving 85 mph on a brand-new limited access highway in Texas.

backy · April 2013

It is a non-issue for me personally.... I don't live or work near these closely-bunched roundabouts on a two-lane road, nor do any family members (although my mother used to live there). But if I did, a few seconds could matter. I just don't think this was the appropriate use of this intersection type. Roundabouts are much better suited for high-traffic main roads, which result in roundabouts that are wide enough for large emergency vehicles to use without slowing to a crawl.

stever · April 2013

Interesting - I think they really come into their own in neighborhoods where you can use them as traffic calming devices, especially on the collector roads. You can slow the yahoos down a bit without making a bunch of drivers grind to a halt every few blocks.

fintail · April 2013

I don't think traffic needs to slow beyond where it has devolved to today. And about the emergency vehicles, it doesn't seem to be a problem in areas with more developed roadway infrastructure.

For inconsiderates, yesterday I drove south to visit my grandma in the evening - morning drive was a breeze, evening drive was a headache. Traffic jam on several miles of 405 at 8pm for no reason - no crash, nothing blocking, just slow people, and the domino effect you get when a couple of them are running side by side. It mysteriously broke up without incident (although the slowpokes were still everywhere, like pylons, people literally going 45 in a 60 in any lane they pleased). Highlights were an Astro van crawling at 40-45 near Factoria, a dope in a Pilot towing a travel trailer (have fun with that transmission rebuild) who wouldn't get less than a mile behind the car in front of him, and a young woman in a Kia who merged into traffic about 20 car lengths before the end of the gore point.

stever · April 2013

There's no need for people to be moving faster than 25 or 30 in my neighborhood. Next up for us are those flashing "your speed is ____" signs and an additional stop sign in the next block.

andres3 · April 2013

Oh Jesus! I hate unnecessary stop signs. In my younger days, I'd blow through those stop signs extra fast to teach those residential neighbors a "lesson!"

Traffic control devices should be used to facilitate the smooth flow of traffic, not to impede it.

That breeds disrespect and contempt.

The new radar detectors will "erase" those "your speed is" radar signs from causing false alarms.

fintail · April 2013

Just make intersections uncontrolled (and prohibit property "owners" from growing hedgerows out to the right of way) - traffic still moves, and drivers have to be alert. Problem solved. Stop signs are lazy policing, which fits right in with our civil engineers and LEOs who are in fact, lazy.

I'm not talking residential streets. I find suburban arterial traffic that is posted at 25-30 to be unreasonably slow.

backy · April 2013

In my younger days, I'd blow through those stop signs extra fast to teach those residential neighbors a "lesson!"

LOL! I had to remember when I read this what day it is. Teaching residential neighbors "a lesson" by blowing through stop signs... yeah, right!

stever · April 2013

I'm not talking residential streets.

But I was. :shades:

The nearby collector street has a few too many boy racers. That designation usually one step below an arterial.

roadburner · April 2013

I hate subdivisions cluttered with speed bumps/humps. However, I figure they were placed there due to safety concerns, so as I traverse each one I blow my horn for 2-4 seconds- just to warn passerby and contribute to the safer atmosphere.
Especially if I am driving through the subdivision after 10:00 to 11:00 at night.

ruking1 · April 2013

Too funny! I guess if you sound the horn and don't hit anybody, you are SAFE !!

stever · April 2013

"The myths addressed by the safety group include the notion that hands-free cell phones are safer than handheld models. Research by Carnegie Mellon University indicates that both methods of using a mobile phone result in the same degree of distraction. Whether holding the phone or using hands-free connectivity, the processing of visual images sent to the brain decreases by 37 percent when the person is engaged in a phone conversation while piloting a vehicle."

National Distracted Driving Awareness Month Focuses on Myth-Busting

xwesx · April 2013

I had an interesting situation come up yesterday.

State law dictates that drivers yield right of way to pedestrians in a crosswalk. It makes sense, and yet it is not rare at all for a pedestrian to wait at a busy, uncontrolled crosswalk as car after car continually passes without yielding.

There is one location, in particular, where this happens pretty much any time a pedestrian needs to cross, and I generally find myself stopping to grant these pedestrians (who are not overly common here, but do cross from time to time) the right of way. Of course, I always catch the ire of motorists behind me, who often honk or share their frustrations in other creative ways.

So be it; you can't always satisfy everyone.

Yesterday, though, I am near the back of a long string of cars on this stretch of road, all swinging right to merge onto another expressway (and crossing this particular crosswalk in the process). The snow berms along both sides of the road here are about 4-5' high, and I'm driving my Fiesta, which puts my eye level at about 48" off the ground.

Turns out, there is a pedestrian on the right (which is completely in my blind spot due to the snow berms) who has been waiting for this string of vehicles without a single one of them stopping for him. Mind you, they were all pickups and SUVs, so their ride heights were sufficient to allow them to see this man waiting well in advance. Finally, he gets fed up and simply walks out into the road... right in front of me! Well, happy day that my brakes work very well, because I couldn't even see him until I was probably 40' away.

So, he starts barking at me how he has right of way and that I'm "required by law" to stop for him. I rolled down the window and politely stated that he is absolutely right - the law does grant him right of way, and I would have been happy to stop for him had I been able to see him through the snow berm. I then reminded him that he is responsible for his own safety, and that the law isn't going to keep him from being dead.

He walked on, and I drove on. Oh, and amazingly, the car(s) behind me didn't honk or rear-end me, thank goodness!

backy · April 2013

Might help remind to pedestrians who decide to test whether a car or their bodies can better withstand a collision that it's better to be alive than right.

fintail · April 2013

It would be interesting to see where the funding comes from. I'd rather be around someone yapping into a speaker than holding a phone or texting.

Today I was on a 4 lane arterial, I am in the far right lane, MB R-class beside me, I was moving past, as she was going slow, as I just got my nose level with hers, she hits the signal and starts moving over. I hit the horn, she jerked back. She then gets behind me, I later get into the left lane for an upcoming turn, she soon then gets in the left lane and turns left - having no reason to be in the right lane to begin with (she wasn't passing anyone - she was in fact the obstructor). Not all there.

xwesx · April 2013

I have absolutely no doubt that the level of distraction is the same, even as it would be with the same conversation happening with a passenger in the same vehicle.

That said, the real difference between hands-free (or passenger) versus holding a phone is that the ability to react (once the "driver" recognizes the need to do so) is not inhibited by holding a device.

fintail · April 2013

Good point about reaction time - something I didn't notice in the "study".

Passengers are as bad as phones for some - time to muzzle them :shades: I especially see problems when lights turn green and people dawdle because they are in an animated conversation with their passenger.

backy · April 2013

How can you keep both hands on the wheel while sipping a Starbucks or Big Gulp or whatever?

There's a reason German cars never had cupholders until the US market forced their hand.

Oh, but just listen to the uproar if anyone suggests that sipping a beverage while driving is a distraction! Now, if that hot coffee spills on the driver's lap... THERE's a distraction!

As for yakking passengers, I've tried for years to explain to my DW that the reason I don't listen to her and engage in conversation when she's talking to me in the car is that I don't want to be distracted. She doesn't believe me.

fintail · April 2013

And smoking.

If your DW is like some I know, she will remove her hands from the wheel and become engrossed in chat - while in moving traffic.

I can honestly say I have never used the cupholders in my car. Maybe a passenger has once or twice, but I prefer no drinking or eating in the car to begin with, less mess that I will be stuck with.

xwesx · April 2013

Much agreed. I do try to listen to what she's saying, but driving takes precedence, and it seems she always likes to chat in traffic. :sick:

As with yours, mine doesn't believe me either.

Regarding cup holders, I tend to use mine on long trips, as I like to keep a water bottle on hand and make sure I drink the whole thing before arriving at my destination. It's important to keep hydrated, you know. :P

Is it a distraction while I'm using it (the water bottle)? You betcha.

backy · April 2013

At least my DW keeps her hands on the wheel while driving. But she won't let me drive in peace.

The no drinking/eating in the car can be a problem if, say, you are on a cross-country trip, with a family. Which I have been many times.

Smoking... that should have been prohibited while driving a car years ago. Yes, it's ok to hold a burning stick in your hand while driving. But talk on a hands-free phone? Nope.

Oh, and while we're at it, we need to ban playing of recordings e.g. audio books, while driving. Too distracting.

fintail · April 2013

Sometimes being single can be nice. Clean car, less distracting passengers :shades:

Every distraction can't be controlled, but surely some are easier to alleviate than others. I get pretty irked seeing cigs flicked or butts tossed out of windows.

xwesx · April 2013

You want to hear about distracting?! Try the last time I had my butt tossed out the window! I don't know how I made her so mad, but perhaps if I were listening..... :surprise:

stever · April 2013

It would be interesting to see where the funding comes from.

The Copper Wire Landline Association methinks.

How can you keep both hands on the wheel while sipping a Starbucks or Big Gulp or whatever?

Don't you people have knees? :P

andres3 · April 2013

Drinking water or any other beverage is not really a distraction. It doesn't take much thought process to drink a beverage, it's pretty much a motor reflex. If picking up a water bottle (and I think most drivers don't do this while needing to change lanes or mind a merge; reasonable judgment as to when it is a good time to pick up the drink is important here) is dangerous, then stick shift manuals are dangerous, because it's basically the same thing, one hand off the wheel, temporarily. If anything shifting requires more thinking because you have to decide what gear, up or down, whereas drinking is drinking.

Cell phones are particularly distracting because they make people mindless zombie drivers. It really is about how much brain power is being used on activities other than driving, but only as long as you keep at least one hand on the wheel (and one eye on the road) at all times.

Speaking of which, can you still get a driver's license if you have one eye?

xrunner2 · April 2013

Drinking water or any other beverage is not really a distraction. It doesn't take much thought process to drink a beverage, it's pretty much a motor reflex. If picking up a water bottle (and I think most drivers don't do this while needing to change lanes or mind a merge; reasonable judgment as to when it is a good time to pick up the drink is important here) is dangerous, then stick shift manuals are dangerous

Good point. Could be a bottle of coke or pepsi too. Of course, don't pick up the bottle if driving on the twisties in a rural area or in the fast lane of an interstate. Another idea is to drink out of the right side of mouth rather than center. Do not have to pick up head.

Cell phones are particularly distracting because they make people mindless zombie drivers. It really is about how much brain power is being used on activities other than driving

Exactly. Would like to see some scientific studies on this. Have to guess that very little brain processing resources used to drink from a water bottle vs an "active" conversation with a driver on the cell phone.

backy · April 2013

Holding a container with a beverage, which could be hot, is in no way comparable to operating a stick shift. Compare for example the time it takes to move your hand from the stick shift back to the wheel, in case an emergency maneuver is required, vs. replacing the beverage (maybe that hot one) in its holder, then getting both hands on the wheel. Also it's not possible to spill the contents of the stick shift on you, which is a huge distraction--especially if the contents are hot.

If listening or talking via hands-free device is distracting, then so is listening to the radio, especially if it's "talk radio". So that needs to be banned also.

Yes, you CAN get a driver's license with one good eye. Why do you ask?

hammerhead · April 2013

I don't *always* have both hands on the wheel, and I'm guessing a lot of us don't either.

Coffee, soda, water? No big deal... leave it in the cupholder until you can comfortably get to it.

Talk radio? No thanks. Don't need another source of potential road rage. :mad:

One eyed license? A law-enforcement (both car & motorcycle) officer friend of mine lost an eye to cancer years ago.

I seem to remember 'dual outside mirror' requirements years ago for one-eyed or hearing impaired drivers, but since most cars have mirrors on both sides now, it's pretty much a moot point.

xrunner2 · April 2013

Coffee, soda, water? No big deal... leave it in the cupholder until you can comfortably get to it.

Sometimes have a third or half cup of coffee, with lid and small opening for mouth, left over after stopping at a fast food place for a sandwich, burger, etc. Eat the burger in the car while parked, coffee left over. No big deal to finish up coffee while in the car on the road. While fully stopped at one or more traffic signals and waiting for light to turn green. Not inconsiderate. Safe.

euphonium · April 2013

how many semi crashes are the result of the driver being distracted by using his CB radio. :confuse:

andres3 · April 2013

Compare for example the time it takes to move your hand from the stick shift back to the wheel, in case an emergency maneuver is required, vs. replacing the beverage (maybe that hot one) in its holder, then getting both hands on the wheel

If you really had an emergency where for some very odd and rare reason you couldn't do it with one hand and needed a second hand, you could simply throw the drink on the passenger and worry about the spillage later. Takes all of .01 seconds to do that, and you won't get any on yourself.

Spillage is another thing entirely, as our hot drinks (which should have a good lid). First, don't spill, second, if it's hot, be extra careful. If you do spill, don't let it distract you until it is safe to be distracted.

stever · April 2013

Yeah, but the open lidded containers are better for quenching the dropped cigarette that's burning a hole in your pants leg.

imidazol97 · April 2013

This story has a driver cutting in front of the 2nd driver and brake checking him 3 times. On the third time, the 2nd driver rear ended the irrational guy in the video. A marine, indeed.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=73b_1364917659
If the link doesn't work, full story here:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/03/marine-absolutely-loses-it-during-roa- d-rage-incident-caught-on-tape-get-the-fk-out-of-your-truck/

Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles