When I was much younger, traffic was light, and people actually stopped on yellow, I would actually try to hit synchronized lights "on the roll" as they turned green. Much better than stopping, right?
No way now. The first 5 seconds of any green light around here (the Puget Sound area) is devoted to red light runners. Makes me think that red-light cameras might be a good thing. (Yes, I know THAT topic has been beat to death on the "Big Brother" board).
(the Puget Sound area) is devoted to red light runners."
Yeah....San Diego area too....unfortunately some of the green lights for left turns are only 3 or 4 seconds long which means if you want to turn left you have to run yellow/red also. It's a vicious circle!
Those german guys are never around when you want them. Some years ago I saw an article by a member of "ABATE" (anti helmet org.) that head injuries were the cause of death in the same percentage of automobile collisions as for motorcycle collisions. They concluded (with thier ajenda, of course) that helmets for automobile occupants made more sense than seat belts. :<)
I think it has more to do with traffic density than hat fashion. This morning I stopped a light while the 80's era Ford pickup in the lane next to me ran it, even though he was half a car length behind me when the light tuned yellow. It was clearly red when he entered the intersection. I didn't see if he was wearing a hat.
I think that people driving in heavy traffic become paranoid/anxious/angry about losing their place in the flow, falling behind, getting passed. They know that if they miss the light, especially on multi-cycle, left-turn lane type intersections, that they will have to sit for several minutes while dozens of other drivers get in front of them.
In fact. I'll bet there is a correlation between red light runners and the cycle time of the traffic lights (as well as traffic density).
Green - drive fast Yellow - drive faster Red - Drive really fast and for goodness sake don't try to establish eye contact with another driver. If you don't see them, they aren't there.
There is a certain amount of logic to their conclusions. In almost ALL auto racing a helmet is required. Also required are usually 5 point safety harnesses a roll cage and fire resistant suit (nomex)This combination has been more than amply shown to keep most folks, so they can walk away from a catastrophic collision at 2 to 3 times the highway speed limit of 65 mph. Before the advent of required safety belts, most folks died of secondary collisions with the dashboard, steering wheel and windshield glass. and or the sides of the car doors and glass. Unfortunately there is a still very high % of fatalities due to you guessed it: NOT WEARING SEAT BELTS!
The fact of the matter is that the wearing of helmets in cars would severely curtail auto accident injuries and fatalities due to head trauma. Air bags are most capable of making unplanned dental and facial rearrangements, ala PAINFUL . However the current level is acceptable to the driving public. Current fatalities are ap 40-44k per year and over 6.5 M accidents.
I survived 3 motorcycles. I always wore a helmet. Your vision and hearing are severely impaired wearing a helmet. On a motorcycle you can easily turn your head to see traffic in other lanes. You are exposed and can hear emergency vehicles. Seat belted in a car with a helmet would cause many more accidents because of restricted vision. With a helmet on in an a/c car, you would never hear an emergency vehicle or police officer, either. More accidents from restricted hearing. You better have some well developed neck muscles, too.
...it gives me the "pole position" for when it turns green, something I love now that I'm back to driving a stickshift!
Here's how I rank inconsiderate drivers at intersections:
(1) those who run red lights
(2) those who run red lights and in the process cause those who have been waiting the whole light to turn left to be stuck for another light cycle.
(3) those who block the intersection because traffic is backed up and thus sit in the middle of the intersection for your entire green light.
(4) in a two lane one-way street when I decide to do the right thing and not block the intersection and the knucklehead in the lane next to me takes my spot and blocks the intersection.
The car driving advocates of required helmets for motorcycle drivers basically advocate: " do what I say not what I do". This is probably the anti motorcycles strongest argument. Helmets were to be the be all to end all when it came to motorcycle fatality rates. In fact, there is concern that the MFR is even worse NOW than when helmets were not required.
The difficulty lies in the fact that fatality rates are HISTORIC. So one can isolate the cause of a auto fatality and "look back." (say you isolate fatalities due to head trauma)
For example, in 37 years of driving and over 1M miles of driving with NO caused accidents, I have NOT NEEDED the safety belt fully 100% of the time.
BUT and I emphasize a BIG BUTT, that does not keep me from WEARING the selt belt almost 99.9999999 % of the time!!
I'd say let people decide whether or not they want to wear a helmut. But if they don't wear a helmut and they get in an accident, they lose the right to sue everyone and their brother for punitive damages for the loss of the left side of their face.
Currently, there are no aural requirements to drive any type of vehicle, ie, you can be legally deaf and still drive. Driving has always been and will continue to be, a sight related activity.
Let me put it another way, WOULD YOU want Stevie Wonder and/ or Ray Charles driving just because they have great hearing?!
But I've also always believed that insurance companies shouldn't pay for drunk drivers who total their cars. They should pay for the damage they do to others, but why give them money to go out and buy another car?
I guess it's slightly on topic as drunk drivers are inconsiderate drivers.
The state I live in, was used as the example of how good a helmet law worked. They took the last eighteen months we had a helmet law, and compaired it to the eighteen months after the Illinois Supreme Court overturned the law. There was a rise in fatalities of about eleven percent! The monkey wrench in these statistics, however, was the eighteen month with a helmet law included two winters and a summer, the period without, two summers and a winter. Fatalities went down per mile ridden without the law.
We cannot overlook the posibility that most of the idiots were killed in the last year of the helmet law, and only the more careful ridders survived. A very significant percentage of motor cycle collision deaths are in the first six weeks of riding a new bike, and the period of comparison for with the law had a huge increase in cycle registrations.
MD rescinded the helmet law for motorcycle drivers not passengers. I always wore a helmet anyway. Head injuries were the leading cause of death in a motorcycle accident. I always wore long pants, boots, and leather gauntlets. I didn't want to leave any of my skin on the road.
over 90 % of the time. Sometimes the wind in my hair felt too good. While head injuries kill a lot of people, the collisions where they happen are often (not always) the result of operator stupidity.
What on earth do people learn at the driving "school"? You really have to wonder. Daily, I see examples of dangerous behaviors on the road and I actually wonder now why road fatalities statistics aren't greater than what they already are. It's frightening.
Tailgaters are maybe the most deadly disease. I see that every single day. Whether I'm in town or on the road. On my usual weekly commute, when a car/truck is going too slow for most people's tastes, there's always a patch of vehicles tailgating each other, waiting for an opportunity to pass. That said "blocking car" is just obeying the speed limit is not the problem here. I stand behind at (what I think is) a reasonable distance. As a result, when an opportunity to pass exists, I'm always the one to pass first - I have enough clearance to accelerate in order to pass, unlike them! It wouldn't just come to the mind of these people. Sure, the probability of the vehicle in front having to do an emergency braking is slim, but it's not zero. Murphy's law. The worst is that even 30 tons trucks are guilty of the same behavior. IT IS THEIR WORK, DARNIT, I'd think they'd be more conscious than that!
In the same vein, passing is sort of a game of "who has the most balls to do so". Hah! Just as an example, I was going to pass two trucks in succession but the truck behind wanted to pass, and did so - first error, the guy didn't look in his mirrors. I keep at a distance of the passing truck (on the left lane since it was my intention to pass as well. A car gets behind me, which wanted to pass too. Seeing that I wasn't tailgating the truck ("of course I wasn't, you cretin!"), the guy flashed his lights at me. Well what, couldn't he see the situation or was he just overly stupid? At the minimum he was inconsiderate. Well, the truck was so slow to pass that eventually there wasn't enough room for me to pass anymore, so I stepped back on the right lane... And the Cretin(tm) passes me and destroys my attempt to keep a safe distance! Similarly, each time there's a patch of cars following each other and there's a passing lane, half of the cars try to pass and tailgate each other until the end, as a result they step back on the right lane endangering the poor folks who were driving gently by nearly fishtailing them. In this scenario I back up until there is (if any) an opportunity, but this doesn't prevent Cretins(tm) to pass me nevertheless whereas they SEE that it's congested ahead of me... And these Cretins(tm) are the majority!
Are turn signals an option? You have to wonder about that, too. Not only when passing, but at traffic lights I see that all too often. Do they just forget to put them on? Haven't they been taught that they HAD to use them when making a turn? How many times have I been following someone and wondering why they were slowing down for no reason, just to see that in fact they were turning right or left. Couldn't they have just the common sense to tell me and others about what they wanted to do? Is it THAT hard to do? How many times also did I have to brake while passing simply because a Cretin(tm) didn't look in its side mirrors and changed lanes WITHOUT SIGNALLING? What, should side mirrors be optional too? Would people matter?
What are crossing lanes? Do people know about them? Are they so used to people backing off when they see a car coming that they just don't stop, or at least ready their foot on the brake pedal? How many times have I jsut stepped on the crosslanes IN MY RIGHT TO DO SO and see cars reacting only a second later and braking urgently - AND THEN HONKING AT ME? In these numerous cases I just come at a dead stop and point my finger at what is the obvious - THERE'S A CROSSING LANE HERE, I HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY, YOU CRETIN(tm)! I'm not proud of it, but once a guy was so angry that he stepped out of the car and yelled at me, coming as if he wanted to hit me... The best defense being attack, I punched him right in the nose before he could raise his hand, and crossed without another word. That felt good on the moment, believe me!
And the list goes on, and on, and on. And the worst of it all is that NONE OF THESE BEHAVIORS IS SANCTIONED, EVER. NEVER have I seen anyone fined for not respecting safety distances. NEVER have I seen anyone being fined for not putting on his turn signals when he had to. NEVER have I seen anyone being fined for not respecting a crossing lane. This is infuriating beyond all belief. "Only" 8000 deaths a year (for 60 millions inhabitants) is a real exploit at this point.
You are under the mistaken belief that the main purpose of issuing moving violation tickets is to create safer driving conditions and not to make $ for the government. Highway speeding tickets are a much more efficient way of meeting quotas.
I wonder what percent of tickets are issued on highways? If they really wanted to slow us down they'd put one state trooper on the road driving at the posted speed limit, no one would dare to pass. But this would make zero dollars. Instead the troopers issue tickets and then pass everyone doing 100 miles an hour to get back to their speed trap.
I'm just waiting for the day when I get on a toll highway and when I get to my exit I pay my toll and a speeding ticket comes with it because they timed my journey.
I always like the fact that when the trooper goes to testify in court, he states that he was out on the road for the purpose of safety and slowing traffic down. Of course! That is why he had his vehicle hidden behind a row of bushes.
Every now and then, my town runs a sting for crosswalk violations. They have people start to walk across, if vehicles do not yield they are ticketed. Last time, they had to have been ticketing over 75% of the vehicles.
Oh yeah, I'm very conscious about that... And it's all the more irritating that Mr Chirac declared road security to be a "major concern" for his government. I hesitate between laughing and crying.
Francis, here's another jolt for ya, this one's about the truckers. You wrote about the inconsiderate drivers: "The worst is that even 30 tons trucks are guilty of the same behavior. IT IS THEIR WORK, DARNIT," as if they would be expected to demonstrate greater driving skill and better judgement than the average amateur.
This idea that "professional drivers" are the noble knights of the open road, their skills finely honed by the hundreds of thousands of miles they log, went out with "BJ and the Bear." In truth, most of the drivers are operating at the ragged edge of exhaustion, numbed by work schedules that force them to push their stamina beyond human limits to barely make a decent living. Many of them are on methamphetamine or similar stimulants, which impair their judgement even more; quite a few along IH-35 are driving in from Mexico, where the driving culture is inconsiderate to a degree unimaginable to USA motorists.
Summary: professional drivers of giant trucks can be expected to be LESS considerate than average!
As if that was not bad enough, in CA anyway the CHP has conducted on the road inspections and fully 7-8/10 vehicles have so called "SERIOUS" safety issues!! The bad news is that this represents a fairly overwhelming majority.
However every cloud has it's silver lining: for as "bad" as it is, large trucks have very very low incidents of accidents and fatalities!!
And when they do a panic stop, they jackknife so their load blocks all three lanes of traffic causing too much delay for the hundreds of other four wheelers. Long haul trucking should be phased out and using the railroads for long distance freight is much safer. Big trucks should be limited to a 50 mile radius.
If you are looking for the ZERO incident rate then I would say dream on. The other reality is if you could wave your magic wand and put the hauling back to the railroads, the economic benefit from interstate trucking would almost die. Part of the reason the railroads were broken up in our historical past, is it is VERY easy to operate a monopoly!! i.e. you dont pay our rip off prices, we let your product rot where it stands.
Now that the monopolies are no more, competition sets in, but the apparent problem seems to be "setting up" a train of cargo and with all of the computers in the industry it shouldn't be such a problem today. Revelstoke, B.C. is a huge train center and they have solved the problem so what's holding us up from being coordinated while the Cowboy truckers wreck havoc on highways?
I am sure that there is less a requirement to ship bulk products today in America than there ever was. I live in a silicon valley town that has a big rail head. Its main claim to fame is that it off loads app 200-250k cars a year app 50 miles from port. Yet not only does it not diminish the use of the 8 car carriers, it actually increases it! It would be one thing if they could access a major freeway from this location, but in fact these monsters go through city streets to get to any one of 4 freeways! (pop 66k)
If truck drivers were considerate, they would voluntarily choose to drive only in the right lanes on the freeway. They would never use the far left/passing lane under any circumstances. This consideration would allow the rest of us (who are, after all, subsidizing the truckers' livelihood by paying for the bulk of the road system they use to make their living) to use the right lane to pass those damn 18-wheelers.
Perhaps, I am not sure what you mean about truckers? Why would you want truckers to voluntarily stay in the right lane except to pass? It is already the law!!?? The only place where I have seen truckers tarry a bit too long in the passing lane is on AZ interstates. But the speed limit is 75 mph and the truckers do pass at 80 mph. So if a double is passing a double, 80 mph might seem like two hippos racing, but as you can see, things are relative. I also dont think you are advocating a truck passing another at 100 mph!!?
If anything the folks I pass on the right are almost without exception CARS.
People complain WAY too much about truck drivers. I find they are much more considerate than the average car driver.
Truckers are trying to get somewhere too, the only difference is their livelyhood depends on it. They spend days on the road whereas you spend minutes, maybe hours.
I sometimes find myself trading spots with a truck back and forth over and over again. Why? Because with a car you can hold a steady speed while a trucker needs to pick up speeds going downhill to make it up the next hill. Many cars refuse to pull over for these trucks and so the trucks end up traveling up that next hill at 2mph.
I'll pull over for the truck when I see him coming and then he'll usually do the same for me afterward. But if your not considerate to him how motivated is he to be considerate back.
And in stop and go traffic no one seems to mind pulling right in front of a truck. This makes it impossible for them to maintain a safe following distance.
When you choose to NOT react to the initial action, you have chosen to snuff it out. Just last night in a parking lot a big brand new SUV blasted his horn at another car, but the other driver just gave him a friendly wave. No Rage due to no adverse reaction.
I take it you didn't read my excerpts from the driving guides in "Driving Tips: Advise your son/daughter to be a safe and courteous driver." I was thinking you were just blowing me off. Here's a couple of them.....
"Mobility and Gridlock - Accident Avoidance How Fast Is Traffic Moving?
Accidents tend to happen when one driver is going faster or slower than other cars on the road.
If you are going faster than traffic, you will have to keep passing other cars. Each time you pass another car, there is more risk of an accident. The car you are passing may change lanes suddenly. On a two-lane road, an oncoming car may appear suddenly. True, it may not be a big risk, but if you are passing one car after another, the risks begin to add up. Studies have shown that speeding does not save more than a few minutes in an hour's driving.
Going slower than other cars or stopping all of a sudden can be just as bad as speeding. It tends to make cars bunch up behind you and it could cause a rear-end crash. If many cars are pulling out to pass you, move into the right lane and let them pass.
DEALING WITH ROAD RAGE Don’t drive slowly in the left (fast) lane. Avoid using the fast lane except for the brief time it takes to pass another driver. Driving slowly in the fast lane frustrates other drivers.
When You Drive Too Slowly
There are times when you must drive slowly because of heavy traffic or bad weather. However, if you block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic by driving too slowly, you may receive a ticket. When you drive slower than other traffic, do not drive in the “fast” lane. Move to the right when another driver is close behind you and wishes to drive faster."
That was from California's drivers guide...this is from Wash ST.....
"RULES OF THE ROAD
Passing - On a road with two lanes traveling in the same direction, the left-hand lane is intended to be used for passing slower vehicles. On roads with more than two lanes traveling in the same direction, use the right lane for slower speeds, the middle lanes for higher speeds and the left-hand lane for passing only. If you pass on the right, the other driver may have difficulty seeing you and might suddenly change lanes in front of you. Never pass on the shoulder, whether it is paved or not. Other drivers will never expect you to be there and may pull off the road without looking.
Adjusting to Traffic
Keep pace with traffic - If you are going faster than traffic, you will have to keep passing others. Each time you pass someone, there is a chance of a collision. The vehicle you are passing may change lanes suddenly, or on a two-lane road an oncoming vehicle may appear suddenly. Slow down and keep pace with other traffic. Speeding does not save more than a few minutes an hour.
Going much slower than other vehicles can be just as hazardous as speeding. It tends to make vehicles bunch up behind you and causes the other traffic to pass you. Either drive faster or consider using another road with slower speeds. In Washington State, if you are driving a slow moving vehicle on a two-lane road where it is unsafe to pass, and five or more vehicles are in a line behind you, pull over and stop when safe to let them pass."
Pay particular attention to "DEALING WITH ROAD RAGE". Basically ...if you knowingly instigate it, you are a participant. In other words, it isn't just the "reaction" but also the initial "action".
Road rage is the cause of accidents when it's fueled. I try my best, and succeed (but not always) to not "answer" to the guy/girl who made me a dirty trick. Instead I yell.
Oh yeah, another behavior I witnessed today which I deem inconsiderate: a traffic light going green and the car in front of me not starting... The driver was meddling with her (it was a girl, but that's not the matter) belongings into the car and took 5 seconds (and two horns from me) to move on. When you drive, you should do nothing else. JMHO.
"Going slower than other cars or stopping all of a sudden can be just as bad as speeding. It tends to make cars bunch up behind you and it could cause a rear-end crash."
The rear-end crash is only caused by following too close in not having your vehicle under control.
It does NOT bother me when another vehicle is camping in the left lane AT the speed limit because that's as fast as we are supposed to travel. Therefore, the LLC AT the speed limit is not hindering anybody except the wanna be speeder. Less than the speed limit - "Get the H#$% out of my way! Right?
"It does NOT bother me when another vehicle is camping in the left lane AT the speed limit because that's as fast as we are supposed to travel."
Use your judgment. If you can safely step back to the right lane, then why not do so? After all, let the guy speed, that's his problem and his responsibility. End of story. Impeding his way just induces road rage, and that's what we all want to avoid, don't we?
Comments
No way now. The first 5 seconds of any green light around here (the Puget Sound area) is devoted to red light runners. Makes me think that red-light cameras might be a good thing. (Yes, I know THAT topic has been beat to death on the "Big Brother" board).
-james
Yeah....San Diego area too....unfortunately some of the green lights for left turns are only 3 or 4 seconds long which means if you want to turn left you have to run yellow/red also. It's a vicious circle!
Harry
I think that people driving in heavy traffic become paranoid/anxious/angry about losing their place in the flow, falling behind, getting passed. They know that if they miss the light, especially on multi-cycle, left-turn lane type intersections, that they will have to sit for several minutes while dozens of other drivers get in front of them.
In fact. I'll bet there is a correlation between red light runners and the cycle time of the traffic lights (as well as traffic density).
-james
Green - drive fast
Yellow - drive faster
Red - Drive really fast and for goodness sake don't try to establish eye contact with another driver. If you don't see them, they aren't there.
There is a certain amount of logic to their conclusions. In almost ALL auto racing a helmet is required. Also required are usually 5 point safety harnesses a roll cage and fire resistant suit (nomex)This combination has been more than amply shown to keep most folks, so they can walk away from a catastrophic collision at 2 to 3 times the highway speed limit of 65 mph. Before the advent of required safety belts, most folks died of secondary collisions with the dashboard, steering wheel and windshield glass. and or the sides of the car doors and glass. Unfortunately there is a still very high % of fatalities due to you guessed it: NOT WEARING SEAT BELTS!
The fact of the matter is that the wearing of helmets in cars would severely curtail auto accident injuries and fatalities due to head trauma. Air bags are most capable of making unplanned dental and facial rearrangements, ala PAINFUL . However the current level is acceptable to the driving public. Current fatalities are ap 40-44k per year and over 6.5 M accidents.
Seat belted in a car with a helmet would cause many more accidents because of restricted vision. With a helmet on in an a/c car, you would never hear an emergency vehicle or police officer, either. More accidents from restricted hearing.
You better have some well developed neck muscles, too.
Here's how I rank inconsiderate drivers at intersections:
(1) those who run red lights
(2) those who run red lights and in the process cause those who have been waiting the whole light to turn left to be stuck for another light cycle.
(3) those who block the intersection because traffic is backed up and thus sit in the middle of the intersection for your entire green light.
(4) in a two lane one-way street when I decide to do the right thing and not block the intersection and the knucklehead in the lane next to me takes my spot and blocks the intersection.
The car driving advocates of required helmets for motorcycle drivers basically advocate: " do what I say not what I do". This is probably the anti motorcycles strongest argument. Helmets were to be the be all to end all when it came to motorcycle fatality rates. In fact, there is concern that the MFR is even worse NOW than when helmets were not required.
The difficulty lies in the fact that fatality rates are HISTORIC. So one can isolate the cause of a auto fatality and "look back." (say you isolate fatalities due to head trauma)
For example, in 37 years of driving and over 1M miles of driving with NO caused accidents, I have NOT NEEDED the safety belt fully 100% of the time.
BUT and I emphasize a BIG BUTT, that does not keep me from WEARING the selt belt almost 99.9999999 % of the time!!
So, for example that would mean: if I wack you, and you die, due to not wearing a seat belt, I don't pay?
Currently, there are no aural requirements to drive any type of vehicle, ie, you can be legally deaf and still drive. Driving has always been and will continue to be, a sight related activity.
Let me put it another way, WOULD YOU want Stevie Wonder and/ or Ray Charles driving just because they have great hearing?!
I guess it's slightly on topic as drunk drivers are inconsiderate drivers.
We cannot overlook the posibility that most of the idiots were killed in the last year of the helmet law, and only the more careful ridders survived. A very significant percentage of motor cycle collision deaths are in the first six weeks of riding a new bike, and the period of comparison for with the law had a huge increase in cycle registrations.
Harry
I always wore long pants, boots, and leather gauntlets. I didn't want to leave any of my skin on the road.
Harry
Tailgaters are maybe the most deadly disease. I see that every single day. Whether I'm in town or on the road. On my usual weekly commute, when a car/truck is going too slow for most people's tastes, there's always a patch of vehicles tailgating each other, waiting for an opportunity to pass. That said "blocking car" is just obeying the speed limit is not the problem here. I stand behind at (what I think is) a reasonable distance. As a result, when an opportunity to pass exists, I'm always the one to pass first - I have enough clearance to accelerate in order to pass, unlike them! It wouldn't just come to the mind of these people. Sure, the probability of the vehicle in front having to do an emergency braking is slim, but it's not zero. Murphy's law. The worst is that even 30 tons trucks are guilty of the same behavior. IT IS THEIR WORK, DARNIT, I'd think they'd be more conscious than that!
In the same vein, passing is sort of a game of "who has the most balls to do so". Hah! Just as an example, I was going to pass two trucks in succession but the truck behind wanted to pass, and did so - first error, the guy didn't look in his mirrors. I keep at a distance of the passing truck (on the left lane since it was my intention to pass as well. A car gets behind me, which wanted to pass too. Seeing that I wasn't tailgating the truck ("of course I wasn't, you cretin!"), the guy flashed his lights at me. Well what, couldn't he see the situation or was he just overly stupid? At the minimum he was inconsiderate. Well, the truck was so slow to pass that eventually there wasn't enough room for me to pass anymore, so I stepped back on the right lane... And the Cretin(tm) passes me and destroys my attempt to keep a safe distance! Similarly, each time there's a patch of cars following each other and there's a passing lane, half of the cars try to pass and tailgate each other until the end, as a result they step back on the right lane endangering the poor folks who were driving gently by nearly fishtailing them. In this scenario I back up until there is (if any) an opportunity, but this doesn't prevent Cretins(tm) to pass me nevertheless whereas they SEE that it's congested ahead of me... And these Cretins(tm) are the majority!
Are turn signals an option? You have to wonder about that, too. Not only when passing, but at traffic lights I see that all too often. Do they just forget to put them on? Haven't they been taught that they HAD to use them when making a turn? How many times have I been following someone and wondering why they were slowing down for no reason, just to see that in fact they were turning right or left. Couldn't they have just the common sense to tell me and others about what they wanted to do? Is it THAT hard to do? How many times also did I have to brake while passing simply because a Cretin(tm) didn't look in its side mirrors and changed lanes WITHOUT SIGNALLING? What, should side mirrors be optional too? Would people matter?
What are crossing lanes? Do people know about them? Are they so used to people backing off when they see a car coming that they just don't stop, or at least ready their foot on the brake pedal? How many times have I jsut stepped on the crosslanes IN MY RIGHT TO DO SO and see cars reacting only a second later and braking urgently - AND THEN HONKING AT ME? In these numerous cases I just come at a dead stop and point my finger at what is the obvious - THERE'S A CROSSING LANE HERE, I HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY, YOU CRETIN(tm)! I'm not proud of it, but once a guy was so angry that he stepped out of the car and yelled at me, coming as if he wanted to hit me... The best defense being attack, I punched him right in the nose before he could raise his hand, and crossed without another word. That felt good on the moment, believe me!
And the list goes on, and on, and on. And the worst of it all is that NONE OF THESE BEHAVIORS IS SANCTIONED, EVER. NEVER have I seen anyone fined for not respecting safety distances. NEVER have I seen anyone being fined for not putting on his turn signals when he had to. NEVER have I seen anyone being fined for not respecting a crossing lane. This is infuriating beyond all belief. "Only" 8000 deaths a year (for 60 millions inhabitants) is a real exploit at this point.
I wonder what percent of tickets are issued on highways? If they really wanted to slow us down they'd put one state trooper on the road driving at the posted speed limit, no one would dare to pass. But this would make zero dollars. Instead the troopers issue tickets and then pass everyone doing 100 miles an hour to get back to their speed trap.
I'm just waiting for the day when I get on a toll highway and when I get to my exit I pay my toll and a speeding ticket comes with it because they timed my journey.
Every now and then, my town runs a sting for crosswalk violations. They have people start to walk across, if vehicles do not yield they are ticketed. Last time, they had to have been ticketing over 75% of the vehicles.
(It's a major peeve of mine too.)
I'm curious though, is it actually legally required anywhere here in the states to use turn signals? I'm in Ohio, and I don't think it is.
http://forms.lp.findlaw.com/form/courtforms/state/ma/ma000003.pdf
A side benefit of looking this up on the Massachusetts website I signed up for the Commonwealth's "no telemarketer" list. Excellent!
This idea that "professional drivers" are the noble knights of the open road, their skills finely honed by the hundreds of thousands of miles they log, went out with "BJ and the Bear." In truth, most of the drivers are operating at the ragged edge of exhaustion, numbed by work schedules that force them to push their stamina beyond human limits to barely make a decent living. Many of them are on methamphetamine or similar stimulants, which impair their judgement even more; quite a few along IH-35 are driving in from Mexico, where the driving culture is inconsiderate to a degree unimaginable to USA motorists.
Summary: professional drivers of giant trucks can be expected to be LESS considerate than average!
As if that was not bad enough, in CA anyway the CHP has conducted on the road inspections and fully 7-8/10 vehicles have so called "SERIOUS" safety issues!! The bad news is that this represents a fairly overwhelming majority.
However every cloud has it's silver lining: for as "bad" as it is, large trucks have very very low incidents of accidents and fatalities!!
If you are looking for the ZERO incident rate then I would say dream on. The other reality is if you could wave your magic wand and put the hauling back to the railroads, the economic benefit from interstate trucking would almost die. Part of the reason the railroads were broken up in our historical past, is it is VERY easy to operate a monopoly!! i.e. you dont pay our rip off prices, we let your product rot where it stands.
I am sure that there is less a requirement to ship bulk products today in America than there ever was. I live in a silicon valley town that has a big rail head. Its main claim to fame is that it off loads app 200-250k cars a year app 50 miles from port. Yet not only does it not diminish the use of the 8 car carriers, it actually increases it! It would be one thing if they could access a major freeway from this location, but in fact these monsters go through city streets to get to any one of 4 freeways! (pop 66k)
Perhaps, I am not sure what you mean about truckers? Why would you want truckers to voluntarily stay in the right lane except to pass? It is already the law!!?? The only place where I have seen truckers tarry a bit too long in the passing lane is on AZ interstates. But the speed limit is 75 mph and the truckers do pass at 80 mph. So if a double is passing a double, 80 mph might seem like two hippos racing, but as you can see, things are relative. I also dont think you are advocating a truck passing another at 100 mph!!?
If anything the folks I pass on the right are almost without exception CARS.
Sure it's EASIER for cars to pass quickly on the left. But that doesn't mean that the driver always chooses too.
Truckers are trying to get somewhere too, the only difference is their livelyhood depends on it. They spend days on the road whereas you spend minutes, maybe hours.
I sometimes find myself trading spots with a truck back and forth over and over again. Why? Because with a car you can hold a steady speed while a trucker needs to pick up speeds going downhill to make it up the next hill. Many cars refuse to pull over for these trucks and so the trucks end up traveling up that next hill at 2mph.
I'll pull over for the truck when I see him coming and then he'll usually do the same for me afterward. But if your not considerate to him how motivated is he to be considerate back.
And in stop and go traffic no one seems to mind pulling right in front of a truck. This makes it impossible for them to maintain a safe following distance.
As soon as they make inciting Road Rage a license-suspending offense.
That is why I pass on the right when it is apparent that the "passing" lane is not the passing lane to some folks!
I was thinking you were just blowing me off.
Here's a couple of them.....
"Mobility and Gridlock - Accident Avoidance
How Fast Is Traffic Moving?
Accidents tend to happen when one driver is going faster or slower than other cars on the road.
If you are going faster than traffic, you will have to keep passing other cars. Each time you pass another car, there is more risk of an accident. The car you are passing may change lanes suddenly. On a two-lane road, an oncoming car may appear suddenly. True, it may not be a big risk, but if you are passing one car after another, the risks begin to add up. Studies have shown that speeding does not save more than a few minutes in an hour's driving.
Going slower than other cars or stopping all of a sudden can be just as bad as speeding. It tends to make cars bunch up behind you and it could cause a rear-end crash. If many cars are pulling out to pass you, move into the right lane and let them pass.
DEALING WITH ROAD RAGE
Don’t drive slowly in the left (fast) lane. Avoid using the fast lane except for the brief time it takes to pass another driver. Driving slowly in the fast lane frustrates other drivers.
When You Drive Too Slowly
There are times when you must drive slowly because of heavy traffic or bad weather. However, if you block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic by driving too slowly, you may receive a ticket. When you drive slower than other traffic, do not drive in the “fast” lane. Move to the right when another driver is close behind you and wishes to drive faster."
That was from California's drivers guide...this is from Wash ST.....
"RULES OF THE ROAD
Passing - On a road with two lanes traveling in the same direction, the left-hand lane is intended to be used for passing slower vehicles. On roads with more than two lanes traveling in the same direction, use the right lane for slower speeds, the middle lanes for higher speeds and the left-hand lane for passing only. If you pass on the right, the other driver may have difficulty seeing you and might suddenly change lanes in front of you. Never pass on the shoulder, whether it is paved or not. Other drivers will never expect you to be there and may pull off the road without looking.
Adjusting to Traffic
Keep pace with traffic - If you are going faster than traffic, you will have to keep passing others. Each time you pass someone, there is a chance of a collision. The vehicle you are passing may change lanes suddenly, or on a two-lane road an oncoming vehicle may appear suddenly. Slow down and keep pace with other traffic. Speeding does not save more than a few minutes an hour.
Going much slower than other vehicles can be just as hazardous as speeding. It tends to make vehicles bunch up behind you and causes the other traffic to pass you. Either drive faster or consider using another road with slower speeds. In Washington State, if you are driving a slow moving vehicle on a two-lane road where it is unsafe to pass, and five or more vehicles are in a line behind you, pull over and stop when safe to let them pass."
Pay particular attention to "DEALING WITH ROAD RAGE".
Basically ...if you knowingly instigate it, you are a participant. In other words, it isn't just the "reaction" but also the initial "action".
Oh yeah, another behavior I witnessed today which I deem inconsiderate: a traffic light going green and the car in front of me not starting... The driver was meddling with her (it was a girl, but that's not the matter) belongings into the car and took 5 seconds (and two horns from me) to move on. When you drive, you should do nothing else. JMHO.
The rear-end crash is only caused by following too close in not having your vehicle under control.
It does NOT bother me when another vehicle is camping in the left lane AT the speed limit because that's as fast as we are supposed to travel. Therefore, the LLC AT the speed limit is not hindering anybody except the wanna be speeder. Less than the speed limit - "Get the H#$% out of my way! Right?
Use your judgment. If you can safely step back to the right lane, then why not do so? After all, let the guy speed, that's his problem and his responsibility. End of story. Impeding his way just induces road rage, and that's what we all want to avoid, don't we?