Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

1310311313315316478

Comments

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    They don't do what they are told now - most will give a 10%-10mph leeway and have for eons. Your bullethole tangent is irrelevant and insane.

    They are told to obey the law? They do no better a job at that than most of those they observe.
  • jensadjensad Member Posts: 388
    To all. I did not intend that my post would incite such debate about my old job. I could relate to everyone's posts as they reflect an excellent diverse opinions. Ca is still nuts but managable.

    I guess I was fortunate in that I came from Berkeley PD onto a traffic entity and worked the freways and was "present " at every riot in the Bay Area including SF State and Cal Berkeley and everything in between. (i.e. I knew what to expect.)

    I do know we lose about 12 officers each year via accidents/run over/ (rarely) a shoot out. And very high speed chases which I was an active participant I understand is the real killer of many of us.

    Lastly I am speaking only for me, I tried to give people the benefit of the doubt and only cited the ones that really were violating the law and common sense. But that is another time and this is not the place. Eg. 110 mph cite in an 65 mph zone.

    I responsded to that poster as I was tired of the "tried and true" assault on the Ca law enforcement community. (And I would be the first to say much of the criticism is warranted)

    I hope I did not insult anyone and/or get your ire up but that one post got to me. Lastly, there was an "expectation" of a range of numbers that were "expected" by the bosses per month. Just for me, my rule of thumb was about 1 to 2 tickets or fix it tickers per day. Probably today its more but then my time has past.

    I enjoyed everyone posts as this to me, jmo is one excellent group.

    Good luck to all and stay safe.

    jensad
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    I don't think anyone here doubts you were one of the good guys, as 95%+ of patrolmen are ...bashing the entire profession was indeed unfair.

    I am sure the expected quota is higher in these days of budget woes...of course, when interviewed, the suits will deny the quita system. Maybe that draws some ire, not being told the real motivations behind enforcement. But it's the fault of the boss more than the employee.

    I wonder if I'll see a speed trap on my way home today, it will be all for safety of course :shades:
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    edited March 2011
    Your bullethole tangent is irrelevant and insane.

    Nearly as irrelevant and insane as stating that police officers don't have to go out and do their jobs as they have been told to do. I don't know about your job, but most people who work for a living have to do what their bosses expect them to do, or they aren't employed for long.

    Have you ever been a police officer? If not, you have no right stating that they should simply not do the job they are told to do, just so people can break traffic laws more easily and not get so upset at the officers trying to enforce those laws.

    No wonder there's so many inconsiderate drivers out there. Their solution to making driving better for everyone is to expect the police to stop enforcing traffic laws.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    edited March 2011
    They do not in fact have to enforce every law down to the letter, and most in fact do not. That you can breeze by a cop at 7 over and not get whined to about it says everything. Simple fact. I am sure in whatever job you've been able to obtain that you follow every rule to the letter 100%, right.

    Have you ever been a police officer? I will wager an awful lot you have not. Seriously? Another bizarre tangental comment. I have every right to state what I did, you are not in a position to determine my rights to state anything. Please, simmer down and do not think you have the means to determine the rights of others, you do not.

    Who said anyone should stop enforcing laws - sounds awfully and insanely absolutist...but when some laws are based on cash flow above all else, and hinder LEOs from looking after actual crimes, then they indeed do not deserve strict enforcement.

    Show me the money, that's what it's all about, whether you like it or not.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    edited March 2011
    Show me the money, that's what it's all about, whether you like it or not.

    Oh, I understand perfectly how it works: cities/counties are getting less money from states/feds, and they can't raise taxes (or not enough to cover the gap), so they have to make it up somehow to pay the bills. Why not let those who break the law pay the bills? So the police on the street are told to go out and bring in tickets. But why should we get upset at those officers because they are doing what their captains told them to do? Why should we expect them to not do their jobs?

    "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime."

    There's also another motivation for police to regulate traffic laws: public safety. How many people, if they thought there was a decent chance of getting a ticket, would follow traffic laws more closely? How many people, if they knew police would always ignore traffic law violations, would press the pedal to the metal?

    You should be thanking highway patrol officers for going out everyday to encourage drivers to drive in a more considerate fashion... even if their motivation is only to avoid a ticket.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    You seem to imply that laws are just simply because they are laws. If so, there's really nothing to discuss here.

    They don't have to enforce everything to the letter, and they don't. They do give leeway, sometimes significant, and it seems for the most part they meet the quota and move on - as they should.

    Do you seriously believe speed enforcement as it exists today is about safety? Really? If so, there's really nothing to discuss here. Other than in special cases (school zones, etc), it is not.

    Yes, when I see speed traps on wide open roads in perfect conditions as social ills continue to expand everywhere, I should be thankful!
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    edited March 2011
    You seem to imply that laws are just simply because they are laws.

    No. You are the only person here who said anything about police enforcing "everything to the letter." Besides, that's contradictory to what you said a couple of posts ago, that police let a lot of "little" stuff go--might as well go after the worst offenders, yes?

    I believe part of speed enforcement today is about safety, yes. (And you said you believe that, too--school zones are a pretty darn important "special case", don't you think?) Otherwise you wouldn't see officers let people go when they are only a few mph over the limit. And part is revenue generation. Think again about my question: if drivers KNEW there was no enforcement of speed limits, how many do you think would break them--by a big margin? And that would create a huge public safety problem--because most drivers in the USA don't drive as skillfully and courteously as those in Germany.

    So if someone doesn't agree with you, you refuse to have a discussion with them? :surprise:

    I don't like speed traps either. But I realize why they're there. And I realize they're not the fault of the officers sent out to run the trap. They don't have the option of saying, "Gee, Captain, I really don't feel like running speed traps anymore. I don't like the fact that they're there mainly to raise money to pay the bills of the city, plus I might upset some folks, like fintail."
  • hammerheadhammerhead Member Posts: 907
    Can't even remember the forum (not Edmunds), but I've seen one rant recently that suggested all traffic cops should bust all violators, period. As in 61 in a 60, which was his example, not mine, and all in the name of nothing more than revenue enhancement.

    It was so absurd, I couldn't even reply to it.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    edited March 2011
    No, you are the one here who is into the "it's the law" mentality, without thinking about why such laws exist/who makes these laws and how they are enforced. What is contradictory?

    I think most people are so chicken and/or so blindly deferential that if the "laws" stood, but enforcement was more logical, there would not be a significant increase in high speed issues, no.

    It's about money, plain and simple, money demanded by forces who might not have the courage or intellectual honesty to admit their motivations.

    You not agreeing doesn't make my eyes roll, the random insane tangents and positions do that. If you don't like it, maybe you can tell me what my rights are again ;)

    If LEOs did in fact call BS on their revenue collection duties, as most do to a degree (by not enforcing strictly), they could in fact have that option. All it takes is a solid and committed majority to act. They aren't going to be fired or sent to the sticks, hell, they have some of the most militant unions in the land, ones that nobody cries about. Nothing would come of it.

    Let's be real and move on. Money money money, it controls this revenue collection masquerading as safety.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    I've read that kind of stuff too. "It's the law", so it must be good!

    How a nation founded in opposition to unjust laws has devolved to this, amusing and sad.

    As real crimes continue to fester and grow, second world, here we come.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited March 2011
    Money money money, it controls this revenue collection masquerading as safety.

    There may be some of that going on but I don't much buy it. There's plenty of links out there showing that traffic patrols increase road safety and have the ancillary benefit of napping perps for other crimes, like burglary. For example:

    "In 2009, Charleston Police made 12,688 traffic stops within Charleston's 33.3 square mile jurisdiction. In 2010, that number jumped to 13,996, an increase of 1,308."

    And the headline?

    Extra patrols in Charleston may be linked to decrease in crimes (Charleston Gazette)

    Here's a pure safety link from the Camarillo Acorn in CA.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Who bankrolls these "studies"? Look into it (aka civil servants creating job security), as well as the details - simply making stops isn't one in the same as speedtrapping.

    I am sure the local vodka makers association would tell me a fifth a day keeps the doctor away, too :shades:

    Money money money...got a faltering city with insane expenses and overpaid suits running the show? Crank up the speed traps and cameras, and try to save the day.
  • Sandman6472Sandman6472 Member Posts: 7,218
    Sorry for your loss but thanks for your great posts here. You've always been a professional in Edmunds but suspect that's just your nature. Don't listen to the crap from others in here as they have no idea what you've been through & all you want is for folks to drive safely stay safe on the roads.

    Thanks for your posts which are very informative. You are one of the good one's...I salute you sir!

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2023 Hyundai Kona Limited AWD (wife) / 2025 VW GTI (me) / 2019 Chevrolet Cruze Premier RS (daughter #1) / 2020 Hyundai Accent SE (daughter #2) / 2023 Subaru Impreza Base (son)

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Steve, Steve, Steve... by now you should realize the futility of using facts to support a POV here. (wink)

    I have personally seen both sides of this story. I've had two speeding tickets in my life and both were in classic speeding traps. I was pissed I got the tickets, but not at the officers. They were very professional, actually quite courteous as they wrote me up. The speed zones involved were I think clearly designed to catch speeders, not for safety reasons. The DMV officers didn't design those speed zones. But I'm pretty sure they were given a quota of tickets to fill. In my job I get quotas to fill also. Sometimes I think they are really ridiculous quotas. But if I don't make them, at best I lose a lot of my income. At worst, I lose my job.

    Then there's the safety-related cases. A good one off the top of my head is a RR crossing I frequently use. Many people ignore it... it's just a stop sign, no crossing arms or signals. One day, I was preoccupied and forgot to stop there. I was pulled over by a local policeman who was sitting there to catch people doing exactly what I did. He gave me a lecture about the importance of watching out for crossings like that, what could happen if I don't, and let me go. If he were motivated by "money, money, money", he would have written a ticket, and I would have deserved it. But he was clearly motivated by something else. Safety, maybe? I'm sure to stop at that crossing every time now, that's for sure.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    but I've seen one rant recently that suggested all traffic cops should bust all violators, period. As in 61 in a 60

    I have lived in towns like that.

    I know a few other like that too.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    The town I lived in is Stone Park, IL. I have know people who have gotten tickets there for doing 1 MPH over the limit. The town is a very small suburb west of Chicago. It basically exists to catch speeders. The main road through drops in speed as you enter town and increases again when you leave. No rhyme or reason to the seed change.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    When the road is going to one lane, usually the truckers hold the lanes back so if people pull over into the right lane the other people don't zoom on up to cut in ahead and hold back those who are courteously moving over.

    Today, on I70 the trucks didn't do that as well. A Dodge Ram truck with a flatbed trailer, empty, behind moved on up ahead. He wanted to cut over in front of me. I just stayed my ground and he had to pull in behind me. So he zoomed up as close as he could get that dominating ram grill as he could to my rear end.

    I have seem many displays of aggression from Ram truck drivers. Is it a character type that buys these trucks with the "Ram" image. I recall one Ram pickup which tailgated me in our home town then passed illegally in the middle left turn lane. I called the dispatch and told them it was dangerous driver in one of the pickup trucks for people with too much testosterone!!! He was headed to a new home construction area with a large gas heater in the rear of his pickem'up truck.

    The best handling of the zippering together of two lanes reducing to one was in Tennessee. There was large sign on the roadside that said Merge NOW! People alternated and filled into the right lane. It worked so much better without groups running up far to the front of the line and then holding the polite lane drivers back while they bull their way in.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    >It basically exists to catch speeders.

    Ohio used to have one on the old Route 40 west of Columbus. I think they outlawed Mayors Courts and put them out of business. There was something about the policeman and mayor were related

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    I have seem many displays of aggression from Ram truck drivers. Is it a character type that buys these trucks with the "Ram" image.

    Interesting. I've seen the same thing. Until I read your post, I had assumed that these guys just didn't like BMWs. I guess they don't like Buicks, either.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    What's kinda interesting about this is, in some areas they actually encourage drivers to drive right up to the merge point, then merge in. The theory is, this is less of a bottleneck than everyone merging early.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Seems like a good court case to me. Lots of ways a radar gun can be off by that llittle.

    In most smaller cities/towns in the Midwest, the speed drops as you go through town. I can understand that. The ononous cases are where the speed limit changes several times in a short span--seems designed to be a ticket generator.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    I think I may have told this story. About a year or so ago going to work I happened on a construction zone where the right lane was closed. Traffic was all backed up in the left lane and not appearing to be moving, the right lane was clear.

    I decided to get in the right lane pass all that crap, make a right turn on a side street just before the construction site and take an alternative route. As I was passing that traffic some idiot at the very lasy minute decided to move from the left lane into the right to block me. He was a bit late and almost clipped me as I have to swerve off the road to avoid hitting him (her?).

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    I thought that pretty much summed up Ohio...
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Americans can't zipper.

    If you want to see Ram tailgating, spend a few days in Atlanta...or non-metro area WA state for that matter. There's indeed a mental factor there.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    In most smaller cities/towns in the Midwest, the speed drops as you go through town. I can understand that.

    This isn't a case of a small town or city out in the rural areas, this is in a rather high density suburban setting. A type of setting where unless you knew the boarders between towns you would never know when you went from one to the other.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Ah, Ohio AKA Microwave alley.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • shriftyshrifty Member Posts: 255
    I've seen some rather decent zippering in NYC, specifically coming from I78 into the Holland Tunnel, I believe it is 9 toll lanes down to 2, and have almost always seen it work perfectly. Even in Queens/Bronx/Brooklyn I see zippering that is quite predictable, and I am at peace driving there.

    On the other hand, I wish it were so where I live, people are completely clueless as to how the merging process operates. It is actually almost a... for the lack of a better way to say it, a reverse zipper where you zip from the back up to the merge point where you should actually start the zippering. Some people merge in way too early, to have someone pass them up and try to merge in 3 - 5 cars ahead of them, which continues on up to the merge point. Stupid I know, but that's how it uh, "works" around here.
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    The theory is, this is less of a bottleneck than everyone merging early.

    As others have said, this is called the zipper method. It makes complete sense and is much more efficient but it is tough on those who like to prepare early.

    There are several good explanations of the process out there if one does a google search.
  • jensadjensad Member Posts: 388
    Thanks for your posts which are very informative. You are one of the good one's...I salute you sir!

    Thank you

    jensad
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Partly sunny day here today, nicest Sunday in weeks...and the idiots were out. Not fast and crazy idiots like other places have, but northwest style - slow and oblivious idiots. Several people going 10-20 under the limit, weaving around, stopping while turning, holding up huge lines of cars, etc. Got to use the fintail's horn 3 times.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Ran into a driver in his own world yesterday morning. First, I pulled up behind him at a freeway off ramp, at a red light with a big sign "NO RIGHT TURN ON RED". Of course, he turns right on red. Traffic laws don't exist his His World. That's good for a couple of quick horn bleeps, to wake him up. On top of it, it's a dark, rainy morning and he doesn't have his lights on. (Pretty common that morning, saw at least a dozen cars w/o lights in a 5 mile freeway stretch.) Driving safety doesn't exist in His World, either. I catch up to him at the next light, a few blocks up. So turning right on red did him no good at all. We go on to the next light, and both go into left turn lane (has a turn arrow). Arrow turns green. He sits there, fidgeting with something next to him. I wait a few seconds, but I know it's a quick arrow so I give him another bleep. Finally he turns.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Soon everyone will have GPS in their cars and they'll be able to track speeders anywere and anytime. The could by default send a speeding ticket to the registered owner of any vehicle going 10mph or more over the posted speed limit on highways. Heck, they could simply use the maximum possible speed limit (65mph in Ohio) and automatically send ticket to folks going over 75mph anywhere in the State. I'm sure if every day people received tickets in the mail the morning commute would be a little slower!
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Seems to me that would make " inconsiderate" the RULE and hopefully not the EXCEPTION, that we think it is,
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    >they could simply use the maximum possible speed limit (65mph in Ohio) and automatically send ticket to folks going over 75mph anywhere in the State.

    Don't suggest that too loudly: the legislators in Ohio are looking to grab money and power any way they can. They won't undo the red light and speed cameras. They would of course exempt themselves from getting in the mail citations. They exempt themselves from pay cuts, benefit cuts, and even give themselves ability to buy retirement years in the state's weekend pension plans at an 80% discount! We know they'd exempt themselves from citations.

    It would just be a money maker like the current red light cameras without a benefit in safety.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    So anyone will be able to issue a ticket to anyone else. Yeah, the bought-off suit who puts that into law will deserve a one way field trip to a gallows...I volunteer to pull the lever :shades: :sick: :lemon:

    Slower commutes aren't what is needed.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    Actually, I meant by "slower commutes" was that there won't be the crazies out there driving over 75mph. Would it make money for Ohio...sure, why not? Just like any other "sin tax" Like smoking, nobody is forcing someone to drive over 75mph. If someone makes the choice to drive over 75mph, then they can't complain when the $100 ticket charges get mailed to them. Just like smoking. If someone makes the choice to smoke, then they shouldn't complain about paying so much tax on cigerettes. Why not have the speeders pay more to the state? Plus you'd need less highway patrols, so you'd save money there too.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    edited March 2011
    Why is 75 some kind of cut-off point? If speed limits were really about safety, nobody would go over 45.

    I bet smoking costs society a lot more than speeding, I can't compare them.

    I saw a woman applying eyeliner while driving an Explorer this morning...IMO that's infinitely more deserving of a ticket than someone cruising along an interstate at 75 or 80.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I just used 75mph as 10mph over the 65mph state speed limit. That way there is no question if they're over the limit. And you're right about there being other things affecting traffic safety, but speed is an easier one to enforce then putting on eye liner ;) If you make a law that can't be enforced then there's no point in having it.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    And at the same time, laws that can't be justified and defended shouldn't exist either, and the people who create them should be held accountable for their actions.

    Being easy doesn't justify obsessive enforcement.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    I'm sure if every day people received tickets in the mail the morning commute would be a little slower!

    If my morning commute went any slower we would all be going backwards.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • the_big_althe_big_al Member Posts: 1,079
    and I would cry foul at the intrusion of even more govt exploitation into my life. The red light and speed camera's and speed traps are bad enough. Now with a speed monitoring GPS, I have them with me wherever I go watching what ever I do?

    That my friends is not what this country is about. It's just one small step to them tracking my every move. Do you REALLY want that? The freedoms we so much enjoy would then be lost. I say no thank you. The govt already intrudes enough.
  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I just think it would be a way for the government to save money. Right now a lot of money is spent watching for speeders, buying radar guns, training on their usage, etc... If we can use technology, then we can free up police for other work, or reduce the number of police needed.

    And if you're worried about "big brother" watching your every move, well they can do that now if you have a cell phone with GPS!

    Plus if you think about it, if you have a 20 mile commute on the highway, it would take you 18 1/2 minutes at 65mph and 16 minutes at 75mph, or a difference of about 2 1/2 minutes longer going at 65mph. So I don't see how gaining the extra 2 1/2 minutes is worth the increased risk of an accident. If technology can help in enforcing something as clear-cut as a speed limit, I think it's worth it. And for those folks needing the extra 2 1/2 minutes, I say just leave earlier in the morning :P
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    And if you're worried about "big brother" watching your every move, well they can do that now if you have a cell phone with GPS!

    There are ways to avoid that.

    If technology can help in enforcing something as clear-cut as a speed limit, I think it's worth it.

    Well if you really want technology to enforce the speed limit and make things safer I would think tha technology is there to tell the car what the speed limit is and have the onboard computer limit the speed the car can do.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    That's a good idea too. With more and more cars having onboard computers, maybe they should limit the computers to only allow them to go up to a certain speed, say 75mph.
  • tjc78tjc78 Member Posts: 16,951
    maybe they should limit the computers to only allow them to go up to a certain speed, say 75mph.

    Great idea!! So a person out on a two laner in the midwest (where SLs can be 70) can't safely pass a semi doing 10 under (or can't maintain speed on inclines). There are very few cars made today that can't safely travel at speeds over 75. Heck in Montana the interstate SL is 75.

    2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic

  • bobw3bobw3 Member Posts: 2,989
    I was using 75mph for cars driving in Ohio, since it only has a 65mph max speed limit. It would have to be adjusted based on the State max speed limit. That's why the GPS idea might be better, since it would identify both the location and speed of the car.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    That's why the GPS idea might be better, since it would identify both the location and speed of the car.

    About a year ago, there was talk in a State out west, Oregon maybe, of using GPS in cars to track miles travelled and thus a way to tax for road use. It is not out of the realm that that could happen and be mandated on a national level given our fed governmernt's continuing intrusion into our lives.
  • euphoniumeuphonium Member Posts: 3,425
    Freedoms we enjoy would be lost

    You would still have your freedom, but you would no longer have anonymity
    & if you are violating the law, why should anonymity shield you from enforcement?
Sign In or Register to comment.