Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

snakeweasel

there's all kinds of problems with your logic, where to start?

Well you can start where there is a real problem with my logic.

First, if someone is USED to a certain speed then that means they have been driving it regularly, comfortably, for an extended period of time without incident.

Just because someone is used to a certain speed and has no incidents does not mean it is safe to be driving at that speed.

Why would that speed suddenly be unsafe just because they spend 2 weeks or 2 months walking around at 3 to 5 MPH?

Well first tell me where I made such a statement.

If I drive everywhere on the freeway for 2 months at 100MPH, and get away with it, will 100 MPH suddenly seem slow to me?

It would, its called velocitation but it would take a bit of time not suddenly.

snakeweasel

But wait a minute, if the light is red, you don't have to worry about oncoming traffic at all

Gee you are right there is never any circumstances where the oncoming traffic has a green light and you have a red. I guess all those "on coming traffic has longer green" signs were just put up to keep the Department of Public Works employees busy.

andres3

So yes faster speeds would result in more damage and therefore bigger claims.

Discounting the variable of FREQUENCY, which we all now know is that slower drivers tend to get in more accidents, more often, which therefore leads to bigger claims and bigger damage in the long run.

so while one high speed accident may cause 3X as much damage, the slow speed accidents occurring with 10X more frequency would still cost you 3.33 times as much money!

andres3

I have not seen any such sign "oncoming traffic has longer green" in all my years of driving, and mostly that's in CA, but also I've been around in Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and never seen such a sign.

Why on god's green earth would you make opposite directions have differing lengths of green time? I could understand if one's green came a bit later because a left turn signaled lane had more cars in it, but they should most certainly both go red at the same time.

backy

That is very close to one of my motivations for favoring cars with good crash protection... to avoid having someone in my family RECEIVE a death benefit payout. And avoid receiving a death benefit payout on one of my loved ones.

backy

What a remarkable coincidence! You were on the same road at the same time as fintail, and got stopped by the same "emphasis" patrol. How about that!

snakeweasel

Not discounting it just understanding it. The variable of frequency is meaningless unless you know the frequency of travel at certain speeds. If 60% of all accidents happen at or below 50 MPH but 70% of driving is below that speed then not only does higher speed causes more damage it also causes a higher frequency per mile driven.

In short forget the total number of accidents at a certain speed, look at the frequency per mile driven in comparible circumstances.

snakeweasel

You mean you never seen this sign? Or never heard of the "yellow trap"? Its usually where one direction of traffic has to clear an area prior to the intersection and they have two sets of lights. The most common circumstance would be railroad crossings where the tracks run along one of the roads. It can also be found in other circumstances.

the_big_al

I wish the populace here would learn to zipper. As well as finding the gas pedal once the light turns green. There's a section of road that goes from two lanes down to one and it's a nightmare if there is traffic. Clueless drivers that stay in the ending lane until the last second and don't prepare to merge. And then clueless drivers in the continuing lane that will speed up to prevent the cars in the ending lane to merge properly. It's a mess after the stoplight.

Add to that the fact that the SL is 55 and my turn off is more than half a mile away. It's rare if I'm in traffic that I'll reach 50. Lackadaisical driving is a plague.

fintail

The gas pedal thing is a big problem, indeed. If I go a certain way home, I have to go through a light with a turn arrow to turn on to my street. The city, in its infinite wisdom, has the light on a timer rather than a sensor, so you have to get going or not all cars will go through. I swear it takes so many people several seconds to get moving. A few of those, and several cars are left behind.

Another zipper problem here is when everyone gets into the open lane way too early, causing a backup a mile or more before the closed lane.

fintail

I've never seen or heard of that sign,either.

tjc78

You mean you never seen this sign?

We have an intersection near my office with that sign. When you are the one with the extended green, BE VERY CAREFUL!!! as the people on the other side don't read the sign. They see the light turn red and think you are going to stop and then make their left turn right in front of you. When you both slam on the brakes to avoid colliding, there is usually some really dirty looks on both sides. I usually point up to the sign saying "read the !!@#$$% sign!. Its a really bad intersection and I have had more than a few close calls (and everyone else in the office) when left turners don't read the sign.

euphonium

I would like some data that supports your logic, and the insurance industries.

Logic dictates that the Black driving record is a lot more difficult to defend in court than a person with a clean driving record.

If you want more data, you can research the Insurance Services Office & just ask your insurance company for statistics. Conservative drivers of conservative vehicles qualify for lower premiums & that is good.

stever

Someone's bad driving record may not be admissible though.

andres3

Logic dictates that the Black driving record is a lot more difficult to defend in court than a person with a clean driving record.

BUT, and that's a big BUT, your logic requires the assumption that someone with a black record will ever require defending in court! I'd argue that most people with black driving records have PRISTINELY clean accident records.

They simply will never NEED to be defended in court, as they won't ever be involved in anything other than a traffic stop by a revenue generation machine and/or revenue generation cop.

andres3

If I was a judge, I'd allow driving record as pertains to accidents to be admitted. I'd not allow irrelevant driving records such as amounts of times a CHP officer decided to earn a few bucks for the Governator to be admitted into court.

stever

I don't know - some courts might allow it. Seems prejudicial though (fair trial?), and perhaps more suitable to bring up when the judge hands out punishment.

Looking at all the repeat dui drivers out there, something isn't working though.

andres3

Looking at all the repeat dui drivers out there, something isn't working though.

the problem is that our government spends all their time on "traffic court" which is another name for "revenue generation," rather than on serious useful issues and topics, like getting drunk drivers off the road.

DUI's should be a criminal case in a REAL court, complete with real punishments in prison, not the joke and the mockery of a court room that traffic court has become with fake judges (traffic referees).

fintail

Probably 50% of the people I saw driving this afternoon were holding a phone. Aren't the local revenue enforcement officers supposed to be going after this? I guess it is easier to speedtrap.

Also saw a Highlander make a left turn from a straight only lane...I won't describe the driver other than being of the fairer sex.

Lots of dorks out on Harleys on this sunny afternoon, maybe 10% of them not in a short sleeved shirt and jeans or shorts with no other gear. Nice. They all had helmets, anyway.

andres3

Those Harley riders like to say that their baseball cap like helmets are just as good as the full head gear you'll see sport bikers wearing. I just shake my head as that defies common sense.

Are those top of the head only helmets even Snell 2000+ approved?

ruking1

It really doesn't matter much. The NHTSA has noted that even in these consecutive periods of best ever (SAFEST) accident and fatalities rates, since they have been recording this: motorcycle accidents and fatalities remain at epidemic statistical levels. This is especially true for the so called baby boomers.

So find a way to be the beneficiary on the insurance policy.

andres3

Are there any statistics that differentiate how many motorcycle riders kill themselves (at fault) vs. how many are killed by other incompetents (not at fault).

I know that either way your dead, but it would be interesting to see how many die because they think they are expert riders with little experience, or because some segments of the population can't tell the difference between the brake and gas pedals.

ruking1

Allow me to link the source material data (pulldown menu should get you in the correct ball park FARS data

fintail

The dorks also say "loud pipes save lives". I doubt they prevent the average airhead in a Range Rover from pulling out in front of them.

Fatality stats aren't even what's on my mind - it's the simple casualties. At least the sportbike crowd seems to wear more gear. Skin grafts aint cheap, and old bones break easier. And guess who gets to pay?

euphonium

When bikers inc'l pedal pushers stop defying vehicles and stop thinking they deserve to be on the same road impeding cars and trucks. They may be entitled but not deserving. :mad:

ruking1

"...The dorks also say "loud pipes save lives". I doubt they prevent the average airhead in a Range Rover from pulling out in front of them.
"...

It also works both ways (more also). A long line of bikers (60-70 was my swag) where left lane camping on one major (some would say minor, 3 lanes each way) bridge. I do not think there was a muffler in the group. As I was passing the line of bikers, all of a sudden one biker with a passenger: no look no signal, (probably) no care, pulls out in front of my fully noise and emissions compliant car. I had to take evasive action to avoid him crashing into me.

fintail

No doubt the posers were putting out so much noise that they couldn't have heard you if they tried.

Didn't see so many of them today, in fact commuting today was relatively painless in general. Most annoying was randomly sequenced lights, an insane problem in these parts.

ruking1

Either way it would have been his fault (probably with greater catastrophic consequences than with a car), no signal, unsafe lane change.

snakeweasel

Those Harley riders like to say that their baseball cap like helmets are just as good as the full head gear you'll see sport bikers wearing.

I rarely see sport bikers wearing wearing helments.

fintail

Virtually every sportbiker I see in my area has a full helmet - as this state has a helmet law. Harley riders on the other hand - half of them wear the fakey German style helmets that become cool when you watch too many lame 70s biker gang flicks :shades:

snakeweasel

IL doesn't have any helment laws. Every other sport biker I see wear little more than shorts a T-shirt and sandles.

fintail

Yeah, we get the squids here too. They and some of the Harley crowd are equally guilty - a helmet, but not a single piece of other gear. The tank top on Harley look seems to be especially popular. Higher insurance rates for us all :sick:

andres3

I find that more people become LLC's when there's a lot of traffic. Kind of a MOB mentality similar to if a mob started killing people, then everybody else thinks it's okay to committ murder too! You get one LLC, then another, then a 3rd, suddenly Mr. 4, 5, and six think they can get away with LLCing.

I do more good for traffic enforcement on the road flashing my lights and making hand gestures at LLC's than the entire batallion of California Highway Patrol! Traffic flows just a tad more smoothly thanks to my efforts. That tad is small, but with a few more left lane courtesy enforcers on my side, it would grow into something wonderful.

fintail

From what I have seen in CA, I would be leery of looking for fights on the road.

The best LL courtesy enforcer would be an old power wagon with a huge engine and gigantic steel plates for bumpers. Just move the wannabe traffic deputies out of the way. Pit maneuver them into a ravine and keep going :shades:

andres3

Where can I purchase one of those old power wagons you mention? How much?

:P

fintail

This is what I have in mind




Later models work, too. They are Mopar though, don't know if you want that :P

andres3

Later models work, too. They are Mopar though, don't know if you want that

Yeah, gonna have to get the extended warranty on that, or no deal!
Still might not be able to go fast enough to run people off the road and fast lane, and of course, breakdowns would be an issue.

But if I have to get into a Mopar again, crashy derby LLC enforcment would be the best way.

fintail

Big modern engine in a strong old truck...just move the slowpokes and be on your way, nobody will be the wiser. Really, some of them have it coming.

hammerhead

You get enough traffic on a multi-lane road, and LLCing becomes a moot point - there simply isn't enough concrete to accomodate the number of vehicles otherwise.
You better be careful with your hand gestures... and how about just slowing down and waiting for an opening, and leaving the enforcement up to the professionals?

euphonium

WSP: "Why do you stay in the Left lane?
Me: "Because it is a smoother lane & I'm not holding anybody up because I go the limit.
WSP:"We still have a law against LLC."
Me: "You're correct, but When I drive the limit, why should I yield to a speeder?"
WSP:" Good question, we arrest them too. What you say makes sense, but still the law...."

hammerhead

Me: "Because it is a smoother lane & I'm not holding anybody up because I go the limit.

Incorrect.
Just because you're going the limit doesn't mean you're not holding someone up. It's their choice to speed, and enforcement is not your job.
Get out of their way. You're breaking the law.

andres3

You get enough traffic on a multi-lane road, and LLCing becomes a moot point - there simply isn't enough concrete to accomodate the number of vehicles otherwise.

I don't agree taht this is a common occurrence. I think most of the time, the traffic and congestion is simply caused by too many LLCers.

Even in a really bad scenario, the slow lane can move at 5 MPH, the 2nd lane 10 MPH, 3rd lane 15, and the fast lane 20+.

what LLCer's do to traffic is the reality of Left/Fast lane moving 5 MPH, 2nd lane from left going about the same, 2nd from right going about the same, and slow/right lane goign 10-15 or 20+! :sick:

fintail

As if you would question a LEO :P

hammerhead

Didn't say it was common, just reality. And more common in the bigger cities where infrastructure hasn't kept up with traffic volume (fintail's neck of the woods comes to mind).

And in your 'really bad scenario', it just doesn't happen that way. Too much stop & go to get any average lane speed.

Congestion is caused by too much traffic. You can't tell who the LLCers are until they get the chance to prove it.

euphonium

And you don't???

snakeweasel

I find that more people become LLC's when there's a lot of traffic. Kind of a MOB mentality

I don't think thats the case. As traffic builds up more and more have to use lanes further to the left. Until every lane is bumper to bumper traffic, its not due to LLC's but due to massive amounts of traffic on the roads.

Also stop with the flashing of lights and hand jesters as it only makes the situation worse and angers up the blood.

snakeweasel

And more common in the bigger cities where infrastructure hasn't kept up with traffic volume

I would argue that, in many cases the roads can handle traffic volumes a majority of the time, just that at peak times its not enough. My commute takes me on a interstate thats 4 lanes in each direction. Traffic slows to a crawl during rush hour, however during other times of the day and weekends there is very little traffic on it.

For rush hour it needs to be 6 to 8 lanes in each direction but non rush hour it only needs two.

fintail

If I was insulted or felt like I was wronged, I would just take the ticket and go to court or maybe hire a shyster lawyer. No good can come from yapping it up to a LEO with a chip on his shoulder.

hammerhead

I agree. I guess I didn't clarify the 'peak volume' issue. I think regardless of the number of lanes available, the whole thing bogs down during AM & PM drives. Add a fender bender (or worse), or a disabled vehicle, plus all the rubberneckers that go with them, and it's a recipe for slow going.

bobw3

Any of you guys in really bad daily rush hour traffic consider car pooling, using public transportation or leaving for work before or after the rush? Are there no other options? Luckily I live where I can avoid rush hour buy coming to work an 1 1/2 earlier. The key to reducing rush hour isn't making more lanes, but reducing the amount of cars with only one passenger in them.