Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
You're so eloquent in your argument, how could I not be convinced how right you are? And you're obviously thinking clearly so you will consider my arguments before making a reply. I love reasoned discourse on the internet.
Go fuck yourself.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
I hope you die impaled in steel and glass in a single vehicle car wreck, wrought from your awesome driving habits-- and do it soon before you take anyone else out with you.
As someone who has had a close family member die in a car accident, I think you are psychotic.
-
As someone who has had a close family member die in a car accident, I think you are psychotic.
Sorry for your loss. I've lost people too. All those more reason asshole drivers need to be taken out from behind steering wheels.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
who knows what state
Irrelevant, the law is consistent between states.
@Lorne_Kates said:
who knows which country
Look at my hat! It's obviously Britain.
@Lorne_Kates said:
separated freeway
Say what? That's a standard two-way country road at the start of a section with two lanes in the direction the photo is looking. The speed limit is most likely 100km/h. Those double lines on the right are all that's separating you from a high speed head-on collision.
@Lorne_Kates said:
instead of a in-town two way roadway
Again, no difference. The law applies to every road 80km/h or above.
@Lorne_Kates said:
Go print it out an iron spike and fuck yourself with it.
Okay, now I see what you're doing, you're just trying to prove to Jeff that there's no way he can make people like you civilised.
-
Go fuck yourself.
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
But if driving in a particular lane so a dimfuck can speed makes me**emphasized text the asshole, then I think your definition of "asshole" is off.
Are you under an impression there can only be one asshole at most at any given situation?
Assholishness is not exclusive, in this particular case you are both assholes, he's a slightly bigger one perhaps.
-
Yes, it feels good to fuck with people who are driving like knobs. I've taken great pleasure in it before. But for someone who claims to be all about safety, you're advocating pissing off someone who's already showing a disregard for their and others' wellbeing, which can be very dangerous.
The prudent thing to do in that situation is to not piss them off any more, at which point they might do something stupid that will put you, them and other road users in danger, but to get out of the way and hope you don't hit the burning wreckage of their next overtake attempt. The exception to this would be if it is also dangerous for you to move back into a "slower" lane, in which case you carry on at what you deem a sensible speed until you can let them past.
I bet if you had a motorbike you'd be one of the people who got a model the police use, in white, and went at exactly at the speed limit in the overtaking lane while wearing a fluorescent jacket with Polite on the back
-
That sounds like a Lorne_Kates thing to do.
-
You may not be familiar with the landscape of the US outside of the major cities.
Well, actually I am.
So, no license would mean that my housing and employment choices would be severely limited. It's just a fact of life in the US - a car is nearly a necessity.
Yes, so you would be encouraged quite strongly to not lose your license, yes?
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
@loopback0 said:
If there's space to do so, and you're not going so fast you'll fly into the back of traffic in that lane then yes, you should. At least then the idiot flashing his lights behind you can fuck off down the road and annoy someone else.
I needed to make a left turn. So not only should I not, but it would have been way worse for me because then I'd have to swing back over two lanes of traffic to do so.
Give no quarter to idiots. Ever.
If you're driving in the left67 lane and you're impeding traffic, no matter whether there's a law to keep right68 or not, you should (1) move right69 or (2) put your fucking turn signal on because then at least the angry person behind you knows you're driving that way because you're turning left70, not because you're a shithead.
[67] Right lane, in countries where you drive to the left
[68] Left, in countries where you drive to the left
[69] Ibid.
[70] Ibid. 67
-
Ibid.
TIL. You should learn too, because I think you are not using it quite right.
-
Right lane, in countries where you drive to the left
I prefer to use the terms “near side lane” and “off side lane”. The point is that whichever arbitrary side of the road you drive on, the same overall principles hold. Just flipped left/right.
-
@anotherusername said:
Ibid.
TIL. You should learn too, because I think you are not using it quite right.
Sure, I guess the "proper" usage would not use "Ibid." referring back to an explanatory footnote, since it's specifically referring to a source. *shrug*
I prefer to use the terms “near side lane” and “off side lane”. The point is that whichever arbitrary side of the road you drive on, the same overall principles hold. Just flipped left/right.
"Near" and "off" don't clearly refer to either particular side in either case, as far as I can tell. My gut is telling me which is which, but I can't justify it logically based on their meanings or any common usage I've encountered.
By "near", you mean "lane of your own direction which is farthest from the lanes of opposing traffic"?
-
By "near", you mean "lane of your own direction which is farthest from the lanes of opposing traffic"?
I mean “near to the edge of the road”.
-
Then why not just use "outer" and "inner"?
-
Roads there don't have edges on both sides?
-
Traffic going in the same direction usually travels only near one of the edges.
-
So "near" means "nearest to the edge to which my direction of traffic travels nearest"?
-
That's how I understand it.
-
TIL... "near" and "off" are apparently correct terminology to refer to sides of a car (in the UK, at least).
I didn't know if it meant near the middle ("fast" lane), near the driver's side of the car, or near to the side you drive to. Generally here I've always heard them called "driver's side" and "passenger's side", disregarding the fact that most vehicles can have at least 1 passenger sitting on the driver's side (and disregarding also the fact that a vehicle's driver is also a passenger).
-
Only if you're retarded enough to believe that "Don't try to stop an armed robber" is tacit acceptance of armed robbery.
No, I reject this analogy as unreasonable. That's more like saying don't try to pull speeders over until a traffic cop can come along.
-
disregarding the fact that most vehicles can have at least 1 passenger sitting on the driver's side
Those terms refer to the front row, you know.
-
Move the fuck over instead of being a dangerous, self-important entitled prick.
I pretty much have to drive in the wee hours of the morning to have roads that empty around here. That just isn't practical on busy roads, as has already been pointed out.
-
@anotherusername said:
disregarding the fact that most vehicles can have at least 1 passenger sitting on the driver's side
Those terms refer to the front row, you know.
Pretty sure they just refer to where the driver sits. I.e. the "driver's side" is the side the driver sits on and "passenger side" is just the name they called the other side.
-
I can't find any sources on etymolgy of those terms so I can't prove you wrong.
I still don't believe you however."passenger side" is just the name they called the other side.
This looks too contrived.
-
Well, what else would they call it? "Driver's side" is obvious, but the other side needed a name too.
-
I imagine they used a coupe when they invented those words, so the choice was very obvious.
-
I imagine they used a coupe when they invented those words, so the choice was very obvious.
Sounds like a real coup of English engineering.
-
Where I live, sales tax varies by county
Amateur. Here in Arizona, you have to worry about sales tax at the state level, some counties have sales tax, and many cities impose sales tax. Now, imagine trying to keep track of what you will be paying for sales tax in a metro-area is like. Am I in Avondale or Glendale? Phoenix or Tolleson? Goodyear or Buckeye? What is the effective sales tax rate in each of those cities? Then just belgium trying to track that and just figure on about 10% sales tax. Sometimes you'll end up surprised and pay only 8 or 9%.
Yes, I know I'm a few days behind. Deal with it.
-
No, I reject this analogy as unreasonable. That's more like saying don't try to pull speeders over until a traffic cop can come along.
Okay, so we'll go with "Don't stand unmoving in the doorway when an armed robber is trying to leave after a robbery" or something. Whatever, you're just trolling. I'm sure you get the point, or shot, whichever occurs first.
-
I pretty much have to drive in the wee hours of the morning to have roads that empty around here. That just isn't practical on busy roads, as has already been pointed out.
God dammit does nobody have a brain here? Jesus fuck if the lane to the left is full it's full and you can't move over you dumb shit.
-
God dammit does nobody have a brain here? Jesus fuck if the lane to the left is full it's full and you can't move over you dumb shit.
I think you got some @Lorne_Kates on you.
-
Yeah; as far as I can tell the sales tax here varies by county, city, and suburb... I think the poorest parts of town have a 0.5% lower sales tax rate or something like that.
-
@boomzilla said:
No, I reject this analogy as unreasonable. That's more like saying don't try to pull speeders over until a traffic cop can come along.
Okay, so we'll go with "Don't stand unmoving in the doorway when an armed robber is trying to leave after a robbery" or something. Whatever, you're just trolling. I'm sure you get the point, or shot, whichever occurs first.
I get your point. You're just wrong. And no, that's not trolling.
-
@boomzilla said:
I pretty much have to drive in the wee hours of the morning to have roads that empty around here. That just isn't practical on busy roads, as has already been pointed out.
God dammit does nobody have a brain here? Jesus fuck if the lane to the left is full it's full and you can't move over you dumb shit.
OK, that one was just trolling.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
lots are highly licensed. Most of their accidents just take out them and their passengers. Even then, flight accidents are vanishingly rare****strong text compared to car accidents. I don't even know the stats of being killed on the ground by a plane crash. Everything possible has been done to mitigate those fatalities-- highly trained pilots, rigid control of airspace, extensive navigation and safety equipment in the cockpit, autopilots, etc, etc.
Also, survival probabilities in aircraft accidents are... Not high... And even if you do survive, you're probably injured badly enough that you can't fly any more. And even if you can, the FAA probably won't let you fly any more.
Trust me, I'm with an organization that deals with that kind of stuff a lot...
There's basically a high Darwin-rate - bad pilots don't usually stay pilots for long
-
"Near" and "off" don't clearly refer to either particular side in either case, as far as I can tell.
"Near" is the side nearest the curb.
(Yeah, quite likely ).
-
bad pilots don't usually stay pilots for long
"There old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots."
-
That applies to electricians too. (Don't assume that the power is off, confirm it by testing. Without using body parts…)
-
Filed Under: You know what really turns me on? 120VAC
-
Ok - have 6-8" crack in windscreen above-ish the rear-view mirror...
[poll]
- Fix it
- Forget it
- Smash it out and drive the way our Warrior Forefathers intended
- _GLASNOST_FOUND_
[/poll]
Filed under: This poll brought to you by the kind people at VDOT
-
Important question: is it covert by insurance? I would call up the glass guys to have it fixed or replaced just because it will cost me nothing even if they come on location.
I'll guess I'll just go with the bullshit option then
-
is it covert by insurance?
I am trying to be covert w.r.t. insurance... yes. ;)
It is covered though and at some deductible lower than normal, and theoretically with less "penalty" from the insurer because "windshield" and because I can blame the local highway authority for leaving a gravel-ly mess behind their construction project.
Radio traffic even reported the mess this morning... "lower visibility because of the dust kicked up"
-
Ow ... windshield is generally totally covered here. Side or back windows not, that can be expensive.
-
Ow ... windshield is generally totally covered here. Side or back windows not, that can be expensive.
It's been like 20 years since I needed to (I think) and whatever the cost is, its pretty minor, but my car is starting to be worth a pretty minor amount too...
So, pro-"fix-it" folks - why?
-
So, pro-"fix-it" folks - why?
Bonded windscreens provide some structural integrity.
I assume where you are doesn't have some sort of annual inspection which would fail with a significant crack in the windscreen?
-
No inspection.
Didn't you have that tire that was falling apart...?
-
That was @Frostcat IIRC.
-
and because I can blame the local highway authority for leaving a gravel-ly mess behind their construction project.
Yeah...I took Georgetown Pike yesterday just to avoid that mess.