Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
Constantly swapping it from 60 to 50 to 60 to 40 to 60 to 40 to 50 etc at each gantry makes that much worse.
The times the limit drops to 50 or 40 and stays there for the whole stretch of road it does mostly work but those times are rare.
-
There's also a surprise WTF near the beginning.
Was that guy at least signaling to turn left?
I need to fix/replace my dashcam and get back to catching footage of idiots.
I want a dashcam now. What should I buy?
variable speed limit
TRWTF?
I've seen it in school zones. 50kmph, unless lights are flashing (during school hours), in which case 40kmph.
And increased fines.
And if it's a "community safety zone", the fines are doubled on top of that.
@can't be arsed to scroll back up because Discourse will fuck up because I watched an embedded video in this thread said:
Lowering speed limits
Yes, fuck that up every asshole they have or you can rip them.
The roads are built. Very smart and talented engineers come along and assess the roads, and give it a speed limit that already takes into account variable weather, visibility, road surface, curves, etc, etc-- and then lower that speed limit a notch just to be extra safe.
Then some backfuck politician comes along for one of two raisins:
- They want to steal-- I mean raise-- more money from speeding fines in that area
- Someone influential person living in their district has bribed them enough money-- sorry, contributed to their campaign-- to get the speed limit reduced because they don't like people driving on "their" road.
The speed limit is then dropped well below any sane limit. New signs are put up, and there's magically a speed blitz on that street for months on end.
Fuck that shit.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
I want a dashcam now. What should I buy?
I have this one. Decent quality video, small enough to sit behind the rear view mirror out of the way.
Transcend Information, Inc.
Transcend is a globally recognized leader in the manufacture of storage, multimedia and industrial products. Established in Taiwan, Transcend offers a full line of memory modules, flash cards, USB flash drives, portable hard drives, solid state drives, car video recorders, Apple solutions,...
-
Constantly swapping it from 60 to 50 to 60 to 40 to 60 to 40 to 50 etc at each gantry makes that much worse.
That means they're having real congestion problems. The stretch of the M42 between J3A and J9 is pretty desperate, and I purposefully time when I go through to avoid the worst. The M62 is a bit better; the junctions are a bit further apart (though there are real hills instead, so lanes full of slow-moving freight vehicles is a problem there).
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
I want a dashcam now. What should I buy?
I have this one. Decent quality video, small enough to sit behind the rear view mirror out of the way.
Transcend is a globally recognized leader in the manufacture of storage, multimedia and industrial products. Established in Taiwan, Transcend offers a full line of memory modules, flash cards, USB flash drives, portable hard drives, solid state drives, car video recorders, Apple solutions,...
Thanks, I'll start with something like that. I'd love to eventually have one that also can record multiple cameras-- rear face, two side facing, one to monitor the dash itself-- maybe one on me-- and do a "Lorne drives around his psychotic neighborhood and mocks the fucking idiots who don't know how to drive" show.
-
what you see is what you pay, so the listed price already includes VAT and all other taxes if applicable.
That's impractical here in the US. Where I live, sales tax varies by county. New York has 61 counties. And for cars, you pay the sales tax the applies where you live, not where you bought it. So, every car advertisement would have to have this huge disclaimer telling every potential buyer what it might cost them.
Also, we pay sales tax on the purchase price minus the trade-in, not the whole purchase price. I think it's one of those laws written by the dealership lobbyist group to get the government to discourage people from privately selling their cars.
-
I think Seat is mostly Europe.
Apparently also Mexico--I was driving yesterday and saw an Ibiza with Mexican plates. Never had heard of the model or marque before.
-
Removing the VAT from the UK price is still ~£14k though
Perhaps it's to prep you for the horrible price you're going to be paying for gas.
-
you see one price advertised in the shop but you can't really estimate how much you will have to pay in the end.
Except that, by and large, everything is either untaxed, or taxed at the same rate, in any given state. Thus, in (say) Massachusetts, you know to add 5% to the cost of anything that's not tax-free.
It's a little annoying but it's not as if there's a maze of different rates.
-
In Australia we have "Keep left unless overtaking", which I think is a sensible rule. (This would obviously be "Keep right..." for countries where you drive on the right.)
It doesn't stop situations where all 3 lanes of the highway are occupied by cars doing exactly the same speed, usually on or just below the limit. Also, people seem to avoid the furthest left lane like their life depended on it so it's normally the least populated of the 3.
As for the speed limit there is a generally held belief, which has never been confirmed by the police, that you get an extra 10%.
-
As for the speed limit there is a generally held belief, which has never been confirmed by the police, that you get an extra 10%.
It's never been confirmed here either, but some recent leaked emails on the local's QuotaNotQuota said that 1 to 10kmph over the limit doesn't count towards any QuotaNotQuotas.
-
The solution isn't to selectively ignore the law. It's to fix it.
There are stupid laws. The best solution is to ignore them.
If everyone obeys stupid laws, it creates an illusion of content with the law. How do you imagine they would be fixed if everyone is apprently okay with them?Ad absurdum example: (I don't even care whether that's true but it's on the Internet so it must be)
In Memphis and New Orleans: man with flag must walk in front of women drivers.
Do you see many people obeying this?
inb4 this isn't enforced, it's a relic which no one has bothered to remove from the lawbook
-
As for the speed limit there is a generally held belief, which has never been confirmed by the police, that you get an extra 10%.
Here in the UK it's supposedly 10% + 3mph but I've never fancied testing it.
-
As for the speed limit there is a generally held belief, which has never been confirmed by the police, that you get an extra 10%.
That's probably to do with the hassle of prosecuting when there's a reasonable chance that the speedometer may have that sort of inaccuracy anyway. Round here, occasionally they have a blitz where they're stricter, but it's pretty rare. It's the scofflaws they want to catch, not average people.
-
I've never fancied testing it.
Here the only ones not doing ~70km/h in city limits (50km/h) are learner cars and
.
-
It doesn't stop situations where all 3 lanes of the highway are occupied by cars doing exactly the same speed, usually on or just below the limit. Also, people seem to avoid the furthest left lane like their life depended on it so it's normally the least populated of the 3.
No, it doesn't and such a situation is actually the norm.
Yes, this is exactly why I was bitching at @Lorne_Kates earlier. Having come from a country where people generally can't drive for shit but at least keep to the correct lane I find Australia
infuriatingfascinating.I believe the reason for such high rate of being a idiocy are the following:
- People are idiots.
- Only big trucks drive in the left lane. Just because there currently isn't a truck there doesn't mean there theoretically couldn't be one several hundreds of kilometers ahead so fuck it I'm staying in the right lane!
- At least in NSW left lanes have a tendency to randomly end and force you to merge into the right lane. Whoever figured that forcing the slow lane to merge into the fast lane was a buffoon.
-
There are stupid laws. The best solution is to ignore them.
Except that they end up being enforced sometimes, so you never know. Different localities will enforce differently. You might just get a cop having a bad day. On highways, you can typically go 10-15MPH over before you start getting into trouble. But still, if you see a cop somewhere, everyone slows down, because it's generally not worth the risk. It's fucking retarded and frankly evil (like I said, this is a relatively petty thing, but it sets a pattern of expectation of lawlessness in the government and that's bullshit that causes bigger problems).
-
if you see a cop somewhere, everyone slows down
You don't say?
More often everyone slows down to 10 below the limit, stupid fuckers, sometimes this includes me, cops are scary that way.
It's fucking retarded and frankly evil
What "it" refers to in this sentence? Speeding in general, maintaining 10-15 over the limit or slowing down when you see a cop?
this is a relatively petty thing
But in the context of what started this:
it's my decision to speed and I will have to deal with the consequences (in the ascending chance-of-happening order: more severe crash consequences if that crash happens; slightly bigger chance of accident due to not managing to brake on time; getting a fine; smaller chance of getting into an accident due to being a slow vehicle that everyone is trying to overtake; arriving at my destination faster).
Morons who drive in the left lane when right lanes are free or, worse, take up all of the lanes and drive with the same speed because "herp derp I drive the limit, no one is going to go faster anyway" are morons.
-
What "it" refers to in this sentence? Speeding in general, maintaining 10-15 over the limit or slowing down when you see a cop?
Haphazard enforcement of laws. On purpose.
But in the context of what started this:
Yeah, sure. I was using speed limits as an example of bad government.
-
Haphazard enforcement of laws.
While I agree in principle, I'd rather it stays as it is in regards to speeding.
On purpose.
Do you see any evidence this is done on purpose?
I think it's hard for a cop to single out someone if literally everyone drives at least 65 on a 50 street. So they go for those who speed above that and/or drive aggressively (which I think has far more benefit because those are the dangerous guys).
-
While I agree in principle, I'd rather it stays as it is in regards to speeding.
I'd rather that than rigid enforcement of existing ridiculous limits. Far better to have reasonable limits and enforcement thereof.
Do you see any evidence this is done on purpose?
Yes.
I think it's hard for a cop to single out someone if literally everyone drives at least 65 on a 50 street.
Just start pulling people over. True, most people may get by, but pretty soon they'd get the message. Either you mean to enforce it or you don't.
So they go for those who speed above that and/or drive aggressively (which I think has far more benefit because those are the dangerous guys).
No reason they can't continue to go after aggressive driving. But why not be honest about it?
-
No reason they can't continue to go after aggressive driving.
Do they actually do that where you live? I haven't seen them go after aggressive driving anywhere.
-
Not that I know of. I was accepting @obeselymorbid's argument at face value. Though at certain times of the year, the highway alert signs (there to warn of traffic accidents or Amber alerts or whatever) will say that they're enforcing something related to aggressive driving.
Supposedly it's a thing around here, but aside from the signs and other PR stuff, I'm not aware of any actual activities or results:
http://www.ghsa.org/html/resources/showcase/md1.htmlI know some MD cops...I should ask them.
-
Far better to have reasonable limits and enforcement thereof.
Agree. But I don't see the former happening, with all of the speed kills campaigns and an inherent conflict of interest - raise the limits and income from fines will probably drop. So I'd prefer not having the latter meanwhile.
@obeselymorbid said:
Do you see any evidence this is done on purpose?
Yes.
I don't want to doubt you, but what kind of purpose would that be?
-
I haven't seen them go after aggressive driving anywhere.
I think it's considerably more difficult to prove than speeding because it's kind of arbitrary.
-
Agree. But I don't see the former happening
Yes, yes...that's why we have forums on the internet where we can rant at windmills.
I don't want to doubt you, but what kind of purpose would that be?
They know the limits are ridiculous, but then they also end up with quotas and stuff. Or someone gets a bee in their bonnet or whatever and enforcement happens. Dedication to speed limits can also vary widely between jurisdictions. South Carolina and Florida are both notorious for speeding enforcement.
-
I think it's hard for a cop to single out someone if literally everyone drives at least 65 on a 50 street.
That's where camera-based enforcement works well. Digital cameras can keep up with that sort of thing quite capably, so beware…
-
It doesn't stop situations where all 3 lanes of the highway are occupied by cars doing exactly the same speed, usually on or just below the limit.
Are you suggesting that three lanes full of cars should merge into the rightmost lane? I hope you realize that they won't all fit. If you're talking about three lanes that are so far from capacity that they would fit into one lane, then there should be plenty of space to get around people."Stay left except to pass" only works on roads with few cars. Once it is at or near capacity, every lane is full and lane changing is more difficult.
-
I think here it's implemented pretty sensibly - there are a handful of stationary cameras with a warning sign 250 m before it. So you have to deliberately don't give a fuck to get caught.
As an aside my brother-in-law didn't believe the cameras were working and thought that they're just dummies. He was proven wrong by a letter with a photo of his car in the mail pretty soon.There are also mobile cameras that don't have warning signs. These used to be operated by a private entity but now, after that entity's failure to deliver next phase of the contract with more stationary cameras1, there are only 4 (four) left which are owned by police. So the chance of encountering one is slim, especially since they are reported on Waze pretty quick.
1They weren't in a hurry to install stationary ones because stationary cameras require a warning sign and only dumbfucks would get caught so there's not a lot of financial incentive to do that. They had a certain percentage of income from fines.
-
Are you suggesting that three lanes full of cars should merge into the rightmost lane?
I suspect he was talking about the times that the traffic is light enough that it doesn't need to be across all lanes, it's just people feel some need to sit in the middle or outer lanes and get in the way.
-
I know some MD cops...I should ask them.
Please do.
The thing that always has bugged me is the police in their hidey-holes just off the highway where the only thing they can catch is speeding... but not the yahoos whipping through 4 lanes at 90mph+
Some folks will spot the police at the last second and slam on their brakes... which obviously creates far more danger than Joe Briefcase puttering along at 77 mph who didn't see them in time.
The MD Staties seem to be doing a better job of this... and are most often driving circuits where they have some chance of catching or deterring the crazies. Also, their "hiding" places are now almost always in plain sight.
At least at the hours when I'm driving. I think half my morning commute is before they've come on duty. YMMV.
-
The most common thing I see is HOV lane enforcement on the 270 spur. There's a particular curve where there's a giant shoulder. There'll be a couple of trooper cars, with one guy out telling people to pull over and the others writing the tickets. A lot of people know that's where they wait, so they'll drive up and get out of the lane just before that curve.
-
The most common thing I see is HOV lane enforcement on the 270 spur
I know the spot well.
Haven't seen anybody there in a long time... are they State or Monkey-County police?
It usually works to my advantage because most people act like its HOV all the time and stay out even before it changes over.
Unfortunately when you get further up the HOV gets bogged down by folks driving Prii and singing "We are the World". Even when they're not passing the regular lanes.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Was that guy at least signaling to turn left?
No idea. I was too far away to tell.
@Lorne_Kates said:
I want a dashcam now. What should I buy?
For ~$40 G1W. In the ~$70 range the A118(-C) or the Mini 0805. Capacitors > batteries if you live somewhere that gets hot.
If you want a brand name, expect it to be in the ~$200 range
Dashcam Talk has comparison information.
-
He was proven wrong by a letter with a photo of his car in the mail pretty soon
Good thing they can't prove he was driving.
-
Are you suggesting that three lanes full of cars should merge into the rightmost lane? I hope you realize that they won't all fit. If you're talking about three lanes that are so far from capacity that they would fit into one lane, then there should be plenty of space to get around people.
False dilemma. What I see every day is patches of cars with all three lanes full, separated by half mile stretches without any cars at all. The patches normally clear up once one lane gets ahead of the others (usually because they want to move an outer lane in order to exit).
-
Good thing they can't prove he was driving.
Doesn't help here. The letter goes to the “registered keeper” of the vehicle, who has to either take the rap or identify who was driving.
-
-
Good thing they can't prove he was driving.
It's not necessary over here. It was debated when cameras were first introduced but the law settled on:
- no penalty points on the license, I guess at least partly because they didn't want to bother with finding out who was driving.
- a fine is sent to the car's owner who then either pays it or provides the information on the driver in case of e.g. rent car or company car.
But really it is then a responsibility of the owner to deal with the actually offender. I think it works out quite fine. They do send you a photo of your car where a driver can be seen somewhat, date, time and location so you should be able to figure it out even if you've given car to e.g. several friends on separate occasions.
-
This post is deleted!
-
Well, you see, it's not innocent vs. guilty. They don't imply it was you, thus no penalty points on your license.
They just send you a photo with your car speeding. Unless you want to refute the fact of speeding itself, you have to pay fine.
-
This is retarded.
They don't have to identify anyone. They can always just be the person to blame. However, the law states that they've got a duty to ensure that the vehicle is driven within the defined driving regulations. Like that, there's always someone who the fine can get sent to. (If the car's been stolen, that's a case where the owner is typically not responsible for the fine. Assuming they took reasonable steps to secure the vehicle, such as removing the keys and locking the doors.
)We do have penalty points on the license as well as a fine, but with the points waived for the first offence providing a drivers' ed course is taken instead. According to several relatives of mine. (I'm one of the annoying “drive at the speed limit” types. ;))
-
with the points waived for the first offence providing a drivers' ed course is taken instead. According to several relatives of mine.
Not the first time I got caught speeding
That was a few years back though. I've had 0 points for a while now.
-
Well, you see, it's not innocent vs. guilty. They don't imply it was you, thus no penalty points on your license.They just send you a photo with your car speeding. Unless you want to refute the fact of speeding itself, you have to pay fine.
Except for all those cases where the car's owner receives a ticket-- along with a picture of their car on the back of a tow truck.
-
Solution to all of the above: Humans are fucking idiots that can't be trusted to operate two-ton death missiles in public. Automatic driving cars for everyone, always.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Except for all those cases where the car's owner receives a ticket-- along with a picture of their car on the back of a tow truck.
I assume that one would be easy if a bit bothersome to refute.
@Lorne_Kates said:
Automatic driving cars for everyone, always.
I sincerely hope that day never comes because that is a dystopian future for me.
I'm not against automatic cars per se, e.g. for senile, kids, someone not having a license etc.
I could even maybe agree to that being a feature on normal cars so it can take you home when you are pissed.But taking away driving from everyone, fuck no! I hope to not live long enough to experience that.
-
Haven't seen anybody there in a long time... are they State or Monkey-County police?
I think it's county, but I'm not 100% on that.
It usually works to my advantage because most people act like its HOV all the time and stay out even before it changes over.
Unfortunately when you get further up the HOV gets bogged down by folks driving Prii and singing "We are the World". Even when they're not passing the regular lanes.
I usually have my kids in the car, and it's about 4pm, so usually 270 isn't too bad once you get away from the beltway.
-
They don't imply it was you, thus ... you have to pay fine.
They literally imply it was you by telling you to pay a fine.
-
I assume that one would be easy if a bit bothersome to refute.
Sure. Just take the day off work to wait in line for a first showing appointment. Be told "I don't have any power to cancel tickets. Would you like a reduced fine?" Accept a court date. Take another day off of work to go for a court appointment. Wait hours. Finally go before the judge with evidence. Be told "Since the license plate is registered to you, you are the one being fined. You will need to take this up with the tow truck company".
I... I don't have a very good opinion of the traffic court system. Not since I attended to fight a parking ticket, and saw the same judge say to two different people-- one right after the other-- "Sure, you can prove you didn't break the spirit of the law, but you broke the letter of the law. And that's more important. Guilty." and then on the very next case "Sure, you are proving with evidence that you didn't break the letter of the law, but you still broke the spirit of the law. Guilty".
But taking away driving from everyone, fuck no! I hope to not live long enough to experience that.
It'd be okay with the 40k fewer deaths on the road. Humans just aren't responsible enough to operate these things safely or responsibly in public. If 90% of children kept running around whipping lawn darts at people, you take away lawn darts from everyone.
I'd be willing to eventually phase in some sort of driver's exam that would allow people the right to manually operate a car. The exam would be at least as hard, if not harder than, a pilot's license. None of this '16 year old hormone crazed idiot with no concept of reality or risk gets to drive around a block for 15 minutes LICENSED" bullshit. You have to be undeniable, provably responsible and capable of handling these death machines. And even then, you have to be able to handle them in the manner that automatic cars expect-- sane, safe, predictable.
Yearly re-examinations for the first X years. Instant suspension of license for any offense. Permanent revocation after 3 minor or 1 major license.
-
@obeselymorbid said:
They don't imply it was you, thus ... you have to pay fine.
They literally imply it was you by telling you to pay a fine.
OK, pedantry acknowledged.
However they imply it was you or someone you gave your car to. I think it's reasonable to assume you know who has access to your car.
