Traffic sins
-
@Jaloopa You missed one:
-
@RaceProUK I've been trying to think of a 'bird' name for equestrian crossings literally for years! I didn't know pelican/puffin were acronyms (or even backronyms) though.
-
-
@Luhmann said in Traffic sins:
@The_Quiet_One said in Traffic sins:
inch out
Oh ... I hate people who while you are parking still insist on walking right behind or in front of the car. Caution works both ways ... don't walk up behind a (slowly) moving vehicle.
Or when you're backing out, slowly, with signals and everything-- and you're, like, halfway out of the spot. In the middle of the maneuver. And someone STILL drives behind you.
Like, hey, shithead-- I've been clearly visible for a while now. In fact, given I'm in the middle of the row, you absolutely HAVE to have seen me backing out. If you just slowed down a FRACTION of your speed, I'd be able to complete the back out and be straight again before you even reached me. It'd be nice if you stopped completely, but even that isn't needed. Instead you saved 0.05 seconds off your "precious" day, and nearly got a bumper in your fucking ugly face.
-
@Lorne-Kates Just to be clear, in the case I mentioned at the top of the thread, I wasn't right behind the guy. I was off to the side a little, and I stopped because I did see him pulling out, but he was trying to pull out in a curve, and was backing into me.
-
@dkf said in Traffic sins:
You could try that round here, but you'll just make a lot of people mad at you. Tighter packing is the norm, and is absolutely essential at some junctions to prevent a few people from blocking things up thoroughly. (The junction I'm particularly thinking of is tremendously space-constrained and carries a lot of traffic at peak times.)
I learned traffic compression. Stop with a gap. As three or four cars queue up behind you, then you can inch forward to close that gap.
The idea is that if there's no cars behind you, you want to be prepared for the first car. If he doesn't stop, you can prevent the rear end by jumping forward into that gap. Or you can accelerate hard and swerve into a lane beside you. (You should be monitoring those lanes, too). It's an escape route.
If there's one car behind you, you still want the gap. Because if the car behind you gets rear-ended, you can still get hit. You need that full space.
Two cars behind you? The chances of the rear getting hit, and smashing into the one behind you and then him hitting you still exists. It's still likely. But you have more reaction time, and the car behind you is just going to move forward a bit. So you can compress the gap.
Three or more cars? The chances of a rear-end pushing that many cars forward is lower and lower. You can close the gap more.
Personally, I always leave a gap of some sorts. If the car behind me is texting instead of paying attention, they may look up see a green light panic and hit the gas-- and jackrabbit forward. I need to be prepared for that.
OR the car in front of me may decide to break down. If I'm right on his bumper, I can't maneuver around him. If there's a gap, I can steer around him. Heck, if there's enough of a gap, I can get up to speed and merge into traffic.
I do compress when I know that there's a queue behind me that's blocking an intersection further back. Or if there's someone behind me trying to make a right turn, and me moving up a few inches gets them into the right turn lane.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
I learned traffic compression. Stop with a gap. As three or four cars queue up behind you, then you can inch forward to close that gap.
That explains why I always see people not closing the gap straight away, then edging forwards.
TIL.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
OR the car in front of me may decide to break down. If I'm right on his bumper, I can't maneuver around him. If there's a gap, I can steer around him. Heck, if there's enough of a gap, I can get up to speed and merge into traffic.
This is explicitly mentioned in the Highway Code. You should leave enough space in front to manoeuvre around if they break down
-
@Deadfast said in Traffic sins:
It's the part where you imply people should police speeding by blocking the supposed speeders.
I have no obligation to enable someone else's illegal behavior. I do have an obligation to drive according to the road conditions. If someone is tailgating, then there is no safe stopping distance at our current speed. They have created a situation where there is no choice but to slow down.
If they want to drive illegally, they can pass. Otherwise they can fuck off.
You might therefore very well turn out to be the asshole intentionally blocking the 100 km/h lane doing 95.
Fuck off with "spedometer blah blah blah". They're accurate enough. And how does that asshole know he isn't doing 105 and being impatient?
And fuck off with you thinking it's an innocent 5km/h difference, when it's an asshole in a fancy car, tailgating because they came up on me doing 140km/h in an 80 zone.
-
@Zecc said in Traffic sins:
Three reasons for turning on your headlights:
- To be seen by others
- To see what's ahead of you
- See #1.
Zero reasons for using ultra-bright regular lights
- You are blinding other people
- "But I can't see my own headlights!" no shit asshole, there are streetlights and overheads. You can't see your headlights because all the other light is already sufficient and brighter than your car. Idiot
- My penis is small.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
I have no obligation to enable someone else's illegal behavior. I do have an obligation to drive according to the road conditions. If someone is tailgating, then there is no safe stopping distance at our current speed. They have created a situation where there is no choice but to slow down.
But if there's space in the lane to your left/right [delete according to country of residence] then you should be moving over to let him pass.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
ultra-bright regular lights
The way I figure it, if they're bright enough to dazzle me when they shine in my rear-view, they're high beams, no matter how bright the other setting is, and you shouldn't be shining them in my rear-view.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
Zero reasons for using badly adjusted or fitted ultra-bright regular lights
You are blinding other people
"But I can't see my own headlights!" no shit asshole, there are streetlights and overheads. You can't see your headlights because all the other light is already sufficient and brighter than your car. Idiot
My penis is small.Correctly fitted and adjusted ultra bright (within the legal constraints) actually help visibility without impairing that of other road users.
-
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
Stay in your lane. Those lines on the road delineating lane boundaries are there for a reason. If you aren't actively in the middle of the process of changing lanes, with your turn signal on, your tires should not cross them. It makes other drivers uncertain as to what you're about to do; they don't know if you're changing lanes without signaling, or just not all that good at keeping control of your vehicle.
Corollary: KNOW HOW THE FUCK TO JUDGE WHERE A LANE IS.
yes, there's sometimes adverse weather conditions. But if you can see even a hint of a line, you know where the lane is. If you can see where other car's tire tracks are, you know where the lane is. If you know where the sidewalk is, you know where the lane is.
On Sunday I went Christmas tree hunting. We go to a tree farm in rural-country outside the city. There was some snow, but not much. The roads had been ploughed. The road we were on is still a fairly major road. It wasn't slippery. It's a straight-road, without any blind curves or anything. But there is a road-side ditch a few meters away from the paved shoulder.
I saw MULTIPLE cars in the ditch, because the idiot drivers didn't know how to judge where the lane is. And they drifter off the road, over the paved shoulder, and CRUNCH right into the ditch. Not spun out, not black-iced, nothing like that.
This stretch: https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.0097807,-79.2647438,671m/data=!3m1!1e3
Go ahead. Zoom in. Nice wide road, perfectly straight, and the markings were still visible.
Fucking idiots.
-
@boomzilla said in Traffic sins:
Yield left lane to faster traffic on signal. State police say this applies even when faster traffic is speeding.
That's quite the claim. I guess I should read the link that makes that claim.
http://www.fredericksburg.com/news/fls/2006/022006/02092006/166829/"Sorry, the page you're looking for cannot be found."Good source, Boomy.
And even if that's true, that isn't the law saying "Oh sure the speeder is okay, he's allowed to exceed the speed limit". It's saying "Even when that person is illegally speeding beyond the speed limit which they aren't allowed to do which is why they're illegally speeding, the yield law may still apply. But he's still illegally speeding."
-
@RaceProUK said in Traffic sins:
@izzion When traffic is flowing freely, then yes, merge early. When it's queueing however, you use all the road available to minimise congestion, and merge one-and-one at the merge point.
Which sounds good in practice, except it ends up being:
- First car goes as far as possible, and merges
- Second car drives past where the first car merges, and jams up the end of the lane pushing their way in
- Third car queues up behind second car, waits for them to merge, then pushes forward to the end of the lane because OMFG ONE MORE CAR LENGTH!
- Fourth car is also an asshole
- Last car (that's me!) merges early into a gap that's already there-- waves a thank you to the driver behind me, then moves over one more lane to be out of that shitstorm.
-
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
Thou shalt not tailgate! Seriously, it's just plain unacceptable. Do not do it at any time, for any reason. It's an extremely aggressive and threatening act, and it makes you come across as a thug. If the car ahead of you shows any signs that the driver is uncomfortable with how close you're following (flashing hazard lights, tapping their brakes, etc,) back off, and then stay back. Safe following distance is generally considered to be ~2-3 seconds. If you literally can't stand to be slowed down by 2-3 seconds, you do not have the proper temperament to be behind the wheel!
Keeping a 2-3 second following distance on a slow driver does not slow you from getting to your destination by 2-3 seconds. It slows you down by the difference between how fast they are moving subtracted from how fast you would be traveling, divided by the distance. (I think that equation is correct? You know what I am saying.)
Not that I am advocating for tailgating. I just want the discussion to be honest.
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
Seriously, don't tailgate. Not even when stopped. When at a red light, stay far enough back that you can see the road behind the tires of the car in front of you. This is a good rule of thumb to ensure that just in case someone rear-ends you, you won't slide far enough to hit the guy in front of you and make the accident even worse. (This is not a theoretical concern; I've been hit like this by "cue ball" cars twice before. Both times, it wouldn't have happened if the idiot behind me had just stayed back a bit further!)
I see what you are saying, and I mostly agree with you, but your rule of thumb is far too broad to suit everyone. If I did that, there would be a huge amount of dead space due to driving a taller SUV with a long hood.
If I did that with some of the Super Duty pickups I have had for work trucks in the past, I would be leaving 30'+, if I had to take a guess.
-
@RaceProUK said in Traffic sins:
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
I learned traffic compression. Stop with a gap. As three or four cars queue up behind you, then you can inch forward to close that gap.
That explains why I always see people not closing the gap straight away, then edging forwards.
TIL.
Yup.
Also, if I'm approaching a red light that I know is going to turn green soon-ish, and there's only, say, one or two cars already queued-- I'll start slowing down early. Very very gradual reduction in speed. I can usually time it so that by the time I'm near the stopped cars, the light has turned green and they've accelerated. I can sometimes even stay in second gear. It's a great way to reduce gas usage, and prevent wear-and-tear on the brakes.
-
@CarrieVS said in Traffic sins:
But even in California, if pedestrians have right of way at corners it still does not contradict my point that "Do not give up your right of way if there's no point... applies to stopping for pedestrians to cross". In what way are we talking about the same thing?
That.
-
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
@anotherusername No.
I spent my entire childhood getting shoved around by thugs and bullies who thought that force and threats of force were a good way to get what they want. Now that high school is over, that part of my life is behind me, and I will not be pushed around again! So I push back.
The harder someone tries to force me to break the law in order to accommodate their own infantile desires to do the same, the worse I make it for them. I don't do it "just because you're an asshole," I do it for the exact same reason that the USA does not negotiate with terrorists: if you let someone push you around, you legitimize their behavior and invite more of the same. And I'm through with that.
Holy shit. I don't know if I have ever seen anyone trot out so many syllogisms in order to justify being a fucking asshole.
You don't want to drive fast? Fine. Just don't be John Nestor.
You are just as bad as those who are tailgating behind you. They could easily slow down, increase following distance and drive normally. You could just as easily move over a lane and let them past. Neither of you do, because you are both fucking assholes.
-
@Jaloopa said in Traffic sins:
This is explicitly mentioned in the Highway Code. You should leave enough space in front to manoeuvre around if they break down
Sweet. That's some good Coding. I don't recall the Ontario "Highway Traffic Act" codifying it.
-
@Jaloopa said in Traffic sins:
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
I have no obligation to enable someone else's illegal behavior. I do have an obligation to drive according to the road conditions. If someone is tailgating, then there is no safe stopping distance at our current speed. They have created a situation where there is no choice but to slow down.
But if there's space in the lane to your left/right [delete according to country of residence] then you should be moving over to let him pass.
That's cute that you're assuming which lane I'm in.
-
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
ultra-bright regular lights
The way I figure it, if they're bright enough to dazzle me when they shine in my rear-view, they're high beams, no matter how bright the other setting is, and you shouldn't be shining them in my rear-view.
There are laws that specific the brightness allowed, but they're almost never enforced.
-
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
@RaceProUK I'm having trouble thinking of any such sequence of events that doesn't end with me driving off as soon as the person in question gets out of their car, to the nearest police station if necessary.
What if traffic stops, as it is wont to do. How are you going to drive to the nearest police station when traffic comes to a stop and you are stuck in traffic that is not moving?
-
@Lorne-Kates In Pennsylvania, you're required to get an annual vehicle inspection, (which is enforced by speed trap-like scenarios where cops wait at the side of the road and pull over people who drive by if the brightly-colored stickers on their windshield indicate that they're out of date,) and one of the things that will cause you to fail the inspection is headlights being too bright.
-
@Polygeekery Anyone who gets out of their car while traffic is temporarily stopped is guaranteed to be right about to have bigger problems to worry about than the driver in front of them!
-
@Jaloopa said in Traffic sins:
@CarrieVS also, a single flash of high beams really doesn't help. Is that person flashing me or did they just go over a bump?
This. Angled headlights might be supposed to point down toward the road, but they are extremely bright if they're angled up toward you, like right as the car comes over the peak of a hill. Or every little tiny bump in the road, apparently.
Also, "flashing your lights to signal to the car ahead that you want to pass" (as someone suggested earlier) isn't a thing in all places. I don't think it is in the US -- at least, not unambiguously. Flashing your brights can mean a lot of different things, and it's up to the other driver to read your mind. And if they don't know what you're trying to signal, it'll just annoy them.
-
@Polygeekery said in Traffic sins:
Keeping a 2-3 second following distance on a slow driver does not slow you from getting to your destination by 2-3 seconds. It slows you down by the difference between how fast they are moving subtracted from how fast you would be traveling, divided by the distance. (I think that equation is correct? You know what I am saying.)
Yes, but that's not why people tailgate. They tailgate because OMFG I CAN BE A CARLENGTH FURTHER AHEAD!!!
Though by your calculations, following behind a slower driver increases your time to destination by the delta in speed up to the point where you get to a red light / other traffic slowdown that you would have gotten to at either speed.
Then the increase in time-to-destination is 0 because of the slower car.
Also if you speed, and you get pulled over for speeding, your time-to-destination increases by 15 minutes while the cop writes you the ticket.
Also if you speed and smash into someone, your time-to-destination increases by hours.
Also if you speed and run off the road and go into a ditch and die, your time-to-destination doesn't matter, but you've helped cleanse the genepool a bit so it balances out.
-
@loopback0 said in Traffic sins:
@Captain said in Traffic sins:
Presumably because backing into a parking spot is harder than backing out of one
I'm not sure it is.
@anotherusername said in Traffic sins:
@loopback0 well, you have more room to back out -- unless there's a person or car there, in which case you don't.
Backing in means you have to back between two parked cars (or at least the lines that you're supposed to stay inside). It's trickier to back that precisely, and when you're backing out you don't have to be precise as long as you make sure there's nobody coming behind you.
I agree with @loopback0. I usually back in to parking spaces, because I find it easier to do. Especially to end up in the middle of the parking lines. I only pull in when I go somewhere where I will have to open the hatch. If you back in to those spots and some asshole parks too close to your bumper it is hard to load stuff in to the cargo area.
-
@Polygeekery said in Traffic sins:
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
@RaceProUK I'm having trouble thinking of any such sequence of events that doesn't end with me driving off as soon as the person in question gets out of their car, to the nearest police station if necessary.
What if traffic stops, as it is wont to do. How are you going to drive to the nearest police station when traffic comes to a stop and you are stuck in traffic that is not moving?
Lock the doors and pull out the smart phone. =)
-
@anotherusername said in Traffic sins:
Also, "flashing your lights to signal to the car ahead that you want to pass" (as someone suggested earlier) isn't a thing in all places. I don't think it is in the US -- at least, not unambiguously. Flashing your brights can mean a lot of different things, and it's up to the other driver to read your mind. And if they don't know what you're trying to signal, it'll just annoy them.
For the most part, it means "Hey, buddy. You're going less than the speed limit, but it's for Circumstances And Shit. Like it's a country road and you're a tractor, or your car is stuck in first gear and you have your four-ways on. This is a single lane road, and there ain't shit anyone can do about it. But look, one of those temporary right-hand lanes just opened. You may not be aware, but I'd like to pass you. Flash flash, can you move over please? Thanks, I can now proceed at a regular rate of speed, and you can merge back in when the temporary lane ends."
-
@dcon I'm sorry, one of us has clearly missed the other's point entirely, because as I understand your comments, that does not make sense. Please could you explain what point you are actually trying to communicate.
-
@anotherusername said in Traffic sins:
Flashing your brights can mean a lot of different things
It does in the UK too - although most of them aren't official. If a car is behind you flashing its lights then there aren't multiple meanings for that, so it tends to be fairly clear.
-
@dcon said in Traffic sins:
I remember a graphic in the drivers book showing that, but the CA lane use section (https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/hdbk/traffic_lanes) doesn't anymore... Tho
If you can choose among three lanes, pick the middle lane for the smoothest driving.implies that!If the lanes to your right are all relatively full, then the 'keep right" rule goes out the window.
But if the lane to your right isn't full, and you aren't passing anyone who's in it, you should merge into it and drive there.
Generally I'll switch to the middle lane when there's considerable traffic in the right lane (especially merging onto/off the highway). That's ok. But if the right lane's free, you're supposed to drive in it.
-
@masonwheeler said in Traffic sins:
- Seriously, don't tailgate. Not even when stopped. When at a red light, stay far enough back that you can see the road behind the tires of the car in front of you.
Yeah, I learned in defensive driving that you should be able to see where their tires meet the road. Moving or stopped. I kind of get what Lorne is saying though about edging up though once there are more vehicles behind you (less "pinball" risk) and think I do that without really realizing/rationalizing it.
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
- You know the size of the gap between your front bumper and the other car's rear bumper? Yeah, that safe following distance gap? Do not change lanes unless the distance between your back bumper and the other car's front bumper is at least as wide as that same gap.
A really good rule of thumb for this is if you can see the other car's headlights in your rear-view mirror, you have enough room to get over, guaranteed. Makes life pretty easy.
@boomzilla said in Traffic sins:
I have done this several times in the past few months. None of them ever turned their lights on.
Same and yeah, I don't get it. Is that no longer a pretty universally recognized signal? There are so many people driving with their lights off either in the dusk (since it gets dark earlier) or in inclement weather, and it's so dangerous.
@dkf said in Traffic sins:
I'd like to note that when you come to a red light and you've not got traffic in front of you, stop at the line, not a few feet ahead or behind it. It's really not hard to learn where the front of the car actually is…
Yeah, no shit. You need to do it exactly once with any new car. I learned when the sliver of the white line first appears under my side mirror, my tires are right behind the line. Took about two seconds to check and then I never had to worry about it again.
@Zecc said in Traffic sins:
Three reasons for turning on your headlights:
I always learned you lock your doors and you turn the headlights on when you start the car (e.g., headlights always on). I think newer cars do this by default.
@Jaloopa said in Traffic sins:
They noticed what I was doing and backed off, then zoomed past me while making a gesture to suggest I have certain masturbatory habits, then promptly got stuck in traffic directly in front of me, gaining a net benefit to their trip of a couple of seconds.
That's the thing. Being an asshole in traffic doesn't gain you anything. Out of curiosity (and because I'm an engineer), I've timed my commute when I'm driving aggressively and when I just cruise along placidly in the right lane the whole time. There's not enough significant difference to introduce the stress of the former into my life. If I need to try to gain a minute or two (maybe), I obviously left too late from where I was going. I shouldn't do that. Now, obviously highway driving is different but I'm not familiar with much but congestion. :P
-
@CarrieVS said in Traffic sins:
@dcon said in Traffic sins:
@CarrieVS Ah. Yeah, peds only have right-of-way at the crossings. In neighborhoods, there is an implied crossing at a corner, even if there's no markings. So looks like we're talking about basically the same thing.
There is no implied crossing at a corner in Britain and this is the first time I've heard of that being the case anywhere. If there is an explicit crossing then rules apply depending on the type and if not pedestrians may cross (as they may anywhere except on roads where pedestrians aren't allowed) if they think it's safe but have no special priority. Obviously, if a pedestrian is crossing , you may not run them over.
But even in California, if pedestrians have right of way at corners it still does not contradict my point that "Do not give up your right of way if there's no point... applies to stopping for pedestrians to cross". In what way are we talking about the same thing?
Here, I think it's something like pedestrians have the right-of-way to cross regular streets pretty much anywhere unless they're half a block or less from a traffic light. Then they're supposed to walk to the light and cross there.
-
@The_Quiet_One said in Traffic sins:
When I see a car ahead of me use their turn signal, I assume they're turning in front of their car. If they make frequent stops upon doing so, I don't think they're backing into a spot, I think they're just a spazzy idiot driver, because 9 out of 10 times, that's what they turn out to be.
Why not both?
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
If they want to drive illegally, they can pass.
No, they can't, because we were talking about the situation where you were deliberately camping in the left lane to block them from passing.
Maybe you're confused and thought we were talking about something else.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
@anotherusername said in Traffic sins:
if you DON'T move over for faster traffic, you are breaking the law
There is literally nowhere in the world where "faster traffic" is defined as "faster than the speed limit".
Let's enshrine this in a sin:
Thou shalt not ever think exceeding the speed limit is justified, or condoned by any law.
Unless you're an emergency vehicle, there is absolutely nothing in any lawbook that allows you to exceed the speed limit, or requires you to yield to those who do. Nothing. Ever.
You are actually wrong there. In our state at least, you can be ticketed for "obstructing the flow of traffic", even if that traffic would be traveling faster than the speed limit.
I emphasize "can", mostly because it is yet another traffic law that is never enforced.
-
@CarrieVS When I read your original, it sounded like peds didn't have right-of-way in a marked crossing. (Guess the coffee hadn't kicked in yet) I should have made that clearer - sorry! :)
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
@anotherusername said in Traffic sins:
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
There is literally nowhere in the world where "faster traffic" is defined as "faster than the speed limit".
"Literally", eh? TIL that California is "literally" nowhere.
21654. (a) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(b) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation of subdivision (a) of this section.
So you just posted a quote which proves me right? And people think I'm the
?Uhmmmmm...apparently you are? It says, in lawyer speak, that if you are driving slower than the flow of traffic, even if that speed is faster than the speed limit, you are in violation of the law.
It is that fucking "notwithstanding" that makes it confusing.
-
@loopback0 said in Traffic sins:
If a car is behind you flashing its lights then there aren't multiple meanings for that
No. It means "I am an arsehole and probably driving a BMW. This road is mine, get out of the way"
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
@anotherusername said in Traffic sins:
Also, "flashing your lights to signal to the car ahead that you want to pass" (as someone suggested earlier) isn't a thing in all places. I don't think it is in the US -- at least, not unambiguously. Flashing your brights can mean a lot of different things, and it's up to the other driver to read your mind. And if they don't know what you're trying to signal, it'll just annoy them.
For the most part, it means "Hey, buddy. You're going less than the speed limit, but it's for Circumstances And Shit. Like it's a country road and you're a tractor, or your car is stuck in first gear and you have your four-ways on. This is a single lane road, and there ain't shit anyone can do about it. But look, one of those temporary right-hand lanes just opened. You may not be aware, but I'd like to pass you. Flash flash, can you move over please? Thanks, I can now proceed at a regular rate of speed, and you can merge back in when the temporary lane ends."
That might or might not apply to Canada, but as I said, it's not a thing in all places. Remind me again, how much driving have you done in the US?
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Traffic sins:
And even if that's true, that isn't the law saying "Oh sure the speeder is okay, he's allowed to exceed the speed limit".
No one said it was.
-
@Deadfast said in Traffic sins:
And speaking of the police, there is a reason they generally use dedicated equipment to measure speed: speedometers aren't 100% accurate and I suspect many modern cars actually indicate a higher speed than you are traveling at. You might therefore very well turn out to be the asshole intentionally blocking the 100 km/h lane doing 95.
@Jaloopa said in Traffic sins:
I think they all do to some extent. There's probably liability if you get caught by a speed camera doing 75 but your speedo said you were going 69.
If you hook an OBDII scanner to your car and go for a drive, you will probably see that the computer thinks you are going faster than the speedometer is actually showing. I am not sure which one is more accurate for certain, but I would think that the speed on the CANBUS is and then they modify it a slight bit (speed * .95) before they display it to the mushy bag of goo behind the steering wheel.
-
@loopback0 said in Traffic sins:
@Jaloopa Also the cockwombles who sit in the outer overtaking lanes on motorways when the inner lanes are empty, just because they're doing 70mph and no-one should be going faster than that.
We apparently have a few of those cockwombles on this forum. Fucking John Nestors.
-
@CarrieVS said in Traffic sins:
Don't give up your right of way when there's no point
Do not stop or slow down to let people out when there's a large space behind you. It's just confusing, and at best by the time I've made certain that you're stopping for me and not just slowing down out of uncertainty about something, we'd both already be on our way if you'd just driven past so I could pull out behind you.
If there's a constant stream of traffic I'm extremely grateful to you for letting me out and will pay it forward when I get the chance. If there was a socking great stretch of open road behind you, I'm fuming at you all the way down the road. Somehow it's more galling than people being inconsiderate, when they're inconveniencing you by trying to be kind.
This also applies to stopping for pedestrians to cross.
Yes!! I hate it when people stop before me, but then motion for me to go. All they are doing is slowing down the flow of traffic. In most cases when it happens, they could easily have made it through the entire intersection before I would have stopped and proceeded.
-
@Polygeekery said in Traffic sins:
If you hook an OBDII scanner to your car and go for a drive, you will probably see that the computer thinks you are going faster than the speedometer is actually showing. I am not sure which one is more accurate for certain, but I would think that the speed on the CANBUS is and then they modify it a slight bit (speed * .95) before they display it to the mushy bag of goo behind the steering wheel.
True but even with the adjustment it still overreads. It's the easiest way to handle the slight variation in the rolling radius of the tyre as they wear.
-
@Zecc said in Traffic sins:
@The_Quiet_One said in Traffic sins:
Perhaps if we lived in an alternate universe where the vast majority of people DO back into parking spaces habitually, we'd all be aware of the pattern and be better prepared for what people are going to do in a parking lot. We don't live in such a world, though.
First of all, it doesn't need to be the vast majority. It's just needs a big enough minority.
And second, it's a big world; so go easy on those generalizations.Around here the majority of drivers does indeed park front-first, but it's not the "vast" majority. Backing into a parking space is, in fact, how we are taught during driving lessons (though that applies mostly to parallel parking, TBH) and seeing people park that way is not at all unusual.
I usually back into spots. I find it's easier to turn your car in tight spaces when your steering wheels are on "the back".
I say you should park in whatever way you feel most comfortable, just as long as you park safely and respectfully.
I think I find it so easy to back in to parking spaces because I use my mirrors. A hell of a lot of people just don't. They turn and look over their shoulders.
It helps that I grew up with a father who owned mining operations and I helped out there. I basically learned how to drive in one of these:
You had to use your mirrors. Turning and looking over your shoulder showed you nothing but the bed.
-
@Polygeekery said in Traffic sins:
Uhmmmmm...apparently you are? It says, in lawyer speak, that if you are driving slower than the flow of traffic, even if that speed is faster than the speed limit, you are in violation of the law.
That looks like a damned-if-you-do damned-if-you-don't law. If you go faster, you're breaking the law by speeding. If you don't, you're breaking the law by slowing down traffic.
There's something fundamentally wrong with that.
Pegasus crossing - Wikipedia
Definition of NOTWITHSTANDING
