Highway Driving
- Thread starter Dartman
- Start date
Dick Starbuck said:
Come on - did you have to pick on us short folk??? At 5'8" myself - I'm the shortest a man can be, and call himself average height with a straight face...
I've said my peace - y'all return to your fussin' and fightin' now...
Laz
Oh, and as for the IQ - don't need to be flaunting it - like most things in life, those that really have the stuff, don't need to brag about it... And I am well within the critera to join MENSA - so don't bother questioning mine.
Awww, nothin' against short folk in general, just short folk I don't get along with.
Wow, MENSA huh? I'm impressed, ya got me beat!
Wow, MENSA huh? I'm impressed, ya got me beat!
Dick Starbuck said:
LOL 120 would beat you......awwww you don't get along with anyone who disagrees with you? Kind of immature don't you think?
I have all kinds of people in my life that disagree with me on various issues and I consider them my best friends and would bleed (and have bled) for them and vice versa.....
steel24 said:
Good argument there Steel. You made some really valid points????
Woops, my mistake. You haven't added any relevant information but are very quick, like Compromised to be judgmental about me, who you know absolutely nothing about. Isn't that kinda like....pathetic.
Compromised said:
Sorry Compromised, but twisting the truth just doesn't make you right.
Just for the record
Nowhere did I suggest I am perfect....
Nowhere did I suggest I wish to dictate to the world...this all started when I said I would not be intimidated by idiots who tailgate.
Is your only rebutal to my last post that, in your opinion, I don't know how to debate and that I am illiterate? Well haven't you just made a major coup with that well evidenced, highly researched load of BS.
I might remind you that it was you, not I, who decided that I was a self rightious facist because I don't share your opinion that the fastest driver has the most rights on our highway.
And if your posts on this thread are what humility is all about, I think I'll pass.
Last edited:
Dick Starbuck said:
LOL - Well, smart is fine, but if God really wanted to make up for the 2" he cheated me in height, he would have given to me in length...
You are quite right Tboy, I would not puposely pull out right in front an appraoching vehicle if it was within close proximity ....but.. it is quite common on the 400 series to encounter a row of cars doing 100-110. If I am doing 115 and there is adequate room to pull out and pass, I will do so. It is not up to me to slow down and wait for some guy a 1/2 a km back to pass. Why should I have to adjust my speed to make sure I don't inconvenience him/her? If I am passing several vehicles and some road warrior doing 140+ catchs up and tail gates me, I will not pull over until I can safely do so. And if I cannot see the tailgater's lic# because they are too close, then I will definately take my time. If that makes me a pathetic, self rightious, facist..so be it.tboy said:
Data: obviously you are against a law that is meant to take bad drivers off the road. Just from your response here indicates an deep seated mistrust of the police (which is rampant here at terb).
Problems with your logic:
1) A witness saw an action and reported it to the police. This happens all the time which (if you refer to any police site) is where they find out about many illegal activities and catch the perps.
2) It doesn't matter HOW fast the cars were going. If they were adjusting their speed to pace each other that can and was construed as "racing".
3) This law is NO different than the DUI law which enables an officer to determine on the spot if the person should be allowed to continue driving or not. If the case goes to trial and the judge lessons the charge, then so be it. But the gist of the law is to get dangerous drivers/racers/excessive speeders off the road and it is doing just that.
4) A police officer acting on a tip is NOT a bully. Is a bank manager a thief because he takes money from you? Is a bank a loan shark for charging you interest on money you borrowed from them? NO. Because a cop is doing his job does not make it wrong.
5) A person reporting a crime is NOT an asshole. I mean give your head a shake. Is the person who witnessed a bank robbery an asshole? Is the person who witnessed someone hitting your car and then fleeing (and getting the licence number) an asshole? Just because they saw two cars going down the road that appeared to be racing doesn't in and of itself make them an asshole.
Sorry, the kid learned that when you do something stupid on the road, there are consequences to your actions. In addition, I do not doubt for one second that during this "stunt" that they exceeded the speed limit but that is neither here nor there. One doesn't have to speed in order to be "racing".....
You're beginning to sound like the terb member Fabulous here.......
Problems with your logic:
1) A witness saw an action and reported it to the police. This happens all the time which (if you refer to any police site) is where they find out about many illegal activities and catch the perps.
2) It doesn't matter HOW fast the cars were going. If they were adjusting their speed to pace each other that can and was construed as "racing".
3) This law is NO different than the DUI law which enables an officer to determine on the spot if the person should be allowed to continue driving or not. If the case goes to trial and the judge lessons the charge, then so be it. But the gist of the law is to get dangerous drivers/racers/excessive speeders off the road and it is doing just that.
4) A police officer acting on a tip is NOT a bully. Is a bank manager a thief because he takes money from you? Is a bank a loan shark for charging you interest on money you borrowed from them? NO. Because a cop is doing his job does not make it wrong.
5) A person reporting a crime is NOT an asshole. I mean give your head a shake. Is the person who witnessed a bank robbery an asshole? Is the person who witnessed someone hitting your car and then fleeing (and getting the licence number) an asshole? Just because they saw two cars going down the road that appeared to be racing doesn't in and of itself make them an asshole.
Sorry, the kid learned that when you do something stupid on the road, there are consequences to your actions. In addition, I do not doubt for one second that during this "stunt" that they exceeded the speed limit but that is neither here nor there. One doesn't have to speed in order to be "racing".....
You're beginning to sound like the terb member Fabulous here.......
HafDun said:
Once again, the considerate thing to do would be to wait for him to pass YOU (and the rest of the people doing 110) before you made your move.
As for the 1/2 km back, if he's doing 20 kph faster than you, he'll be on you in only a couple of seconds. You can't wait a second or two?
Ever watch a professional race on tv or live? Slower drivers ALWAYS pull over when a faster vehicle is approaching. Ever wonder why that is?
It does as a matter of fact, it also makes you an asshole......
(go look it up if you don't believe me but if the faster driver ended up hitting you when you pulled out in front of him? YOU'D be found at fault for the accident.....)
Sorry to pick on you Tboy, but I don't totally agree with you here.tboy said:
Yes, braking is a very dangerous way to deal with a 200,000Km tailgater, or any tailgater for that matter (but I bet most of us have at least considered doing it) Still it is the wrong thing to do.
But the trucker is supposed to be a professional. Why is he tailgating? He is equally as guilty of endangering both himself and the motorist if he doesn't maintain a reasonable distance.
I am quite aware that trucking continues to be a more difficult profession but it is not the obligation of every car to pull over and let trucks by. It is unfortunate that there are several 2 lane hilly roads where trucks, and even cars have a difficult time passing, but unless the car is going below the posted limit, I would say it above and beyond the call of duty to pull over.
IMESHO
tboy said:
While I agree that it would be considerate, I probably wouldn't wait on a car that far back personally (far too many drivers can't keep a consistent speed going). Wouldn't it also be considerate for the faster car to slow down and let me complete my passing maneuver?
tboy said:
Well not ALWAYS or Tony Stewart wouldn't get to bump people out of his way. <grin> And certainly it's harder for the leader to get by the car about to be put a lap down than it is for the guy running in the #2 spot most of the time. There's a reason why the guy in the flag stand has a blue and yellow flag. <grin>
tboy said:
If you pulled out right in front of him I agree you'd most likely be found to be largely at fault, but if you gave them sufficient time to slow down (especially if they were over the speed limit to start with) I don't think that charge would stick.
HafDun said:
While it may be above the call of duty to pull over, the call of sanity should overrule here. The tailgating trucker has demonstrated clearly that they are capable of making poor decisions (or they wouldn't be tailgating). Better to pull over and let him by rather than try to "educate" him as to the error of his ways. (and no I'm not advocating bailing off onto the gravel shoulder, but most two lane highways have the occasional business that you could pull into and back onto the highway with only a minimal inconvenience to yourself. (certainly less inconvenient than a large steel enema would be at any rate
)Being in the right won't make you any less dead.
the voice of sanity in a sea of craziness.......
As for the charges re: pulling out in front of another vehicle. When an accident occurs the police or investigators typically look at what caused the accident. Did the fact that the vehicle travelling at 120 kph cause the accident? Did the slower vehicle pulling in front of the faster moving vehicle cause the accident? What laws were broken during the events leading up to the accident?
In this case, both vehicles broke the HTA laws: One was speeding (the one doing 120), one made an unsafe lane change (the slower vehicle) as well as speeding (he admitted that he was doing 110 or 115). Since the faster vehicle WAS following the rules of the road (passing in the passing lane) and according to the Ontario Driver's Handbook "....... It is dangerous and illegal for a slower moving vehicle to cut in front of a faster moving vehicle."
from http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/driver/handbook/section2.9.2.shtml
I also ask again, why does someone following too close cause people that much trouble????
Anyone have the balls to answer that?
It appears I've been re-assigned from high on my horse to a more derriere position but in any case I have a little problem with your logic..tboy said:
First, we drive in a 'no fault' system, but I think you will find that in most rear end accidents, responsibility is assigned to the rear ender. There is actually a law that requires you to maintain a safe distance with the vehicle ahead of you. There is no such law saying you are responsible for the distance of the vehicle behind you. And I did specify that I make 'safe' lane changes.
Next..If a vehicle is 1/2 km behind me, travelling 20 km/hr faster than I am, it will take him 90 seconds to catch up to me (that's a couple more seconds than 'a couple'). Even if the distance was only 1/4Km, that would be 45 seconds before he was on my tail.
Now if I have several cars to pass, I may be an asshole, but you are a moron if you think I am going to slow down for 90 seconds, or even 45 seconds to accomodate Mr. "I'm in a bigger hurry than you are" Guy.
As for your analogy to professional racing, frankly I don't give Damn, my dear. Last I checked, our highways were not designated as race tracks and my trip down the road was not intended to be a race.
Now, sorry, but I have to go and clean all the mud off and move on to another sandbox for a while.
HafDun said:
Wrong? It is a positively INSANE thing to do.
As for the trucker being a professional. The thing about trucks is they can see miles farther down the road than you can and can therefore react to situations developing long before a car driver can. Now this doesn't excuse them following too close, but it does make it a lot less dangerous than say a ford GT who can't see around a normal height car.
The thing specific to trucks is: if you hold them back, it costs them money, in fuel and time. Since they are also probably driving another 5,000 kms farther than you, why not just let them past? After driving for hundreds of thousands of kms all over North America I can say from direct observation, two things:
1) If a truck is held to or below the speed limit, they will slow down dramatically going up hills, and speed up dramatically going down hills.
2) If they are allowed to lead, they will maintain a speed slightly above the speed limit and maintain a pretty constant speed whether going up hills or down (except for extreme cases like the smokey mountains in Georgia).
For the life of me I cannot see why anyone with any common sense at all just wouldn't let someone by, trucker or car. There is no reason to purposely endanger themselves and other drivers by doing insanely stupid things like applying the brakes suddenly and with no reason.
As stated, if a 20,000 kg truck is behind you, and you hit the brakes unnecessarily and he hits you (especially in a civic DOH) he will have a scratch on his bumper and you'll be punted into the next life. Yeah, that makes a LOT of sense.........The truly scary thing? People here think that is the RIGHT thing to do.......next time you have the urge to do this? Think of this:
The result could be you sitting in the front seat of your car and turn around and see both your legs lying on the road 10 feet behind you. As you sit there bleeding to death you can say to yourself: I sure showed HIM whose boss.....Maybe you could even put that on your headstone?
Similar threads
