Well, guess I live in Cleveland now
-
I went into a clothing store in the 90s and heard this song playing. I never heard it on the radio before or after that one day (I think it was in a fashion bug?), but it was memorable enough to stick in my head for the rest of that day and I seem to randomly remember it approximately once every decade.
Your post did it this decade.
This is fun!
-
So you switched to a place where you don't need to own a car and can simply walk or use public transport anywhere you want?
Oh, can't afford to move to any of those places!
-
Let you switch lanes?
As they say in Rome, carpe viam. Don't ask for permission, just start moving your car towards the other fuckers. They'll move if they prefer not to have scratches on their car.
Oh also you're gonna wanna drive a shitbox in case they decide to tank those scratches.
The US does not teach you to drive. It is laughable how easy it is to get a license with a fraction of the training of most other western countries.
-
Some people feel like this, "why didn't others make way, I had my blinker on!". But it's the responsibility of the one joining the lane to actually make sure there's room. Some just fucking smash into the lane and I dunno hope for the best, but they're the one's who would have to pay for the damages
True, the responsibility for safe lane change lays on the driver who is changing lanes. However, any sensible country also prohibits obstruction of a lane change, i.e. you can get fined if you don't hold enough distance to the driver in front of you to allow merging, don't make room for the person with the signal on in reasonable time or if you deliberately close the gap so the other person can't change lanes.
That kind of cooperation is mandatory for good traffic flow and properly made laws try to ensure that. Turning signal should result in people noticing you, and letting you safely switch lanes. Too often people get into some vigilante-mode because they see the other driver skipping in line or something similar.
Merging is another story. Merging traffic should explicitly yield to all traffic already on the highway, similarly to how it works in a roundabout. This prevents people merging on a highway that's over its capacity, so the traffic clears quicker. It means that traffic should queue on the ramp until it's safe to merge, indefinitely if necessary. Mathematically it makes sense, but goes against intuition.
Some municipalities have tried out metered entry on highways, that block turning onto the on-ramp altogether if the level of congestion is too high. Some trials have already ended due to the perceived injustice as well, as people already on the highway are typically from out of the city, and thus preventing those living closer from merging onto it. Personally I think if you're close enough to complain about that you should be in public transit range of the population center, and complaining more about the lack of alternatives to driving.
-
from my experience driving in and out of chicago i learned quickly that you have to MAKE them let you in. as someone who grew up on a gravel road it was an interesting experience the first couple times lol
Time that edge in so that if there's a collision, it's technically them running into you, and you've won. Except maybe for the occasional time the other driver wants to hurt you (by going somewhere and fighting outside of the vehicles, random weapons).
-
True, the responsibility for safe lane change lays on the driver who is changing lanes. However, any sensible country also prohibits obstruction of a lane change, i.e. you can get fined if you don't hold enough distance to the driver in front of you to allow merging, don't make room for the person with the signal on in reasonable time or if you deliberately close the gap so the other person can't change lanes.
That kind of cooperation is mandatory for good traffic flow and properly made laws try to ensure that. Turning signal should result in people noticing you, and letting you safely switch lanes. Too often people get into some vigilante-mode because they see the other driver skipping in line or something similar.
Merging is another story. Merging traffic should explicitly yield to all traffic already on the highway, similarly to how it works in a roundabout. This prevents people merging on a highway that's over its capacity, so the traffic clears quicker. It means that traffic should queue on the ramp until it's safe to merge, indefinitely if necessary. Mathematically it makes sense, but goes against intuition.
Some municipalities have tried out metered entry on highways, that block turning onto the on-ramp altogether if the level of congestion is too high. Some trials have already ended due to the perceived injustice as well, as people already on the highway are typically from out of the city, and thus preventing those living closer from merging onto it. Personally I think if you're close enough to complain about that you should be in public transit range of the population center, and complaining more about the lack of alternatives to driving.
I don't think the driver who isn't changing a lane needs to do anything. If you're purposefully slowing down or speeding up to block them then that's different, but if you're just maintaining your own speed normally then it's up to the merging one to do their thing in a safe and legal manner. That is, slow down, speed up, or just decide to merge in some other gap if there's not enough room.
I'm just against people assuming that if they put their blinker on then others should accommodate them. That'd be silly driving. Finding a proper gap and putting on your blinker to indicate you're moving into that gap vs. deciding that you want to merge right now and others should make room
-
True, the responsibility for safe lane change lays on the driver who is changing lanes. However, any sensible country also prohibits obstruction of a lane change, i.e. you can get fined if you don't hold enough distance to the driver in front of you to allow merging, don't make room for the person with the signal on in reasonable time or if you deliberately close the gap so the other person can't change lanes.
That kind of cooperation is mandatory for good traffic flow and properly made laws try to ensure that. Turning signal should result in people noticing you, and letting you safely switch lanes. Too often people get into some vigilante-mode because they see the other driver skipping in line or something similar.
Merging is another story. Merging traffic should explicitly yield to all traffic already on the highway, similarly to how it works in a roundabout. This prevents people merging on a highway that's over its capacity, so the traffic clears quicker. It means that traffic should queue on the ramp until it's safe to merge, indefinitely if necessary. Mathematically it makes sense, but goes against intuition.
Some municipalities have tried out metered entry on highways, that block turning onto the on-ramp altogether if the level of congestion is too high. Some trials have already ended due to the perceived injustice as well, as people already on the highway are typically from out of the city, and thus preventing those living closer from merging onto it. Personally I think if you're close enough to complain about that you should be in public transit range of the population center, and complaining more about the lack of alternatives to driving.
While there might be laws about prohibiting someone from changing lanes, by the time the officer gets there, there will be two stories, "he merged into me!" And "he wouldnt let me merge!" No way to prove that soneone prohibited a merge while the damage will still be caused by the person who changed lanes/merged and theyll be at fault.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Phoenix is 90% people who were on their way to LA, and something happened
-
Where I live sometimes if you don't just jump in the lane and push people out of the way they won't let you. They see a turn signal as a challenge to their authority
carbrains
-
WITNESS ME
SHINY AND CHROME
-
The US does not teach you to drive. It is laughable how easy it is to get a license with a fraction of the training of most other western countries.
moved from the US to Europe - US high school takes less effort in total than a driver's license here
-
moved from the US to Europe - US high school takes less effort in total than a driver's license here
Yea my partner is British, and with her work a number of Brits come through on assignment and need to take the test when they are here. I was young, so it felt so hard, but seeing it through adult eyes, wow. I mean one of them forgot the car was in reverse and almost backed into another car, hit the curb, and still passed.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Εγγραφή Σύνδεση