Ask the Car People.SM


Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

21817 messages,  Last post on Jun 17, 2013 at 10:30 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum.

What is this discussion about? Car Safety

Messages Page 2131 of 2183

#21296 of 21817 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [snakeweasel] by fintail

Jan 20, 2013 (10:20 am)

Replying to: snakeweasel (Jan 20, 2013 9:46 am)
Your case in point is nice, but unrelated to the original context.
 
" I would consider any time during civil twilight bright enough to drive without lights on if the skies are clear. "
 
And you would be in violation of the law, at least in my state, as that would be more than a half hour past official sunset. Twilight is not relevant. Why would someone want to be less visible, anyway? Especially if there are shady streets or kids around, the former of which is a constant in my area.
 
Still seeing nothing concrete about slowing down and living longer. Seems some places with faster traffic than this soon to be second world mess also have better life expectancies, and lower casualty rates. Hmm. Drive as slow as you want, just stay in the right lane where you belong. Then we can all go about our way.

#21297 of 21817 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [snakeweasel] by steve_ HOST

Jan 20, 2013 (10:30 am)

Replying to: snakeweasel (Jan 20, 2013 9:55 am)
It's funny that Alaska has the same requirement as Michigan, except the distance is out to 1,000 feet. In the summer, twilight literally lasts for hours. For most of June, there just isn't any twilight, even down in Anchorage. That time of year it helps to run your lights so the 10 year old kids playing in the street at midnight can see you coming.
 
I'm further west than Chicago yet on Eastern Time - that makes for nice long evenings with sunsets as late as 9:55pm and seemingly long twilights - really around 40 minutes at the peak.

#21298 of 21817 . by fintail

Jan 20, 2013 (8:49 pm)

Drove down the south sound today - very little issues. Only one LLCer comes to mind, a Murano being passed by numerous cars on the right, showing no signs of having a clue. Otherwise, traffic was light and the slowpokes were kindly keeping to the right lane.

#21299 of 21817 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [snakeweasel] by gogogodzilla

Jan 21, 2013 (10:25 am)

Replying to: snakeweasel (Jan 19, 2013 12:27 pm)
Headlights in urban/suburban areas are less about helping the driver see the road and more about letting *OTHER* drivers see that *YOU (the driver)* are on the road.
 
So as soon as it becomes difficult for other drivers to see your car, the lights come on. If you drive a fluorescent-yellow car, then you get to flick your lights on later, as it's highly noticeable to other drivers. But if you drive a silver-grey car, then those lights will probably need to come on anytime it gets cloudy.
 
Now, I know that people will argue about the premise, that lights are more to get you noticed by other drivers. But honestly, think about it. If you have an idiot driving with no lights on a rural road... does anyone really care if he wraps his car around a tree?
 
One less idiot on the road in my book.

#21300 of 21817 Re: Idea: let's take the "in" out of "inconsiderate" [gogogodzilla] by backy

Jan 21, 2013 (10:30 am)

Replying to: gogogodzilla (Jan 21, 2013 10:25 am)
Now, I know that people will argue about the premise, that lights are more to get you noticed by other drivers.
 
I agree with that... to a point. Obviously if it's total darkness, there's two purposes for lights.

#21301 of 21817 Re: . [fintail] by gogogodzilla

Jan 21, 2013 (10:35 am)

Replying to: fintail (Jan 19, 2013 1:26 pm)
Really?
 
Traffic cameras remove judgement from enforcement.
 
For example, a cop might witness a situation where a car runs through an intersection that had just turned red. And also noticed that a semi was behind him, one foot from his bumper, and also ran the light.
 
Now, that cop will ticket the semi and let the car go, as he ran the light to avoid causing a collision. IE: the cop analyzed the situation and made a judgement call.
 
Traffic cameras do not do that. That car, in front of the semi, is a lawbreaker and will get a ticket. Which teaches to the driving public compliance with traffic law, NO MATTER THE CIRCUMSTANCE. Which means that the driver of the car will stop the next time, resulting in an accident and possible loss of life.
 
This is just ONE example of various situations that require judgement calls by police... something traffic cameras cannot ever do.

#21302 of 21817 Re: . [gogogodzilla] by euphonium

Jan 21, 2013 (11:00 am)

Replying to: gogogodzilla (Jan 21, 2013 10:35 am)
There should be "compliance with traffic law, NO MATTER THE CIRCUMSTANCE."
 
Per your example - the semi is the proximate cause of the crash because the driver followed the car too close resulting in property damage & maybe physical injury.
 
IMO all semi vehicles should have a speed limit of 15 less than for cars because when they crash at higher speeds, they do more damage and the 53' box blocks all three lanes of the freeway.

#21303 of 21817 Re: . [euphonium] by steve_ HOST

Jan 21, 2013 (11:27 am)

Replying to: euphonium (Jan 21, 2013 11:00 am)
Well, in the example given, if the car had stopped short, the insurance company would have tried to deny the claim because the driver had the opportunity but failed to try to avoid an accident.

#21304 of 21817 Don't wanna slow down? by imidazol97

Jan 21, 2013 (1:47 pm)

After being criticized for having an LLD flash lights from far behind in a construction zone and pass me in the 2nd lane from right because I was in the 3rd lane and all in a total of 10-12 seconds...
 
Here are some more area interstate drivers who didn't wanna slow down for anything, including a heavy snow flurry area that caused a whiteout and glazed the roadway. Two sets of accidents about 15-20 miles apart (approx) on two different interstates. 80 cars and 50 cars.
 
http://www.local12.com/news/local/story/I-75-South-in-Middletown-Reopens-After-M- - - ulti/JNtflaHUDk-0PLm-93Wg9A.cspx
 
http://www.local12.com/news/local/story/Woman-Killed-After-Multi-Car-Pileup-on-I- - - -275-near/1t2q9pb8HkKwSTKLhxQXAg.cspx
 
The accidents reminded me of the LLDer driving through a dangerous construction area in midtown Dayton without slowing to a safer speed. There are always those drivers who will blast right through heavy rain and slow because nothing can slow them from their assigned speed and mission.

#21305 of 21817 Re: . [gogogodzilla] by fintail

Jan 21, 2013 (4:14 pm)

Replying to: gogogodzilla (Jan 21, 2013 10:35 am)
I agree with your arguments. Maybe we can all just keep dash cameras in our cars to fight the bad light cameras then. I am about to run one in mine. I don't have a problem with some cameras per se, but the justification for them needs to be proven to the public, and the revenue streams can't go to crooked pseudo-private sector contractors who are really just parasites on the taxpayer.
 
I'd like to see the police do more work too, but I suspect the odds of that are low. Police unions make big labor unions look like schoolchildren.

Messages Page 2131 of 2183

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement