Driver turns left *behind* me, I say nothing when I see him (house, versus)
Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, CaryThe Triangle Area
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The driver two cars back can't make the judgement for the other drivers. How does he know how well the other person's car accelerates? Maybe there is a cake in the passenger seat and they can't gun it.
When I taught at Meredith College I had a great student one summer. She was personable...winsome. I really liked her. That fall she was killed when she turned left across traffic and a truck hit her. Did she not see the truck? Did she think she had enough room? This must have been ten years ago and I still think about her.
Making a careless left turn is a hazard, to be sure. There are no doubt times when someone makes the turn out of impatience, makes a bad judgment call, and dies.
But when the cars behind (and thus further from the intersection 99% of the time) are able to (a) see over or around the vehicle in front and (b) make the left turn without it being a close call or even close, it is almost a certain sign that the driver in front was dawdling and needs to be more on the ball. Part of the problem is that often the same types that dawdle drive huge vehicles that block the view of the vehicles behind, and at that point the cars behind don't know if it's just someone who feels entitled to take their sweet time, or if they've fallen asleep / passed out on a Xanax overdose or whatever.
Last edited by glazersight; 10-12-2013 at 11:12 AM..
But when the cars behind are able to (a) see over or around the vehicle in front
and (b) make the left turn without it being a close call or even close...
And why cars are equipped with horns and lights.
Don't be obnoxious about that (or the "aggressive driver" folks will jump in)...
but give a reasonable and prudent notice to the first car that they're missing something.
Don't be obnoxious about that (or the "aggressive driver" folks will jump in)...
but give a reasonable and prudent notice to the first car that they're missing something.
Then wait for them to proceed.
Lots of things behind a wheel can be called rude or obnoxious:
1. Sitting at a turn or light blocking traffic until you're good and ready to go
2. Honking the horn incessantly and hoping the driver hears it in todays highly soundproofed cars
3. Driving overly carelessly / aggressively
The list could go on of possible rude actions. Some drivers are considerate of others around them and others are not. The ones that are not usually "get theirs" eventually, but in the meantime we have to find ways to deal with them.
Top of the list being an unfounded conclusion that momentary inattention or anxiety
is some sort of maliciousness or such by the "offending party"
In your opinion. Let's not let cognitive degradation get to the point where facts and opinion are blurred.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational
So... how about not *starting* with that as the assumption?
Lets start with a gentle toot or two. See what happens.
I'm personally in favor of this approach, but I don't like the idea of falling back on it as a responsibility of everyone else to wake up sleeping drivers with their horn. It's better to create awareness of the issue as it exists from all sides, including the dawdlers and the impatient.
It's better to create awareness of the issue as it exists from all sides...
Call it what you like but after the "awareness" has been attempted and however polite or not...
the second car still doesn't have a right to turn left before the first car.
If no median is there you might be able to make a U turn...
or go to the lane t your right and then make a U turn at the light 100 yards ahead...
or turn left there and then find your way back to the first position.
The frustrated drivers behind have lots of options but NONE of them are to cut in front of that first car.
Regardless of why that guy hasn't turned.
Call it what you like but after the "awareness" has been attempted and however polite or not...
the second car still doesn't have a right to turn left before the first car.
If no median is there you might be able to make a U turn...
or go to the lane t your right and then make a U turn at the light 100 yards ahead...
or turn left there and then find your way back to the first position.
The frustrated drivers behind have lots of options but NONE of them are to cut in front of that first car.
Regardless of why that guy hasn't turned.
Do you stand behind your blanket statement if the car ahead is broken down, or the driver has passed out cold? If so, then your opinion is probably misaligned with that of most (not only in the sense that you're unable to distinguish it from fact but, in the sense that *at some point* in time it might make sense for the car behind to assume the car ahead is not going to move and go ahead and proceed with the left hand turn if they can do so safely). This would be no more dangerous than the other options you've mentioned. How much time should elapse before the aforementioned point in time is again a time threshold that's going to vary from one opinion to the next. Someone who is extremely impatient, as I said before, is probably going to be the same person who misjudges what "they can do safely" (as mentioned above), and wind up in a collision (perhaps a t-bone from an anxious left turn, perhaps another type).
My point is that the impatient one is typically no more dangerous or at fault than the inattentive one who's lingering at the turn in the first place. If you can show me something in the DMV manual that allows a left-turning driver to pick and choose among the first, second, or thirteenth safe opportunity to turn, then I'd be happen to reconsider my position.
I find that people have as strong and unrelenting opinions about driving habits as they do about crawl spaces.
Have you found that these sort of announcements contribute meaningfully to the topic being discussed or do you find that bringing unrelated topics into the thread to be more or less troll bait? I have a strong, unrelenting opinion about that one, wonder what the moderator thinks?
Do you stand behind your blanket statement if the car ahead is broken down,
or the driver has passed out cold? If so...
Which blanket statement?
Quote:
My point is that the impatient one...
...has other LEGAL options aside from the most expedient in that moment.
He should use one of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
