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.
Because they paid a boatload of money for their car and like a turkey displaying its feathers they desperately need you to know it
Because they have to 'win' the commute
Because they really need to get home 3 minutes sooner - cat videos to watch, beers to drink, Facebook to update, video games to play
Because they're emotionally 12 years old and driving fast is 'thrilling' (I wonder, do these people sprint to the mailbox, too? )
Because 'time is money' ... (on the other hand, they do have to pay off that fast/shiny car, so...)
I can literally tell that you are professionally-trained in recognizing and diagnosing such things. The only thing missing is mention of how speeders secretly lust for their mothers.
Hmmm...this got me to thinking. I drive 45 miles to work, five days a week. Rural driving. It takes me close to an hour. Let's be more conservative and cut your figures in half. Let's say I save 45 seconds per five minutes on the road each. Over that hour drive that is 45 seconds x 12 = 9 minutes. That's 18 minutes per day, which translates to 90 minutes per work week, which translates to 360 minutes per month, and then to 3,240 minutes per year (I teach, so nine months). Now, I'm not a math guy, but I believe that translates into over two fewer days spent in my car over the course of only one year. Doing this for years, we're then talking about weeks of my life not spent in my car.
Getting back weeks of their lives isn't particularly important to many people. They move slow in their cars, they move slow as they meander down the grocery store aisle. I get it, but it is important to me. The very marginal safety benefit in going 55 versus 65 is far outweighed by the time I get back to my life, so much so, that I've referred to speeding tickets in the past as a "cost of doing business." Is it worth getting a $200 every 5/6 years in exchange for the time I get to spend outside of my car? Absolutely.
I totally agree about speeding tickets. They're a cost of doing business as far as I'm concerned, and a nominal fine every few years surely isn't going to deter me from driving at a speed of my choosing under the right conditions. I like to do the things that have to be done quickly, like you, so that I have more time for the things I really want to do. That includes driving places.
I, like most people, let things go and not let situations escalate on the road. I grasp your thought process very well, and I've run into many people with your though process. What you don't understand is I'm not defending those that get in a rage. Nor am I defending those that instigate road rage, knowingly or unknowingly. They are just as culpable, especially so if they're doing it on purpose. If you're not aware of your surroundings and environment while driving, you're doing it wrong.
You'd be a terrible doctor because all you'd do is treat the symptom and not cure the cause.
Blaming a road rager's rage on their surroundings IS treating the symptom, not the cause. The cause is in the mind of the rager, not anyone around him - otherwise, everyone would be road raging and out shooting each other and running into each other all the time, and while some would like to believe that that's the case, it's just not. If it were, it wouldn't hit the news when it does happen. That's where you're making your mistake.
Again the faster you drive the faster people behind you can drive its just being courteous with as much traffic as LA has its appalling to me when traffic clears up that people drive slow.
Not all the time that you don't get places faster. Once you start driving fast and you see just how much faster you beat your GPS it can be kind of hard to stop you're literally wasting your precious time by driving slow. Imagine driving across west Texas going slow, logically that does not make any sense.
Having driven across West Texas, the one thing you need to consider is that not only can you see another car coming 100 miles away (not much of an exaggeration), but there are not a lot of roads intersecting with the highway for miles and miles. So not a real good example if you're talking about driving on the roads with other people.
Also, define "slow". At the speed limit, or below it? There's a big difference.
Some people are even worse being extra sensitive, and not just letting people drive how they want, and get buthurt when someone tries to go around them, these people cause more traffic then the speeders.
Trying to dominate the road is not thinking about others if someone is driving faster do the world a favor and get over.
Old people drive slow for a reason it's because they are losing competence, some people are just more competent than others so driving fast is not as bad for them.
Except that a truly competent driver (not just one in their own head) knows that they share the road with people of varying degrees of competence and experience and doesn't consider it a great place to show off what a flashy (not great) driver they are and how fast they can go. Nor does a truly competent driver consider it a necessity for his own peace of mind and ego to do that.
Anyone who does, isn't a truly competent driver no matter how they try to justify it to themselves. Competent driving is about a whole lot more than how fast you can go.
Blaming a road rager's rage on their surroundings IS treating the symptom, not the cause. The cause is in the mind of the rager, not anyone around him - otherwise, everyone would be road raging and out shooting each other and running into each other all the time, and while some would like to believe that that's the case, it's just not. If it were, it wouldn't hit the news when it does happen. That's where you're making your mistake.
He’s not blaming their surroundings. He saying that it normally takes two people to cause an accident. The road Rager, and then the person who engages with the road Rager. In the story I told about the lady on the expressway trying to pass and the guy in the left lane deliberately blocking her, Legally it would not be anyone else’s fault if she ended up killing an innocent person when she passed on the shoulder, but in my opinion the guy who was deliberately blocking her would still have blood on his hands too.
I’d have gone out of my way to let her by. And if I was the lead car in the middle lane I would’ve floored it for a few seconds to let her get in front of that guy in the left lane. I’d rather have her just get by. The person who thinks that ithey are entitled to teach the person a lesson, is just as culpable morally, not legally, if an innocent person ends up getting hurt because both of them were being idiots.
There was a big accident several years ago near the Poconos. A car full of teenagers going to a cheerleading camp tried to pass a pick up truck. The guy decided to close the space between him in the car in front of him so they couldn’t get in, and they ended up hitting a dump truck head on, with all of them dying in the car. Thats what happens when someone decides they don’t like someone’s driving and decide to teach them a lesson.
Blaming a road rager's rage on their surroundings IS treating the symptom, not the cause. The cause is in the mind of the rager, not anyone around him - otherwise, everyone would be road raging and out shooting each other and running into each other all the time, and while some would like to believe that that's the case, it's just not. If it were, it wouldn't hit the news when it does happen. That's where you're making your mistake.
Life must be so hard being right all the time
I have yet to see or hear of an instance of a single person go down the road all of a go into a road rage. If someone's being an aggressive driver and you purposely get in the way, you're just as guilty. Not just in my eyes, but in the eyes of the law as well.
Maybe you're not seeing road rage events, but they happen all the time in the northeast. You want to be self righteous and be passive aggressive toward these crazies, be my guest. Blaming them as the lone reason it happened isn't going to help you a lot when they pull up along side you and shoot you or, pull you out of the car and beat you up. I'm not making this up, this has happened just in the last few months in this area. There's a lot of traffic in this area and being proactive by not blocking anyone and being nice to other drivers goes a long way in avoiding these situations.
would you rather have me on your tail for 17 miles or let me get by so you can have the road to yourself
I'll answer that for her: Yes, she would prefer that you tail her for 17 miles so that she can slow you down and then complain to people about all those speeders. She's been doing it for years here.
we got many of road that are up and down hilly with curves so passing is very limited, speed limit 55, nothing worst than getting behind a car doing 35 for 22 miles where you cannot pass. most people run that road at about 60-65 and its not a problem. when you get 17 cars on your tail, you could be the problem
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.
) 
... (on the other hand, they do have to pay off that fast/shiny car, so...)
