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.
I dont know about the traffic in your area but if you leave a 6-7 car length between you and the car in front of you here in Montreal you will continually have cars pulling into that space and effectively eliminating your safety zone.
Pretty difficult (if not impossible) in DC Metro, too. I suppose one could give a valiant effort during off-peak hours...maybe.
if you "never" have trouble then you 'always' maintain the distance.
I like how you backpedal then into the "so most of the time..." which is not the universal claim you just claimed in the preceding sentence.
I'm pointing out that no matter how safe YOU are, someone can still put you in an unmanageable situation.
*edit*
since you like the ad hominems, you seem like the type that doesn't think before they type. but hey, it's OK. most people are the same.
ps, what's "arugeing" ?
No I'm not backpedaling nor "typing before thinking." Based on your inability to grasp the simple concepts and words I have laid out for you; you either have serious reading comprehension issues and/or you have never operated a motor vehicle. And I especially love how you had to point out a simple spelling error. That's a classic signs of someone who has nothing of substance to say so they resort to nitpicking in order to assert their self importance. Let me explain what I said as simplistically as possible.
There is a very good reason why I used the phrase "I never have trouble keeping a safe distance" instead of "I always keep a safe distance" or "I'm never an unsafe distance away from a car." In the first phrase the word never is not used in absolute terms. In the second and third phrase "always" and "never" are used in absolute terms.
So based on the above. I can't always keep a safe distance because when someone cuts you off as per your example, you have a temporary time period where the distance is not a safe distance. However, I never have trouble creating a safe distance because I use the strategy I outlined for you above. Therefore, when I said "I never have trouble keeping a safe distance" it is a correct statement.
So to put that into your example: When a car cuts me off I have a temporary time period when I'm too close to that car. But by doing what I explained previously I create a safe distance. So in essence "I never have trouble keeping a safe distance." And please don't say something ridiculous like "well even the temporary unsafe distance means your not always maintaining a safe distance." This is because when a car cuts you off, this is a NEW car that just merged into your lane. Therefore, you have to create a safe distance before you can maintain it. That's how driving works. When I used the phrase "most of the time" I wasn't referring to having trouble keeping a safe distance. I was simply stating that when someone cuts you off you temporarily have an unsafe distance between your car and the car in front. But that occurrence doesn't stop someone from "never having trouble keeping a safe distance" because you slow down, create the safe distance and maintain it.
By the way the entire point of my initial post was that keeping a safe distance from the car in front is not an unreasonable goal even in a busy expressway. That's a point you have yet to disprove. And if your whole goal was to point out that "people can put you in a dangerous situation no matter how safe you are" then all I have to say is "way to state the obvious." That's a point that almost everyone understands in all circumstances of life so there was absolutely no point in you even typing all these posts to make a useless and obvious notion. All of which makes it clear that I was correct when I stated that "you seem like the type that likes to argue for the sake of arguing."
I dont know about the traffic in your area but if you leave a 6-7 car length between you and the car in front of you here in Montreal you will continually have cars pulling into that space and effectively eliminating your safety zone.
This.
I routinely drive around Miami, and while yes, traffic is bad and drivers are pretty crazy, Montreal is up there with NYC in terms of aggressive drivers, if not worse. Drivers WILL constantly pull into whatever space there is in front of you. I find it to be the toughest place to drive out of any city I've been to in NA.
The woman was convicted in court. She was sentenced to serve 90 days in jail, on weekends.
Her Quebec driving license has been revoked for a period of 10 years.
Jim B.
As a Canadian familiar with your system, how do you feel about her sentence? Do you think it's too light, just fine, or too harsh?
I don't know much about Canadian law and I'm only learning about American criminal law, but I don't understand why the sentence is being served only on weekends rather than 90 days straight. It will take her longer to serve the 90 days on weekends, so she will not be done as quickly which kind of sucks for her, but I think 90 straight days is more of a punishment. The "on weekends" thing seems more like a vacation (though I know jail is NOT like a vacation, but the whole "you get to go home and then come back" thing is weird to me). I 100% agree with taking her license for 10 years though. Seems fit to me.
I do know a guy in my town actually who served a jail sentence on weekends only, but he was a cop so I always thought he got special treatment.
I dont know about the traffic in your area but if you leave a 6-7 car length between you and the car in front of you here in Montreal you will continually have cars pulling into that space and effectively eliminating your safety zone.
Plus, if you slow down every time a car takes that zone you'll either be stopped or driving in reverse. Here in CA cars look like railroad cars they stay so closely locked. Any crack will immediately be taken by a lane swapper trying to beat everyone to where ever they are going.
You have to find that sweet spot where no one takes the space and tailgating. That's usually only about 3-4 car lengths.
The woman was convicted in court. She was sentenced to serve 90 days in jail, on weekends.
Her Quebec driving license has been revoked for a period of 10 years.
Jim B.
Jim, I have appreciated your input on this thread very much.
Because of her having filed an appeal, her sentence has apparently been put on hold, she now is free to drive again, pending the results of the appeal. Is this the usual progression of the law in Canada, in the case of appeals to the sentencing of a case?
Also, do you know if she had been incarcerated directly after the sentencing, but before the appeal was filed? I'm uncertain of that time frame.
Ya totally stupid to leave her car IN THE ROAD!!!!!!
Its nice she wanted to help ducks but WHY LEAVE YOUR CAR IN A DANGEROUS PLACE??
Because she was a freekin' moron with no consideration for the lives of others? I haven't re-read the entire thread but did this jackass even turn on her emergency flashers? Kill 2 people and get 90 DAYS? Absurd.
The woman was convicted in court. She was sentenced to serve 90 days in jail, on weekends.
Her Quebec driving license has been revoked for a period of 10 years.
Jim B.
She is appealing this sentence, unless you mean this post to say her appeal has been heard, denied, and the original sentence upheld.
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.
