Road rage accounts for 15% of Dallas murders over 7 years (Lubbock: live, legal)

[Leonard123]

Originally Posted by Angie682

Hardly anyone in DFW does 60 mph on the highways. If you do, you are probably going to be involved in a road rage incident.

Most people are doing 70+ in the slow lane and 80/90+ in the fast lane.

Speed limits in Texas are "suggestions" which most don't follow since there is no enforcement.

I've heard RIchardson police are strict about speed limits, but I don't know if that's still the case.

I'll never understand how so many people even figure out how to use those roller coasters, let alone pay money to do so. Don't any other people get terrified just looking at them?

Am I the only licensed driver in Texas who does not ever drive these "highways" or access roads?

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

I disagree on #2. The law only addresses the leftmost lane. If I'm in lane 3 on a 4-lane freeway and doing limit+5, and someone behind me wants to do 5-10 mph faster, I owe them nothing, other than safe lane changing when I do decide to move and proper signaling. The onus is on the faster person to move left and go around.

I should have been more clear. That list as told to me by a German police officer is how his department tends to manage the roads.

______

If you are driving slower than the bulk of traffic you owe everyone the courtesy of moving right whenever safe. If you are truly locked in at 5 over that happens a lot.

[jgn2013]

Originally Posted by EDS_

That's just not reality not broadly anyway. The allusion does not fit well because I'm 6'3" 245, great shape, used to bounce, look a little scary apparently.....when traveling overseas and a little less so in The US I'm selected for, "random extra screening" regularly. Anyway, your logic is 180 degrees out of phase. When non-criminals carry they are less likely to get involved in situation that could escalate, DPS data more or less proves as much. I'm a choir boy when I carry. When I'm not carrying much less so.

BTW my theory on protective martial arts is simple and rooted in my bouncing days. Never go the ground on purpose because the BG likely has friends and your shirt will be ruined. Agreed on the jab. I have very long arms and have become pretty good at a couple of stand up Ezekiel Choke variations....even my cop friends don't consider that move. But my standard theory is create distance and get away. Even this stuff though is generally needless as good situational avoidance tactics win the day.

How many of these road rage incidents would have occurred if no guns were involved? People that would have cursed, slammed their own steering wheel etc., would now "rage out" and pull out their gun in a fit of anger. A well-adjusted person will be fine with or without a gun but someone that's not a criminal with a bit of temper may have.....a moment.......something that they can't take back. I don't think all of these incidents are tied to career criminals (some are obviously). Killing someone with a knife is a bit more deliberate and intimate. It's harder to just randomly whip a blade out in a fit of rage whereas a gun is much easier. I don't think the gun is the problem but some folks are just better without them. Most people don't even need them.

[jgn2013]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Yea but driving like a 90 year old with 20-500 vision isn't safe.

It's also illegal on many roads to cruise in the fast lane.

Not turning right on red at intersections where such is legal isn't being safe - that's being passive aggressive/rude to the people behind you. Alternatively, if your driving skills are so poor you are worried about that and similar moves you shouldn't be driving at all.


The other problem is super careful drivers tend to be among the worst on the road. It's just how these things work being an outlier is dangerous. Per mile driven casual speeders are the safest cadre by a lot.


I've been very happy to see LEOs in Denton County in particular moving lane jammers to the right on 35 regularly over the past couple of years.



ETA - forgot to mention my source for all this is an actuary buddy at my wife's company. They have car wreck data going back 100 years.

That could also be a function of all the transplants. I was just in NYC and NJ a couple of months ago and distinctly remember seeing a lot of signage about "not turning right on red." Some folks are just being absent minded but others won't because they never did it where they came from. It's frustrating though lol.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by jgn2013

How many of these road rage incidents would have occurred if no guns were involved? People that would have cursed, slammed their own steering wheel etc., would now "rage out" and pull out their gun in a fit of anger. A well-adjusted person will be fine with or without a gun but someone that's not a criminal with a bit of temper may have.....a moment.......something that they can't take back. I don't think all of these incidents are tied to career criminals (some are obviously). Killing someone with a knife is a bit more deliberate and intimate. It's harder to just randomly whip a blade out in a fit of rage whereas a gun is much easier. I don't think the gun is the problem but some folks are just better without them. Most people don't even need them.

I wish we had perfect or even just better data about all this. I simply want to fight off the silly notion that the average good guy/gal daily carrier is out looking for a fight or somehow more likely to engage in a road rage incident when s/he's carrying vs. not. I know it's not perfect for a lot of reasons but the DPS CHL/LTC data point in the direction or my argument pretty hard.

No question otherwise, "good" people snap and do stupid/unforgivable things.

Also given the fact that the absolute number of road rage homicides is a fairly low I'm betting a very substantial heavy half are committed by criminals.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by EDS_

I should have been more clear. That list as told to me by a German police officer is how his department tends to manage the roads.

______

If you are driving slower than the bulk of traffic you owe everyone the courtesy of moving right whenever safe. If you are truly locked in at 5 over that happens a lot.

I disagree. If there were no speed limits, I would agree with you. But I generally lock into 5 over out of a modicum of respect for the law. As long as I'm not in the designated passing lane, I have no obligation, even out of "politeness," to move right. Period. If the rest of traffic chooses to fully ignore the law, that's their problem, not mine.

[Taub201]

Are there more road rage killings in Texas per cap than other states? If so, why? I'd think Texas would be less than denser populated states like the Northeast or California.

Does road rage tend to occur during certain times of the day? Last February, Chris Murzin was shot around 1 p.m. during potentially icy conditions on Interstate 20 near Polk.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

I disagree. If there were no speed limits, I would agree with you. But I generally lock into 5 over out of a modicum of respect for the law. As long as I'm not in the designated passing lane, I have no obligation, even out of "politeness," to move right. Period. If the rest of traffic chooses to fully ignore the law, that's their problem, not mine.

You are defining passive aggressive.

You are under no legal obligation to wait for others to exit an elevator before hopping in but most people are courteous enough too wait.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by EDS_

You are defining passive aggressive.

You are under no legal obligation to wait for others to exit an elevator before hopping in but most people are courteous enough too wait.

I am under a legally mandated obligation to follow the speed limit. There is no legal mandate for me to move right, especially if I'm at or already above the limit. There certainly is no obligation for someone who is following or at least partly honoring the law to defer to someone who chooses to fully ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, people who think the opposite are engaging in a shameful, anti-society attitude, since at least nominally speed limits are there to protect human life.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by jgn2013

How many of these road rage incidents would have occurred if no guns were involved? People that would have cursed, slammed their own steering wheel etc., would now "rage out" and pull out their gun in a fit of anger.

Very good point. The Kyle Carruth situation in Lubbock is a prime example of how a gun can escalate a situation that would have otherwise been harmless. Regardless of whether one thinks he violated Texas law, there's no question that his going to get a gun during a mild verbal custody dispute escalated the situation into a deadly one. He was under no real threat until he inserted a gun into the situation.