Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTSP)   Not news: Jackass gets all road ragey, shoots a woman the bird, cuts her off. Fark: What happens next. With video   (wtsp.com ) divider line 563
    More: Florida, jackass, U.S. 41, fools, dolls  
•       •       •

15454 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Mar 2014 at 9:33 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



563 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-28 04:01:27 PM  

Gonz: [Sarcastically] If you're driving in the left lane, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. If the car behind you wants to go faster, that's your problem, and you'd better let them pass you or you're wrong.


Gecko Gingrich: It's not because this is Fark. It's because in many jurisdictions it is the law. *Expressly* the law.


Ctrl-Alt-Del: Meh, I don't know about "many," the Keep Right laws I'm familiar with require you to stay in the righmost lane unless you are passing, or unless you are approaching a left turn - they do NOT require you to move out of the way of an overtaking vehicle,

Gecko Gingrich: Link

From your link: "Six states require drivers to move right if they are blocking traffic in the left lane"

"Six" is not "many" when discussing US states
 
2014-03-28 04:06:07 PM  

Cerebral Ballsy: Dash cam won't help you there in Florida. We're a no-fault state. Driver in the rear is always at fault,


No.

Rear-End Collisions and Recovery of Damages in Florida
While it is true that in Florida there is a presumption that the driver who rear-ended another vehicle was the sole cause of the accident, the rear-ending driver can rebut that presumption by producing evidence that shows that the accident was not caused solely by his or her negligence (fault).

The rear driver can do so by showing that the front driver had some fault in it as well, such as; suddenly or unexpectedly stopping, unexpectedly changing lanes or that the vehicle had a mechanical failure. If the rear driver fairly and reasonably shows or rebuts the presumption of negligence, the jury then determines the issue of the rear driver's negligence and determines the damages.
 
2014-03-28 04:06:29 PM  

tforbes: there are only two types of drivers worse than left lane nazis.

people who break check you (regardless of lane) and people who try to high-beam you after you pass them.


One usually follows the other.  Every time I'm driving in some shiathole like NJ or MA and give someone on the interstate the "please move over" headlight flash, they give a pretend brake-check instead of moving.  When I eventually pass them on the right, they will zip in behind me and try to melt my retinas.

Usually this earns them a real brake check since they love to follow at 10ft or less.

Listen people, this shiat is simple.

1. If someone behind you wants to go by, just get out of their way.  No need for drama.
2. If someone in front of you won't move over, just go around them.  No need for drama.

That said the actual WORST are the hoodrats with the fake blue HIDs, or worse, real HIDs mounted in factory headlight housings.  If this is you, kill yourself.
 
2014-03-28 04:08:56 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Cerebral Ballsy: Dash cam won't help you there in Florida. We're a no-fault state. Driver in the rear is always at fault,

No.

Rear-End Collisions and Recovery of Damages in Florida
While it is true that in Florida there is a presumption that the driver who rear-ended another vehicle was the sole cause of the accident, the rear-ending driver can rebut that presumption by producing evidence that shows that the accident was not caused solely by his or her negligence (fault).

The rear driver can do so by showing that the front driver had some fault in it as well, such as; suddenly or unexpectedly stopping, unexpectedly changing lanes or that the vehicle had a mechanical failure. If the rear driver fairly and reasonably shows or rebuts the presumption of negligence, the jury then determines the issue of the rear driver's negligence and determines the damages.


Don't let facts get in the way.
 
2014-03-28 04:09:32 PM  
moike:

Obviously didn't read my earlier posts...

I don't tailgate.

But I have been cruising along in the right lane and had asshats change lanes into my safe buffer zone shaving my front bumper by inches and then slam on their brakes for no apparent reason at all.

So far years of practice braking vehicles right to the bleeding edge of control have saved my ass.  But the HD dashcam is a good secondary source of unquestionable truth if I do make contact with one of these morons.


I don't tailgate either; it is a dickish and dangerous thing to do.

Good on you, I have been considering getting a dashcam myself.  Detroit-area (read: suburbs) drivers are terrible, and don't give a smelly rat's butt about your car, their car, or the sanctity of life in general, it seems...
 
2014-03-28 04:11:03 PM  
I'm from Fark.
I can drive however I want.
It's always everybody else's fault.
 
2014-03-28 04:12:50 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Gonz: [Sarcastically] If you're driving in the left lane, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. If the car behind you wants to go faster, that's your problem, and you'd better let them pass you or you're wrong.

Gecko Gingrich: It's not because this is Fark. It's because in many jurisdictions it is the law. *Expressly* the law.

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Meh, I don't know about "many," the Keep Right laws I'm familiar with require you to stay in the righmost lane unless you are passing, or unless you are approaching a left turn - they do NOT require you to move out of the way of an overtaking vehicle,

Gecko Gingrich: Link

From your link: "Six states require drivers to move right if they are blocking traffic in the left lane"

"Six" is not "many" when discussing US states


Oh, good lord.

Firstly, quite deliberately I did not limit myself to US states with my use of "many jurisdictions".

Secondly, I linked to that list of US state laws simply to help you with your ignorance (I do not use that as a pejorative). Said ignorance was demonstrated with your own admission of not being familiar with any laws that "require you to move out of the way of an overtaking vehicle".

Thirdly, I'll admit that the text at the top of the list states that only six states require moving right. Confusingly, it seems to contradict itself with the very next sentence. Either way, the chart (including citations) indicates that there are much more than six.
 
2014-03-28 04:17:36 PM  
The more you drive the less intelligent you are.

criticsroundup.com

/Plate of Shrimp
 
2014-03-28 04:25:43 PM  
That video amuses me greatly.
 
2014-03-28 04:32:58 PM  

SmokinTrees: moike:

Obviously didn't read my earlier posts...

I don't tailgate.

But I have been cruising along in the right lane and had asshats change lanes into my safe buffer zone shaving my front bumper by inches and then slam on their brakes for no apparent reason at all.

So far years of practice braking vehicles right to the bleeding edge of control have saved my ass.  But the HD dashcam is a good secondary source of unquestionable truth if I do make contact with one of these morons.

I don't tailgate either; it is a dickish and dangerous thing to do.

Good on you, I have been considering getting a dashcam myself.  Detroit-area (read: suburbs) drivers are terrible, and don't give a smelly rat's butt about your car, their car, or the sanctity of life in general, it seems...


http://dashboardcamerareviews.com/lukas-lk-7900-ace/

You're welcome.
 
2014-03-28 04:33:32 PM  

tforbes: there are only two types of drivers worse than left lane nazis.

people who break check you (regardless of lane) and people who try to high-beam you after you pass them.


Dont forget about the slow drivers on two lane roads that as soon as you get to a passing zone to legally go around them, they take it as a personal insult and proceed to floor it in an attempt to force you back in behind them. THOSE people need to be run into a ditch asap. Especially if there is a car coming in the opposite direction.
 
2014-03-28 04:36:00 PM  

Falin: OregonVet: Falin: In even littler-boy words- You're wrong.

You are wrong. You are not allowed to speed. The entire law is written to cover circumstances when someone is under the limit. Not to mention in the video she is passing other vehicles while this guy is on her ass. Show me where speeding in the law is permitted and I'll yield. You won't.


Sorry man, you're just flat-out wrong on this one. The laws governing keeping right in this state do not take speed limit into account. Some states do have a law that specifically says that if you're going the speed limit you don't have to get over. Washington isn't one of them.


The best states will also have it set up so you will get a ticket if you are simply left lane cruising.   you can get a ticket.
If you are not actively passing anyone then you move to the right.

What happens is that people will zone out in the left lane and then force someone to hit the brakes and then pass on the right.  That is activity that should not happen.

Self important assholes will say "I'm driving 55, I will not yield.  YOU are not allowed to exceed 55.  I AM THE LAW"

Of course, Mr Pompous has no idea why someone else might be driving 56.  It is not his concern.
 
2014-03-28 04:36:08 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-28 04:37:22 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Thirdly, I'll admit that the text at the top of the list states that only six states require moving right. Confusingly, it seems to contradict itself with the very next sentence. Either way, the chart (including citations) indicates that there are much more than six.


Good lord, is there something about this topic that makes compromises peoples reading comprehension skills? It does not contradict itself in the next sentence

From your link:
  Most states follow the Uniform Vehicle Code and require drivers to keep right if they are going slower than the normal speed of traffic (regardless of the speed limit; see below). These are listed as "slower", with an asterisk and an explanation under "comments" if vehicles lawfully using the left lane must yield to overtaking traffic.

This is not hard to understand. The ones listed as "slower" require you to move left if you are going slower than "the normal speed of traffic"  How fast the single asshole behind me is going, or wants to go, is not what determines "the normal speed of traffic".  However some jurisdictions DO require you to move out of the way of that single asshole. So how did they indicate those? Let's look at the text again

Most states follow the Uniform Vehicle Code and require drivers to keep right if they are going slower than the normal speed of traffic (regardless of the speed limit; see below). These are listed as "slower", with an asterisk and an explanation under "comments" if vehicles lawfully using the left lane must yield to overtaking traffic.

So the jurisdictions that require you to move out of the way of an overtaking vehicle are those with the word "slower" and an asterisk. And there are six of them. Six. Out of 50 states
  

Gecko Gingrich: Firstly, quite deliberately I did not limit myself to US states with my use of "many jurisdictions".


Seriously?  Then why did you limit yourself to the US with your evidence? Because what you've provided so far not only doesn't support your initial assertion, it contradicts it.

Gecko Gingrich: r ignorance (I do not use that as a pejorative). Said ignorance was demonstrated with your own admission of not being familiar with any laws that "require you to move out of the way of an overtaking vehicle".


No offense taken, it's a good source, thanks.
 
2014-03-28 04:40:08 PM  
As a public service announcement for FARK:

If you are faced with a road-rager giving you the bird, cussing, etc., I have a suggestion:

Do not return the bird, or yell back, or anything obviously defensive. Simply place your free hand to your ear, and pantomime that you cannot hear them. Make sure they understand you are truly interested in hearing what they have to say, yet cannot, and continue with the "I can't hear you, please speak louder" gestures.

So, so much fun. I am fairly sure the last person I had the pleasure of doing this to had a squirting aneurism by the time I was done with the gesticulating.  And then I laughed and laughed, and they went even more berserk.
 
2014-03-28 04:45:17 PM  

SurfaceTension:
 Actually there is reason for it. Because almost every car on the road in the US is left-hand drive, it is much easier and safer to pass on the left by weaving over slightly to see what might be up ahead than the much more dangerous pass on the right, in which you basically have to swing the entire car over before you can see what's ahead.

This is why people driving slower in the left hand lane ARE a safety hazard.


If you can't see far enough beyond the car you're passing without moving over to EITHER side you're too close.  They teach that in the first week of driver's ed.  It's one of the many reasons not to tailgate.

 the money is in the banana stand: This isn't very complicated. The left lane is used for passing AND for faster moving vehicles.


Actually, it's pretty complicated.  About 60% of US States have some kind of LL law, and they're all subtly different.   Of states that have LL laws, most require that motorists stay to the right unless passing, so the left lane isn't "AND for faster moving vehicles."  (At least not everywhere)


The whole mess basically reinforces my original point:  drivers now need to keep track of something like 30 different LL laws, which in effect makes the left lane useless.  You see it everywhere.  Miles and miles of highway with nobody in the left lane and a long string of cars and trucks riding on a pothole-strewn crumbling right hand lane.  It's even affected highway construction- rightmost lanes have deeper footings and thicker concrete to compensate for the increased traffic, making the per-mile cost that much higher.  I have no idea how many billions of taxpayer dollars are wasted on something that is completely unnecessary.
 
2014-03-28 04:49:32 PM  
I don't hang out in the left lane.

But I don't believe there's any state law that says a driver has to move over as quickly as possible for any random, tailgating asshole who believes you're not driving fast enough. On any roadway.

The only circumstance in which I believe it is mandatory for drivers to move over to the right ASAP for a vehicle is for emergency vehicles: ambulance, firetruck, cops with lights and sirens going. I'm not aware of any law that says, "If you're going the speed limit on a roadway in the left lane and some douchebag comes up behind you and immediately starts losing his shiat because you're slowing him down, you must move over so as to avoid inconveniencing him/her any further, because the left lane is for passing only, motherfarker, regardless of the traffic conditions."
 
2014-03-28 04:50:05 PM  

for good or for awesome: Roads with intersections every few hundred yards don't have fast lanes.  I'm not going to weave in and out of traffic to make my turn just so you can drive a couple miles and hour faster than me.  Even if you are a big tough guy in a truck.


yeah not every road is an expressway. a 4 lane hwy with intersections doesn't have a "fast lane" and there's no law about slow traffic having to stay in the right lane.
she was going the speed limit.
he sped ,he passed on the right,tried to quickly swerve in front of her (and was probably going to hit the brakes and try to make her hit him in the ass) but lost control and crashed.

the only thing she did wrong was record this while driving.
 
2014-03-28 04:58:05 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Loreweaver: Fade2black: Because taking video while you're illegally in the left lane absolves her of all blame (if you're not passing you're impeding). fark this biatch.


sammyk: OregonVet: sammyk: Meh, left lane nazis' make my blood boil

I don't think 55+ in a 50 zone is hogging the left lane if you have a turn coming up.

I don't either. But please don't pretend that there is not an abundance of self important douche bags that think it's their civic duty to block traffic and set the speed for everyone else.


And this. Lots of passive aggressive narcissistic assholes out there that feel it's their duty to slow down anyone that is going faster then they are. As the video proves, this creates just as much road rage as the speeding dickhead.

/Aggressive driver, but moves to the right for faster cars.

Do I really need to point out yet again that this incident was not on a highway, but on a multi-lane city street? You know, streets that do NOT have a passing lane! There is no such thing as a "lane hog" when they are driving the speed limit on a city street.

It was on a highway, dumbass


Highways don't have intersections, FYI. Watch the video again...
 
2014-03-28 05:00:48 PM  

tillerman35: The whole mess basically reinforces my original point: drivers now need to keep track of something like 30 different LL laws, which in effect makes the left lane useless.


Or you just follow common courtesy and if someone wants past you.  Let them go by.

Just because the law lets you do something doesn't mean you're not a dick when you do it.
 
2014-03-28 05:02:04 PM  
There are only two relevant "laws," for anyone who may have missed them:

1) Stay away from other cars
2) Don't be a dick

Obedience to the actual traffic laws is important only insofar as it keeps your insurance rates low and your license intact.  The two above are the ones that actually keep you alive.
 
2014-03-28 05:02:58 PM  

BEER_ME_in_CT: tforbes: there are only two types of drivers worse than left lane nazis.

people who break check you (regardless of lane) and people who try to high-beam you after you pass them.

Dont forget about the slow drivers on two lane roads that as soon as you get to a passing zone to legally go around them, they take it as a personal insult and proceed to floor it in an attempt to force you back in behind them. THOSE people need to be run into a ditch asap. Especially if there is a car coming in the opposite direction.


They go along with the guy behind me who has been up my ass the whole windy no passing zone (I am in the middle of a long line of cars stuck behind a slow moving thing- farm country, there are lots of slow moving things about and most of them stink) who, as soon as a passing zone is in sight, whips out and passes the long line of cars, not giving anyone in front of him a chance to pass first. F*ck that guy.
 
2014-03-28 05:03:19 PM  
Anyone notice the same people do this on the huge escalator at the airport?
 "Fark people trying to make their flight, there's no law saying I have to move to the right! They should have left earlier!"
 
2014-03-28 05:04:01 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: Seriously? Then why did you limit yourself to the US with your evidence? Because what you've provided so far not only doesn't support your initial assertion, it contradicts it.


My use of "many jurisdictions" was part of a response to the following statement: If you're driving in the left lane, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. If the car behind you wants to go faster, that's your problem, and you'd better let them pass you or you're wrong. "Many" is somewhat non-specific. I did not use "most" or "a large portion", I used "many" and I stand by that. Just because you and I differ on what constitutes "many" (and you insist that only US states be counted - Fark is a multinational website, after all), does not mean my statement was incorrect.

My link to the US laws was in response to your unfamiliarity with laws that require one to move out of the way of an overtaking vehicle.

Why you insist on conflating those two - very distinct - responses is beyond me.

I do want to thank you with helping me understand the confusing wording of that link. You, of course, are correct. Six states require a driver to get out of the way of an overtaking vehicle regardless of either car's speed, the speed of the flow of traffic, or the posted speed limit. It states simply, when the speed of the overtaking car is greater than the speed of the car being overtaken, the car being overtaken must yield.

My confusion came from my own prejudice. Too many left lane blockers think they they are immune to "slower traffic keep right laws" because they are either traveling at or below the posted speed limit, or because they are speeding but still going slower than the flow of traffic. In *most* US jurisdictions, that is not true.
 
2014-03-28 05:06:02 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: But I don't believe there's any state law that says a driver has to move over as quickly as possible for any random, tailgating asshole who believes you're not driving fast enough. On any roadway.

The only circumstance in which I believe it is mandatory for drivers to move over to the right ASAP for a vehicle is for emergency vehicles: ambulance, firetruck, cops with lights and sirens going. I'm not aware of any law that says, "If you're going the speed limit on a roadway in the left lane and some douchebag comes up behind you and immediately starts losing his shiat because you're slowing him down, you must move over so as to avoid inconveniencing him/her any further, because the left lane is for passing only, motherfarker, regardless of the traffic conditions."


Funny thing about beliefs, they're often not based on facts.
 
2014-03-28 05:07:58 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Loreweaver: Except the "slower traffic keep right" and passing rules you refer to only apply to highways

Perhaps you could enlighten us to the code that says this.


Here you go:

THE VEHICLE CODE (TITLE 75)
PART III. OPERATION OF VEHICLES
CHAPTER 33. RULES OF THE ROAD IN GENERAL
Subchapter A - General Provisions.
§ 3313. Restrictions on use of limited access highways.

(d) Driving in right lane.--
1. Except as provided in paragraph (2) and unless otherwise posted, upon all limited access highways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lanes when available for traffic except when any of the following conditions exist:
i. When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction,
ii. When traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow.
iii. When moving left to allow traffic to merge.
iv. When preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted.


The bold part is important. The law only applies to limited access highways, which are defined as having a divided center, with grade-seperated interchanges. Any 1-mile section of roadway with at-grade intersections and/or at-grade access to adjacent private property, is not defined as a limited-access highway.
 
2014-03-28 05:10:14 PM  

SmokinTrees: /Prove I brake-checked you after YOU slam into ME.  It's a tough sell to a cop...


If someone slams into you, you may well end up in pain and physically disabled for the rest of your life. Why in the holy hell would a sane person EVER court that possibility? Brake-checking is crazy. Disclaimer: I used to do it "when necessary" before I grew up and realized how stupid I was being. These days I would just move over and carry on with my life.
 
2014-03-28 05:13:49 PM  

Loreweaver: The bold part is important. The law only applies to limited access highways, which are defined as having a divided center, with grade-seperated interchanges. Any 1-mile section of roadway with at-grade intersections and/or at-grade access to adjacent private property, is not defined as a limited-access highway.


I'm not saying you're wrong, but how does that jibe with sec iv?
 
2014-03-28 05:16:43 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Smelly Pirate Hooker: But I don't believe there's any state law that says a driver has to move over as quickly as possible for any random, tailgating asshole who believes you're not driving fast enough. On any roadway.

The only circumstance in which I believe it is mandatory for drivers to move over to the right ASAP for a vehicle is for emergency vehicles: ambulance, firetruck, cops with lights and sirens going. I'm not aware of any law that says, "If you're going the speed limit on a roadway in the left lane and some douchebag comes up behind you and immediately starts losing his shiat because you're slowing him down, you must move over so as to avoid inconveniencing him/her any further, because the left lane is for passing only, motherfarker, regardless of the traffic conditions."

Funny thing about beliefs, they're often not based on facts.


Yes, you're right. Tailgating someone for a mile or so and then cutting in front of them in such an abrupt manner that you go into the median is definitely what the law requires. Much better than driving in the left lane for one moment longer than some guy in a truck feels is necessary. That fat biatch is definitely 100% at fault here. Not the guy in the truck.
 
2014-03-28 05:20:23 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Gecko Gingrich: Smelly Pirate Hooker: But I don't believe there's any state law that says a driver has to move over as quickly as possible for any random, tailgating asshole who believes you're not driving fast enough. On any roadway.

The only circumstance in which I believe it is mandatory for drivers to move over to the right ASAP for a vehicle is for emergency vehicles: ambulance, firetruck, cops with lights and sirens going. I'm not aware of any law that says, "If you're going the speed limit on a roadway in the left lane and some douchebag comes up behind you and immediately starts losing his shiat because you're slowing him down, you must move over so as to avoid inconveniencing him/her any further, because the left lane is for passing only, motherfarker, regardless of the traffic conditions."

Funny thing about beliefs, they're often not based on facts.

Yes, you're right. Tailgating someone for a mile or so and then cutting in front of them in such an abrupt manner that you go into the median is definitely what the law requires. Much better than driving in the left lane for one moment longer than some guy in a truck feels is necessary. That fat biatch is definitely 100% at fault here. Not the guy in the truck.


I never said anyone was 100% at fault. Both parties share fault. The guy in the truck the majority of it, but certainly not anywhere near all of it. That said, there are six US states that mandate exactly what you claim none do, namely that you must yield the right of way regardless of your speed, the posted speed limit, and/or the speed of the flow of traffic.
 
2014-03-28 05:21:43 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Loreweaver: Except the "slower traffic keep right" and passing rules you refer to only apply to highways

Perhaps you could enlighten us to the code that says this.


Also, some highways change status along their length. For example, Rt 30 in York, PA is a limited-access highway from Mt Zion Rd, extending east to a point just past Rt 222. Along that stretch of road, all interchanges use bridges and ramps.

However, from Mt Zion Rd west to Carlisle Rd, Rt 30 is a regular multi-lane road, with lighted intersections, access to adjacent businesses, and a 40 MPH speed limit. along this sections of road, the "Keep Right" law does not apply. In addition, if you've ever encountered the high traffic volume along that stretch, you'd know that is would be impractical to "keep right" if you need to make a left turn anywhere along that stretch of road.  There is no way you are going to be able to merge across 3 lanes of crowded traffic to make your turn, unless you get into the correct lane before reaching that section of road.
 
Bf+
2014-03-28 05:24:26 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: The guy in the truck the majority of it, but certainly not anywhere near all of it.


What would be your estimate?
60/40 or so?
 
2014-03-28 05:26:13 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: My confusion came from my own prejudice. Too many left lane blockers think they they are immune to "slower traffic keep right laws" because they are either traveling at or below the posted speed limit, or because they are speeding but still going slower than the flow of traffic. In *most* US jurisdictions, that is not true.


Indeed. I think a vast majority of them believe that going over the speed limit means they "can't be going too slow" Hell, even one of my posts in this thread could be interpreted that way, though I didn't mean that and know it's not true. The subtlety of "going too slow" not necessarily meaning "going below the speed limit" is lost on many, I think, just as the subtlety between "blocking traffic" and "blocking me" is lost on many others.

As for non-USian jurisdictions, I haven't a clue, and (no offense) don't really care. SO I'll grant that it may be true pretty much anywhere or everywhere outside the US
 
2014-03-28 05:28:47 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Loreweaver: Except the "slower traffic keep right" and passing rules you refer to only apply to highways

Perhaps you could enlighten us to the code that says this.


One final word on the subject:

There ARE sections of regular roadways where you DO have to keep right. However, those sections of road are specifically posted with signs, because it is the exception to the general rule. Those sections of road are usually on a steep incline, or along stretches of road where at-grade intersections are spaced more than a mile apart.
 
2014-03-28 05:29:43 PM  

Gonz: OregonVet: sammyk: Meh, left lane nazis' make my blood boil

I don't think 55+ in a 50 zone is hogging the left lane if you have a turn coming up.

No, no, no. This is Fark. If you're driving in the left lane, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. If the car behind you wants to go faster, that's your problem, and you'd better let them pass you or you're wrong.

Also, someone in the right lane going exactly the speed limit is a hazard to everyone else on the road. I've been told this many, many times.


Yeah; here in MD we have a major highway divide with 270 heading north and 495 veering East.  The 270 exit is the two left lanes (but only one is open during HOV hours).  Anyone that thinks I'm going to change my speed just because I've been forced to take a left hand exit, or that I'm going to give a flying fark how fast they want to go until it opens into two lanes again can eat their farking spleens.
 
2014-03-28 05:29:45 PM  

Bf+: Gecko Gingrich: The guy in the truck the majority of it, but certainly not anywhere near all of it.

What would be your estimate?
60/40 or so?


I blame the person that wrecked their truck without anyone forcing them to 100%.

Maybe the lady recording everything gets some blame in pissing him off, but it isn't her problem if he can't handle his emotions.
 
2014-03-28 05:32:34 PM  

Bf+: What would be your estimate?
60/40 or so?


70/30, or thereabouts. But I'm hard-pressed to quantify that.
 
2014-03-28 05:35:14 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Bf+: What would be your estimate?
60/40 or so?

70/30, or thereabouts. But I'm hard-pressed to quantify that.


His inability to drive was her fault? His accident was her fault? Really?
 
2014-03-28 05:38:17 PM  

IRQ12: Nix Nightbird: I drive all across the state as part of my job, and I have determined the following:

If you aren't on freeway the whole time, continually going 15-20 mph over the speed limit during a 50-mile trip gets you to your destination approximately 2 minutes faster.

Two. Minutes.
...

Check your math.  At 15mph over on a 50 mile trip @55mph zone you are saving ~12 minutes.



Consumer Reports tested how much time is actually saved by speeding v. obeying the law. Over 1000 mile trip, the speeder saved 30 minutes. The real world intrudes.

/Bracing for the deeply sworn testimonials of the he men who know how to drive.
 
2014-03-28 05:38:38 PM  

sammyk: OregonVet: sammyk: Meh, left lane nazis' make my blood boil

I don't think 55+ in a 50 zone is hogging the left lane if you have a turn coming up.

I don't either. But please don't pretend that there is not an abundance of self important douche bags that think it's their civic duty to block traffic and set the speed for everyone else.


Theres a jackass that I have to pass.on  the way to work every morning who thinks it's his job to keep traffic under control in the fast lane . And yet cant be bothered with controlling traffic in the slow lane ( most of which is passing him ) . I call him the traffic warden . I almost got a chance to call him that in person one day . He was leaving a store the other day as I was pulling in .
 
2014-03-28 05:41:48 PM  

R.A.Danny: His inability to drive was her fault? His accident was her fault? Really?


Let's say you steal a dog's bone and he bites you. Are you faultless?
 
2014-03-28 05:44:54 PM  
You know why most left-lane hogs do it, aside from ignorance? Because they are afraid of driving, and particularly afraid of changing lanes. They would rather do something unsafe than have to signal and change lanes whenever they come up on slower traffic in the right lane. My sister's like that; she would rather drive at the speed limit, 15 miles an hour slower than the flow of traffic, than drive at a safer speed she finds "scary." I've explained to her about delta-V to no avail.

That truck driver's just an asshole, though. The proper response to left lane hogs is to find a way around them, make a mental note to biatch about them on Fark, and go on your way. Turning it into some sort of road rage challenge makes it no longer their fault at all when you wreck your truck because you can't drive.

This particular woman is worse than your typical left lane hog, in that she's driving unsafely while VERTICAL VIDEOing. I'm just sorry she didn't wreck, too.
 
2014-03-28 05:45:13 PM  

Bf+: Gecko Gingrich: The guy in the truck the majority of it, but certainly not anywhere near all of it.

What would be your estimate?
60/40 or so?


It's an easy call for me - the whole issue of her "speeding up after he passed" discussed earlier confuses things, especially since his posture, attitude and actions seem to indicate (to me, at least) that it was actually him slowing down just to make sure she got a good view of his finger and his evil grin so she would know good and well that he was intentionally farking her over when he cut her off like that.

1) For the first sixty seconds of the video she was passing two trucks, and she was not going 10 (or more) mph below the limit, so she had every right to be in that lane at that time at that speed, and no obligation to get out of his way.

2) Once she passed the 2 trucks, he IMMEDIATELY moved over to the right lane and accelerated, giving her no chance to get out of the way even if she wanted to

3) He was tailgating, which is damned dangerous. In my state it's on par with racing, going more than 30mph over the limit, or driving to the left of oncomin traffic

4) When he finally does go in front of her, it's pretty clear that he is at the least trying to scare the shiat out of her, and to be honest, it looks to me like he's intentionally trying to cause her to have an accident.

If I were the cops, I would have nailed Mr Leadfoot Totsquasher  for tailgating, reckless (not careless) driving, improper lane change, leaving the scene of an accident, failure to wear a seat belt, and improper hand signal. I would have charged her with distracted driving (or careless driving) for fiddling about with the cameraphone.

As for the accident, it is absolutely, 100% his fault. She was not breaking any law in any way that had any direct influence on him or his truck other than annoying him. The fact that some other driver is being an annoying asshole (which, to be fair, can easily be argued about her actions) is no goddamned excuse for anything he did, and was in no way responsible for his actions.
 
2014-03-28 05:45:23 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: R.A.Danny: His inability to drive was her fault? His accident was her fault? Really?

Let's say you steal a dog's bone and he bites you. Are you faultless?


1) A dog is an animal, not a civilized human being
2) The dog would be put down
3) I don't let my dog drive
 
2014-03-28 05:46:14 PM  

justtray: Loreweaver: duffblue: Gonz: OregonVet: sammyk: Meh, left lane nazis' make my blood boil

I don't think 55+ in a 50 zone is hogging the left lane if you have a turn coming up.

No, no, no. This is Fark. If you're driving in the left lane, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. If the car behind you wants to go faster, that's your problem, and you'd better let them pass you or you're wrong.

Also, someone in the right lane going exactly the speed limit is a hazard to everyone else on the road. I've been told this many, many times.

Since the law is to yield to faster traffic in most states, you have to be a special kind of stupid to do what the driver behind the camera does.

Those laws only apply on a highway. They do not apply within 500 feet of an intersection. EVER.

Highways have intersections. Freeways do not.


Apologies, its a terminology thing. Here in PA, when referring to a highway, it is generally understood to mean the limited-access variety with bridges for interchanges.
 
2014-03-28 05:46:46 PM  

R.A.Danny: Bf+: Gecko Gingrich: The guy in the truck the majority of it, but certainly not anywhere near all of it.

What would be your estimate?
60/40 or so?

I blame the person that wrecked their truck without anyone forcing them to 100%.

Maybe the lady recording everything gets some blame in pissing him off, but it isn't her problem if he can't handle his emotions.


ts4.mm.bing.net
 
2014-03-28 05:46:49 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: R.A.Danny: His inability to drive was her fault? His accident was her fault? Really?

Let's say you steal a dog's bone and he bites you. Are you faultless?


Let's just say she was driving with her feet drinking bourbon from a funnel.
 
2014-03-28 05:47:11 PM  

umad: Gonz: No, no, no. This is Fark. If you're driving in the left lane, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. If the car behind you wants to go faster, that's your problem, and you'd better let them pass you or you're wrong breaking the farking law.

FTFY, you farking idiot.


It's not the law here, dumbass
 
2014-03-28 05:48:18 PM  

R.A.Danny: 1) A dog is an animal, not a civilized human being
2) The dog would be put down
3) I don't let my dog drive



That's a lot of words when a simple, "No," would have sufficed.
 
2014-03-28 05:48:31 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: R.A.Danny: His inability to drive was her fault? His accident was her fault? Really?

Let's say you steal a dog's bone and he bites you. Are you faultless?


1) She didn't steal his property or violate his rights in any way

2) He's not a dog, he's a human goddamned being, and the law, at least, expects him to act like one
 
Displayed 50 of 563 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report