Road Rage or Not? Justified anger?

[David]

So I ran out to get some errands done. Here is what happened on the freeway and my understanding of the lanes here in Washington State.

Far left lane for passing and those wanting to go a bit faster than the posted limit.

Middle lane is for going at least the speed limit.

Far right lane is for going speed limit or slower and exiting the freeway.

I got onto the freeway, traffic moving below the posted 60 so moved over into the middle lane and ended up behind a lazy person going 10 under the speed limit. Full traffic behind and besides me in the left lane, so just stayed where I was at. The traffic in front of the person clears out so this person could speed up to 60 but no, they stay at 50. After about a mile or so, I flash them with my high beams so they can move over to the slower right side lane. But NO they still stay where they are and I am still locked in unable to move. Over the next 2 miles or so I flash them 3 more times and still the idiot does not move.

Finally I get an opening and take it to move into the left hand lane and then a person from the carpool lane move over and slows down. Traffic is in the carpool lane but I am a single driver so cannot move over. I flash the person but they also ignor me and still stay. I am frusterated and even honk once but still they do not move.

I am now coming up to my exit and as such now move over the right lane where the car in front of me takes the earlier exit and I finally have an open lane in front of me. The Car in the middle lane is a Toyota Camry driven by an asian lady who can barely see over the dash. The Car in the left lane is an older impala lowered and driven by what looks like a hispanic person. I wonder if either of them even can speak english as they sure as hell cannot drive.

Police here advertise on the TV about Speed kills, Sorry, SPEED DOES NOT KILL! Stupid Drivers, especially ones who are timid and do not speak english cause more problems.

Driving is not a right, it is a privilage that you earn and if you are too damn timid, cannot see out the car very well, do not speak english let alone be able to read and write it. You should NOT be driving.

Washington State has 54 languages you can take the written driving test in and will supply a transilator if you need one to take the driving test.

HOW THE HELL CAN THEY BE ALLOWED TO DRIVE IF THEY CANNOT READ THE ENGLISH ONLY ROAD SIGNS??????????????

Some will probably say I have Road Rage, but for me, I have little patience for Stupid idiot drivers. Your on the road to get from Point A to Point B as fast and as safe as possible. Talking on the phone, smoking, eating etc. are not part of driving. Especially when I see the bimbo's putting on makeup or Idiots shaving and messing around with trying to get ready for work because they choose to sleep in rather than be responsible for getting to bed, get rested and get up in an appropriate amount of time to get ready for work or what ever they are doing.

PEOPLE WAKE UP, Driving is a privilage earned and a responsibility. Drive the speed limit, stay to the right if you are not comfortable going faster than the speed limit, stay off the road period and let someone else drive if you are timid about driving.

Edited April 9, 2009 by dfelt

[Croc]

Sorry, dude, but yeah, you were actually the jackass on the road. You're telling me you could not get over for 1-2 miles, that traffic was bumper-bumper on either side of you but the person in front of you was going too slowly at 50? Makes no sense. In LA I can get over 2-3 lanes in 1/4 mile under the heaviest traffic conditions. Sounds to me that you were just impatient, and in the process revealing some racist tendancies. Not cool.

And unless there are signs plastered everywhere "Slower traffic keep right" there are no separate speed limits for each lane on a freeway.

[Robert Hall]

And unless there are signs plastered everywhere "Slower traffic keep right" there are no separate speed limits for each lane on a freeway.

Not to mention the 'flash to pass' trick is a European thing, it's not standard procedure or widely known in the US, may be illegal in some jurisdictions. I've found that even in the heaviest traffic I can get over a lane when I use what are called 'turn signals'.

[Intrepidation]

Funny thing is that the owner's manual in my car instructs you how to use "flash to pass".

I've always been able to get over even in the heaviest of traffic...and 50 mph isn't that heavy. It just takes some time, patience, and turn signals.

[Croc]

Not to mention the 'flash to pass' trick is a European thing, it's not standard procedure or widely known in the US, may be illegal in some jurisdictions. I've found that even in the heaviest traffic I can get over a lane when I use what are called 'turn signals'.

Or in LA we put on our turn signals and just start moving over in between two cars (when you almost have it, but not quite) and usually the person slows and lets you in. Or they honk and they don't, but the next guy will. You can also use your BRAKES and get in behind someone else instead of in front of them.

Edited April 9, 2009 by Croc

[Intrepidation]

You can also use your BRAKES and get in behind someone else instead of in front of them.

I can not begin to tell you how this is such a foreign concept to most people.

[Croc]

Funny thing is that the owner's manual in my car instructs you how to use "flash to pass".

I've always been able to get over even in the heaviest of traffic...and 50 mph isn't that heavy. It just takes some time, patience, and turn signals.

QFT.

Yeah, flash-to-pass is legal in many states (hence the owner's manual reference), but it isn't widely done, and most people think you're just being a jackass.

[Intrepidation]

QFT.

Yeah, flash-to-pass is legal in many states (hence the owner's manual reference), but it isn't widely done, and most people think you're just being a jackass.

Yep...normally it's because they are being jackasses. I've had retards in one lane each way no passing roads try to flash me to get over when I was already going 5 over the speed limit.

Usually I just flash someone when I'm letting them turn.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Not to mention the 'flash to pass' trick is a European thing, it's not standard procedure or widely known in the US, may be illegal in some jurisdictions. I've found that even in the heaviest traffic I can get over a lane when I use what are called 'turn signals'.

I believe in AZ there is a law that states if someone flashes you, you are required to move over. Police here will flash you for you to move over as well.

Edited April 9, 2009 by CaddyXLR-V

[CaddyXLR-V]

Yep...normally it's because they are being jackasses. I've had retards in one lane each way no passing roads try to flash me to get over when I was already going 5 over the speed limit.

Usually I just flash someone when I'm letting them turn.

It's not only done to be a jackass. To me, being a jackass is being on a 2 lane highway and pacing the person to the right of you when they are going 10 under the speed limit, and you have a row of 20+ cars behind you that are backed up waiting to pass.

[Intrepidation]

It's not only done to be a jackass. To me, being a jackass is being on a 2 lane highway and pacing the person to the right of you when they are going 10 under the speed limit, and you have a row of 20+ cars behind you that are backed up waiting to pass.

It's much more a of a jackass when you're already going over teh speed limit, there's no passing lane, and they want you to let them pass. Of course I've seen retards go in the opposing, NO PASSING lane anyway on 110. Often leads to pretty nasty wrecks.

Or then you've got the jackass who is riding your ass in the cruising lane even though you're already going at or over the speed limit, and the passing lane is clear...but they don't move.

[Croc]

It's not only done to be a jackass. To me, being a jackass is being on a 2 lane highway and pacing the person to the right of you when they are going 10 under the speed limit, and you have a row of 20+ cars behind you that are backed up waiting to pass.

Going under the speed limit when conditions do not permit is being a traffic hazard, and can warrent a ticket. But unless there are "slow traffic keep right" signs, there is no obligation to go faster the further left your lane is.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Going under the speed limit when conditions do not permit is being a traffic hazard, and can warrent a ticket. But unless there are "slow traffic keep right" signs, there is no obligation to go faster the further left your lane is.

Well the highway I'm referring to, there are multiple "slower traffic keep right" signs posted

But regardless, if your going the exact same speed as the person on the side of you, and there is not heavy traffic in front of you, why not just get behind the person your on the side of, and allow everyone else to pass if they want to? I know for a fact people here do it on purpose, just so you can't pass them.

Edited April 9, 2009 by CaddyXLR-V

[Robert Hall]

I know that in Colorado on 4 lane roads there is a law that you have to use the left lane only for passing, not hanging there blocking traffic (outside of metro areas). It's a ticketable offence. Not sure about other states, seems like a good idea.

In the Phoenix metro area, I tend to stay in the middle of the 3 or more lanes on the freeways except when I'm exiting/entering..and try to stay at or no more than 5 miles over the speed limit, because of the omnipresent vile speed cameras they use around here..

Edited April 9, 2009 by moltar

[Oracle of Delphi]

I am shocked and dismayed ...

[CaddyXLR-V]

I know that in Colorado on 4 lane roads there is a law that you have to use the left lane only for passing, not hanging there blocking traffic (outside of metro areas). It's a ticketable offence. Not sure about other states, seems like a good idea.

In the Phoenix metro area, I tend to stay in the middle of the 3 or more lanes on the freeways except when I'm exiting/entering..and try to stay at or no more than 5 miles over the speed limit, because of the omnipresent vile speed cameras they use around here..

You're allowed up to 11 miles over the speed limit in most cities with the speed cameras. I hope they go away soon. There's talk that someone is drafting a law to get rid of them, I don't know how true it is though.

[Robert Hall]

You're allowed up to 11 miles over the speed limit in most cities with the speed cameras. I hope they go away soon. There's talk that someone is drafting a law to get rid of them, I don't know how true it is though.

I've heard that there is a lot of opposition to them. Last week for April Fools one of the radio drive time shows did a fake story about it being lowered to 6 miles over and that the City of Phoenix was buying 350 cameras to use in town. A lot of people thought it was for real, as did I.

Already, there are a number of intersections in town that have them, and I see them on the 51, 10, and 202 Santan in my daily commute.

Edited April 9, 2009 by moltar

[ShadowDog]

Well, if Mrs. Slow is in the middle lane and each lane beside is going faster, following her is just being a victim of circumstance. You pick your moments to pass. If people don't let you into their lane, they're just as bad as Mrs. Slow. Common courtesy starts by turning on a signal light and waiting for the person with consideration for others to let you in. As much as a slow driver can cause problems, IMHO, it tends to be an impatient driver to cause the accident with their lapse in judgment due to anger or frustration.

On Calgary's Deerfoot Trail, the general consensus is that if you aren't doing 20 km/h over the posted 100 km/h limit, your ass is gonna get run over no matter which lane you're in. The logical road rules state that slower traffic should stay right to be at the comfortable speed with merging traffic; however, that is neither mandated by law or required. That stretch has its own problems anyway as it is not uncommon for daily traffic to go 125-130 km/h regularly. People with aging or lesser-powered vehicles have a difficult time keeping pace or merging as a result when that area is a main artery for 120 km/h semi-trucks. Since there have been over 10,000 accidents in under 5-years, there is a great deal of scrutiny due to heavier congestion on that road.

There are a number of suggestions for this stretch of road. Read this one fellow's reply to them and tell me if he isn't simply part of the problem:

# Jay on July 24th, 2008 at 9:15 pm:

1. Reduce access points? How do you decide which ones are important enough to keep and which ones will go? This solution makes no sense

2. Increase the speed limit to 110. This worked before. I don’t understand why it became 100 in the first place.

3. Enforce new speed limit? People go 130 because it makes sense to on Deerfoot. The path is long and straight enough to allow for speeds that fast.

4. Introduce and enforce Passing on left rule? It’s not MY fault if some guy decides to pass a guy going 85 in the middle lane by cutting left and going 90. This DOESN’T work here.

5. Education. Most definately, and if you’re not ready to be on Deerfoot, GET OUT OF MY WAY.

So, by not changing anything and simply saying 'educate' people... what are you trying to educate them with? To just... speed up? Yeah, this guy is even more of a problem than the slow driver he's annoyed with.

Edited April 9, 2009 by ShadowDog

[Croc]

Well, if Mrs. Slow is in the middle lane and each lane beside is going faster, following her is just being a victim of circumstance. You pick your moments to pass. If people don't let you into their lane, they're just as bad as Mrs. Slow. Common courtesy starts by turning on a signal light and waiting for the person with consideration for others to let you in. As much as a slow driver can cause problems, IMHO, it tends to be an impatient driver to cause the accident with their lapse in judgment due to anger or frustration.

On Calgary's Deerfoot Trail, the general consensus is that if you aren't doing 20 km/h over the posted 100 km/h limit, your ass is gonna get run over no matter which lane you're in. The logical road rules state that slower traffic should stay right to be at the comfortable speed with merging traffic; however, that is neither mandated by law or required. That stretch has its own problems anyway as it is not uncommon for daily traffic to go 125-130 km/h regularly. People with aging or lesser-powered vehicles have a difficult time keeping pace or merging as a result when that area is a main artery for 120 km/h semi-trucks. Since there have been over 10,000 accidents in under 5-years, there is a great deal of scrutiny due to heavier congestion on that road.

There are a number of suggestions for this stretch of road. Read this one fellow's reply to them and tell me if he isn't simply part of the problem:

So, by not changing anything and simply saying 'educate' people... what are you trying to educate them with? To just... speed up? Yeah, this guy is even more of a problem than the slow driver he's annoyed with.

Disagree, almost entirely.

If speeding is such a problem with over 10,000 accidents in less than 5 years, then I think it is pretty obvious that this stretch of road is poorly designed.

If traffic is able to go that quickly, and it is deemed a problem, then maybe one lane per direction should be converted for truck use, bus use, carpool only, etc. in a way to reduce capacity and increase congestion to a point that people are driving at a safe speed?

Of course, I have no idea what those speeds you listed are, and for all I know 130kph could be no biggie at all, and you're just whining. I have no clue--but if the problem is widespread, the design of the highway is lacking.

[Robert Hall]

Disagree, almost entirely.

If speeding is such a problem with over 10,000 accidents in less than 5 years, then I think it is pretty obvious that this stretch of road is poorly designed.

Of course, I have no idea what those speeds you listed are, and for all I know 130kph could be no biggie at all, and you're just whining. I have no clue--but if the problem is widespread, the design of the highway is lacking.

130kmh is about 80mph, 120kmh is about 75mph, 100kmh is about 62mph. No faster than a typical busy metro suburban US freeway that I've seen.

[Camino LS6]

The bottom line is, if you are in the left lane and pacing cars in the right lane(s), you are an utter imbecile and grade "A" road hazard.

It's called impeding traffic, and anyone who does it is creating unnecessary danger to all around him or her.

Not to mention that you have to be an arrogant son of a bitch or an idiot to do it in the first place.

I'm all for MASSIVE fines for those that do this and a major PR campaign to get them to stop.

[Robert Hall]

It's called impeding traffic, and anyone who does it is creating unnecessary danger to all around him or her.

I'm all for MASSIVE fines for those that do this and a major PR campaign to get them to stop.

Agreed..it's especially annoying on a freeway when two truckers do it...I've been behind them for miles at night where two rigs are just crusing along, side by side...no way to pass them.

[Croc]

130kmh is about 80mph, 120kmh is about 75mph, 100kmh is about 62mph. No faster than a typical busy metro suburban US freeway that I've seen.

Yeah, 80 is no big deal here. Sorry, Shadow, no road deficiencies, maybe just some driving deficiencies.

[SAmadei]

Going under the speed limit when conditions do not permit is being a traffic hazard, and can warrent a ticket. But unless there are "slow traffic keep right" signs, there is no obligation to go faster the further left your lane is.

There is no obligation to go faster the further left your lane is, but you DO have the obligation to move over. "Keep Right, Pass Left" is basic traffic law in almost all states, and most have laws spelling out penalties for impeding traffic. If you are in the left most lane, and someone passes you on the right, you are breaking the law. "Slow Traffic keep right" is merely a reminder.

A lot of people get spiteful at having someone tailgate them in the left lane, or start a "rolling blockade" thinking they are vigilantes who are enforcing the speed limit or going "fast enough". This is not the case. If you are doing the 170 mph in the left lane, and someone comes up behind you going 190, you are still the breaking the law to not move over when there is a safe opportunity.

The biggest problem here causing left lane road rage is that people simply NEVER look behind them. I'm stunned how long it takes some people to move over for police with the flashing lights and siren. With the police cameras running, these violators should get invitations mailed to them for a required safety course for not moving over for the police within, say ten seconds.

[Intrepidation]

You're both breaking the law by going over the speed limit in the left lane. So both are in the wrong.

[deftonesfan867]

Actually Croc AFAIK ANYTIME there is 3 or more lanes law, even if it's not posted, dictates that if you're going under the speed limit you MUST use the right lane. Also around Philly and on a certain section of I30 in D/FW semi's are not allowed in the left lane. Good law to have to keep traffic flow @ a good pace.

Edited April 10, 2009 by deftonesfan867

[Intrepidation]

Also, I hate how people try to justify themselves going like 140 in a 65 zone and getting pissed off because the guy in the left lane is "only" doing 90. Get real.

[Satty]

Also, I hate how people try to justify themselves going like 140 in a 65 zone and getting pissed off because the guy in the left lane is "only" doing 90. Get real.

'Tis pretty dicky.

[Camino LS6]

Also, I hate how people try to justify themselves going like 140 in a 65 zone and getting pissed off because the guy in the left lane is "only" doing 90. Get real.

Speed makes no difference, nor does the limit.

If you are blocking the left lane you are wrong.

[Intrepidation]

Speed makes no difference, nor does the limit.

If you are blocking the left lane you are wrong.

You are not blocking the lane by going faster than the speed limit and the person behind is not trying to pass another car, merely just trying to go even faster.

No, that's being a douchebag.

Also, if there's enough traffic that you can't freely fly down teh highway at stupid speeds, then you probbaly shouldn't be doing them in the first place.

[Intrepidation]

I suppose next time I'm going to hear about how it's ok to weave in and out of lanes during busy traffic, cutting people off just so you can go faster is ok, next.

[frogger]

I suppose next time I'm going to hear about how it's ok to weave in and out of lanes during busy traffic, cutting people off just so you can go faster is ok, next.

Yep, so is going on to the onramp merge lane to pass a few cars in bumper to bumper traffic, only re re-merge back onto the highway after passing a few cars.

[Camino LS6]

You are not blocking the lane by going faster than the speed limit and the person behind is not trying to pass another car, merely just trying to go even faster.

No, that's being a douchebag.

Also, if there's enough traffic that you can't freely fly down teh highway at stupid speeds, then you probbaly shouldn't be doing them in the first place.

No.

Anytime that you pace someone in the other lane at any speed while in the left lane, you are creating the hazard, and you are in the wrong.

[Intrepidation]

No.

Anytime that you pace someone in the other lane at any speed while in the left lane, you are creating the hazard, and you are in the wrong.

No again. If they are going over the speed limit already, then you should just back the f@#k off and keep you pants on.

There is no need to be going even faster. If they are already going well over the speed limit you should be content with that. It is not your right to be going as fast as you want on a speed governed road. If there was no speed limit then fine, your argument is valid.

I hate how society feels the need to rush to get to the next red light (literally and metaphorically).

[Camino LS6]

No again. If they are going over the speed limit already, then you should just back the f@#k off and keep you pants on.

There is no need to be going even faster. If they are already going well over the speed limit you should be content with that. It is not your right to be going as fast as yo want on a speed governed road. If there was no speed limit than fine, your argument is valid.

I hate how society feels the need to rush to get to the next red light (literally and metaphorically).

You miss the point,DF.

If you are blocking traffic by camping out next to someone in the other lane, you are always in the wrong no matter the speed.

This asinine action bunches traffic together and creates an unsafe situation just because the douche in the left lane is:

A) an asshole doing to be an asshole

or

B) oblivious to what is behind him

Either way he is impeding traffic , creating a hazard, and breaking the law. It doesn't matter what speed each car might be going (35, 65, 85) that changes nothing.

[Robert Hall]

Speaking of traffic, my usual 30-40 min commute took 90 min tonight... ugh. 5 lanes of traffic that usually goes 65 slowed to a standstill. Apparently, a couple miles up the road, someone laid down their motorcycle then got run over by a semi. Not good. I got off the freeway and zig-zagged around surface streets for an hour till I made it home.

[Intrepidation]

You miss the point,DF.

If you are blocking traffic by camping out next to someone in the other lane, you are always in the wrong no matter the speed.

This asinine action bunches traffic together and creates an unsafe situation just because the douche in the left lane is:

A) an asshole doing to be an asshole

or

B) oblivious to what is behind him

Either way he is impeding traffic , creating a hazard, and breaking the law. It doesn't matter what speed each car might be going (35, 65, 85) that changes nothing.

I see your point but you don't seem to see mine. What you imply is that you are condoning someone going 130 mph or in a 65 mph or area. If there is enough traffic to not be able fly down the highway, it is unsafe to be going those speed, and you should just keep your impatient ass in line.

[Camino LS6]

I see your point but you don't seem to see mine. What you imply is that you are condoning someone going 130 mph or in a 65 mph or area. If there is enough traffic to not be able fly down the highway, it is unsafe to be going those speed, and you should just keep your impatient ass in line.

I never condoned that scenario.

But, if I saw someone coming up behind me going 130, I'd get the hell out of his way!

This actually happened to me twice, both times the cops were right on the guy's tail.

A bit exciting to see.

[Intrepidation]

I would too, although I just cruise in the middle lane normally since I'm not a speed freak whiel commuting. 70-75 is fine for me.

[Camino LS6]

I almost always drive fast.

But my mission is to put as much distance between me and other cars as I can.

I hate crowds - especially on the roads.

I'll never understand why people like to travel so close to other cars when they don't have to.

Herd mentality, I guess.

[Robert Hall]

I would too, although I just cruise in the middle lane normally since I'm not a speed freak whiel commuting. 70-75 is fine for me.

Yeah, my goal is a smooth cruise when commuting...I try and avoid speedups/slow downs, just a steady speed and predictable run times...usually, works pretty well...seems like I'm usually going against the main low in the morning (city -> suburbia) and in the evening (suburbia -> city).

[Intrepidation]

That brings up another pet peeve....when someone can't go a constant speed.

I don't mind going at or even a little below the speed limit

I just want to be able to use my cruise control :hissyhit:

[Robert Hall]

I'll never understand why people like to travel so close to other cars when they don't have to.

Because they have to go to work? I don't know of any way to easily avoid traffic and congestion---it's just

the way it is..for me, it's just part of life in a major metro area like Phoenix, where there is a lot of sprawl.

[Robert Hall]

That brings up another pet peeve....when someone can't go a constant speed.

I don't mind going at or even a little below the speed limit

I just want to be able to use my cruise control :hissyhit:

It's funny, I almost never use cruise control, except on long road trips.

[Camino LS6]

Because they have to go to work? I don't know of any way to easily avoid traffic and congestion---it's just

the way it is..for me, it's just part of life in a major metro area like Phoenix, where there is a lot of sprawl.

No, no, I mean when I see a group of say, 5-7 cars all bunched together with open road ahead and behind and they still stay glued to each other's bumper!

Safety in numbers doesn't work on the highway.

[Intrepidation]

It's funny, I almost never use cruise control, except on long road trips.

I do from time to time...when teh trip is longer and I just want to cruise...

[SAmadei]

I see your point but you don't seem to see mine. What you imply is that you are condoning someone going 130 mph or in a 65 mph or area. If there is enough traffic to not be able fly down the highway, it is unsafe to be going those speed, and you should just keep your impatient ass in line.

I don't think anyone here is condoning 130 mph in a 65. OTOH, 80 in a 65 is a everyday occurrence. You can argue all day that 130, 80, 66 in a 65 is a tragedy waiting to happen, but that is a separate issue from hogging the left lane. Properly trained drivers in Germany are doing 130+ as we type.

If you block the left lane, at _any_ speed, you are forcing drivers to pass on the right, disrupting proper traffic flow, and creating a hazard. You are also leaving yourself to be involved in a incident that goes beyond the normal scope of traffic law... being shot at.

The highways were created to transport people and goods safely and _QUICKLY_.

I drive fairly fast... in the 97th percentile. However, I move over quickly when someone is barreling down the left lane. It's not my responsibility to hold them up. I don't know their situation. Are they late for work? A flight? Is a relative dying in the hospital? I don't know if they are just an ass, or a psycho who forgot to take their meds.

If one is so concerned about stopping impatient speeders, you should become a police officer. They are properly trained and armed to deal with the unexpected, and you can pull over assholes all day long.

[Intrepidation]

I forget what the original situation of the thread was.

[siegen]

In Washington, at least in the Seattle area, nobody really gives a crap when you're on I-5 or I-405. People drive the speed they want in all lanes, and there are plenty of people who will cruise along at 60mph in the left lane. You just end up having to get around them. And flashing the lights or honking won't do anything but piss them off. And from my experience, pissed off drivers will be stupid and do things just to spite you. And don't be surprised if you get a ticket going 70mph in a 60, even if it's with the flow of traffic. I stick to 65mph on I-5 and never really exceed it, although I used to. I see people cruise by at 75-80, and enough of the time I will see them down the road pulled over by a trooper.

[Robert Hall]

No, no, I mean when I see a group of say, 5-7 cars all bunched together with open road ahead and behind and they still stay glued to each other's bumper!

Safety in numbers doesn't work on the highway.

I've seen that...but what I usually see is 3-5 lanes of traffic with at most a couple car sized spaces between in front and behind...a big fast moving swarm......which can sloooooow to a halt pretty quickly.

Edited April 10, 2009 by moltar