Introduction
I searched at least 20 different threads looking for discussion that interested me and I have chosen dialogue from ten of them. Each of the newsgroups is different. Some of the groups had a lot of feedback and opinions that went against eachother. Others had few responses. Some went way off topic and some seemed to be informative to the members participating. I noticed that many participants are not afraid to express a full range of emotions and levels of intensity of these emotions. It is fascinating that people can get so emotional about driving while only writing. If people can get this emotion on paper then they really must be experiencing intense levels of emotion while actually on the road. I think that one of the major emotions illustrated is fear. People do not like to be put in danger. That is understandable. I think something that speeders and weavers do not realize is that they are making a lot of drivers around them feel insecure. The speeders are only getting angry because they feel that they are being slowed down whereas the drivers around them are getting angry because they feel their life is in danger. There is a big difference in risk between the two views and of course a lot of views in-between.
NewsGroup #1 Driving Pet Peeves
On 04 Oct 1999 01:41:05 GMT
Does anyone
have pet peeves on other drivers (this might be you!!) that really annoy you?
1. Flashing their lights to tell you to move over, when the other lane is free
and clear.
I can't tell if you are thinking of left or right passes here, but:
I was looking at my mother's West Penn AAA newsletter last week, and the
headline story was that PA has passed a new law making it illegal to hog the
left lane on an expressway. All left lane traffic is supposed to get to the
right after passing cars and all passes are supposed to be on the left. So if
those people are asking you to get out of the left lane, they are asking you to
follow the new law.
Actually, this is more or less a reinstatement of an older law, which was
relaxed some years ago to allow both left and right lane passes on expressways.
When I got my driver's license (back in the Jurassic period) passing on the
right on an expressway was a serious offense.
1999/10/04
In GA there is a sign on the Interstates: Vehicles over 6 wheels MUST
use right lane except passing. I wish that there was a sign or a law saying
that in FL. Pet Peeve #3: Semis who are going about 60 trying to pass another
truck going at 55. Happens everyday on I-75 here in Lee County, FL
Mine, the 'weavers'. Closely related are those whom will try to 'sneak' between
my car and the vehicle in the adjacent lane that is about 1.25 car-lengths in
front of me. I will actively deny that driver the space whenever possible (by quickly
shortening that distance to about 0.9 car-lengths and then passing the first
vehicle at a 'safe and sane' speed if I am the one in the left lane).
1999/10/04
If your in the left lane and there the right is free and clear. I have to pass
many on the right on I 70 because they don't understand that they are pulling a
trailer and can't go atleast 70 as everyone else is going.
I guess that would be #3. I heard that it won't go into effect until
1/1/00.
MY Reaction
I found interesting that people were expression their pet peeves about driving on the Internet. At least it is a way for drivers to get a feel of what annoys other drivers. It helps drivers to work out differences and to understand eachother better. I also think that it is helpful that they are talking about different rules and basically helping eachother become better drivers.
The risk of being involved in a
crash increases with the speed a vehicle is being driven because there is less
time to react, less control of the vehicle and the distance needed to stop is
longer. Pity this flies in the face of reality. As several people have already
pointed out on numerous occasions, the safest roads also have the *highest*
prevailing speeds - ie, freeways.
Traffic is also moving in the *same direction* on freeways (a major bit of
context you left out). On two lane country roads and city streets the
connection between speeding and crashes is obvious. It causes a good
number of crashes on freeways too. A pack of unidirectional speeders
encountering an unexpected event (like a dust storm or a mattress in the road)
are in more trouble than a pack of cars going slower in the same circumstances.
On 1999/09/23
Uh, oh, the Carl troll has
struck the auspices of aus.cars. For those who don't know him, Carl has been
trolling the rec.autos.driving newsgroup for quite a while. His modus operandi
is to make ludicrous assertions, and run for cover when a decent counter
argument with evidence is put to him. The classic was when one of the posters
there stated that he would have an IQ 30 points higher than Carl. He then used
an IQ test on the web; he had an IQ of about 155 according to that page. Not a
peep was heard from Carl.
ÊAnyone wanting a laugh can have a look
at Carls webpage with his scenario of a "proof" that "speed
kills".
Increasing your speed by only 10% will double the impact if a crash
occurs.
Bollocks. The impact will be 10% greater at a 10% higher speed. Kinetic energy
is a different story, but let's not get into that as you probably wouldn't have
the brainpower to comprehend anyway.
Kinetic energy and "impact" energy are the same thing, idiot. Crash
energies increase in a non-linear curve as speeds rise.
Yep, but a 10% increase does not
double the energy. Folks, Carl is the physics wizz who came up with F = mv. And
this is the guy trying to preach his version of physics to the world. Carl,
physics ain't your friend!
The higher the speed a vehicle is travelling when it hits a pedestrian the
greater the chance of a fatality occurring.
This is actually correct, however it is quite possible to kill a pedestrian by
hitting them even at 50km/h, so what should we do ö introduce blanket 20km/h
speed limits? Or maybe ban motor vehicles altogether, just to be safe.
The fact remains that you're much more likely to die (or not be able to run out
of the way) when a car hits you or approaches you at a higher speed. You are
using the tired slippery-slope argument and defying common sense.
Carl, as has been pointed out to you numerous times, there is a huge difference
between driving too fast for conditions and exceeding an arbitrary speed limit.
The impact on a person in a crash at 60km/h is equivalent to falling from a
four storey building, while the impact at 100km/h equals falling from a 12
storey building.
Some vaguely interesting trivia, but none of it demonstrates that speeding
kills.
Did you have a point?
Yes he did, but you're too busy defending your speeding habit to see it.
Honest speeders at least own up to the higher risk they generate.
Carl, in rec.autos.driving I have enumerated on numerous factors that would
make driving faster safer. You never bothered trying to counter them. Let's try
it again:
1) A higher speed means less time spent on the road, giving a reduced exposure
time. The fact is, even 0km/h does not mean zero risk, so the less time spent
on roads, the better.
2) Depending on conditions, a higher speed will reduce fatigue and boredom,
reducing the chances of a crash.
3) Cars doing the same average distance, but averaging a higher speed, will
result in a reduced traffic density, thereby reducing exposure to an accident.
Countering this, you have an increased severity of crash if you DO have a
crash. Looking at worldwide statistics, the pros and cons tend to
counterbalance each other.
Going to ignore these points AGAIN Carl (for the fourth or fifth time), or are
we going to get a coherent response? [ Dennis ]
Ê[ http://ctx1.tripod.com/driving/ ]
My reaction
Here there are several people arguing about whether or not it is more dangerous to drive fast or slow. This discussion is a little disturbing because the people in it are arguing in an aggressive uncompromising manner. It does not appear that they are both really taking into account what the other is trying to say. I think that driving too fast and too slow both have problems. It depends on the situation and I think that is the important fact that these two fail to mention to eachother.
Newsgroup#3: Head lights
On Fri, 08 Oct 1999 14:41:09
GMT
Why don't
Perth drivers put on their head lights?
The reason I think it doesnt do well during the day is people forget to turn
them off, as you cant tell they are on when you park during the day.
On Fri, 08 Oct 1999 23:19:48
+0800
I wont turn my lights on unless they obviously NEED to be on or I WILL forget
to turn them off. A pet hate of mine is people who turn their lights on when it
is not raining and the first signs of dusk begin to set in, but there is going
to be a good 30-40 minutes of decent light yet. I notice this more and more
lately. I take great delight in flashing my lights at them in the opposite lane
as if to say "Hey mate, you left your lights on" :)
A bigger problem for me is people who speed in the rain.
I was driving home today on the freeway, heading south just past Mt Henry
Bridge.
I pulled into the passing lane to pass a convoy of 3 slow moving trucks.
I was about half way past the first truck when a jeep or something came to a
screeching halt behind me. It must have been doing about 130.