Re: Caution: Driver doesn't give a ****

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
D

Doug Kanter

Guest

"donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>R Philip Dowds wrote:
>> PS: Statistics tell me that I am most likely to be harmed, not by either
>> terrorists or global warming, but rather by other drivers. So, if I
>> wanted to save American lives, would my best shot be spending a
>> kerjillion billion dollars on invading Iraq? Or on a nationwide highway
>> safety program?
>
> Yesterday I saw this bumper sticker on a Hummer: "Caution: Driver
> doesn't give a ****"... :(
>
> And soon enough he cut off another car.
>
> I wonder if the authorities know about this kind of terrorism, of if
> they too give a **** about it.

"Hello 911? This asshole just pulled a really dangerous move, and I could
swear I saw her swigging from a Budweiser bottle. She's going west on
route..."


 
A lady was watching TV when a news bulletin came on stating a car was
driving in the wrong direction on the interstate. Her father was coming to
her house via that interstate so she called him on his cell phone to warn
him. She said, 'Dad be careful there is car going the wrong way on the road
you are on. He said 'One car, are you kidding, there are a whole bunch of
them passing me going the wrong way.


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> "Hello 911? This asshole just pulled a really dangerous move, and I could
> swear I saw her swigging from a Budweiser bottle. She's going west on
> route..."
>


 
"Mike Hunter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>A lady was watching TV when a news bulletin came on stating a car was
>driving in the wrong direction on the interstate. Her father was coming to
>her house via that interstate so she called him on his cell phone to warn
>him. She said, 'Dad be careful there is car going the wrong way on the
>road you are on. He said 'One car, are you kidding, there are a whole
>bunch of them passing me going the wrong way.

<drum crash!>

"Is this an audience, or an oil painting?"
-Henny Youngman


 
"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>R Philip Dowds wrote:
>>> PS: Statistics tell me that I am most likely to be harmed, not by either
>>> terrorists or global warming, but rather by other drivers. So, if I
>>> wanted to save American lives, would my best shot be spending a
>>> kerjillion billion dollars on invading Iraq? Or on a nationwide highway
>>> safety program?
>>
>> Yesterday I saw this bumper sticker on a Hummer: "Caution: Driver
>> doesn't give a ****"... :(
>>
>> And soon enough he cut off another car.
>>
>> I wonder if the authorities know about this kind of terrorism, of if
>> they too give a **** about it.
>
> "Hello 911? This asshole just pulled a really dangerous move, and I could
> swear I saw her swigging from a Budweiser bottle. She's going west on
> route..."

Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77 (star
77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting aggressive
drivers.
Tomes


 
"Tomes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77
> (star 77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting
> aggressive drivers.
> Tomes
>

If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no wonder
there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a contribution by
Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering hallucinations.


 
No question about that. More American die in three days in motor vehicle
accidents in the US than have been killed, fighting for our county in Iraq,
in over three years of war. The number killed in 2005 exceeded 43,000
The problem we have in this country is we allow drivers that do not know how
top drive to teach others to drive, sad.

mike hunt


"Tomes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>R Philip Dowds wrote:
>>>> PS: Statistics tell me that I am most likely to be harmed, not by
>>>> either
>>>> terrorists or global warming, but rather by other drivers.

>
> Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77
> (star 77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting
> aggressive drivers.
> Tomes
>


 

"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tomes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77
>> (star 77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting
>> aggressive drivers.
>> Tomes
>>
>
> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no wonder
> there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a contribution by
> Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering hallucinations.

Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the drivers'
manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you did not know the
local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having grew up with them I see
them as no problem at all, but I need to watch out for those that have less
experience with the adventure. There is now a slow moving program to
eliminate the large circles, some in total, some in part.
Tomes
- from the land of the first jughandle, NJ


 
Tomes wrote:
>> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no
>> wonder there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a
>> contribution by Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering
>> hallucinations.
>
> Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
> Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
> non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the
> drivers' manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you
> did not know the local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having
> grew up with them I see them as no problem at all, but I need to
> watch out for those that have less experience with the adventure. There is
> now a slow moving program to eliminate the large circles,
> some in total, some in part. Tomes
> - from the land of the first jughandle, NJ

The last time I was in NJ, 1977 I think, the first car in the left turn lane
went before the cars coming in the opposite direction through lane. The rest
in line in the turn lane had to wait for the through lane to clear before
making a left turn. Caused some unique reactions from the locals when I
forgot this custom. Also, a local company merged with a company in NJ and
quite a few NJersians were transplanted here. Took a while for some of them
to get over this same habit.
davidj92


 
"davidj92" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tomes wrote:
>>> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no
>>> wonder there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a
>>> contribution by Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering
>>> hallucinations.
>>
>> Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
>> Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
>> non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the
>> drivers' manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you
>> did not know the local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having
>> grew up with them I see them as no problem at all, but I need to
>> watch out for those that have less experience with the adventure. There
>> is now a slow moving program to eliminate the large circles,
>> some in total, some in part. Tomes
>> - from the land of the first jughandle, NJ
>
> The last time I was in NJ, 1977 I think, the first car in the left turn
> lane went before the cars coming in the opposite direction through lane.
> The rest in line in the turn lane had to wait for the through lane to
> clear before making a left turn. Caused some unique reactions from the
> locals when I forgot this custom. Also, a local company merged with a
> company in NJ and quite a few NJersians were transplanted here. Took a
> while for some of them to get over this same habit.
> davidj92

Yep, this is how it works here for a regular stop light with a left turn
lane, or even at a stop light without a special left turn lane. This is
just common sense here in NJ (from an NJ perspective, lol). The lights turn
green in both directions and the first in the left turn lane easily and
without any problem just darts through to make his left turn before the
oncoming traffic even has a chance to get within the intersection. Easy as
cake. I do this everywhere out of NJ and never found it to be a problem
anywhere else. Actually, most times if it has a left turn lane, it has a
green arrow that makes the left turn go in protected mode before oncoming
traffic goes green (although in rare cases it allows the left turn to go
last instead of first).
Tomes


 

"rigger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
> > No question about that. More American die in three days in motor
vehicle
> > accidents in the US than have been killed, fighting for our county in
Iraq,
> > in over three years of war. The number killed in 2005 exceeded 43,000
> > The problem we have in this country is we allow drivers that do not know
how
> > top drive to teach others to drive, sad.
> >
> > mike hunt
>
>
> And then we put cell phones in their hands. :(
>
> dennis
> in nca


if you ask me they should totally outlaw the use of a cell phone by a motor
vehicle operator while the vehicle is in motion...the "hands free" stuff is
a joke.

--
-Chris
05 CTD
99 Durango


>


 
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 17:45:34 -0700, Tomes spat out the following

> Actually, most times if it has a left turn lane, it has a
> green arrow that makes the left turn go in protected mode before oncoming
> traffic goes green (although in rare cases it allows the left turn to go
> last instead of first).
> Tomes


Here in the Tucson area the latter is the rule: The protected left turn arrow
goes last, after the light for oncoming traffic has turned red and before the
light for crosstraffic turns green. At a rare few intersections the left turn
arrow goes first, as you describe, and there is typically a sign indicating
the same.

The idea is that with a left turn arrow that goes first the driver who runs a
yellow/red light will come at you from the side, where you are less likely to
notice.

But with a left turn arrow that goes last, the driver who runs a yellow/red
light will be coming right at you, which gives you a better chance to spot
the aberrant vehicle.

Or so the theory goes. I don't have any data on T-bone collisions, it would
be interesting to see which system actually has the smaller number.

Most places I've lived have the system you describe, which made my first few
months here in Tucson a real adjustment.


Desert Guy


 
Suddenly, without warning, Tomes exclaimed (17-Feb-06 10:12 PM):
> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Tomes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77
>>> (star 77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting
>>> aggressive drivers.
>>> Tomes
>>>
>> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no wonder
>> there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a contribution by
>> Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering hallucinations.
>
> Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
> Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
> non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the drivers'
> manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you did not know the
> local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having grew up with them I see
> them as no problem at all, but I need to watch out for those that have less
> experience with the adventure. There is now a slow moving program to
> eliminate the large circles, some in total, some in part.
> Tomes
> - from the land of the first jughandle, NJ
>
>

They're called roundabouts here in the UK, extremely common. When
everybody knows the rules (car on the right has right of way, for
instance) they actually work better than traffic lights to keep things
flowing. Of course, this is the UK so that doesn't always work out either.

I'm not sure how your NJ rotaries work, I know that the two traffic
circles I used to go through in PA worked the same as roundabouts, just
in reverse. I'm assuming everybody moves the same way around the circle
though (here it's clockwise, in the US counterclockwise)?

Still don't like them. With the really big ones here, which can have
more than four exits, it can be very confusing on just which lane you're
supposed to be in.

Here's the scariest one I know of:

http://tinyurl.com/d5dlb

and a short video: http://www.fotosearch.com/BYV203/intp006/

Arc de Trioumphe, Paris. This is on a quiet morning. Imagine what this
is like during rush hour! Our bus driver told us that most insurance
companies won't ensure a car that gets in a wreck in this circle. Also,
that buses have the right of way - hit a bus, and it's always *your* fault.

There's an underpass for pedestrians. Can you imagine having to walk
through that to get to the Arc?

jmc
 
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 00:45:34 GMT, "Tomes" <[email protected]> found these
unused words floating about:

>"davidj92" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Tomes wrote:
>>>> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no
>>>> wonder there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a
>>>> contribution by Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering
>>>> hallucinations.
>>>
>>> Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
>>> Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
>>> non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the
>>> drivers' manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you
>>> did not know the local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having
>>> grew up with them I see them as no problem at all, but I need to
>>> watch out for those that have less experience with the adventure. There
>>> is now a slow moving program to eliminate the large circles,
>>> some in total, some in part. Tomes
>>> - from the land of the first jughandle, NJ
>>
>> The last time I was in NJ, 1977 I think, the first car in the left turn
>> lane went before the cars coming in the opposite direction through lane.
>> The rest in line in the turn lane had to wait for the through lane to
>> clear before making a left turn. Caused some unique reactions from the
>> locals when I forgot this custom. Also, a local company merged with a
>> company in NJ and quite a few NJersians were transplanted here. Took a
>> while for some of them to get over this same habit.
>> davidj92
>
>Yep, this is how it works here for a regular stop light with a left turn
>lane, or even at a stop light without a special left turn lane. This is
>just common sense here in NJ (from an NJ perspective, lol). The lights turn
>green in both directions and the first in the left turn lane easily and
>without any problem just darts through to make his left turn before the
>oncoming traffic even has a chance to get within the intersection. Easy as
>cake. I do this everywhere out of NJ and never found it to be a problem
>anywhere else. Actually, most times if it has a left turn lane, it has a
>green arrow that makes the left turn go in protected mode before oncoming
>traffic goes green (although in rare cases it allows the left turn to go
>last instead of first).
>Tomes
>
Have fun IF you visit CAFA land ... IF you cause -any- oncoming car to apply
it's brakes, you've made an illegal (and ticketable) 'left turn'.

In NV, it's quite common, for the time of day, to have the timing of the
left turn arrows move from first to last. The flow is computer synchronized
and this permits the most flow in the major direction.
 
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 08:18:37 +0000, jmc <[email protected]>
found these unused words floating about:

>Suddenly, without warning, Tomes exclaimed (17-Feb-06 10:12 PM):
>> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> "Tomes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>> Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77
>>>> (star 77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting
>>>> aggressive drivers.
>>>> Tomes
>>>>
>>> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no wonder
>>> there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a contribution by
>>> Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering hallucinations.
>>
>> Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
>> Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
>> non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the drivers'
>> manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you did not know the
>> local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having grew up with them I see
>> them as no problem at all, but I need to watch out for those that have less
>> experience with the adventure. There is now a slow moving program to
>> eliminate the large circles, some in total, some in part.
>> Tomes
>> - from the land of the first jughandle, NJ
>>
>>
>
>They're called roundabouts here in the UK, extremely common. When
>everybody knows the rules (car on the right has right of way, for
>instance) they actually work better than traffic lights to keep things
>flowing. Of course, this is the UK so that doesn't always work out either.
>
>I'm not sure how your NJ rotaries work, I know that the two traffic
>circles I used to go through in PA worked the same as roundabouts, just
>in reverse. I'm assuming everybody moves the same way around the circle
>though (here it's clockwise, in the US counterclockwise)?
>
>Still don't like them. With the really big ones here, which can have
>more than four exits, it can be very confusing on just which lane you're
>supposed to be in.
>
>Here's the scariest one I know of:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/d5dlb
>
>and a short video: http://www.fotosearch.com/BYV203/intp006/
>
>Arc de Trioumphe, Paris. This is on a quiet morning. Imagine what this
>is like during rush hour! Our bus driver told us that most insurance
>companies won't ensure a car that gets in a wreck in this circle. Also,
>that buses have the right of way - hit a bus, and it's always *your* fault.
>
>There's an underpass for pedestrians. Can you imagine having to walk
>through that to get to the Arc?
>
>jmc

France has (used to have?) one very simple rule ... unless signed or a STOP
sign, all traffic coming from the right has the right of way. IF you get
into an accident and your car is struck from the center of the hood around
to the post behind the front right passenger ... YOU are at FAULT.

Used the ADT nearly daily for three years <G>!

 
"Christopher Thompson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
>
> if you ask me they should totally outlaw the use of a cell phone by a
> motor
> vehicle operator while the vehicle is in motion...the "hands free" stuff
> is
> a joke.

It (the hands free thing) was shown to be a joke within a month of the law
being passed in NY. NPR interviewed some researcher from Columbia University
who did a very simple study. He put people in front of some sort of video
simulator which measured reaction time or something, and found that even
wearing a headset with microphone, a normal conversation was enough of a
distraction to cause problems. It was significantly worse for women.


 
Suddenly, without warning, J. A. Mc. exclaimed (18-Feb-06 3:07 PM):
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 08:18:37 +0000, jmc <[email protected]>
> found these unused words floating about:
>
>> Suddenly, without warning, Tomes exclaimed (17-Feb-06 10:12 PM):
>>> "Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> "Tomes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>> Actually, we have in NJ a special phone number exactly for that. *77
>>>>> (star 77) is the 'Aggressive Driver Hotline' specifically for reporting
>>>>> aggressive drivers.
>>>>> Tomes
>>>>>
>>>> If NJ still has some of those insane rotary intersections, it's no wonder
>>>> there are aggressive drivers. :) I wonder if those were a contribution by
>>>> Robert Moses during one of his civic engineering hallucinations.
>>> Yep, we still have them, lol. I live right near the 3 of them in
>>> Flemington. At least they have now put up yield signs up in the
>>> non-dominant flow directions. I remember when I was a kid the drivers'
>>> manual said regarding circle rules: 'local custom'. If you did not know the
>>> local custom it was an adventure indeed. Having grew up with them I see
>>> them as no problem at all, but I need to watch out for those that have less
>>> experience with the adventure. There is now a slow moving program to
>>> eliminate the large circles, some in total, some in part.
>>> Tomes
>>> - from the land of the first jughandle, NJ
>>>
>>>
>> They're called roundabouts here in the UK, extremely common. When
>> everybody knows the rules (car on the right has right of way, for
>> instance) they actually work better than traffic lights to keep things
>> flowing. Of course, this is the UK so that doesn't always work out either.
>>
>> I'm not sure how your NJ rotaries work, I know that the two traffic
>> circles I used to go through in PA worked the same as roundabouts, just
>> in reverse. I'm assuming everybody moves the same way around the circle
>> though (here it's clockwise, in the US counterclockwise)?
>>
>> Still don't like them. With the really big ones here, which can have
>> more than four exits, it can be very confusing on just which lane you're
>> supposed to be in.
>>
>> Here's the scariest one I know of:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/d5dlb
>>
>> and a short video: http://www.fotosearch.com/BYV203/intp006/
>>
>> Arc de Trioumphe, Paris. This is on a quiet morning. Imagine what this
>> is like during rush hour! Our bus driver told us that most insurance
>> companies won't ensure a car that gets in a wreck in this circle. Also,
>> that buses have the right of way - hit a bus, and it's always *your* fault.
>>
>> There's an underpass for pedestrians. Can you imagine having to walk
>> through that to get to the Arc?
>>
>> jmc
>
> France has (used to have?) one very simple rule ... unless signed or a STOP
> sign, all traffic coming from the right has the right of way. IF you get
> into an accident and your car is struck from the center of the hood around
> to the post behind the front right passenger ... YOU are at FAULT.
>
> Used the ADT nearly daily for three years <G>!
>
Wow, and you lived to tell about it? I'm impressed. It scared the
willies outta me, and I wasn't even driving!

jmc
 
Suddenly, without warning, Doug Kanter exclaimed (18-Feb-06 4:14 PM):
> "Christopher Thompson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> if you ask me they should totally outlaw the use of a cell phone by a
>> motor
>> vehicle operator while the vehicle is in motion...the "hands free" stuff
>> is
>> a joke.
>
> It (the hands free thing) was shown to be a joke within a month of the law
> being passed in NY. NPR interviewed some researcher from Columbia University
> who did a very simple study. He put people in front of some sort of video
> simulator which measured reaction time or something, and found that even
> wearing a headset with microphone, a normal conversation was enough of a
> distraction to cause problems. It was significantly worse for women.
>
>

Well, then, we probably shouldn't even be talking to our passengers
then, huh?

jmc
 
In article <[email protected]> "Doug Kanter"
<[email protected]> writes:


>It (the hands free thing) was shown to be a joke within a month of the law
>being passed in NY. NPR interviewed some researcher from Columbia University
>who did a very simple study. He put people in front of some sort of video
>simulator which measured reaction time or something, and found that even
>wearing a headset with microphone, a normal conversation was enough of a
>distraction to cause problems. It was significantly worse for women.

Is talking on a cell phone while operating a vehicle any more of a
distraction than carrying on a conversation with the passenger sitting
next to you in the same car?
 
What make you think driving is a right, let alone a Constructional right?
LOL


mike hunt


"donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> No question about that. More American die in three days in motor vehicle
>> accidents in the US than have been killed, fighting for our county in
>> Iraq,
>> in over three years of war. The number killed in 2005 exceeded 43,000
>> The problem we have in this country is we allow drivers that do not know
>> how
>> top drive to teach others to drive, sad.
>>
>> mike hunt
>
> That's because driving is a constitutional right envisioned by the
> founding fathers when they said: "All men are created equally fit to
> drive, even the Mentally Confused and Prone To Wandering..."
>


 

"jmc" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Suddenly, without warning, Doug Kanter exclaimed (18-Feb-06 4:14 PM):
>> "Christopher Thompson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>
>>> if you ask me they should totally outlaw the use of a cell phone by a
>>> motor
>>> vehicle operator while the vehicle is in motion...the "hands free" stuff
>>> is
>>> a joke.
>>
>> It (the hands free thing) was shown to be a joke within a month of the
>> law being passed in NY. NPR interviewed some researcher from Columbia
>> University who did a very simple study. He put people in front of some
>> sort of video simulator which measured reaction time or something, and
>> found that even wearing a headset with microphone, a normal conversation
>> was enough of a distraction to cause problems. It was significantly worse
>> for women.
>
> Well, then, we probably shouldn't even be talking to our passengers then,
> huh?
>
> jmc

If you get into a weird situation, the passengers usually shut up, unless
they're kids, in which case, you ignore them.


 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Re: Caution: Driver doesn't give a ****
Replies
1
Views
544
Keep YerSpam
K
H
Re: Caution: Driver doesn't give a ****
Replies
0
Views
483
Hachiroku
H
M
Re: Caution: Driver doesn't give a ****
Replies
1
Views
415
Bill Brabender
B
D
Re: Caution: Driver doesn't give a ****
Replies
0
Views
452
Doug Kanter
D
J
Re: Federal scientists say politics distorts their work
Replies
0
Views
1K
John
J
Back
Top