Subject: Re: Driving Pet peeves

From: [email-masked] (John P. Curcio)
Date: 16 Jun 1995 16:00:09 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>,
 <[email-masked]@atlanta.com> wrote:

>If you drive down the (clear) lane-that-ends, passing all the people who moved
>into the through lane early, intending to force your way into the queue in 
>front of everyone, you should be spread out and nailed to the end of that 
>lane as a deterrent to other line jumpers who might try the same (they'd 
>probably just run over you anyway).. 

Wait a minute.... why the hell should people merge before they have
to?  The only thing this accomplishes is to move the merge point
further back, increasing the delay for everyone else further back in
the pack.  This happens countless times at every merge I know--
whether it be a construction zone lane closing or a standard "lane
ends-- merge left" type of thing.

As long as the lane isn't a turn-only lane, I see no problem with this.
In fact, I have a bigger problem with people who wait in a half-mile
long line of traffic while the other lane has two cars in it.

-JPC

-- 
 -<=>- Just say NO! to Budmilloors...   Support your local MICROBREWERY -<=>-
John P. Curcio  [email-masked]  Philips Labs  Briarcliff Manor, NY
   "If nothing beats a Bud, given the choice, I'd take the nothing..."
   "No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'"  -BH

---

From: Scott Kirkham <[email-masked]>
Date: 19 Jun 1995 11:58:35 GMT

[email-masked] wrote:

>I feel that the through lane wouldn't be backed up at all if it weren't for the
>line jumpers forcing their way in (at low speed) at the head of the line.  If 
>the people in the through lane were able to cruise straight through without 
>waiting for the people ahead letting the jumpers in, there wouldn't be any 
>delay.

Nope. No way. Wouldn't happen. Have you ever been driving down an 
interstate, or heck, even a state highway, and encountered construction?
Regardless of how many people are on the road, most peoples' instinct
is to lift. You get Maw and Paw in their Crown Vic who hit their brakes 
whenever someone is headed their way, regardless of construction. 
Construction is a true challenge for them. People slow down when 
approaching construction. As they slow down, the person behind them
over-compensates, slowing down even more. It doesn't take a genius to 
realize that if everybody slows down more than the person in front of
them, eventually the traffic will come to a virtual standstill. I wish 
that this idealistic situation of people merging but maintaining speed
would happen as much as the rest, but it ain't gonna happen. Not in my
lifetime. anyway.

Scott Kirkham

---

From: [email-masked] (David Glenn)
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 23:36:03 GMT

[email-masked] wrote:

>In <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Michael Cornell) writes:
>>Major peeve:
>>You're on a highway half a mile away from a construction zone where 2 lanes 
>>narrow to one, and the signs say "Use Both Lanes".  Two damn tractor-trailors 
>>are side-by-side, preventing you from continuing down the lane that ends.  
>>There's no traffic in that lane ahead of the truck.  Pass the self-righteous 

>(Major pet peeves.. Assholes who run down turn-only or blocked off lanes, 
>passing hundreds of cars who moved over early, where they then squeeze in 
>front of everyone (regardless of what the signs say)..

>(If you want to get past traffic, find another route, one that doesn't delay
>everyone else just so you can save some time.) 

Well, as I see it there are two situations here. A lane is open until
the barricade right? So if traffic is moving as normal I see no
problem with using the open lane until it is time to merge. Holds up
no one, blocks no one, uses the lane as intended. The other situation
is the 'oh god, we have to merge' syndrome, where the road is at a
practical standstill (or is) and the open lane traffic is a mile long,
people who rush up in the to be blocked lane and jump in line here are
causing a problem and should be dealt with as suggested. Simple,
common sense.