bad driving move of the day

I-135 southbound, 30 miles or so south of salina, KS. construction zone,
lanes are coned off so that there's only one lane open southbound. there's
steady traffic, nothing real heavy on a friday afternoon, speed limit marked
at 60 and we're doing about that.

so i watch something developing two cars in front of me; there's a dude
towing a MASSIVE RV trailer behind his truck going to merge onto our lane of
freeway from the rest area we've just passed... it's moment of truth time
as he's creeeeeping along at around 15 MPH -- is he really gonna try to
merge with a 45 MPH speed difference?

fortunately, RV driver knows how to drive--he stops at the yield sign and
waits for traffic to clear in a moment. UNFORTUNATELY, the auto two cars in
front of DOES NOT know how to drive. he SLAMS ON HIS BRAKES stopping all
traffic on the freeway so that RV dude can now have an unimpeded lane onto
the freeway!

RV dude doesn't move for a few moments because he's probably going "what are
you doing dude? you're holding up traffic illegally." when it becomes
clear that the "courteous" driver intends to stay there until the RV has
merged in front of us all, the RV has no choice but to putter onto the
freeway.

i of course lay on my horn hoping that clueless dude two cars up doesn't
have his stereo up too loud to get the message. i'm sure he thought he was
being a nice guy by doing this, the problem is this is exactly how
chain-reaction accidents happen and at the least about 30 cars were delayed
unnecessarily by the self-made traffic cop.

brink

brink wrote:
> I-135 southbound, 30 miles or so south of salina, KS. construction zone,
> lanes are coned off so that there's only one lane open southbound. there's
> steady traffic, nothing real heavy on a friday afternoon, speed limit marked
> at 60 and we're doing about that.
>
> so i watch something developing two cars in front of me; there's a dude
> towing a MASSIVE RV trailer behind his truck going to merge onto our lane of
> freeway from the rest area we've just passed... it's moment of truth time
> as he's creeeeeping along at around 15 MPH -- is he really gonna try to
> merge with a 45 MPH speed difference?
>
> fortunately, RV driver knows how to drive--he stops at the yield sign and
> waits for traffic to clear in a moment. UNFORTUNATELY, the auto two cars in
> front of DOES NOT know how to drive. he SLAMS ON HIS BRAKES stopping all
> traffic on the freeway so that RV dude can now have an unimpeded lane onto
> the freeway!
>
> RV dude doesn't move for a few moments because he's probably going "what are
> you doing dude? you're holding up traffic illegally." when it becomes
> clear that the "courteous" driver intends to stay there until the RV has
> merged in front of us all, the RV has no choice but to putter onto the
> freeway.
>
> i of course lay on my horn hoping that clueless dude two cars up doesn't
> have his stereo up too loud to get the message. i'm sure he thought he was
> being a nice guy by doing this, the problem is this is exactly how
> chain-reaction accidents happen and at the least about 30 cars were delayed
> unnecessarily by the self-made traffic cop.
>
> brink


That is so unbelievably stupid and dangerous to everyone. But then so
is doing 100 mph and yet when you see someone doing that, you say "go
dood".

On 22 Jul 2005 22:38:01 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
> was understood to have stated the following:

>
>That is so unbelievably stupid and dangerous to everyone. But then so
>is doing 100 mph and yet when you see someone doing that, you say "go
>dood".

Why not? If the conditions are favorable for it, ie no
traffic/people/animals around, dry weather, good visibility, etc, then
why limit the speed?

David W. Poole, Jr. wrote:
> On 22 Jul 2005 22:38:01 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
> > was understood to have stated the following:
>
> >
> >That is so unbelievably stupid and dangerous to everyone. But then so
> >is doing 100 mph and yet when you see someone doing that, you say "go
> >dood".
>
> Why not? If the conditions are favorable for it, ie no
> traffic/people/animals around, dry weather, good visibility, etc, then
> why limit the speed?

So that's your attitude, huh? Let people decide for themselves what
laws they will obey???

On 23 Jul 2005 09:26:20 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
> was understood to have stated the following:

>
>
>David W. Poole, Jr. wrote:
>> On 22 Jul 2005 22:38:01 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
>> > was understood to have stated the following:
>>
>> >
>> >That is so unbelievably stupid and dangerous to everyone. But then so
>> >is doing 100 mph and yet when you see someone doing that, you say "go
>> >dood".
>>
>> Why not? If the conditions are favorable for it, ie no
>> traffic/people/animals around, dry weather, good visibility, etc, then
>> why limit the speed?
>
>So that's your attitude, huh? Let people decide for themselves what
>laws they will obey???

Where did you learn to read, moron? You've been spending *way* too
much time in the bath houses, faggot.


--

The last song I started on my PC was: Counting Crows - Daylight Fading - Recovering The Satellites
K:\Audio\Counting Crows\Recovering The Satellites\03-Daylight Fading.mp3
This is track 2 of 57 in the current playlist.

"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> David W. Poole, Jr. wrote:
>> On 22 Jul 2005 22:38:01 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
>> > was understood to have stated the following:
>>
>> >
>> >That is so unbelievably stupid and dangerous to everyone. But then so
>> >is doing 100 mph and yet when you see someone doing that, you say "go
>> >dood".
>>
>> Why not? If the conditions are favorable for it, ie no
>> traffic/people/animals around, dry weather, good visibility, etc, then
>> why limit the speed?
>
> So that's your attitude, huh? Let people decide for themselves what
> laws they will obey???

His question was "why limit the speed?" IF there isn't a speed limit (as
was the case in the mid-west 35+ years ago), then no one would be disobeying
any laws by doing 100MPH.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 19:05:13 -0400, "James C. Reeves"
> wrote:

>
>"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
roups.com...
>>
>>
>> David W. Poole, Jr. wrote:
>>> On 22 Jul 2005 22:38:01 -0700, "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend"
>>> > was understood to have stated the following:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >That is so unbelievably stupid and dangerous to everyone. But then so
>>> >is doing 100 mph and yet when you see someone doing that, you say "go
>>> >dood".
>>>
>>> Why not? If the conditions are favorable for it, ie no
>>> traffic/people/animals around, dry weather, good visibility, etc, then
>>> why limit the speed?
>>
>> So that's your attitude, huh? Let people decide for themselves what
>> laws they will obey???
>
>His question was "why limit the speed?" IF there isn't a speed limit (as
>was the case in the mid-west 35+ years ago), then no one would be disobeying
>any laws by doing 100MPH.

Under the right conditions, there's nothing wrong with doling 100 MPH.

You need to free your mind from the shackles of the "speed kills"
myth. There is nothing INHERENTLY wrong with driving 100 MPH; it's the
context that makes it dangerous (or not).