Ya gotta love California "drivers"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:54:54 +0000 (UTC), (Kenneth
Crudup) wrote:

>How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there?
>
> http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup
>
> -Kenny


Yeah, right...
Windows Media Player cannot play the file because the server is not
responding. If you entered a URL or path to play the file, verify
that it is correct. If you clicked a link to play the file, the link
may not be valid.

Crap server.

Try again



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.1

iQA/AwUBQtboWAIk7T39FC4ZEQISxQCfT0yQT9zAzTV1nkM+bcUWzJ fG/y0AoJcs
FusaEqv4C3GeDBEB+x22AiI1
=jTsJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-john
wide-open at throttle dot info

On 14 Jul 2005 08:24:10 -0700, "John S." > wrote:

>Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways
>seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there.
>The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast
>they will with only 2 car lengths between.


If you're lucky. Often, they'll be so close, you could hand the other
driver a cigarette...

-LMB

223rem wrote:
>
> Kenneth Crudup wrote:
>
> > How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there?
> >
> > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup
> >
> > -Kenny
> >
> Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived!

I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine?

--
Cheers, Bev
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please hassle me, I thrive on stress.

The Real Bev wrote:
> 223rem wrote:
>
>>Kenneth Crudup wrote:
>>
>>
>>>How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there?
>>>
>>> http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup
>>>
>>> -Kenny
>>>
>>
>>Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived!
>
>
> I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine?
>

That's what I had to do too.

223rem wrote:
>
> The Real Bev wrote:
> > 223rem wrote:
> >>Kenneth Crudup wrote:
> >>
> >>>How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there?
> >>>
> >>> http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup
> >>
> >>Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived!
> >
> > I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine?
>
> That's what I had to do too.

Was it good for you?

--
Cheers,
Bev
----------------------------------------------------------
"When I was in college, the only job I could get was
****ting on people's lawns. Sure, the owners complained,
but it was honest work and it kept me off welfare..."
-- M. Tabnik in mcfl (paraphrased)

On 14 Jul 2005 05:19:15 -0700, "John S." > wrote:

>Not surprising given the speed that California traffic moves at and how
>closely the cars are spaced. A trip down the 405 is downright scary at
>the usual 70+ mph.

If 70 MPH scares you, you'd no doubt have a heart attack if you rode
with me at 100 MPH down the 5...

The Real Bev > writes:

>>Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived!

>I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine?

It needs WiMP (fortunately, it plays in MacWiMP too).

--
Cameron Kaiser * * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **

John S. wrote:
> Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways
> seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there.
> The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast
> they will with only 2 car lengths between.

Here's the chain of causation that leads to this situation.

1. California law stupidly says that if someone cuts into your lane
right in front of you, and you hit him anywhere behind the lights, it's
a "rear ender" and YOU are blamed.

2. A large number of skillful but stupid drivers take advantage of that
law by performing a maneuver known as the "LA lane change": jam your
front fender into a 2-3 foot gap between cars in an adjacent lane, then
just follow it in, thus forcing the driver behind the gap to slam on his
brakes and let you in.

3. Drivers who fall for the "LA lane change" get it done to them over
and over again and become "rocks in the stream" of traffic, and are
rightly regarded as complete idiots and assholes by everyone else.

4. Naturally, all drivers with sufficient skill and brains start
keeping up very closely, because it's the only way to prevent themselves
from becoming part of that category.

Of course, this situation is marginally less safe than if everyone
followed at a safe stopping distance. But the only step in the chain
that can sensibly be changed is step 1. So long as that law stands, the
possibility of these pileups must be regarded as one of the unavoidable
risks of driving on the freeway.

"John David Galt" > wrote in message
...
> John S. wrote:
>> Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways
>> seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there.
>> The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast
>> they will with only 2 car lengths between.
>
> Here's the chain of causation that leads to this situation.
>
> 1. California law stupidly says that if someone cuts into your lane
> right in front of you, and you hit him anywhere behind the lights, it's
> a "rear ender" and YOU are blamed.
>
> 2. A large number of skillful but stupid drivers take advantage of that
> law by performing a maneuver known as the "LA lane change": jam your
> front fender into a 2-3 foot gap between cars in an adjacent lane, then
> just follow it in, thus forcing the driver behind the gap to slam on his
> brakes and let you in.
>
> 3. Drivers who fall for the "LA lane change" get it done to them over
> and over again and become "rocks in the stream" of traffic, and are
> rightly regarded as complete idiots and assholes by everyone else.
>
> 4. Naturally, all drivers with sufficient skill and brains start
> keeping up very closely, because it's the only way to prevent themselves
> from becoming part of that category.
>
> Of course, this situation is marginally less safe than if everyone
> followed at a safe stopping distance. But the only step in the chain
> that can sensibly be changed is step 1. So long as that law stands, the
> possibility of these pileups must be regarded as one of the unavoidable
> risks of driving on the freeway.

Can you cite the law that says this? I don't know about California, but in
NC there are laws that cover people making unsafe manuvers that lead to
accidents. Surely California is the same. I looked through the California
Vehicle Code and couldn't find anything that says "if someone cuts into your
lane right in front of you, and you hit him anywhere behind the lights, it's
a "rear ender" and YOU are blamed."

I did find the following laws that might apply in some way (depending on how
they are interperted):

"23103. (a) Any person who drives any vehicle upon a highway in willful or
wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless
driving."

Seems like cutting in front of someone so that he is unable to stop is
operating a vehicle "in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of
persons or property...."

"22107. No person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right
or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable
safety and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal in the manner
provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by
the movement."

Seems like cutting in front of someone violates this part of the code.

"22109. No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle on
a highway without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided
in this chapter to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when
there is opportunity to give the signal."

If you cut in front of someone and brake rapidly, it seems to me your are
violating this part of the code.

"21703. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more
closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of
such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway."

I suppose if they cut in front of you and you continue to follow too closely
and later have an accident you are violating this portion of the code.

Regards,

Ed White

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:04:04 -0700, John David Galt
> wrote:

>Of course, this situation is marginally less safe than if everyone
>followed at a safe stopping distance. But the only step in the chain
>that can sensibly be changed is step 1. So long as that law stands, the
>possibility of these pileups must be regarded as one of the unavoidable
>risks of driving on the freeway.

Except that none of the people in the video were doing "LA Lane
Changes" or tailgating. The video merely shows a bunch of dumb****s
who aren't paying attention to what's in front of them.