What exactly is "left lane blocking"?

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 03:09:46 GMT, Arif Khokar >
wrote:

>Big Bill wrote:
>> <SIGH>
>> Read what you wrote.
>
>Ok, here it is again:
>
>Should one drive in such a way as to not require others to adjust their
>speed or direction due to one's actions such as pulling out from a side
>road, merging, or changing lanes?
>
>Now, let's substitute the pronoun 'you' for 'one' and see how it reads.
>
>Should you drive in such a way as to not require others to adjust their
>speed or direction due to your actions such as pulling out from a side
>road, merging or changing lanes?
>
>There are three actions mentioned in that sentence.
>1. You're pulling out from a side road
>2. You're merging
>3. You're changing lanes

See, here's a great example of what I'm saying.
You obviously haven't read what you yourself wrote.
You said "such as", which does not limit actions to your above
examples.
>
>The first clause in the sentence stipulates that you should drive in a
>certain way. When driving in that certain way, other drivers who are in
>proximity should not have to adjust their own speed or direction due to
>one of the three actions that are listed above that you are planning to
>engage in.

See above; you're wrong. What you wrote does not mean what you think
it means.
>
>Now, let's move onto one of your responses
>
>Big Bill wrote:
> >>You're coming upon another
> >>vehicle, and want to pass it. You look in your mirror, and notice
> >>another vehicle in the left lane, close enough that, if you pull out
> >>to pass, that other vehicle will need to slow down unless you speed
> >>up.
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >>It has nothing to do with checking mirrors. If *I* have to alter my
> >>speed to let the othe rpasser go by, the other passer is a MFFY
> >>driver, by the definition given, becasue he made me alter my speed.
>
>In your scenario, you want to pass another vehicle. Someone is already
>passing you. As per the first sentence, you have to drive in such a way
>as to not require others to alter speed or direction since you are the
>one who is preparing to do action #3 (changing lanes).
>
>Unfortunately, you're too ****ing stupid to realize that the one person
>passing you is not the 'you' the scenario refers to since that person is
>not engaging in one of the three actions specified above. You're the
>one who wants to change lanes, and if you do so in a way that requires
>the driver who is passing you to slow down, then you're not following
>the suggestion in the sentence that started it all.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

"Harry K" > wrote in
oups.com:

>
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> "Harry K" > wrote in
>> oups.com:
>>
>> >
>> > Jim Yanik wrote:
>> >> "Harry K" > wrote in
>> >> oups.com:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Jim Yanik wrote:
>> >> >> "Harry K" > wrote in
>> >> >> ps.com:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > John F. Carr wrote:
>> >> >> >> In article
>> .com>,
>> >> >> >> Harry K > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >There is nothing in the law that says a leading car, as
>> >> >> >> >long as it is driving legally, has to consider what the car
>> >> > behind
>> >> >> >> >wants to do.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Nevada, Utah, and Virginia
>> >> > drivers
>> >> >> > in
>> >> >> >> the left lane are required to move right to allow faster
>> > traffic
>> >> > to
>> >> >> >> pass. Only Georgia limits this law to vehicles traveling
>> > within
>> >> > the
>> >> >> >> speed limit. This duty is in addition to the "slower
> traffic
>> > keep
>> >> >> >> right" rule in most of these states.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> See http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/laws.html for details.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Even though honking or flashing to pass is no longer
> customary,
>> >> > the
>> >> >> >> law in many states still requires the lead driver to
> recognize
>> > the
>> >> >> >> signal and facilitate passing on roads where passing on the
>> > right
>> >> >> >> is not permitted.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> John Carr )
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > True, IF the lead is just cruising. As long as the lead is
>> >> > actively
>> >> >> > (not sloth) passing, he doesn't need to do anything. Granted
> it
>> >> > would
>> >> >> > be nice to speed up but not required. My imposition on you
> by
>> >> > makeing
>> >> >> > you slow down for a few seconds is no worse than your
> imposition
>> > on
>> >> > me
>> >> >> > by trying to force me to speed up. Note that I am discussing
> a
>> >> > passer
>> >> >> > who is passing at a -reasonable- rate. If I am passing a 70
>> > mpher
>> >> > at
>> >> >> > 80 that is it, I ain't going to speed up.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Harry K
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Then you have become a LLB.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT,including you.
>> >> >> If you are in the passing lane and someone is approaching you
> in
>> > that
>> >> >
>> >> >> lane,then YOU are the *slower traffic*. Get it? (I doubt it)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Jim Yanik
>> >> >> jyanik
>> >> >> at
>> >> >> kua.net
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes, I get it. Before pulling out I check mirrors, nobody
>> > approaching
>> >> > rapidly, I pass at a good rate, someone closing in I wait. I
> pull
>> > out
>> >> > and someone really cooking comes up that was way back when I
>> >> > checked...tough, you're going to have to slow down until I get
>> >> > clearance to pull over. It might be a shock but the first
> person
>> > in a
>> >> > lane has the legal (not moral I agree) right of way.
>> >>
>> >> The typical MFFY response.
>> >>
>> >> Again you forget about "slower traffic keep right".There's no
>> > exemption for
>> >> vehicles already passing.
>> >>
>> >> > Again, I am
>> >> > speaking of actively passing at a decent rate, not sloth
> passing,
>> > not
>> >> > staying in the lane longer than necessary and not cutting off
>> > people
>> >> > approaching.
>> >> >
>> >> > Harry K
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> You would be sloth passing if you cause a faster car to brake and
>> > slow
>> >> because you have not completed your pass.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Jim Yanik
>> >> jyanik
>> >> at
>> >> kua.net
>> >
>> > Agree to disagree in my style of driving. You will just have to
> bite
>> > the bullet and slow down if you catch up to me while passing.
> KRETP
>> > and SLTK does -not- apply while I am passing in spite of all your
>> > attempts to deny it.
>> > Again, I'll put it in caps so you get it MORALLY yes, LEGALLY no.
>> >
>> > Harry K
>> >
>>
>>
>> Again,the typical MFFY response.
>> "I screwed up,but Fanyways."
>> --
>> Jim Yanik
>> jyanik
>> at
>> kua.net
>
> And there is another typical MMFFY response. You want to force me to
> alter my driving style.

Yes.
Because it is wrong in this case.

> That makes you just as much as a MFFY as I am,
> actually more so as I have the legal right of way.

Actually,no you don't,as you are violating the slower traffic keep right
rule. Being first (me first) does not negate that rule.

> I admit that I am a
> MFFY in the rare exceptions

evidently not so rare.

> that I have quoted but I'll bet you can't
> look in the mirror and admit you are one too.
>
> Harry K
>
> Harry K
>
>

Becuase I am not the one doing the "Me First,so you have to brake(change
YOUR driving)" shtick.
You are.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Harry K" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> And there is another typical MMFFY response. You want to force me to
> alter my driving style. That makes you just as much as a MFFY as I am,
> actually more so as I have the legal right of way. I admit that I am a
> MFFY in the rare exceptions that I have quoted but I'll bet you can't
> look in the mirror and admit you are one too.

Zacly, Harry. If we're going to share the road with even one other vehicle,
we have to alter our driving style. The only alternative is to stay off the
road.

Big Bill wrote:

> See, here's a great example of what I'm saying.
> You obviously haven't read what you yourself wrote.
> You said "such as", which does not limit actions to your above
> examples.

Neither Scott nor Nate had a problem properly interpreting the sentence
I wrote. Why are you having a problem? I wrote the sentence, and I
certainly am in a position to clarify its meaning.

Here's a clarification for you.

Any action that requires you to yield to other traffic before making a
maneuver fits the criteria of a maneuver you should not undertake unless
it will not affect the speed and direction of other traffic that could
possibly interact with you. This does not apply to traffic behind you
in the same lane that have to slow down if you yourself are yielding.

<snip a whole bunch>
--
> >> Jim Yanik
> >> jyanik
> >> at
> >> kua.net
> >
> > And there is another typical MMFFY response. You want to force me
to
> > alter my driving style.
>
> Yes.
> Because it is wrong in this case.
>
> > That makes you just as much as a MFFY as I am,
> > actually more so as I have the legal right of way.
>
> Actually,no you don't,as you are violating the slower traffic keep
right
> rule. Being first (me first) does not negate that rule.

Again, while I am passing I am not the slower traffic. STKR does not
apply while I am passing and you can run that by any LE officer,
traffic safety guy, or driving instructor you like with the possible
exception of race conditions.

>
> > I admit that I am a
> > MFFY in the rare exceptions
>
> evidently not so rare.
>
> > that I have quoted but I'll bet you can't
> > look in the mirror and admit you are one too.
> >
> > Harry K
> >
> > Harry K
> >
> >
>
> Becuase I am not the one doing the "Me First,so you have to
brake(change
> YOUR driving)" shtick.
> You are.
>
>
> --
> Jim Yanik
> jyanik
> at
> kua.net

I knew you couldn't do it. I would like you to explain to me (and the
others) just -how- is my causing you to slow down any more of a MFFY
than you causing me to speed up? If it is an imposition on you to slow
down, it is an imposition on me to speed up. I asked that before, got
no answer and really expect nothing but more hand waving this time.

Harry K

Harry K

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:51:30 GMT, Arif Khokar >
wrote:

>Big Bill wrote:
>
>> See, here's a great example of what I'm saying.
>> You obviously haven't read what you yourself wrote.
>> You said "such as", which does not limit actions to your above
>> examples.
>
>Neither Scott nor Nate had a problem properly interpreting the sentence
>I wrote. Why are you having a problem? I wrote the sentence, and I
>certainly am in a position to clarify its meaning.

Maybe I haver a problem understanding what yiou mean because I read
what you wrote.
That you and others think you undersatand what was written (when you
obviously didn't) should give you a hint about their reading
comprehension.
>
>Here's a clarification for you.
>
>Any action that requires you to yield to other traffic before making a
>maneuver fits the criteria of a maneuver you should not undertake unless
>it will not affect the speed and direction of other traffic that could
>possibly interact with you. This does not apply to traffic behind you
>in the same lane that have to slow down if you yourself are yielding.

That's nice. But it's not what you wrote earlier.

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

"Harry K" > wrote in
oups.com:

>
><snip a whole bunch>
> --
>> >> Jim Yanik
>> >> jyanik
>> >> at
>> >> kua.net
>> >
>> > And there is another typical MMFFY response. You want to force me
> to
>> > alter my driving style.
>>
>> Yes.
>> Because it is wrong in this case.
>>
>> > That makes you just as much as a MFFY as I am,
>> > actually more so as I have the legal right of way.
>>
>> Actually,no you don't,as you are violating the slower traffic keep
> right
>> rule. Being first (me first) does not negate that rule.
>
> Again, while I am passing I am not the slower traffic.

If another car is approaching,YES YOU ARE.

> STKR does not
> apply while I am passing

SAYS WHO? It applies ALL the time.
Let's see a cite on that.

> and you can run that by any LE officer,
> traffic safety guy, or driving instructor you like with the possible
> exception of race conditions.
>
>>
>> > I admit that I am a
>> > MFFY in the rare exceptions
>>
>> evidently not so rare.
>>
>> > that I have quoted but I'll bet you can't
>> > look in the mirror and admit you are one too.
>> >
>> > Harry K
>> >
>> > Harry K
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Becuase I am not the one doing the "Me First,so you have to
> brake(change
>> YOUR driving)" shtick.
>> You are.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Yanik
>> jyanik
>> at
>> kua.net
>
> I knew you couldn't do it. I would like you to explain to me (and the
> others) just -how- is my causing you to slow down any more of a MFFY
> than you causing me to speed up? If it is an imposition on you to slow
> down, it is an imposition on me to speed up. I asked that before, got
> no answer and really expect nothing but more hand waving this time.
>
> Harry K
>
> Harry K
>
>

Once again;
Becuase I am not the one doing the "Me First,so you have to brake(change
YOUR driving)" shtick.
You are.




--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .
> "Harry K" > wrote in
> oups.com:

>> STKR does not
>> apply while I am passing
>
> SAYS WHO? It applies ALL the time.
> Let's see a cite on that.

Two questions, Jim. Both questions presume we're on a freeway, the speed
limit is 65, and the car I'm passing at 75 is doing 70:

* If I'm alongside a car I'm passing and see your car approaching at 80 from
1/4 mile behind, should I immediately abort my pass, even if it means
colliding with the car I'm passing? Or should I immediately slow down to
pull into the right lane to allow you to pass first?

* If I'm alongside a car I'm passing and decide to complete my pass even
though it impedes you approaching me from 1/4 mile behind at 80, your car is
delayed by perhaps 5-8 seconds max. Where is the harm?

Okay, that's three questions. Whatever. Your response?

Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:

> * If I'm alongside a car I'm passing and see your car approaching at 80 from
> 1/4 mile behind, should I immediately abort my pass, even if it means
> colliding with the car I'm passing? Or should I immediately slow down to
> pull into the right lane to allow you to pass first?

At 5 mph, it takes about 3 minutes to cover a quarter mile. Unless you
plan on taking more than 3 minutes to pass, I wouldn't worry about it.

Big Bill wrote:

> Maybe I haver a problem understanding what yiou mean because I read
> what you wrote.

The fact is that 2 people had no problem understanding what I wrote the
first time and required no further clarification. You, OTOH, continue
to purposefully sidetrack the discussion due to your inability to
understand what I actually meant even after multiple clarifications.

Either you're doing it on purpose as a form of entertainment, or you're
mentally handicapped.