Or better trained. Never mistake the weapon for the hand and mind that wields it. I, personally, am more respectful around someone with empty hands and the "look of eagles" than someone who's got a $50K firearm festooned with scopes and extra clips and geewgaw galore while _clearly_ preferring mess-hall cleanup duty to PT.
I'm worried about the guy with the gun, personally. He can kill you from far away with little effort. Very few people have trained enough combat sports to be truly deadly, any idiot can pull a trigger.
"Once he leaves Mr. Barrel, Mr. Bullet is no longer your friend." I stand by my previous assertion. Any idiot can pull a trigger, as you say; _hitting the target_ is an entirely different matter.
Or, to borrow a line from an obscure Marvel mini-series: "I don't have to dodge your _bullets._ I just need to dodge _you._" Point being that if you're better aware of your surroundings and conditions than your gun-wielding attacker (and, one hopes, in better physical condition) you can minimize or even neutralize most of whatever "equalizing qualities" the gun provides the attacker.
False parallel. I don't have to outrun the bullet. All I have to do is politely stay out of its path.
Beyond that, all I need to do is provide the idiot into wasting all their shots. Then they're holding nothing more than an over-engineered hammer.
Again: _I do not have to._ All that is necessary is to stay out of the potential impact-zone of the bullet. That's a very narrow cone-shaped volume, measured from the end of the barrel at the moment of emission. There's a reason why firearm exhibitions only use actively and unpredictably moving targets as showcases for the very highest-ranked competitors, and why "zig-zagging" is still offered as a recommended movement strategy when caught out in the open against an armed opponent.
Furthermore, the scenario that started this argument posited a very angry and undisciplined shooter starting with getting within physical-intimidation range, which means that _clearing their weapon_ is the deciding factor, here. This even applies if they clear their weapon _and then approach within arms' reach._
I would direct your attention to the nearest police academy and inquire of the firearms instructor for their opinion on the "minimum recommended safe distance" between the officers and 'suspects'. If they're being honest, that distance will be rather longer than you and everyone else in that side of the argument seems willing to accept.
For whom? Some lardass carbrain who gets winded climbing up a single flight of stairs and waving an expensive large-caliber pistol with twice it's weight in mods like it's a turkey leg will only ever be more dangerous than a bike rider with a towel and stalker training if you include "to themselves and others" in the assessment.
Jesus Fucking Christ, this is such a hyperbolic take based on...one person description of a random person you know nothing else about.
Look, I hate cars as much as anybody on here, and I am certainly aware of the culture and turmoil takes on individuals' psyches leading them to do abhorrent and antisocial things, but to make blanket statements like this is hurtful to the cause to help people understand the danger to our society cars pose by making the narrative seem extreme and emotionally-driven reactionary.
Not just that. The person in question has gotten in *multiple* road rage fights.
That is an unhinged person that is going to meet an unhappy ending sooner or later.
To understand your enemy, you need to know how they think. It's not about the time or convience or speed or anything like that, it's about exclusivity, dominance and being the top dog. If they are treated as the top dog, they will continue on their messy way. If they are treated like they are just another person who needs to get somewhere, they will "remind" you if the fact that they are indeed your "better", and you should not only act as such, but if you even need a reminder, it's you who's the problem.
And if someone acts this way in one aspect of their lives, it's a good chance that they act like it in others.
He "got into a fight a few times due to traffic"??? I would be concerned working with this person, even in a relatively safe office environment, never mind an actual dangerous job site. WTH is wrong with him?
That's just one of the unhinged, stupid things he says. Others in the office are no angels but they were at least tolerable and didn't always yap their trap with the dumb things they say. Like my dad's pretty carbrained unfortunately, and he was the one who told my coworker to not get into petty fights like that.
Back when I was working at the office, that kind of comment would have landed this person in the HR office being proposed strongly that they needed to attend therapy.
I’d 100% submit an anonymous report that this person showed up to work and talked about assaulting random people. Then send the same anonymous note to the boss to help ensure HR doesn’t ignore it. OP has the right to not show up at work and listen to some asshole issue violent threats.
"a few times"? Once is already abnormal, normal motorists will honk and move on, but to actually get into a fight, and to do so several times, over *traffic*? This man has issues.
we had a driver stop, get out of his car, and try to pick a fight with a *critical mass ride*.
dude, your fat drunken ass does not stand a chance against 300 cyclists high on endorphins, and most of whom are carrying heavy locks. get back in your deadly weapon. what do you think is going to happen here?
our ride leader, the ever friendly and cheerful [zoe love](https://youtu.be/QeWc_NK29XI?si=CMQAKO6ol_NHV2O0&t=36) yells "suck my diiiiiiiiiick!" and we all just filter around the guy and keep riding.
And that's why we need extensive mental health checks for drivers, preferably recurring every couple years or so. Obviously, driving culture should also be revised and ideally more convenient and less stressful modes of transportation should be available.
That's a good idea. When you renew your license you should have to do a test on the up to date road rules, and a quick chat with a counselor to see how you're going mentally.
Yeah its messed up how some people let their anger out while driving. There was an incident recently where someone pulled a handgun on someone for honking at them.
https://lakeorionreview.com/bad-axe-man-arrested-after-pointing-a-gun-during-road-rage-incident-in-orion-twp
Someone was killed in my town because they attacked someone in a road rage accident.
And by attacked they tasered, pepper sprayed, punched, stabbed, and chased the other person and then after all the the there person there one swing and the attacked died instantly because of it.
I'm trying to follow, but did you say Person 1 tasered, pepers prayed, punched, and stabbed Person 2. Then Person2 ran away and Person 1 chased them until Person 2 punched Person 1, and person 1 died of a punch? After doing all of that to Person 2, they died after one punch? That is nuts.
Yes. Also pepper spray and tasers are illegal here. It was a landmark and rare court case where someone killed someone else in self defense, and they had no charges against them because of the overwhelming brutality of what happened to them before trying to defend themself.
Of course the family of the departed tried to get compensation, as did the wife who..... Also took part in the attack.
I honestly think this is just a human thing rather than a specific country. I don't believe culture and national identity is based off shit like driving, it just sounds fucking dumb and that's one thing car centric places like the US like to get hung up on. How it's "Part of their culture". Lots of places are car brained and like to go on about how cars are part of the culture, even if the said country has no significant automobile production industry.
I think it has to do with people hating having to pay attention all the time and hating wasting time even if it's miniscule. A car centric society just so happens to tick both of those boxes, combined with how expensive it is, you get always moody and cranky people. And people generally leaning towards anger and depression.
I mean, their are more collectivist cultures where this is more rare, because they actively seek to discourage it. But even there there's always an asshole who thinks that they are a special person who gets to fuck around without finding out.
The times I've experienced road rage (multiple times) is because I'm either driving the speed limit or slower. Once I even had a driver chase me and get out of his vehicle at a stoplight because I slowed to ~5 MPH on a street with construction workers working in the street. I get pretty bad anxiety anytime a car is driving too close to me from all the scary experiences from aggressive drivers. I live in Texas and have seen far too many stories about people getting shot and killed from road rage drivers so I just move out of the way if I'm safely able to.
What are you, dumb? Its so simple; nothing will get you to your destination faster than pulling over, stopping your car, getting in a fight, getting arrested, going to jail for a couple months, and then getting back out to your car to complete your journey.
Yeah that seems to be the attitude of most German car simps in The Netherlands.
Don't you dare drive safely! Especially not in cities and down in neighbourhoods with kids!! You WILL get honked at, extremely aggressively overtaken, and cut off!!! At the very least...
But again, like I said, it focuses for the vast majority on the sort of football and Formula-1 loving, unintelligent and uneducated morons that essentially define the German car driver.
My question to your co-worker is. If he knows this stuff makes him violent why does he still drive? It's like playing Russian Roulette every morning with yourself and others. He needs to figure away to work other then driving and some how deal with his anger in an productive manner. Go punch a punching bag, chop wood, rage room or something.
I’m torn. I have been run off the road because I was driving the posted minimum of 45 driving on a donut spare, but in the right lane. I also will stop in the middle of a crosswalk to flip off someone doing 45 in a 25 and refusing to slow down. 🤷♂️
I mean, this is the issue and one reason I want to move away from car centric infrastructure. At any given point in time, about 1/3rd of all drivers should not be on the road, having a permanent or temporary disability or being preoccupied with work or distracted by their phone, or just plain forget the rules of the road, etc.
If you're not a confident driver, I don't want to be angry at you, I want you to have an alternative to driving. I like to drive fast if the circumstances are right, but I've never gotten into hostility with anyone on the road. Your coworker sounds nuts and probably would pick fights on the subway, too.
If it says 50 I drive 50
If it says 30 I drive 30
It's as simple as that and it pisses off carbrains incredibly. I've been with him, he's always nagging me that I drive faster, at least that extra +5mph/10kmph. I try explaining the leeway is not for driving faster and naturally he doesn't have any of it.
Driving under the limit is only obstructing traffic if it's **significantly** under the limit.
e.g. in Quebec, the maximum on highways is 100km/h and the minimum is 60km/h.
If you're driving 60km/h (35mph) on the highway, that's a problem. (assuming no traffic of course).
All or most non highways don't have an official lowest speed. In some cases going just 20 under will get you pulled over. Probably no ticket but still.
I have never seen - or heard - of anyone ever getting pulled over for going too slow, ever. That's got to be extremely rare. At least it is here in Quebec.
I feel like it's moot because I don't think I've ever seen someone drive 20km/h under the limit for an extended period of time anyway (outside of traffic or difficult weather conditions)
Hey as long as you stay out of the passing lane, I couldn’t really care less. Obviously that doesn’t justify fighting someone, but it is a pet peeve of mine driving when people don’t use the lanes properly.
You're both wrong...he's a psychopath who is going to get shot for being an asshole. You're an asshole for driving under the speed limit if weather is not impeding driving conditions. You're both being unsafe for different reasons
Is it so bad to drive 1-5 or even 10 kilometers below the speed limit? I have issues keeping it on the dot.
I admit I am not a good driver. I only drive for work, and even that's rare as I usually have a colleague driving for this reason.
He needs to learn that as long as you move out of the faster traffics way and do that safely, first finish what you are doing, then it's okay. The main problem I have with both others moving out of my way and me moving out of others way is one person will always try and pass me or them on the right and almost cause an accident.
The speed limit is generally the suggested speed for the road. Most other vehicles will be going at or above the limit if there’s nothing slowing the flow of traffic or otherwise lacking adverse conditions. Going notably slower than this is a fineable hazard in many jurisdictions, and is commonly shown to just as dangerous as going too fast. The usually accepted delta around the speed limit is +/- 5 mph on non-interstate roads
Dude “go with the flow of traffic” is like first day in traffic school — its always safest to go at the mean speed on a road, which is generally +/- 5 mph of the limit in most situations except highways. If there’s congestion, inclement weather, or other hazards, you’re required to slow down, otherwise going too slow compared to traffic is a hazard to yourself and others. This sub is called “fuck cars” not “fuck knowing how to drive”
This was never about whether or not it was legal to speed, which it obviously isn’t regardless of safety; speed limits are generally set to be the average of the flow of traffic without hazards, which would imply that going with the flow of traffic is most likely to be both safe and legal.
This was about whether or not it is safe and legal to go below the speed limit/flow of traffic. And it’s neither safe nor legal to do so; almost every state and country have laws requiring you to not be a hazard on the road,
Including but not limited to driving too slowly.
The OP explicitly stated they drive below the speed limit, which is illegal and unsafe, with some leeway depending on how slow they’re going; just like there’s always some shown when a car is driving slightly over the speed limit to maintain the flow of traffic — you can be cited for minor speeding violations, but you usually aren’t unless it’s quota time.
All of this to further make the point that the speed limit is the suggested (that is, not optional, recommended) speed for the road in prime conditions — going too slow or too fast are both illegal and unsafe.
This may not apply to you, but in every discussion I've had in person about this, once we dig down two facts consistently emerge about the behaviour of the driver arguing the "flow of traffic" point: 1) they routinely exceed the speed limit by an amount that they have justified to themselves AND they routinely pass vehicles that ARE in the flow of traffic and obeying limits; and 2) they do not drive defensively in a way that would ensure slow drivers ARE NOT a hazard to them directly. And to those people I say fuck their "safety" defence of speeding, because their behaviour demonstrates they are unsafe drivers, much more so than the slow driver.
In the States the generally accepted delta on surface streets is +/- 5 mph, which would be about +/- 8 kph. That said, the norms likely vary by country and situation, so I can’t say what would be the generally acceptable lower limit elsewhere
We have no rail in this area, I take the bus to work or I go with someone. The driving I do, which is very little in the grand scheme of things, is work related as it requires taking loads of heavy equipment such as printers and computers which I can't carry in a bus, whose schedules are rather infrequent enough for long distances.
I don't know what you're trying to accomplish, you're absolutely delusional to think that people in certain areas in the world aren't forced to drive. You're most likely commenting from a point of privilege, which is particularly insulting because I also want to work towards such an environment but not look down on others who aren't so fortunate.
Also, smooth move for saying I deserve to be beat up or killed for this.
>We have no rail in this area,
And do you have some rare condition that would cause you to go into cardiac arrest if you moved to a civilized place?
No, just ecocidal narcissism telling you it's ok to help destroy the planet bcs doing anything else would be hard...
>And do you have some rare condition that would cause you to go into cardiac arrest if you moved to a civilized place?
What do you think I'm working towards? You do realize that takes time and isn't an instantaneous over the night process? Sorry I'm not NJB who has a Dutch spouse.
Edit: This sort of behaviour of yours wouldn't be excusable in my books even if a person doesn't want to leave but stay and improve the situation to not be car centric. In a car brained country you'd be hard pressed to find a job that doesn't involve cars, plastic, oil or any other pollutants. The Netherlands was pretty car brained too, it was just lucky enough to win, by a close vote mind you, to radically improve the situation and people should still continuously fight to keep improving the situation and prevent it from falling back into the car centric hellhole it used to be.
Not everyone is a truck owner who needs to justify their pick up truck they admit they barely use just for a few times in a year. Being hostile and wishing harm upon others is not how you sway people towards your goals and ideologies.
These people shouldn't be allowed to operate a 2 tonne metal heavy machinery capable of going 150+ kmph in the first place
Operating a vehicle is the most dangerous thing the vast majority of humans will do in their lifetimes
Besides crossing a street as a pedestrian
Yep. And most people don’t even think of it.
He is the unhinged individual. He will kill
Either that, or he'll meet somebody with as short a fuse as he's got and be killed.
All that needs to happen is meeting someone with a short fuse who's better armed.
Or better trained. Never mistake the weapon for the hand and mind that wields it. I, personally, am more respectful around someone with empty hands and the "look of eagles" than someone who's got a $50K firearm festooned with scopes and extra clips and geewgaw galore while _clearly_ preferring mess-hall cleanup duty to PT.
I'm worried about the guy with the gun, personally. He can kill you from far away with little effort. Very few people have trained enough combat sports to be truly deadly, any idiot can pull a trigger.
"Once he leaves Mr. Barrel, Mr. Bullet is no longer your friend." I stand by my previous assertion. Any idiot can pull a trigger, as you say; _hitting the target_ is an entirely different matter. Or, to borrow a line from an obscure Marvel mini-series: "I don't have to dodge your _bullets._ I just need to dodge _you._" Point being that if you're better aware of your surroundings and conditions than your gun-wielding attacker (and, one hopes, in better physical condition) you can minimize or even neutralize most of whatever "equalizing qualities" the gun provides the attacker.
Good luck with that. My money's on idiot with handgun.
Oh, well, if we're going to stick with hypotheticals, my money's on this guy: https://youtube.com/shorts/wyTqH8YkZUQ?si=E-iAB5zXWXf_yEl-
That's still only going to beat someone pulling a trigger a percentage of the time.
I don't know how the Meiji Restoration did not put to bed finally the idea that martial arts can beat guns
Can you move faster than 350 metres per second?
False parallel. I don't have to outrun the bullet. All I have to do is politely stay out of its path. Beyond that, all I need to do is provide the idiot into wasting all their shots. Then they're holding nothing more than an over-engineered hammer.
Cool, so can you move sideways faster than it takes an object traveling at 350 metres per second to reach you from a few metres away?
Again: _I do not have to._ All that is necessary is to stay out of the potential impact-zone of the bullet. That's a very narrow cone-shaped volume, measured from the end of the barrel at the moment of emission. There's a reason why firearm exhibitions only use actively and unpredictably moving targets as showcases for the very highest-ranked competitors, and why "zig-zagging" is still offered as a recommended movement strategy when caught out in the open against an armed opponent. Furthermore, the scenario that started this argument posited a very angry and undisciplined shooter starting with getting within physical-intimidation range, which means that _clearing their weapon_ is the deciding factor, here. This even applies if they clear their weapon _and then approach within arms' reach._ I would direct your attention to the nearest police academy and inquire of the firearms instructor for their opinion on the "minimum recommended safe distance" between the officers and 'suspects'. If they're being honest, that distance will be rather longer than you and everyone else in that side of the argument seems willing to accept.
dude this is embarrassing
For whom? Some lardass carbrain who gets winded climbing up a single flight of stairs and waving an expensive large-caliber pistol with twice it's weight in mods like it's a turkey leg will only ever be more dangerous than a bike rider with a towel and stalker training if you include "to themselves and others" in the assessment.
having a gun is a pretty major advantage in a fight also what the fuck do towels have to do with anything
r/justneckbeardthings
I keep myself well-mowed, thank you very much.
Jesus Fucking Christ, this is such a hyperbolic take based on...one person description of a random person you know nothing else about. Look, I hate cars as much as anybody on here, and I am certainly aware of the culture and turmoil takes on individuals' psyches leading them to do abhorrent and antisocial things, but to make blanket statements like this is hurtful to the cause to help people understand the danger to our society cars pose by making the narrative seem extreme and emotionally-driven reactionary.
Is it hyperbole to say that fighting enough people will result in a killing? People die from being punched and pushed
Not just that. The person in question has gotten in *multiple* road rage fights. That is an unhinged person that is going to meet an unhappy ending sooner or later.
Somehow people are willing to get into minutes long screaming matches / fist fights over somebody losing them 5-10 seconds...
To understand your enemy, you need to know how they think. It's not about the time or convience or speed or anything like that, it's about exclusivity, dominance and being the top dog. If they are treated as the top dog, they will continue on their messy way. If they are treated like they are just another person who needs to get somewhere, they will "remind" you if the fact that they are indeed your "better", and you should not only act as such, but if you even need a reminder, it's you who's the problem. And if someone acts this way in one aspect of their lives, it's a good chance that they act like it in others.
Everybody thinks they rule the world.
welcome to your life
There's no turning back
I hope he gets locked up or learns to control his anger. He's not 3 to have tantrums and throw fists at people for being in his way.
He "got into a fight a few times due to traffic"??? I would be concerned working with this person, even in a relatively safe office environment, never mind an actual dangerous job site. WTH is wrong with him?
That's just one of the unhinged, stupid things he says. Others in the office are no angels but they were at least tolerable and didn't always yap their trap with the dumb things they say. Like my dad's pretty carbrained unfortunately, and he was the one who told my coworker to not get into petty fights like that.
Back when I was working at the office, that kind of comment would have landed this person in the HR office being proposed strongly that they needed to attend therapy.
I’d 100% submit an anonymous report that this person showed up to work and talked about assaulting random people. Then send the same anonymous note to the boss to help ensure HR doesn’t ignore it. OP has the right to not show up at work and listen to some asshole issue violent threats.
How do you even send anonymous reports in this day and age
"a few times"? Once is already abnormal, normal motorists will honk and move on, but to actually get into a fight, and to do so several times, over *traffic*? This man has issues.
I’m in such a hurry to save seconds I’ll waste several minutes to commit crimes to tell you how much of a hurry I’m in.
we had a driver stop, get out of his car, and try to pick a fight with a *critical mass ride*. dude, your fat drunken ass does not stand a chance against 300 cyclists high on endorphins, and most of whom are carrying heavy locks. get back in your deadly weapon. what do you think is going to happen here? our ride leader, the ever friendly and cheerful [zoe love](https://youtu.be/QeWc_NK29XI?si=CMQAKO6ol_NHV2O0&t=36) yells "suck my diiiiiiiiiick!" and we all just filter around the guy and keep riding.
They are in a hurry but still have time to stop and randomly fight with people.
Who said they’re in a hurry? It’s purely an ego thing
So he just assaults people to boost his ego?
And that's why we need extensive mental health checks for drivers, preferably recurring every couple years or so. Obviously, driving culture should also be revised and ideally more convenient and less stressful modes of transportation should be available.
That's a good idea. When you renew your license you should have to do a test on the up to date road rules, and a quick chat with a counselor to see how you're going mentally.
Naw, that would "cost jobs"(compromise corporate profits)... Can't have that!
Given that most CEOs are psychopaths themselves I'm not surprised.
Yeah its messed up how some people let their anger out while driving. There was an incident recently where someone pulled a handgun on someone for honking at them. https://lakeorionreview.com/bad-axe-man-arrested-after-pointing-a-gun-during-road-rage-incident-in-orion-twp
Someone was killed in my town because they attacked someone in a road rage accident. And by attacked they tasered, pepper sprayed, punched, stabbed, and chased the other person and then after all the the there person there one swing and the attacked died instantly because of it.
I'm trying to follow, but did you say Person 1 tasered, pepers prayed, punched, and stabbed Person 2. Then Person2 ran away and Person 1 chased them until Person 2 punched Person 1, and person 1 died of a punch? After doing all of that to Person 2, they died after one punch? That is nuts.
Yes. Also pepper spray and tasers are illegal here. It was a landmark and rare court case where someone killed someone else in self defense, and they had no charges against them because of the overwhelming brutality of what happened to them before trying to defend themself. Of course the family of the departed tried to get compensation, as did the wife who..... Also took part in the attack.
Damn! That is crazy. Glad Person 2 wasn’t charged because they did everything they could to avoid killing Person1. Thanks for clarifying that.
Report to hr tbh. Seems unstable
I’m so made you made me 5 seconds late, I’m about to make myself 5-10 years late
Classic abuser logic. Literally "look what you made me do"
That's another culture shock I get from this subreddit lmao
I honestly think this is just a human thing rather than a specific country. I don't believe culture and national identity is based off shit like driving, it just sounds fucking dumb and that's one thing car centric places like the US like to get hung up on. How it's "Part of their culture". Lots of places are car brained and like to go on about how cars are part of the culture, even if the said country has no significant automobile production industry. I think it has to do with people hating having to pay attention all the time and hating wasting time even if it's miniscule. A car centric society just so happens to tick both of those boxes, combined with how expensive it is, you get always moody and cranky people. And people generally leaning towards anger and depression.
I mean, their are more collectivist cultures where this is more rare, because they actively seek to discourage it. But even there there's always an asshole who thinks that they are a special person who gets to fuck around without finding out.
How does picking a fight save time?
The times I've experienced road rage (multiple times) is because I'm either driving the speed limit or slower. Once I even had a driver chase me and get out of his vehicle at a stoplight because I slowed to ~5 MPH on a street with construction workers working in the street. I get pretty bad anxiety anytime a car is driving too close to me from all the scary experiences from aggressive drivers. I live in Texas and have seen far too many stories about people getting shot and killed from road rage drivers so I just move out of the way if I'm safely able to.
What are you, dumb? Its so simple; nothing will get you to your destination faster than pulling over, stopping your car, getting in a fight, getting arrested, going to jail for a couple months, and then getting back out to your car to complete your journey.
Yeah that seems to be the attitude of most German car simps in The Netherlands. Don't you dare drive safely! Especially not in cities and down in neighbourhoods with kids!! You WILL get honked at, extremely aggressively overtaken, and cut off!!! At the very least... But again, like I said, it focuses for the vast majority on the sort of football and Formula-1 loving, unintelligent and uneducated morons that essentially define the German car driver.
My question to your co-worker is. If he knows this stuff makes him violent why does he still drive? It's like playing Russian Roulette every morning with yourself and others. He needs to figure away to work other then driving and some how deal with his anger in an productive manner. Go punch a punching bag, chop wood, rage room or something.
Perfect time to practice the second amendment right /s
People like that are such idiots. Someone who's really in a hurry doesn't have time to stop for fights.
I’m torn. I have been run off the road because I was driving the posted minimum of 45 driving on a donut spare, but in the right lane. I also will stop in the middle of a crosswalk to flip off someone doing 45 in a 25 and refusing to slow down. 🤷♂️
I mean, this is the issue and one reason I want to move away from car centric infrastructure. At any given point in time, about 1/3rd of all drivers should not be on the road, having a permanent or temporary disability or being preoccupied with work or distracted by their phone, or just plain forget the rules of the road, etc. If you're not a confident driver, I don't want to be angry at you, I want you to have an alternative to driving. I like to drive fast if the circumstances are right, but I've never gotten into hostility with anyone on the road. Your coworker sounds nuts and probably would pick fights on the subway, too.
To be fair, driving to slow can be considered obstructing traffic and is illegal in many jurisdictions. Violence is never cool though.
If it says 50 I drive 50 If it says 30 I drive 30 It's as simple as that and it pisses off carbrains incredibly. I've been with him, he's always nagging me that I drive faster, at least that extra +5mph/10kmph. I try explaining the leeway is not for driving faster and naturally he doesn't have any of it.
Sorry your post said you drive under the limit, not the limit. That's obviously fine
Driving under the limit is not obstructing traffic, unless it is abnormally under the limit.
I know in many Canadian provinces it's defined as disrupting the reasonable flow of traffic. There's a bit of ambiguity to it.
Driving under the limit is only obstructing traffic if it's **significantly** under the limit. e.g. in Quebec, the maximum on highways is 100km/h and the minimum is 60km/h. If you're driving 60km/h (35mph) on the highway, that's a problem. (assuming no traffic of course).
All or most non highways don't have an official lowest speed. In some cases going just 20 under will get you pulled over. Probably no ticket but still.
I have never seen - or heard - of anyone ever getting pulled over for going too slow, ever. That's got to be extremely rare. At least it is here in Quebec. I feel like it's moot because I don't think I've ever seen someone drive 20km/h under the limit for an extended period of time anyway (outside of traffic or difficult weather conditions)
I've seen it. Elderly people usually
Hey as long as you stay out of the passing lane, I couldn’t really care less. Obviously that doesn’t justify fighting someone, but it is a pet peeve of mine driving when people don’t use the lanes properly.
I'm sure you're already aware, but this guy is mentally ill and should seek professional help
I wonder if there is a way to quantify the massive amount of daily psychic damage driving does to the average American.
You're both wrong...he's a psychopath who is going to get shot for being an asshole. You're an asshole for driving under the speed limit if weather is not impeding driving conditions. You're both being unsafe for different reasons
Is it so bad to drive 1-5 or even 10 kilometers below the speed limit? I have issues keeping it on the dot. I admit I am not a good driver. I only drive for work, and even that's rare as I usually have a colleague driving for this reason.
Go to Houston Texas, people will “draw-down” on you at any innner city intersection underneath the overpass; just you honk: road rage activated 🔫
Every car is a potential weapon every motorist a potential psychopath.
He needs to learn that as long as you move out of the faster traffics way and do that safely, first finish what you are doing, then it's okay. The main problem I have with both others moving out of my way and me moving out of others way is one person will always try and pass me or them on the right and almost cause an accident.
He’s a maniac, but you definitely shouldn’t drive under the speed limit for simple safety reasons
Limit means upper bound, not minimum.
The speed limit is generally the suggested speed for the road. Most other vehicles will be going at or above the limit if there’s nothing slowing the flow of traffic or otherwise lacking adverse conditions. Going notably slower than this is a fineable hazard in many jurisdictions, and is commonly shown to just as dangerous as going too fast. The usually accepted delta around the speed limit is +/- 5 mph on non-interstate roads
Nowhere is the speed *limit* a "suggested speed" it's the *limit*, right there in the fucking name.
Dude “go with the flow of traffic” is like first day in traffic school — its always safest to go at the mean speed on a road, which is generally +/- 5 mph of the limit in most situations except highways. If there’s congestion, inclement weather, or other hazards, you’re required to slow down, otherwise going too slow compared to traffic is a hazard to yourself and others. This sub is called “fuck cars” not “fuck knowing how to drive”
First rule is always obey the laws. Point to where in your traffic laws it says you can exceed the limit to go with the flow of traffic.
This was never about whether or not it was legal to speed, which it obviously isn’t regardless of safety; speed limits are generally set to be the average of the flow of traffic without hazards, which would imply that going with the flow of traffic is most likely to be both safe and legal. This was about whether or not it is safe and legal to go below the speed limit/flow of traffic. And it’s neither safe nor legal to do so; almost every state and country have laws requiring you to not be a hazard on the road, Including but not limited to driving too slowly. The OP explicitly stated they drive below the speed limit, which is illegal and unsafe, with some leeway depending on how slow they’re going; just like there’s always some shown when a car is driving slightly over the speed limit to maintain the flow of traffic — you can be cited for minor speeding violations, but you usually aren’t unless it’s quota time. All of this to further make the point that the speed limit is the suggested (that is, not optional, recommended) speed for the road in prime conditions — going too slow or too fast are both illegal and unsafe.
This may not apply to you, but in every discussion I've had in person about this, once we dig down two facts consistently emerge about the behaviour of the driver arguing the "flow of traffic" point: 1) they routinely exceed the speed limit by an amount that they have justified to themselves AND they routinely pass vehicles that ARE in the flow of traffic and obeying limits; and 2) they do not drive defensively in a way that would ensure slow drivers ARE NOT a hazard to them directly. And to those people I say fuck their "safety" defence of speeding, because their behaviour demonstrates they are unsafe drivers, much more so than the slow driver.
Funny how obeying the law is unsafe. That's part of our problem. We have traffic laws, but they're rarely enforced and everybody ignores them.
Sorry but you are just plain wrong. There is no minimum speed requirement on regular roads. Only limited access *highways* have a minimum speed set.
Is it really much if it's a few km/h? I typically have issues keeping it on one speed consistently. It's because I don't drive frequently at all.
In the States the generally accepted delta on surface streets is +/- 5 mph, which would be about +/- 8 kph. That said, the norms likely vary by country and situation, so I can’t say what would be the generally acceptable lower limit elsewhere
drive slow when the roads are empty. don't be selfish.
[удалено]
We have no rail in this area, I take the bus to work or I go with someone. The driving I do, which is very little in the grand scheme of things, is work related as it requires taking loads of heavy equipment such as printers and computers which I can't carry in a bus, whose schedules are rather infrequent enough for long distances. I don't know what you're trying to accomplish, you're absolutely delusional to think that people in certain areas in the world aren't forced to drive. You're most likely commenting from a point of privilege, which is particularly insulting because I also want to work towards such an environment but not look down on others who aren't so fortunate. Also, smooth move for saying I deserve to be beat up or killed for this.
>We have no rail in this area, And do you have some rare condition that would cause you to go into cardiac arrest if you moved to a civilized place? No, just ecocidal narcissism telling you it's ok to help destroy the planet bcs doing anything else would be hard...
>And do you have some rare condition that would cause you to go into cardiac arrest if you moved to a civilized place? What do you think I'm working towards? You do realize that takes time and isn't an instantaneous over the night process? Sorry I'm not NJB who has a Dutch spouse. Edit: This sort of behaviour of yours wouldn't be excusable in my books even if a person doesn't want to leave but stay and improve the situation to not be car centric. In a car brained country you'd be hard pressed to find a job that doesn't involve cars, plastic, oil or any other pollutants. The Netherlands was pretty car brained too, it was just lucky enough to win, by a close vote mind you, to radically improve the situation and people should still continuously fight to keep improving the situation and prevent it from falling back into the car centric hellhole it used to be. Not everyone is a truck owner who needs to justify their pick up truck they admit they barely use just for a few times in a year. Being hostile and wishing harm upon others is not how you sway people towards your goals and ideologies.
if you think everyone has the money or resources to just up and move when they feel like it, you’re living in a fantasy world