 |
Business Directory |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coupons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Classifieds |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| | Author | Messages | |
geewiz
Posts:282
 | | 11/15/2007 8:36 AM |
 Alert | | 5th grader 2 Jason 0 try again | | | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/15/2007 9:37 AM |
Alert | OK, looks like I'm going to have to spell this one out step by step. You stated that the sign says "slow" but does not define slow on the sign, so you can define slow to mean what you want. I said this would be like saying you can change lanes whenever you want, because there are no signs saying you can't change lanes into another car.
This analogy works because the law tells you can't change lanes into another car (unsafe lane change) and it also tells you what slow is. You just have to read it.
5th grader 2 Jason 0 try again
It is appropriate that you put "5th grader 2" apart from my name. You think you've won, but my explanation is as clear as day. Read the statutes before spouting off that there is no definition of slow. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:08 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By badastro on 11/13/2007 12:38 PM
Maybe we should put this into a little perspective. Let's think in terms of what you CAN control and what you CAN'T control. You CAN'T control the fact that many of us drive in excess of 65 MPH on the 347. You CAN however control your actions behind the wheel. If you want to increase the safety of yourself and others on the road, don't obstruct traffic if you are driving slower than the flow of traffic in the left lane, and move into the right lane. Is that so difficult? Apparently so...</div>
So.. It's ok to Speed? Not obstructing traffic if traffic wasn't speeding! | |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:08 AM |
Alert | | 00ps | |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:16 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Jason on 11/14/2007 9:41 AM
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>So my question is: am I supposed to pull off to the shoulder to let this speeder pass? Or do I hold my own, going the speed limit in the right lane like I'm supposed to? Or do I move to the left to let him pass me on the right?</div>
You're supposed to just stay where you are.</div>
And that is what I chose to do... "STAY WHERE I AM". If you want to speed, be my guess.
The question is.. who is in violation first, the speeder or the person in the right lane doing the speed limit?
If you aren't speeding, I am not blocking traffic.
Here Jason.... Here's a $1.00, feel free to buy a clue! | |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:34 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Jason on 11/14/2007 11:19 AM
I wouldn't care if I was stuck in traffic going 65 all the way home but it's never like that any more. There's always some jerk leading the line speeding up and slowing down. 55->50->60->70->60. You get the idea. No one can pass or everyone who can is too chicken or absorbed in their cell phone call or something. I actually like it now when I get stuck at Riggs and I'm in the front of the line. I get to put some distance between me and them and set the cruise for 70-80 depending on the conditions. I know that my drive will be far safer than the people who are stuck behind the control freaks.</div>
Wow.. that sounds a little SELF-Centered to me.Forget the speeding laws and Don't you dare get in my way when I am trying to drive 70-80 mph....Which is faster than the LAWS or the SAFETY person has deemed safe for this road.
Man... you need a bigger clue.... here's two more dollars.. you're going to need a bigger clue.
| |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
|  | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:39 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Scorpio on 11/14/2007 9:09 PM
Geez, I can't stand it anymore! I have driven all over the United States, several times, and my father was a truck driver for many years. It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE and COMMON COURTESY that the left lane is for passing ONLY. As soon as you pass the car you move to the right lane so as not to block traffic. It has been that way since the beginning of highways and it will always be that way. Sinbad, you must really be a country bumpkin if you don't know that and have all these arguments for not following the rules of highway etiquette. Who taught you how to drive? Anyone causing a back up of traffic on a highway is playing a deadly game.
End of story.
P.S. I'm not a speeder. </div>
So... If I am going 65 in a 65 Mph zone.. and I am in the right lane... How are you catching up to me if you are 3 car length behind me?
Your above statement shows me that you haven't thought out your argument correctly.
What you are suggesting is, "Let's follow some of the rules and not the others."
You can't just pick and choose what law you want to throw out to prove your point.
oh yeah.. just to let you know, speeding has be around just as long as Slow traffic stay right.
The Story Part 2
| |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:42 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Jason on 11/14/2007 10:47 PM
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By geewiz on 11/14/2007 6:17 PM
Jason if you ask a question of myself that proves your smarter than a 5th grader I will answer it.
</div>
Apparently a simple analogy goes over your head. The sign says slower and the law defines slower. End of story. Get it?</div>
The speed limit is the speedlimit and should be followed no matter what your thought on the matter is.
If I am going 65 mph and you are going 65 mph... how long does it take you to pass me? Don't forget to add the safe diving distance from the lead car.
You don't get it...
End of LINE! | |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 11:50 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Jason on 11/15/2007 9:37 AM
OK, looks like I'm going to have to spell this one out step by step. You stated that the sign says "slow" but does not define slow on the sign, so you can define slow to mean what you want. I said this would be like saying you can change lanes whenever you want, because there are no signs saying you can't change lanes into another car.
This analogy works because the law tells you can't change lanes into another car (unsafe lane change) and it also tells you what slow is. You just have to read it.
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>5th grader 2 Jason 0 try again</div>
It is appropriate that you put "5th grader 2" apart from my name. You think you've won, but my explanation is as clear as day. Read the statutes before spouting off that there is no definition of slow.</div>
Slow is defined as "slower the the speed limit". No matter how you slice it.. if you are speeding, you just broke the law. That means you are going faster than the "POSTED" speed limit.
Therefore, how can I be blocking you if you are going the speed limit? | |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | vinny
Posts:636
| | 11/15/2007 12:19 PM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By sdmphx777 on 11/12/2007 12:39 PM
Actually according to the NHTSA 32% of traffic fatalities in 2006 were caused by speeding. So according to statistics speed does kill.</div>
well my statistics say 99% of accidents are caused by speeding. the average human can only run at about 15 miles per hour, the average american is probably far slower. anything above this is a faster speed than our brains can comprehend, and therefore all accidents that occur at a speed over 15 mph are caused by speeding. all vehicles should be limited to travel no faster than 15 miles per hour.
of course speed kills you fool, if we never moved we wouldn't bump into each other. if your so concerned about it, walk. a 2,500 pound car has the ability to kill at ANY speed. <img src='http://www.85239.com/desktopmodules/ntforums/images/emoticons/wow.gif' height='20' width='20' border='0' title='Wow' align='absmiddle'>
keep right, pass less. it will cause far less road rage and keep traffic moving. | |
Follow your bliss. Happiness is a conscious decision | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/15/2007 1:12 PM |
Alert | | Once again: Where is your proof that your speedometer is calibrated? Otherwise, you need to get a clue and realize that you might be the one breaking the law when someone who comes up on you and they're the ones going 65. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 1:44 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 11/15/2007 1:06 PM The primary decision of where to put them will be based on roadways with the most accidents and those with construction zones. 347 probably won't be high on the list. Do they expect to catch many people? They're putting up signs and we're talking about wide open stretches, so you're going to have plenty of warning to slow down. They'll probably catch the most dangerous: those on cell phones, reading, texting and otherwise too distracted to even be going 65. And that's the concern: they're not doing anything but catching speeders. Heck, they're not even going to go after those going excessively fast, so there is no immediate effect. We need real cops that can go after those going too fast, or are too distracted or driving aggressively, etc.
OK everyone read this statement Jason posted on another thread. Is he worried about speeders? or is he worried about the Slow traffic to the right traffic signs.
Jason.. this whole thread was you saying that it's ok to go 70-80 miles an hour on the 347 in good conditions. In the quote above, you clearly want the cops to catch speeders Which is it my friend?
Can everyone else see what is happening here? Jason.. you just lost ground on your arguement. That my firend is what I am talking about.
If you are so concerned about speeders... then why are you Pro-speed here and on another thread you wish they would do something about it?
Once again.. If you are going 65 and 3 cars length behind me .. I am going 65... how is that blocking traffic or RACING as you put it. I think you tried to TWIST that Racing thing to Spin it in your favor.
| |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Sinbad
Posts:3036
| | 11/15/2007 1:48 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 11/15/2007 1:06 PM The primary decision of where to put them will be based on roadways with the most accidents and those with construction zones. 347 probably won't be high on the list. Do they expect to catch many people? They're putting up signs and we're talking about wide open stretches, so you're going to have plenty of warning to slow down. They'll probably catch the most dangerous: those on cell phones, reading, texting and otherwise too distracted to even be going 65. And that's the concern: they're not doing anything but catching speeders. Heck, they're not even going to go after those going excessively fast, so there is no immediate effect. We need real cops that can go after those going too fast, or are too distracted or driving aggressively, etc.
OK everyone read this statement Jason posted on another thread. Is he worried about speeders? or is he worried about the Slow traffic to the right traffic signs.
Jason.. this whole thread was you saying that it's ok to go 70-80 miles an hour on the 347 in good conditions. In the quote above, you clearly want the cops to catch speeders Which is it my friend?
Can everyone else see what is happening here? Jason.. you just lost ground on your arguement. That my firend is what I am talking about.
If you are so concerned about speeders... then why are you Pro-speed here and on another thread you wish they would do something about it?
Once again.. If you are going 65 and 3 cars length behind me .. I am going 65... how is that blocking traffic or RACING as you put it. I think you tried to TWIST that Racing thing to Spin it in your favor.
| |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/16/2007 1:54 AM |
Alert | Jason.. this whole thread was you saying that it's ok to go 70-80 miles an hour on the 347 in good conditions. In the quote above, you clearly want the cops to catch speeders Which is it my friend?
Can everyone else see what is happening here? Jason.. you just lost ground on your arguement. That my firend is what I am talking about.
My argument has always been consistent: catch the dangerous drivers. When I say "speeders" I mean people driving too fast for the conditions. For some, that is 65. For some that is 55. The problem with the vans is that they don't use any intelligence and only start ticketing after a set MPH over the limit (IIRC, it is greater than 10 MPH over). Then people just speed back up after the van and they completely miss the aggressive drivers, reckless and distracted drivers. So that's what I'm saying I want: real, live enforcement by someone that can think and evaluate the situation and then chase down the offender. There is no immediacy with the vans. You could very well have a driver go on to cause a fatal accident, and what's going to happen? They get a ticket later? Some consolation to the family that loses someone, right?
Once again.. If you are going 65 and 3 cars length behind me .. I am going 65... how is that blocking traffic or RACING as you put it. I think you tried to TWIST that Racing thing to Spin it in your favor.
OK, there are three ways this can be addressed, but I'd like to verify that we're seeing this the same way. You said that you feel it is your duty to make people go 65, right? If I read this correctly and we take that the same way, you feel it is OK to drive alongside another car going 65, right? Keep this in mind then:
#1) Your speedometer is not 100% accurate. This is a fact, and it is allowed to be up to 3% off.
#2) Keeping #1 in mind, at 65 your car could be within allowed tolerances and actually going 63. If this is true, you are considered slow traffic and you should be in the right lane. But you aren't, you're breaking that sign, but also by pacing the other car, you qualify for the section of Title 28 that defines racing on highways. You also qualify for driving too slow for the conditions.
#3) Even if your speedometer is accurate or it is off in the other direction (yes you could be a SPEEDER too), by pacing another car, knowing full well that other cars are trying to pass you, you meet the qualifications for racing. There is no exception to that definition that says the other driver must be obeying the law. There is a good reason for this. It is recognized that by blocking traffic at any speed you are contributing to road rage. The road is safer when the crazies aren't being blocked by a passive aggressive.
Does that help clarify my position? | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/16/2007 1:57 AM |
Alert | Wow.. that sounds a little SELF-Centered to me.Forget the speeding laws and Don't you dare get in my way when I am trying to drive 70-80 mph....Which is faster than the LAWS or the SAFETY person has deemed safe for this road.
Man... you need a bigger clue.... here's two more dollars.. you're going to need a bigger clue.
Apparently you can't read. I said I'm happy to go 65. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/16/2007 1:59 AM |
Alert | <div class='NTForums_Quote'>So... If I am going 65 in a 65 Mph zone.. and I am in the right lane... How are you catching up to me if you are 3 car length behind me?
Your above statement shows me that you haven't thought out your argument correctly.
What you are suggesting is, "Let's follow some of the rules and not the others."
You can't just pick and choose what law you want to throw out to prove your point.
oh yeah.. just to let you know, speeding has be around just as long as Slow traffic stay right. </div>
You never drive a perfect 65 MPH. That is impossible, don't pretend like you're perfect.
Again my position is consistent: Safely moving traffic. It is proven that traffic that is artificially bottled up and forced to go the same speed across all lanes is less safe than traffic driving at the safe speed that drivers set. <i>Even ADOT recognizes this!</i> | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/16/2007 2:00 AM |
Alert | Slow is defined as "slower the the speed limit". No matter how you slice it..
You keep spouting off about the law but you keep showing your lack. Slow is not defined this way. Read and then come back and post something that proves your point. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | LHM
Posts:5
| | 11/16/2007 4:59 AM |
Alert | Roving speed cameras to hit state freeways, highways
Associated Press
Nov. 15, 2007 12:05 PM
The Arizona Department of Public Safety says it's ready to begin using its photo enforcement vehicles along the state's highways and freeways.
DPS says the new roadside vans will make Arizona the first to have a state-level program using electronic speed enforcement.
DPS Director Roger Vanderpool says the vans aren't intended to replace law enforcement officers, but are simply a tool to increase public safety. He says many crashes are caused by speeders and the technology should cut down on those accidents.
DPS will use the vans on highways where a high number of crashes are caused by speeders. It won't say exactly where they will be deployed.
They are run by Redflex Traffic Systems of Scottsdale, which is being paid about $95,000 a year for two vans under a contract awarded in August.
Note, the photo radar is not being expanded to catch slow drivers. SPEEDERS, that's the problem, the law is going after SPEEDERS. The silliness of the arguement going on here is clear. Smile for the cameras!!! Yeah, I'm thinking they won't hit 347 for awhile, but, they will be here. Talk to the Judge about the slow drivers in the passing lane, read the 'law' to him. I'm thinkin' the judge will laugh as he takes your money. The arguement concerning 'slow' drivers just doesn't wash!! Law enforforcement isactively looking for SPEEDERS, plain and simple. SPEEDERS are sited daily. So, slow down!!
The article says it, the camera flashing in your face will prove it!! | | | |
|
| | Jason
Posts:3378
| | 11/17/2007 12:11 AM |
Alert | The arguement concerning 'slow' drivers just doesn't wash!!
OK then, you're saying 80 MPH is not safe in 65 traffic right? But one car going 50 in 65 MPH traffic is? Makes exactly zero sense. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
| | geewiz
Posts:282
| | 11/17/2007 4:53 AM |
Alert | According to Jason A cop can sit at a traffic light and site you for racing as soon as the light turns green for racing because you took off at the same rate of speed as the driver next to you.
here is the definition of slow from the dictionary
Jason pay attention to #6 it states why you always need to remain in the right lane
1. moving or proceeding with little or less than usual speed or velocity: a slow train.
2. characterized by lack of speed: a slow pace.
3. taking or requiring a comparatively long time for completion: a slow meal; a slow trip.
4. requiring or taking a long time for growing, changing, or occurring; gradual: a plant of slow growth.
5. sluggish in nature, disposition, or function.
6. dull of perception or understanding; mentally dull: a slow child.
7. not prompt, readily disposed, or in haste (usually fol. by to or an infinitive): slow to anger; slow to take offense.
8. burning or heating with little speed or intensity, as a fire or an oven.
9. slack; not busy: The market was slow today.
10. having some quality that retards speed or causes movement, progress, work, etc., to be accomplished at less than the usual or expected rate of speed: a slow, careful worker; a slow road.
11. running at less than the proper rate of speed or registering less than the proper time, as a clock.
12. passing heavily or dragging, as time: It's been a slow afternoon.
13. not progressive; behind the times: a slow town.
14. dull, humdrum, uninteresting, or tedious: What a slow party!
15. Photography. requiring long exposure, as by having a small lens diameter or low film sensitivity: a slow lens or film.
16. (of the surface of a race track) sticky from a fairly recent rain and in the process of drying out.
–adverb 17. in a slow manner; slowly: Drive slow.
–verb (used with object) 18. to make slow or slower (often fol. by up or down).
19. to retard; reduce the advancement or progress of: His illness slowed him at school.
–verb (used without object) 20. to become slow or slower; slacken in speed (often fol. by up or down).
This tells me that if I am doing 65 ( +/- Jason's 3% ) and another driver is doing 60 ( +/- Jason's 3% ) I am ok to travel in the left lane even though the rest of traffic is wanting to do 80 ( +/- Jason's 3% ).
Or lets say someone wishes to travel at 90 ( +/- Jason's 3% ) everyone else at 80 ( +/- Jason's 3% ) or less they need to stay to the right.
I feel the law means slower traffic as to mean going under the maximum posted speed ( +/- Jason's 3% ).
| | | |
|
| |
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.6 |
|
|
|