On Dennis Prager’s radio program yesterday, he devoted the entire third hour to a discussion of the annoying tendencies exhibited by many of the drivers with whom he shares the roads.  At the top of his list was the driver who, while waiting to make a left turn at an intersection where there is a left-turn arrow, refuses to proceed with his turn after that arrow goes out.  The lesson: unless there is a red signal indicating you have to wait, it is permissible to make your turn even after the green arrow is no longer illuminated; you just have to yield to oncoming traffic as you would at an intersection where there is no left-turn arrow.

Related to this and just as vexing to those unfortunates stuck behind such people is the driver who, when making a left turn, remains at the limit line when the light turns green rather than pulling into the intersection while waiting for traffic to clear as the law and common sense allow, thereby leaving the drivers behind him with no chance to make their turns before the signal changes to red.  Mr. Prager said he takes it as a “point of pride” that as many people as possible are able to make their turn behind him, an opinion I wholeheartedly share.

High on my own list of driving frustrations, owing to my profession, are those drivers who refuse to pull the right and stop for approaching emergency vehicles.  I’ve seen people here in Los Angeles who seem to think that a police car, ambulance, or fire engine going down the street with its emergency lights ablaze and its siren wailing is there to serve as their escort through heavy traffic.  I once even had someone pass me as I drove code-3 down Central Avenue, apparently figuring (correctly) that if I was in such a hurry to get somewhere, I would not take the time to stop and ticket him.  The lowest pit of Hell awaits him, whoever he is.

And now I put it to the Ricochet community: What are your pet peeves about your fellow drivers?  (As time allows I’ll try to answer any questions you may have about the traffic laws.)

Comments:



Joined
May '11
ctlaw
Marythefifth: Where was I the year the rule of the highway changed from one where cars in the on-ramp yielded to cars already on the highway to the opposite? I'm still wanting to abide by lessons learned in high school driving class. Can anyone tell me when that rule changed; why it happened? It seemed to work fine the old way. So many drivers think there's magic that happens at the highway end of the on ramp lane that creates a space for them no matter what. There's not always room to move over a lane.

The concept of merging would allow that. The car on the road does not have to move over. Most onramps have a sufficient length parallel to the right lane to allow a merge. I am annoyed by people who, rather than do a normal merge, come to a dead stop where the onramp joins the highway. They then wait until there is a HUGE gap, all the while backing up competent drivers behind them on the onramp.

Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Joined
Aug '10
Midget Faded Rattlesnake

ctlaw

Matthew Bartle

Exactly! I do the same thing - try to find the speed that will let me move along without having to start and stop. It's better for me and for everyone behind me.

Unfortunately, that can be the cause of traffic jams. You leave more room than the traffic flow requires. 

Well perhaps. But so can having to stop. One person who stops suddenly can cause a traffic jam.

It's possible that as long as we don't have a complete model for these things (and which of us who isn't a traffic-flow expert does? -- supposing their models are complete to begin with), our tendency is just to rationalize what we're inclined to do anyhow.

Though we hope that what we're inclined to do anyhow has some bearing on reality...

I'm not consistent. I don't like starting and stopping a lot, but sometimes I feel pressure to budge up to pack more cars in, so I do that instead. I don't know what makes me choose one over the other, and I wouldn't even say I choose wisely.

Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Joined
Aug '10
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Marythefifth: Where was I the year the rule of the highway changed from one where cars in the on-ramp yielded to cars already on the highway to the opposite? I'm still wanting to abide by lessons learned in high school driving class. Can anyone tell me when that rule changed; why it happened? It seemed to work fine the old way. So many drivers think there's magic that happens at the highway end of the on ramp lane that creates a space for them no matter what. There's not always room to move over a lane.

Yes, there's not always room for the folks already on the highway to move over a lane. On the other hand, when there are lots of folks on the on-ramp behind me, sometimes I just go for it and hope that space to merge appears. People on on-ramps want to get somewhere, too.

While I'm on the highway, if I see a congested merge coming up, I'll try to move out of the right lane early if I can. I got this idea from my husband.

The Great Adventure!
Joined
Dec '10
The Great Adventure!
Marythefifth: Does anyone else here ponder the ethical question of obedience to the speed limit? I tend to go up to only 5 mph more, both city and highway, but wonder if an argument could be made that a true conservative obeys the law when there's no moral reason for breaking it.  · 5 hours ago

I suppose I see those who vehemently - viciously? - adhere to the speed limits as being pretty much akin to Fundamentalists, be it Christian, Muslim, Mormon, etc.  

show iWc's comment (#125)
iWc
Joined
Mar '11
iWc

What drives me NUTS is inconsistent and capricious policing. Police officers behave like classic bullies, and it is only by luck of the draw that I have such a clean driving record.

We have a famous speed trap near us, where the road opens up - and the speed limit drops. There is usually a copper at the end of the road picking up everyone who is not a vigilant local. Unacceptable. Speed limits should be there for a reason BEYOND taxation on the unlucky.

Keep it simple: set realistic speed limits (not 5-30 mph below what the road can safely support), and enforce them. What is the challenge in that?

Paul DeRocco
Joined
Aug '10
Paul DeRocco

I just took a 480-mile drive today, and was reminded of another pet peeve: people who can't keep a constant speed on the freeway. I use cruise control, and it's always obvious whether other drivers are using it or not. If not, their speed acts as a high-gain indicator of every slight change in the inclination of the road, which of course makes it hard for me to keep my cruise control on.

If traffic's light enough, I can usually leave the cruise on, and merely steer from lane to lane. A couple times, I've managed to drive from San Diego to Los Angeles in the late evening without interrupting the cruise control, but it's not easy.

What's inexcusable about the failure to keep a constant speed is that practically all cars now have cruise control, but only a minority of people seem to use it. I don't get it. Who wants to keep tension on the ankle for hours at a time?


Joined
Mar '12
kvh14

People who stop short of the stop line at traffic lights and don't trip the sensors.  They'll sit there and shake their heads when their light never turns green and when cars behind them start honking their horns, but they never seem to realize they need to pull up.

People who don't go around those turning left.  Sorry "The King Prawn" but I can't subscribe to the theory this is inherently unsafe.  Done carefully it keeps traffic moving.

People in the right lane at a red light who are going straight who don't allow room for those who want to turn right to get past them.  Again, this keeps traffic moving at the maximum efficiency.

People who don't realize that ultimately speed differential is what kills.  Yes, the speed differential between a car at 70 and an immovable object is greater than 55 and immovable, but people who drive 50 on an interstate where traffic is moving along at 75 are just as bad because they are moving and therefore more unpredictable.

Peter Gøthgen
Joined
Feb '11
Peter Gøthgen

One of my biggest annoyances is people who enter an intersection which they can't clear, thus getting stuck in the middle during a red light, which blocks drivers on the other road. My other biggest annoyance is those who think "no parking" or "no standing" don't apply to them. It only takes one self-entitled jackhole to snarl traffic for everyone.

The other big thing that bugs me is bicyclists who want to be on the road, without having to follow the rules of the road (blowing through stop signs, etc).

For my money, the best way to enforce traffic laws would be for the police to drive around in bulldozers, following the rules of the road precisely, without regard to other vehicles. If the light is green, they would go. If they have the right of way, they would take it. If a lane has no legal parking, they drive in it.

Edited on March 20, 2012 at 2:21pm

Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In