There I was, Driving in the Right Lane...

"Dave Head" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:19:02 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
> > wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:55:22 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
> >
> >>there's a car coming up behind me, assumedly at the 70 mph that most
everyone
> >>else wants to go, and he gets really, really close before I can tell
that he's
> >>slowing down at all. Yeah, he got it hauled down before hitting me, but
that
> >>was close. He had to get it hauled down, as the left lane was full of
70 mph.
> >>
> >>What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy -
what a
> >>JERK - I SHOULDA BEEN IN THE LEFT LANE!!!!
> >
> >Yeah, right - nobody EVER gets rear-ended in the LEFT lane - that only
> >happens in the RIGHT lane.
>
> Duh - the slow delivery trucks are in the right lane... get real.

If they drive like you they would be in the left lane.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:06:07 GMT, "Bill 2" > wrote:

>
>"Dave Head" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:19:02 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:55:22 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>> >
>> >>there's a car coming up behind me, assumedly at the 70 mph that most
>everyone
>> >>else wants to go, and he gets really, really close before I can tell
>that he's
>> >>slowing down at all. Yeah, he got it hauled down before hitting me, but
>that
>> >>was close. He had to get it hauled down, as the left lane was full of
>70 mph.
>> >>
>> >>What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy -
>what a
>> >>JERK - I SHOULDA BEEN IN THE LEFT LANE!!!!
>> >
>> >Yeah, right - nobody EVER gets rear-ended in the LEFT lane - that only
>> >happens in the RIGHT lane.
>>
>> Duh - the slow delivery trucks are in the right lane... get real.
>
>If they drive like you they would be in the left lane.

If they drove like me they'd be 7 over the limit, too - and not all that much
of a problem then.
>

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:06:07 GMT, "Bill 2" > wrote:

>
>"Dave Head" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:19:02 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:55:22 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>> >
>> >>there's a car coming up behind me, assumedly at the 70 mph that most
>everyone
>> >>else wants to go, and he gets really, really close before I can tell
>that he's
>> >>slowing down at all. Yeah, he got it hauled down before hitting me, but
>that
>> >>was close. He had to get it hauled down, as the left lane was full of
>70 mph.
>> >>
>> >>What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy -
>what a
>> >>JERK - I SHOULDA BEEN IN THE LEFT LANE!!!!
>> >
>> >Yeah, right - nobody EVER gets rear-ended in the LEFT lane - that only
>> >happens in the RIGHT lane.
>>
>> Duh - the slow delivery trucks are in the right lane... get real.
>
>If they drive like you they would be in the left lane.

If they drove like me they'd be 7 over the limit, too - and not all that much
of a problem then.
>

In article >, Dave Head wrote:

> What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy - what a
> JERK - I SHOULDA BEEN IN THE LEFT LANE!!!! Problem would have been solved.
> The speeding idiots could have just gone around on the right, and rightfully
> had to deal with the slow truck in the right lane instead of putting me at
> risk.

So what if the truck driver practices the same line of thought?
So he ends up cruising at 40mph in the LEFT LANE? I've seen it many
times, especially in low visability and bad weather. I've seen it in the
left lane of the dan ryan express, I've seen it in the left lane of the
Kennedy express. Places where trucks shouldn't even be, let alone in the
left lane.

What you are saying is you don't have to obey the keep right laws but
for you to be safe, everybody else HAS TO. Yet you don't see the
problem there. Typical me first **** you. The rules are for other people,
not you. You are special, you are more important. Me first, **** you at
it's finest.

Your whole scheme once again collaspes when you come across another
driver that thinks the way you do, but drives slower.

In article >, Dave Head wrote:

> What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy - what a
> JERK - I SHOULDA BEEN IN THE LEFT LANE!!!! Problem would have been solved.
> The speeding idiots could have just gone around on the right, and rightfully
> had to deal with the slow truck in the right lane instead of putting me at
> risk.

So what if the truck driver practices the same line of thought?
So he ends up cruising at 40mph in the LEFT LANE? I've seen it many
times, especially in low visability and bad weather. I've seen it in the
left lane of the dan ryan express, I've seen it in the left lane of the
Kennedy express. Places where trucks shouldn't even be, let alone in the
left lane.

What you are saying is you don't have to obey the keep right laws but
for you to be safe, everybody else HAS TO. Yet you don't see the
problem there. Typical me first **** you. The rules are for other people,
not you. You are special, you are more important. Me first, **** you at
it's finest.

Your whole scheme once again collaspes when you come across another
driver that thinks the way you do, but drives slower.

In article >, Dave Head wrote:
> Duh - the slow delivery trucks are in the right lane... get real.

Hmm.. that explains the box truck in the middle lanes of the dan ryan
express the other day.... (trucks belong in the locals, he was 5 lanes
too far to the left for his vehicle type and speed.) Get real, truckers
obey keep right laws only slightly better than you do.

In article >, Dave Head wrote:
> Duh - the slow delivery trucks are in the right lane... get real.

Hmm.. that explains the box truck in the middle lanes of the dan ryan
express the other day.... (trucks belong in the locals, he was 5 lanes
too far to the left for his vehicle type and speed.) Get real, truckers
obey keep right laws only slightly better than you do.

Dave Head wrote:


> A straight truck, with a minimum of lights - I think maybe 4 - two down low,
> two up high, and a big black void in between, appears out of the rain and mist
> doing about 40 mph. I hit the brakes, slow down without problem, but now...
>
> there's a car coming up behind me, assumedly at the 70 mph that most everyone
> else wants to go, and he gets really, really close before I can tell that he's
> slowing down at all. Yeah, he got it hauled down before hitting me, but that
> was close. He had to get it hauled down, as the left lane was full of 70 mph.
>
> What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy

Check your mirror, switch lanes, accelerate, pass the truck, check other
mirror, switch lanes, and slow back down.

Visibility must not have been that bad if you felt safe going 62 mph.

Dave Head wrote:


> A straight truck, with a minimum of lights - I think maybe 4 - two down low,
> two up high, and a big black void in between, appears out of the rain and mist
> doing about 40 mph. I hit the brakes, slow down without problem, but now...
>
> there's a car coming up behind me, assumedly at the 70 mph that most everyone
> else wants to go, and he gets really, really close before I can tell that he's
> slowing down at all. Yeah, he got it hauled down before hitting me, but that
> was close. He had to get it hauled down, as the left lane was full of 70 mph.
>
> What did I do wrong? How could I have avoided this close call? Easy

Check your mirror, switch lanes, accelerate, pass the truck, check other
mirror, switch lanes, and slow back down.

Visibility must not have been that bad if you felt safe going 62 mph.

>There are times when
>going with the flow is the only safe thing to do even if that would be
>at what would be considered an unsafe speed.


But not in the right lane. If I was "with the flow" at 70 in the right
lane, I
_might_ have had a problem with slowing for the truck.

What!!!. Here is a clue. Going with the flow means the flow of
traffic in the lane you are using, not some lane 2 or 3 over. You
seem to understand that concept about as well as KRETP.

Harry K