Finally, California drivers can read a cell phone map (iPad too?)

In article >, T0m $herman
> wrote:

> On 2/28/2014 5:31 PM, Alexander Schreiber wrote:
> > Well, while you are driving, you should_not_ fiddle with your GPS/phone,
> > that's what car mounts are for. You should not eat your lunch, do your
> > makeup, drink a cup of coffee, ... that's what rest stops are for.
>
> Drinking from a properly secured hydration bladder is fine - this is
> common practice in endurance racing.

It's "common practice" for drivers here to use their mobile phone while
driving ... doesn't make it right or sensible though (even worse since
it's been illegal for a couple of years now).

On 2014-03-16, T0m $herman > wrote:
> On 3/15/2014 5:57 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2014-03-15, T0m $herman > wrote:
>>> On 3/12/2014 1:46 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>> Straw man. Fail. I never said that at all. As I said, I rarely visit the
>>>> left lane, except to pass. It's often some other poor schmuck who I see
>>>> getting tail gated in the left lane. And you are still ignoring all the
>>>> other bad behavior I outlined. Wonder why?
>>>
>>> Not a poor schmuck, but either a blithering idiot or arsehole for
>>> blocking the passing lane. Go to Germany and try that on the Autobahn,
>>> and you will soon be escorted to the side of the road by the police, who
>>> will then issue you a citation with a hefty fine.
>>>
>>> The passing lane blockers are more dangerous than the fast drivers, all
>>> else being equal.
>>
>> Is it impossible for you to imagine a case where a highway might be
>> fairly congested with cars in the left, middle, and right lanes? Is it
>> hard for you then to imagine that in that situation, where all lanes are
>> going approximately 55-60 mph, one car might attempt to go much faster
>> than the prevailing traffic? Is it then hard for you to imagine what
>> might happen as this fearless important individual who must go faster
>> than everyone else starts tailgating cars in any lane, left, middle, or
>> right? Let's say this individual, out of say 20 cars in the vicinity on
>> this crowded highway, starts tailgating people in the left lane. On this
>> crowded stretch of highway, what should all of the other 20 cars do for
>> this person? Should they all call each other and coordinate a controlled
>> multiple-car merge maneuver to get out of his way? Not gonna happen. So
>> what normally does happen is this important individual who must get past
>> literally every other car on the road starts behaving badly and generally
>> making the situation unsafe for others. I know this take a lot of brain
>> power to imagine, but I've seen it play out in real life; so I know for
>> a fact it's not so far from reality to be hard to imagine. Try it - you
>> can do it!
>>
> Yo Dude! I commuted for 3 years on the North-South Freeway in Milwaukee
> while the Marquette Interchange was being rebuilt. I never sat in the
> left lane and blocked traffic when it was flowing at 50+ mph.

I never said you did, dude. I also never said *I* do it, dude. What I
said, if you can keep up, is that *people* do it. And in such a
situation there is no ****ing excuse for a driver who is upset by this
to drive in an unsafe manner. If you are trying to convince me that
unsafe driving is excusable if someone is blocking the left lane, then
you have failed.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

In article >, T0m $herman
> wrote:
> On 2/28/2014 2:12 AM, micky wrote:
> > I drove from Baltimore to Dallas and back a few yeas ago. I don't
> > remember trying to do this on the way there, but on the way back, I told
> > myself special circumstances existed (and they did) and tried a couple
> > times to read my paper map while driving. I didn't hit anything but it
> > was a big mistake.
>
> I have tried reading maps, talking on a phone, etc. while riding as a
> passenger, and found it impossible to pay attention to traffic and road
> conditions at the same time.

If I tried reading a map as a passenger, I'd quickly be throwing up all
over the driver, which "might" prove to be a "little" distracting for
them. :-)

In article >, T0m $herman
> wrote:
> On 3/9/2014 8:53 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
> > Yes, we also need to ban speedometers, oil pressure gauges,
> > temperature gauges, radio dials, AC controls, etc since they all need
> > to be seen and/or touched by the driver.
>
> Be like riding a dirt bike, then.

Nah, it's quicker and easier to simply ban the car / bus / truck /
motorbike ... solves all the problems in one go that way. ;-)

On 3/15/2014 4:41 PM, Lewis wrote:
> It is not your job to enforce speed limits. If you are in the left lane,
> you damn well better be the fastest moving vehicle.

The only case I can see it being reasonable to hold up faster traffic in
the inner lane is for a short period while waiting for a vehicle ahead
to complete a pass, such as the those who like to pass an articulated
truck at about 1 mph faster than the truck is going. Particularly on
the moto, I will wait until the lane is clear, and then get by the truck
as fast as I can to minimize the time I am beside it.

People who drive or ride beside a large truck for extended periods are
clueless.

--
T0m $herm@n

In article >, T0m $herman
> wrote:

> On 3/11/2014 12:12 AM, Your Name wrote:
> > In article >, DevilsPGD
> > > wrote:
> >> In the last episode of >, Your
> >> Name > said:
> >>> In article >, Ashton Crusher
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:12:22 +1300, Your Name >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> In article >, Ashton Crusher
> >>>>> > wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yes, we also need to ban speedometers, oil pressure gauges,
> >>>>>> temperature gauges, radio dials, AC controls, etc since they all need
> >>>>>> to be seen and/or touched by the driver.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How in the world do idiots like you manage to exist in nature?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Technically, the radio dial and AC controls don't need to be seen nor
> >>>>> touched by the driver while driving (neither do the warning lights if
> >>>>> they have audible alerts as well).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Some cars have started using "HUD" displays for the speedometer,
> >>>>> although personally I think that would be more distracting.
> >>>>
> >>>> Really? You switch the ac from vent to AC thru mind control? same
> >>>> with switching radio stations?
> >>>
> >>> Neither of those things is actually necceassary to do while driving.
> >>
> >> While technically true, in a practical sense, people won't be happy
> >> being unable to adjust such things to their comfort, it's a measured
> >> risk.
> >
> > You "adjust things" when you get in. You pull over somewhere safe to
> > "adjust things". There's no need to "adjust things" while actually
> > driving.
> >
> Yes there is, at least to address window fogging in winter conditions.
> Hint - the vehicle being in motion makes a difference, so things cannot
> be correctly adjusted while sitting at the side of the road.

When you see the windows starting to fog up, you pull over and start
the "defogging" equipment, wait for the windows to clear well enough
for driving, and THEN continue driving.

If you open the windows a little and set the vents, etc. properly
before even starting out, then there's less chance of the windows
fogging up in the first place.

On 3/15/2014 5:31 PM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> Another reason one might find themselves wanting to be in the
> middle lane is when there are a lot of cars on an entrance ramp entering
> the highway in the right lane.

Why? You have the right-of-way over the merging vehicles, and it is up
to them to avoid you.

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/15/2014 2:46 PM, Arif Khokar wrote:
> On 03/15/2014 01:50 PM, T0m $herman wrote:
>> As I tell people who ask "Isn't riding a motorcycle dangerous?"; "No, it
>> is much less dangerous to other road users than if I drove my truck
>> instead."
>
> Are you implying that you're a terrible driver?

Everyone is a comedian.

--
T0m $herm@n

In article >, T0m $herman
> wrote:

> On 3/11/2014 3:10 PM, Your Name wrote:
> > In article >, DevilsPGD
> > > wrote:
> >> In the last episode of >, Your
> >> Name > said:
> >>> In article >, DevilsPGD
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> In the last episode of >, Your
> >>>> Name > said:
> >>>>
> >>>>> You "adjust things" when you get in. You pull over somewhere safe to
> >>>>> "adjust things". There's no need to "adjust things" while actually
> >>>>> driving.
> >>>>
> >>>> Given that most cars have no thermostat, and instead rely on a "hotter
> >>>> vs colder" style knob, adjusting the temperature is often necessary.
> >>>
> >>> The knobs (or in my car it's a slider) usually has a few variable
> >>> positions. In a car you drive often you would get used to what those
> >>> settings mean in terms of comfort.
> >>
> >> Probably. However, current interior and exterior temperatures are a
> >> factor, as will be the heat of the engine in a non-thermostat-controlled
> >> car.
> >>
> >>>> And a safety issue, if your windows start to fog unexpected.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, and you carefully pull over and stop somewhere safe to do that,
> >>> then drive off when you can actually see properly again.
> >>
> >> You don't actually drive much, do you? You can normally observe the fog
> >> start since it typically appears first at the edges of the windshield.
> >> You can safely drive for minutes or seconds before the windshield is
> >> obscured, or with the flip of a switch, drive indefinitely.
> >>
> >> It's also difficult to predict when it will or will not fog, since one
> >> of the factors is the humidity and body heat of the passenger's breath.
> >
> > "You can safely drive for minutes or seconds" ... which means you can
> > pull over safely and stop (or at worst at a red traffic light), and
> > THEN fiddle with the controls. You DO NOT fiddle with controls while
> > actually driving.
> >
> > OR simply open the window before driving.
>
> Open the window how much, and which windows? This can only be
> determined while the vehicle is in motion (unless we build wind tunnels
> along side the road), and often requires frequent adjustments. Your
> contention is asinine.

I almost always have both windows on my two-door car open. In winter
they may only be open a little. If it's pouring with rain they would
stay closed, but I instead set the vents to blow on the windscreen
before I drive off. Never ever had any issues with major fogging up at
all.

There's no need at all to keep playing with the controls. That's likely
only going to make things worse.

On 3/15/2014 4:37 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message >
> T0m $herman > wrote:
>> On 3/10/2014 3:23 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2014-03-10 19:01:00 +0000, nospam > said:
>>>
>>>> In article <2014031011461633808-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>>>> Savageduck > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The frequency of accidents has more than kept up with the increase in
>>>>> the numbers of vehicles and drivers on today's roads.
>>>>
>>>> definitely not.
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.nhtsa.gov/PR/NHTSA-05-11>
>>>> U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced that the
>>>> number and rate of traffic fatalities in 2010 fell to the lowest
>>>> levels since 1949, despite a significant increase in the number of
>>>> miles Americans drove during the year.
>>>
>>> Note: that refers to FATAL accidents.
>>>
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._in_U.S._by_ye
>>>> ar>
>>>> From 1979 to 2005, the number of deaths per year decreased 14.97%
>>>> while the number of deaths per capita decreased by 35.46%. In 2010,
>>>> there were an estimated 5,419,000 crashes, killing 32,885 and
>>>> injuring 2,239,000.[1] The 32,367 traffic fatalities in 2011 were the
>>>> lowest in 62 years (1949).
>>>>
>>>>> A large number of
>>>>> those accidents are directly related to distraction, whatever that
>>>>> distraction might be, including but not limited to, using cell phones
>>>>> without a hands free device, texting, eating, changing CDs, kids,
>>>>> arguments (with passengers, or on the phone), and opportunistic mobile
>>>>> sex acts.
>>>>
>>>> in other words, if you're going to ban cellphones, you need to ban
>>>> everything else, which of course, won't ever happen.
>>>
>>> There is this to consider:
>>> "For drivers 15-19 years old involved in fatal crashes, 21 percent of
>>> the distracted drivers were distracted by the use of cell phones (NHTSA)".
>>>
>>> Once more you have engaged in selective reading and editing. I addressed
>>> accidents, not fatalities, and I explained the reduction of vehicle
>>> accident fatalities in the body of my post which you edited.
>>>
>>> Here is what you snipped:
>>> "The thing that has reduced fatalities in those accidents has been the
>>> improvement in automobile design and safety features, not the least of
>>> which is seat belts."
>>>
>>> I agree that there has been a reduction in fatal vehicle accidents.
>>> These stats bear that out:
>>> < http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx >
>>> However, the actual numbers of ALL accidents, not necessarily fatal
>>> accidents has kept pace with rising traffic numbers.
>>>
>>> Here are the NY State stats for 2012:
>>> <
>>> http://dmv.ny.gov/sites/default/file...cs/2012nys.pdf >
>>>
>>> ....and a few snippets of information from the Golden State:
>>> < http://www.ots.ca.gov/OTS_and_Traffi...Score_Card.asp >
>>>
>>> So to summarize; Yup there are fewer FATAL accidents while the total
>>> number of accidents has risen. Strangely enough the average number of
>>> miles driven hasn't significantly changed in years.
>>>
>> Motorcycle death rates are increasing, despite bike sales dropping and
>> modern bikes having generally much better brakes and handling
>> (particularly heavy cruisers) compared to the past. Anyone want to
>> guess why that is?
>
> Around here its because motorcyclists drive like ****ing assholes at
> excessive speeds.
>
> Yesterday--No, it was Thur, I was waiting on a on-ramp for the
> traffic-control light. Two lines of cars waiting. A motorcycle came
> zipping down between the cars at 30-40mph and then barreled down the
> shoulder of the highway, easily hitting 80mph. This was a high-traffic
> "rush hour" were the average speed on the highway was about 30mph.
>
> This sort of thing happens regularly.
>
But more often than 10 years ago? I think not.

Sales of race-replica motorcycles (e.g. Suzuki GSX-R "Gixxer" 600) have
dropped to the point that models are being updated every 5 or 6 years
instead of every 1 or 2 years, while the only growing segment is in
adventure-touring (e.g. BMW R1200GS), and the latter are not ridden by
"squids".

So while the numbers of reckless riders drops, death rates increase. Why?

--
T0m $herm@n