Slow Drivers cause majority of accidents--BS

Actually, I completely, with all honesty buy into much of what that article is saying. A lot of people, react in ways they probably shouldn't to particularly slow drivers. Go at 35 in a 50 with a bunch of cars behind you and there's a good chance somebody will pass you--double yellow lines or not, safe or not.

The problem with traffic in general is that one person can control the progress of many behind them, since we all share a lane. The cultural norm is to go at or slightly above the speed limit. If you don't do that, if you go slower, if you refuse to take a right at a red, etc. you are naturally asking for anger from those you are holding up.

I am positive slow drivers in general do not realize how irritating they are to people behind them.

 

As Grumpy pointed out this is the UK. Having driven over there the roads are very different - narrow and twisty. I love Ireland and the UK, but many roads there are more like really nice private driveways - the sort of thing that an old estate or hotel in the country might have here in the US - if you have not seen them it is hard to understand. You really need to work at driving. Slow vehicles are a real hazard - many trucks are smaller than US 18 wheelers and when loaded up they can be slow. You also do not need to be too far out of town to come upon farm equipment or even animals. Even doing the speed limit you need to stay alert since there lines of sight can be short and often there is no shoulder to pull off onto.

 

My general rule is to maintain constant speed so that people can make a better decision. But when push comes to shove I'll hit the brakes so that I don't have an over-committed idiot ram into my car.

Rule 1: trying to merge ahead of a car is a crash waiting to happen and if you really must do it, you really need to floor it.

I will move over, but I'm leery of doing it since the merging vehicle will probably end up driving faster than I am.

Rule 2: when somebody moves over to let you merge, let them pass and move over again before you try to get fully up to speed.

 

This has happened to me only I was going 35 in a 35!! A woman behind me in her SUV had ignored three passing zones that were free of oncoming traffic, and then decided she just HAD to pass me on a short uphill with a blind crest.

She made it, but her only problem was that a CT State Trooper popped up over the crest of the hill just as she was merging back into "my" lane. His blue lights went on, he spun a u-turn and nailed her.

 

Yes. I'm sure many just think "they'll overtake me", completely ignoring the difficulty and danger of overtaking.

By choice, my regular commute is a 2-lane highway with limited safe overtaking stretches. There's just enough traffic coming in the opposite direction to frustrate overtaking at times.

I don't mind sitting behind the slowpoke but I do mind their lack of courtesy. It's usually a Buick or Camry, but I have regularly been behind a pick-up going 5-under.

 

Ironically I was just watching the old (2005?) TopGear episode where they go caravan-ing and basically a make a 20-30 car queue behind them whereever they are. Campers are annoying monstrosities on american roads, they are deadly on UK roads...

There is a big disconnect between what americans perceive as a road and europeans. Your 1 lane each way A-Roads have no equivalent here. All the "A-Roads" here are interstate which are usually minimum of 2 lanes each way with a giant divider and a shoulder on both sides and gigantic lanes. The streets in my subdivision are wide enough for 5 lanes of traffic (2 each direction and a centre perhaps) but it is one lane each way split down the middle. And people use the whole width of it when they drive. I would fear letting an american anywhere near the roads over there especially the B-roads or the ones where buildings are literally a meter from the road and windy!

Having said all that I am a firm believer that slow drivers are partially responsible for impatient driver's accidents. Pretty much summed up in the first post. A slow driver makes others behind them impatient and more wreckless in turn putting other drivers at risk. There are minimum speed limits on a lot of a-road/interstate roads but the reality is that the posted maximum limit is the publicly accepted minimum limit. So someone who is driving perfectly legally at the posted limit in the passing lane is causing irritation to a long queue behind them. Undoubtedly one or two or more of these irate people will use the inner lanes, slow lanes, and onramp/offramp lanes to overtake a slow vehicle putting everyone at risk in those lanes.

I don't care if you drive the speed limit, just get the hell out of the way of those that dont. Because you put everyone in all the surrounding lanes at risk. Legal or not, it is the civil thing to do.

 

To some extent, I can see both sides. Driving at a speed significantly different than the posted llimit, whether above or below, is unsafe. But just because most people drive too fast for the conditions, how is that the fault of the person driving the limit? Who's usually IN the accident, the impatient driver who took the risk, or the person driving like we all know we're supposed to? "It was his fault, officer! He was doing the speed limit!"

Having said that, it's not often I drive precisely the speed limit myself. Unless conditions warrant, said conditions including the presence of the local constabulatory.

 

The other people driving too fast is faulted on the person driving slowly if they refuse to give way and cause someone else to get angry. It is a direct correlation. Again, nothing illegal, but it is increasing danger.

This is part of my point. The driver causing the irritation in the left lane is rarely involved in the collision caused by the moron swerving. But the swerving of the moron is directly caused by the driver going too slow for others.

Driver A is driving below or at the posted limit in the fast lane. Drivers B, C, D, and E are all traveling close behind and getting impatient. Driving onto the shoulder slightly to see what the hold-up is, and or flashing lights and beeping the horn to indicate they want to pass. Driver D decides he has had enough and swerves hard into the right lane to overtake C, B, and A on the right. Now when Driver D does this, he cuts off Driver F and takes the opening Driver F was leaving for Driver G to merge onto the interstate causing Driver G to miss the merging opportunity and making everyone slam on their brakes to let them in and everyone behind G also trying to merge. If Driver D were to collide with F or G, I would put blame on Driver A for driving too slowly and causing this scenario in the first place. If you want to drive the limit, fine. Just do so elsewhere like in the slow lane so that drivers like Mr. D don't endanger others like F and G because of you.

We know that driving the limit does not make those waiting behind "see the light" and also drive responsibly. It makes them angry and more dangerous to everyone else on the road. So there is no benefit to holding up traffic in the fast lane, and lots of downsides. It is your legal right to drive the speed limit in the left lane, but I know I couldn't live with myself if I was a contributing factor to getting a minivan full of kids smucked by a jerk trying to pass me because I refused to move over when I could have.

 

sounds like road rage to me

 

The problem of on ramps, and merging was solved in Wisconsin eons ago simply by putting a YIELD sign BEFORE the lane appeared. It was/is manditory that if another car is entering the freeway, the car that is in the far right lane must get their nice person 1 lane over to the left or slow down, JUST YIELD to the traffic entering a freeway. How hard is that to figure out. IT MAKES TOO MUCH SENSE!

Another problem is when you enter the flow of traffic, you had DAMN well better be at the same speed as the lane you are merging into. Can not count how many times I have seen idiots that get on the freeway at 40...ish and the flow of traffic is 65 or better. That's a real eye opener!

And for Christ sake, if you are going to stick at 65, or slower, get your nice person out of the 2 far left lanes, in Cal that would be the #1 & #2 lanes. YOU DON"T BELONG THERE. It's called the FAST lane for a damn good reason! If you take a look at the clowns that insist on vegetating there, you will notice a trend.....a commonality, ....once you start looking and rembering, you will figure it out.

I just wanna know why the hell they are all over there anyway? Magnetism? Weak Nuclear force, Dark Matter, I don't know but something's going on!

 

I just have to say I hate it when cars speed up or slow down when I'm trying to merge. I'm capable of gauging the speed of traffic and then can make the decision to merge in front of or behind traffic - when the thing that should be constant changes it makes things so much more difficult. I guess it would not be a problem if I could put all my attention on the car that is slowing or speeding up, but I can only shoot it a couple of quick glances over my shoulder while keeping an eye on all of the other traffic and moving at over 50mph - and it all happens in a couple of seconds. Add to it I'm in a Prius so it is not like I can stomp on the gas and take off if the person is actually slowing.

 

More often than not around here, inconsiderate drivers would simply speed up to close the gap in order to prevent you from cutting in. This is why I no longer use my turn signals until right before I need to change lanes, thanks to the inconsiderate drivers.

What's this thread doing in the Prius v forum? I was expecting to see a picture of a v.

 

I've noticed this to be a more common maneuver when you're around the perimeter of the country. Once you get more towards the central part of the country, I find drivers to be a bit more courteous and tend to stick closer to the PSL. Granted, it's been awhile since I was in those areas driving, and when I was it was 90% interstate travel.

 

How absolutely Los Angeles. I grew up in the SF area, and when I moved to LA I found the traffic terrorizing. After a few years, I learned to cope with LA, but then moved back the to SF area. LA drivers may be rude, offensive, and all that, but they are competent. I think it's called the Darwin effect.

You can get a ticket for going 75 mph on the freeway in CA. In northern CA it will be for speeding. In southern CA it will be for obstructing traffic.

 

okay, i read the article. first, 143 accidents a year? we have that many out in front of my house. what percentage is that? second, if there's a minimum posted, they should get a ticket for going below it. but, we hardly give any tickets for people going above the max, so they should be treated equally. third, if you're going to throw in 'not keeping up with the flow of traffic' you might as well throw the speed limits out the window. fifth, if your leading the pack and you're somewhere in between the min/max, everone is keeping up with you. no prolemo!

 

And this is what causes aggressive drivers. It is a big "problemo" and even bigger since you don't care how your actions threaten lives.

 

or non action. and btw, speeding is more action than driving between the limits. as said above, should i keep my cash under my mattress?

 

If there is room for you to move over, then do so. Your non action causes aggression and takes lives directly. I have no idea how this relates to banking. Read my couple longer posts above.

 

grumpy says one lane windy with no room to move. if you keep your cash under the mattress, people won't rob banks.

 

You aren't in the UK. In the states people usually talk about interstates, in the UK A-Roads.

You not moving over on an interstate is dangerous. On many A-Roads, there is no place to move over. There is no correlation there.

And I don't suggest that slow drivers are the sole cause of aggressive drivers. But it is one of many reasons and extremely easy to reduce by just moving over.