dcbwhaley wrote:
Quote:
It's not my business if they wish to commit a traffic infraction - nor is it anyone else's if I wish to do the same.
How far do you go with that philosophy? Do you apply it to all laws or just traffic? I would say it was everyone else's concern if, for example, you choose to drive on the left side of the road

I won't break 'The Rules', and I won't exceed my personal limits.
From there it would follow that I would only drive into a lane normally reserved for oncoming traffic only if it were safe to do so, when road and traffic conditions leave me enough spacetime to get back on my side of the road (I only need about two thirds of what the Vehicle & Traffic code recommends), and when 'everyone' amounts to no more than two other vehicles that I could easily outpace. (It's The Rush, not The Racer.)
Other people tend to get offended when someone uses a lane that
they wouldn't use to make a pass. I really could care less if someone uses the shoulder, or even the lane normally reserved for oncoming traffic, to pass me - as long as there is no oncoming traffic, and as long as no one is using the shoulder, of course.
Pratnership wrote:
Johnnytheboy wrote:
Driving slowly, then speeding up and moving to the middle of the road in any viable overtaking spot and grinning at me in his mirror.
I see, but that's a blatant deliberate block.
Does anyone have any input about if you should slow down or even pull over for someone whom wants to get past? This is assuming you are doing the limit, and they are going faster.
In my case, it's not unlikely that we may both over the posted speed 'limit'; but it makes no difference. I'll help them to pass me if at all safely possible. By my road position, I will present an opening to where I feel it would be safest to pass me, for both of us. The other car passes me, and life goes on.
(If I were driving so fast that I didn't think it would be safe to pass me, the likelihood that the car behind me is a cop skyrockets by orders of magnitude, which means I should both slow down AND allow the pass - and the sooner, the better.)
In fact, it pleases me to cooperate with another driver to increase the utilization rate of the road we're on. That we both did it at 'extra-legal' speeds only proves that those going slower than us have no excuse but to drop the self-righteous bu11$h!t [and perhaps to go and get remedial training?].
[tangent]
I forget the state in this country (but it starts with a 'V') that was enlightened enough to pass laws which explicitly amount to ...
If someone behind you is speeding, and you do not permit them to pass, you are both wrong.
It could very well mean that, by preventing someone from speeding, you denied the state the money from the speeding ticket the other driver was going to get.
It definitely means that if someone wants to pass you, and you can physically and safely do so, you should. If the other driver undertakes, he gets a summons for speeding and a summons for passing on the wrong side {undertaking?}, and you get a ticket for not moving over. (What a racket.)
Were I driving there, I'd adjust to the local driving culture, perhaps by significantly reducing the number of undertakes (?) I'd perform, and increasing the number of overtakes I'd encourage, among other things.
I do believe that the higher the speed limits tend to get, the more sense it makes to encourage overtaking, and discourage undertaking. When everyone - including the state - is on the same sheet of music, everyone tends to be safer.
[/tangent]