Slower traffic keep right. That's all the sign says. There are no exclusions, no caveats, no waivers. The sign doesn't have a little asterisk on it. I know you would think that asterisk was there just for you. Slower traffic keep right means if I am coming up behind you and you can safely move to the right to get out of my way, you are obligated to do so. You are slower than me, therefore you are slower traffic; KEEP RIGHT!!!
It doesn't matter if you are already going 70 mph and the speed limit is 60 mph. It doesn't matter if you think it's your right to drive wherever you want, because it isn't. It is not up to you to evaluate and enforce the law. No evaluation is needed. It is so simple, a caveman could do it. Slower traffic keep right! It's taken so seriously in Germany that if you are rear ended on the Autobahn, it's your fault.
Perhaps you are spatially challenged and can't determine that I'm gaining on you (which means I'm going faster than you). Hopefully you are not also unable to differentiate size and should see that my car is getting bigger in your mirror. Bigger = closer = gaining = faster. Perhaps you are confused about which side is right. I'll make it easy; it's the side I have to pass you on because you won't get out of the way!
I only wish there were some way to push a button and override the driver. either that or allow fender mounted rocket launchers. I know that's a bit harsh, but people should pay attention, know the rules of the road (and common courtesy), and do it!
Monday, January 15, 2007
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Are Speed Limits Safe
The short answer is, statistically, no. If you obey the posted speed limit you are statistically more likely to be in an accident. This has been proven in numerous traffic studies conducted, including an extensive one done by the U.S. Department of Transportation. That study focused on the effect on driver speeds when posted speed limits are raised or lowered. It was intended to prove that lower speed limits would increase safety and that higher speed limits would just cause people to driver faster and faster. The findings proved that none of that is true. What they did find is that posted speeds do little to affect driver speeds; that when posted speed limits are increased drivers do not necessarily increase to the limit; that higher posted speed limits resulted in fewer accidents; and that lower posted speed limits resulted in more accidents.
That seems counter intuitive, doesn't it? Thank all the propaganda for that. The reason that higher speeds are safer and lower speeds are not is that most drivers intuitively know what is safe. They tend to drive at a comfortable safe speed regardless of what is posted. However, many drivers are conscientious about obeying the law and will not exceed the posted limit. Because of these two factors, the lower speed limits result in a higher variation of speeds. It is the variation, and not the speed itself, that makes for hazardous driving. As speed limits are raised, the law abiders are free to speed up to the rest of the flow.
What is truly surprising to the brainwashed masses is that, statistically fastest 10% of drivers are the least likely to be in an accident, and the highest accident risk are the slowest 5% of drivers. Imagine that!
I would venture to guess the reason for this are vehicle types and driver competence; primarily driver competence. However, faster drivers are generally driving higher performance vehicles. Higher performance vehicles (sports cars, sport coupes, etc.) are better equipped for the higher speeds. My SVT Focus is a safer car at any given speed than most cars on the road. That's because it can stop better, turn better, and accelerate fairly well. So any situation that presents itself, I have more maneuvering ability at my disposal, therefore, a safer car. Think about it, isn't a Ferrari safer at 80mph than a F150? But chances are it's the Ferrari with the flashing lights behind it. Explain that if it's really about traffic safety.
Getting back to the safe speed limit issue. The traffic engineers at the DOT will tell you that the safest posted speed limit is the 85th percentile. So if the 85th percentile is the safest speed, why don't we use it? Revenue! Imagine how much money municipalities would lose if suddenly 85% of all the drivers on the road were now legal! They depend on traffic tickets for revenue so the speed limits are set artificially low. And it is all supported by huge lobbying efforts from insurance companies because traffic tickets allow them to raise rates.
That seems counter intuitive, doesn't it? Thank all the propaganda for that. The reason that higher speeds are safer and lower speeds are not is that most drivers intuitively know what is safe. They tend to drive at a comfortable safe speed regardless of what is posted. However, many drivers are conscientious about obeying the law and will not exceed the posted limit. Because of these two factors, the lower speed limits result in a higher variation of speeds. It is the variation, and not the speed itself, that makes for hazardous driving. As speed limits are raised, the law abiders are free to speed up to the rest of the flow.
What is truly surprising to the brainwashed masses is that, statistically fastest 10% of drivers are the least likely to be in an accident, and the highest accident risk are the slowest 5% of drivers. Imagine that!
I would venture to guess the reason for this are vehicle types and driver competence; primarily driver competence. However, faster drivers are generally driving higher performance vehicles. Higher performance vehicles (sports cars, sport coupes, etc.) are better equipped for the higher speeds. My SVT Focus is a safer car at any given speed than most cars on the road. That's because it can stop better, turn better, and accelerate fairly well. So any situation that presents itself, I have more maneuvering ability at my disposal, therefore, a safer car. Think about it, isn't a Ferrari safer at 80mph than a F150? But chances are it's the Ferrari with the flashing lights behind it. Explain that if it's really about traffic safety.
Getting back to the safe speed limit issue. The traffic engineers at the DOT will tell you that the safest posted speed limit is the 85th percentile. So if the 85th percentile is the safest speed, why don't we use it? Revenue! Imagine how much money municipalities would lose if suddenly 85% of all the drivers on the road were now legal! They depend on traffic tickets for revenue so the speed limits are set artificially low. And it is all supported by huge lobbying efforts from insurance companies because traffic tickets allow them to raise rates.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Turn Signals
So I pose the question, do you need to use your turn signal in a left turn only lane? Aside from how annoying it is to set there with the blinker clicking away, it's obvious and redundant. It would surprise me, but could the law really require such stupidity? I had to know so I looked up the California Vehicle Code on the subject.
Division 11 Section 22107. No person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.
Wow, there it is! You must signal 'in the event any other vehicle may be affected'. So even under the law you don't have to signal in the left turn only because no one should be affected by your left turn.
I once got a warning because I did not signal a turn coming out of our housing area. There is a light there, only one lane in each direction, and a parking lot on the opposite site. I wish I had known this law because I would have told the officer that I didn't need to signal. If right of way is signal controlled (meaning I have a green light), there is only one lane (meaning cars can only be behind me and must wait until I commit to a right or left turn before they can make a right or left turn), and no oncoming traffic, how could my turning left (or right) possibly have any affect on any other vehicle on the face of the planet?
What's nice about this particular wording of the law is that it should place the burden of proof on the citing officer to show that your movement did affect another vehicle. Webster's dictionary defines affect as, to produce an effect upon; especially : to produce a material influence upon or alteration in. In driving terms 'to produce a material influence upon or alteration in', would mean another vehicle would need to change speed or course because of the movement you made. With that in mind, it is rare that you would be required to signal.
That's not to say I don't. There is also a matter of courtesy, but for the most part, I try to go where I need to go, and do what I need to do, without making anyone else need to change speed or course because of me.
See you in the fast lane (I may signal my entry...)
Division 11 Section 22107. No person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.
Wow, there it is! You must signal 'in the event any other vehicle may be affected'. So even under the law you don't have to signal in the left turn only because no one should be affected by your left turn.
I once got a warning because I did not signal a turn coming out of our housing area. There is a light there, only one lane in each direction, and a parking lot on the opposite site. I wish I had known this law because I would have told the officer that I didn't need to signal. If right of way is signal controlled (meaning I have a green light), there is only one lane (meaning cars can only be behind me and must wait until I commit to a right or left turn before they can make a right or left turn), and no oncoming traffic, how could my turning left (or right) possibly have any affect on any other vehicle on the face of the planet?
What's nice about this particular wording of the law is that it should place the burden of proof on the citing officer to show that your movement did affect another vehicle. Webster's dictionary defines affect as, to produce an effect upon; especially : to produce a material influence upon or alteration in
Friday, January 5, 2007
Driver IQ Introduction
The Smart Driver's Blog is all about intelligent driving. Smart drivers are ones who think about what they're doing. Smart drivers ask questions. Smart drivers think outside the box. Smart drivers are also, probably peeved as I am, about driving laws and the driving habits of most people.
So you might ask, what do you mean, smart driving? What kinds of questions should I be asking? Here is an example. When sitting in a left turn only lane, why does everyone use their turn signal? If you have pondered this question, I applaud you! In this blog we will ponder other such things like speed limits, traffic control, and look at what "safe" driving really looks like.
So you might ask, what do you mean, smart driving? What kinds of questions should I be asking? Here is an example. When sitting in a left turn only lane, why does everyone use their turn signal? If you have pondered this question, I applaud you! In this blog we will ponder other such things like speed limits, traffic control, and look at what "safe" driving really looks like.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
