Discussion:
Jury Awards $15M to Truck-Wreck Victim
(too old to reply)
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-10 05:46:21 UTC
Permalink
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128

Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006

A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
2006-11-10 08:13:54 UTC
Permalink
richard
2006-11-10 14:11:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------


80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car driver
doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.

The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have time to
react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that the car
driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts. Outside
of falsifying his log books.

I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as they get
around, slow down. Bad move.
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do not pay
attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph while yacking
on the phone. During their conversation, not once looking to see what's
around them.

Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
Harry K
2006-11-10 15:00:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by richard
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------
80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car driver
doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.
The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have time to
react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that the car
driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts. Outside
of falsifying his log books.
I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as they get
around, slow down. Bad move.
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do not pay
attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph while yacking
on the phone. During their conversation, not once looking to see what's
around them.
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.

Harry K
realitytrucker
2006-11-10 16:57:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.
Harry K
I use the 6 second rule because I know how long it takes for a truck to
stop. But how can you maintain that space when car drivers seem to
think that, as long as there is room, no matter how little room, to get
their car in front of that truck it's their God given right to put it
there.
I have seen car drivers squeeze in between me and the vehicle in front
of me when there has been, literally, just inches to spare.
Class A CDL holders are trained, professional drivers. I am not saying
that all act like professionals. Truckers are as human as anyone else.
We have to be extensivly trained and tested to operate our vehicles.
Car drivers are required to pass a very simple written and driving test
and then are set loose upon the nations highways.
Part of the solution is more education for car drivers and more
extensive training before licenses are issued. Does the average car
driver know how long it takes a loaded tractor trailer traveling 55 mph
to come to a complete stop? Do you? FYI about 255 feet. That's
nearly the length of a football field.
What about grandpa who, after never having driven anything larger than
his 4 door Buick all of his life, buys himself a 45 foot motorhome and
doesn't have to have anything more than a simple car driver's license
to drive it?
I drive a truck but I am not defending bad truck drivers. And believe
me, I know there are some bad ones out there. Nothing pisses me off
more than to see a big truck tailgating a car about 2 feet off of their
rear bumper. But there are just far more bad car drivers. And it
seems that most of them are wannabe NASCAR drivers.
Harry K
2006-11-10 18:36:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by realitytrucker
Post by Harry K
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.
Harry K
I use the 6 second rule because I know how long it takes for a truck to
stop. But how can you maintain that space when car drivers seem to
think that, as long as there is room, no matter how little room, to get
their car in front of that truck it's their God given right to put it
there.
I have seen car drivers squeeze in between me and the vehicle in front
of me when there has been, literally, just inches to spare.
Class A CDL holders are trained, professional drivers. I am not saying
that all act like professionals. Truckers are as human as anyone else.
We have to be extensivly trained and tested to operate our vehicles.
Car drivers are required to pass a very simple written and driving test
and then are set loose upon the nations highways.
Part of the solution is more education for car drivers and more
extensive training before licenses are issued. Does the average car
driver know how long it takes a loaded tractor trailer traveling 55 mph
to come to a complete stop? Do you? FYI about 255 feet. That's
nearly the length of a football field.
What about grandpa who, after never having driven anything larger than
his 4 door Buick all of his life, buys himself a 45 foot motorhome and
doesn't have to have anything more than a simple car driver's license
to drive it?
I drive a truck but I am not defending bad truck drivers. And believe
me, I know there are some bad ones out there. Nothing pisses me off
more than to see a big truck tailgating a car about 2 feet off of their
rear bumper. But there are just far more bad car drivers. And it
seems that most of them are wannabe NASCAR drivers.
You are correct in all points. What pisses me off is things like the
report above where the trucker is using the exuse that the car 'slowed
suddenly and I couldn't stop" That is the purest BS and he is guilty
of tailgating. People cutting in? No different for trucks than cars,
someone cuts into my comfort zone (about 3 sec), I back off.

Harry K
gringo
2006-11-26 01:02:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
Post by realitytrucker
Post by Harry K
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.
Harry K
I use the 6 second rule because I know how long it takes for a truck to
stop. But how can you maintain that space when car drivers seem to
think that, as long as there is room, no matter how little room, to get
their car in front of that truck it's their God given right to put it
there.
I have seen car drivers squeeze in between me and the vehicle in front
of me when there has been, literally, just inches to spare.
Class A CDL holders are trained, professional drivers. I am not saying
that all act like professionals. Truckers are as human as anyone else.
We have to be extensivly trained and tested to operate our vehicles.
Car drivers are required to pass a very simple written and driving test
and then are set loose upon the nations highways.
Part of the solution is more education for car drivers and more
extensive training before licenses are issued. Does the average car
driver know how long it takes a loaded tractor trailer traveling 55 mph
to come to a complete stop? Do you? FYI about 255 feet. That's
nearly the length of a football field.
What about grandpa who, after never having driven anything larger than
his 4 door Buick all of his life, buys himself a 45 foot motorhome and
doesn't have to have anything more than a simple car driver's license
to drive it?
I drive a truck but I am not defending bad truck drivers. And believe
me, I know there are some bad ones out there. Nothing pisses me off
more than to see a big truck tailgating a car about 2 feet off of their
rear bumper. But there are just far more bad car drivers. And it
seems that most of them are wannabe NASCAR drivers.
You are correct in all points. What pisses me off is things like the
report above where the trucker is using the exuse that the car 'slowed
suddenly and I couldn't stop" That is the purest BS and he is guilty
of tailgating. People cutting in? No different for trucks than cars,
someone cuts into my comfort zone (about 3 sec), I back off.
Harry K
Sometimes you will be backing all the way to the place you just left.
Lookit, the fact is that some damned fools drive 40 mph or slower on
interstates--until they get off the phone or finish the dripping burger,
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job). It's called "just in time
delivery", it minimizes warehousing needs but puts a helluva strain on
the transportation industry...it doesn't allow for delays to due to
accidents and road construction and icy roads.

You don't like tailgating? Then write your congressman, demand that
truck lane restrictions be lifted. The right lane is used for ingress
and egress, the middle lane of a 3-lane the primary travel lane. When
thru trucks are not permitted to travel in the faster moving outside
"thru traffic lane," they will tailgate to get the 40 mph grannies to
move to the right out of their only legal passing lane--which the
grannies invariably are reluctant to do. To all with eyes and a brain,
it ought to be obvious that such restrictions creates tailgating by less
than perfect truckers. Here's a universal truth: no human is perfect.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-26 01:22:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job).
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
Post by gringo
You don't like tailgating? Then write your congressman, demand that
truck lane restrictions be lifted.
As if the truck lane restrictions are obeyed as it is. The lane
restrictions are there to keep truckers from clogging up the road with
micropassing and pure 'me first fuck you' behavior.
Post by gringo
The right lane is used for ingress and egress, the middle lane of a
3-lane the primary travel lane.
This is not the case. All lanes are travel lanes. If you want to argue
the point produce some vehicle code to support your argument.
Post by gringo
When
thru trucks are not permitted to travel in the faster moving outside
"thru traffic lane," they will tailgate to get the 40 mph grannies to
move to the right out of their only legal passing lane--which the
grannies invariably are reluctant to do.
They will tailgate whomever and whenever they want to, not just '40mph
grannies'. I've been in a snow storm in the right lane going as fast as I
could keep traction making almost constant corrections only to have some
trucker up on my bumper. Safe drivers my ass. I've seen truckers tailgate
someone who was several vehicles back from the 'slow' driver as well.
Post by gringo
To all with eyes and a brain,
it ought to be obvious that such restrictions creates tailgating by less
than perfect truckers.
The lane restrictions are to reduce congestion by keeping some lanes free
from trucks blocking them.
Post by gringo
Here's a universal truth: no human is perfect.
Yet the truckers here keep acting like they are.
b***@hotmail.com
2006-11-26 01:53:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
As if the truck lane restrictions are obeyed as it is. The lane
restrictions are there to keep truckers from clogging up the road with
micropassing and pure 'me first fuck you' behavior.
And this is different than your "me first fuck you" attitude in what
way?

Giddy Up Gone
Brent P
2006-11-26 01:55:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@hotmail.com
Post by Brent P
As if the truck lane restrictions are obeyed as it is. The lane
restrictions are there to keep truckers from clogging up the road with
micropassing and pure 'me first fuck you' behavior.
And this is different than your "me first fuck you" attitude in what
way?
What behavior would that be? I keep right except to pass and don't
micropass.
b***@hotmail.com
2006-11-26 05:07:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by b***@hotmail.com
And this is different than your "me first fuck you" attitude in what
way?
What behavior would that be? I keep right except to pass and don't
micropass.
Your a walking talking example of the Animal House line, "some animals
are more
equal then others", you figure your more equal then they are.
They can't go as fast as you therefore they have no right to pass
someone going slower then they are, because they can't do it
as fast as you can. That would be the "me first fuck you attitude"
And yet in another post you bitch about one being 3 inches off your
back bumper,
obviously he wanted to go faster than you did.
Common sense says move over and get out of the way of the 80,000 pound
truck, regardless
of whose right or wrong, because the 80,000 pound truck will squash you
like
a bug if something goes wrong (this is where your going to tell us how
much more of a superior driver
you are than he was, and your vehciel was soo much faster and more
manuverable than he and how that could never happen to you) Some how I
dont think moving over is what you did
But like the old sage Will Rogers said
"The problem with common sense is it t'aint common t'all"


Giddy Up Gone
Brent P
2006-11-26 07:22:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@hotmail.com
Post by Brent P
What behavior would that be? I keep right except to pass and don't
micropass.
They can't go as fast as you therefore they have no right to pass
Strawman.
Post by b***@hotmail.com
someone going slower then they are, because they can't do it
as fast as you can. That would be the "me first fuck you attitude"
And yet in another post you bitch about one being 3 inches off your
back bumper, obviously he wanted to go faster than you did.
So do I. But there is some condition, like a vehicle in front of me I
cannot control. Ya think a trucker would be able to see it from up there.
Post by b***@hotmail.com
Common sense says move over and get out of the way of the 80,000 pound
truck, regardless
How do you move out of the way when you're already in the rightmost lane
and the snow storm means punching it and moving right will result in a
nasty spin?
Post by b***@hotmail.com
a bug if something goes wrong (this is where your going to tell us how
much more of a superior driver
Strawman.
t***@hotmail.com
2006-11-28 04:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@hotmail.com
Your a walking talking example of the Animal House line, "some animals
are more
equal then others", you figure your more equal then they are.
I only lurk here 'cause family members are truckers and post here, and
would normally not post, but my friend, that is a George Orwell "Animal
Farm" quote. Please, give the great man his due. Oh, the horror...
ND
gringo
2006-11-26 07:07:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job).
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You don't like tailgating? Then write your congressman, demand that
truck lane restrictions be lifted.
As if the truck lane restrictions are obeyed as it is. The lane
restrictions are there to keep truckers from clogging up the road with
micropassing and pure 'me first fuck you' behavior.
bullshit. The lane restrictions create the very behavior you
denigrate. Our grandfathers wisely put up those signs, "Thru traffic
keep left!". Commonsense dictates that traffic that will not be getting
off any time soon (i.e. thru-traffic) should travel as far as possible
from the 90% of freeway traffic that drives 10 miles form home to work
twice a day. It ain't speed that causes the majority of accidents.
It's the speed differential. 45 mph cars mixing it up with the 86% who
drive 70-80 and the 2% who try to drive 100. Increase the minimum
speeds by 10 mph; either increase the top limit for trucks or lower the
limit of cars, and you'll see an immediate decrease in the accident rate.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The right lane is used for ingress and egress, the middle lane of a
3-lane the primary travel lane.
This is not the case. All lanes are travel lanes. If you want to argue
the point produce some vehicle code to support your argument.
good god. don't be facetious. You yourself just mentioned the lane
restrictions. Connecticut does in fact have that in code form, but that
is not what I was referring to. I was referring--obviously--to normal
practice on 3-lane highways. You should get out on the roads more often
if you doubt that.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
When
thru trucks are not permitted to travel in the faster moving outside
"thru traffic lane," they will tailgate to get the 40 mph grannies to
move to the right out of their only legal passing lane--which the
grannies invariably are reluctant to do.
They will tailgate whomever and whenever they want to, not just '40mph
grannies'. I've been in a snow storm in the right lane going as fast as I
could keep traction making almost constant corrections only to have some
trucker up on my bumper. Safe drivers my ass. I've seen truckers tailgate
someone who was several vehicles back from the 'slow' driver as well.
no one has stated that all truckers are perfect. in fact, I said just
the opposite. But no one gives unsafe truckers a harder time than other
truckers. I must ask, however, just what you mean by that last line. I
do occasionally crowd a car that refuses to give up my only legal
passing lane--but only if the lane beside him is free--if he cannot move
faster or to a parallel lane, then he and I are both stuck, aren't we.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
To all with eyes and a brain,
it ought to be obvious that such restrictions creates tailgating by less
than perfect truckers.
The lane restrictions are to reduce congestion by keeping some lanes free
from trucks blocking them.
bullshit. Get your ass out on the freeways in states that don't have
the restrictions, and notice how smoothly traffic flows. Dallas/Ft
Worth traffic can be a bitch. The only place that bottlenecks develop
in dallas on 1-20 is the 10-mile stretch that restricts trucks from the
left lane. Thru trucks left to our own devices stay far to the left and
out of the way of exiting/entering autos and trucks; therefore, all move
more smoothly.

your prejudice against trucks is showing!
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Here's a universal truth: no human is perfect.
Yet the truckers here keep acting like they are.
I beg your pardon. On average, we are in fact safer than the average
auto driver--statistics prove it. But we are not Jesus. Truckers come
from all walks of life, all kinds of family and neighborhood
backgrounds. Some of us are practically saints; some of us deserve
horns and a pointy tail. But as a class, we are undoubtedly more
experienced handling all kinds of traffic situations, and that, my
friend, makes us as a class, better driver. You've seen those million+
mile safety patches on truckers shoulders? Drivers get that only if
they stay with the same company long enough to earn it. Eighty percent
of drivers who have been in the business for 7-10 years have a million
or more accident-free miles. I myself have been driving for 20 years,
and I had my first accident of any kind a few months ago (a 4-wheeler
gave a right signal, then whipped hard to the left in front of me when I
moved left to pass him).
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-26 07:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job).
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
I don't need an excuse. Try reading the rules of the road. There is no
'yield to truckers because they are truckers'
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You don't like tailgating? Then write your congressman, demand that
truck lane restrictions be lifted.
As if the truck lane restrictions are obeyed as it is. The lane
restrictions are there to keep truckers from clogging up the road with
micropassing and pure 'me first fuck you' behavior.
bullshit. The lane restrictions create the very behavior you
denigrate.
Hey asshole.. stay out of the left lane. The sign says TRUCKS, USE RIGHT
2 LANES, stay the fuck over there instead of blocking up the road.
Post by gringo
Our grandfathers wisely put up those signs, "Thru traffic
keep left!".
Around here it's SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT. And the law is KEEP RIGHT
EXCEPT TO PASS. As it should be.
Post by gringo
Commonsense dictates that traffic that will not be getting
off any time soon (i.e. thru-traffic) should travel as far as possible
from the 90% of freeway traffic that drives 10 miles form home to work
twice a day.
Common sense says KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS. Moron who never bothered to
learn how to drive properly makes up bullshit to justify his me first
fuck you behavior of squating in the left lanes.
Post by gringo
It ain't speed that causes the majority of accidents.
It's the speed differential. 45 mph cars mixing it up with the 86% who
drive 70-80 and the 2% who try to drive 100.
That's why you need to KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS instead of scattering
slow drivers across all the lanes the way you'd have it.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The right lane is used for ingress and egress, the middle lane of a
3-lane the primary travel lane.
This is not the case. All lanes are travel lanes. If you want to argue
the point produce some vehicle code to support your argument.
good god. don't be facetious. You yourself just mentioned the lane
restrictions.
Show me the law that says the right lane is not a travel lane but an
enter/exit lane.
Post by gringo
Connecticut does in fact have that in code form, but that
is not what I was referring to. I was referring--obviously--to normal
practice on 3-lane highways. You should get out on the roads more often
if you doubt that.
I drive in the right lane frequently I probably spend more time in the
right lane than any other. I keep right except to pass. I was
driving in the right lane of I294 tonight. It's as good a travel lane as
any for people who pay attention to the task of driving. State trooper
goes by doing about 85mph in the left most lane.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
When
thru trucks are not permitted to travel in the faster moving outside
"thru traffic lane," they will tailgate to get the 40 mph grannies to
move to the right out of their only legal passing lane--which the
grannies invariably are reluctant to do.
They will tailgate whomever and whenever they want to, not just '40mph
grannies'. I've been in a snow storm in the right lane going as fast as I
could keep traction making almost constant corrections only to have some
trucker up on my bumper. Safe drivers my ass. I've seen truckers tailgate
someone who was several vehicles back from the 'slow' driver as well.
no one has stated that all truckers are perfect.
Many here act like it.
Post by gringo
in fact, I said just
the opposite. But no one gives unsafe truckers a harder time than other
truckers. I must ask, however, just what you mean by that last line. I
do occasionally crowd a car that refuses to give up my only legal
passing lane--but only if the lane beside him is free--if he cannot move
faster or to a parallel lane, then he and I are both stuck, aren't we.
What it means is:

<car1 <car2 <car3<TRUCK

Car three is going the same speed as one and two, but the trucker is on
his ass.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
To all with eyes and a brain,
it ought to be obvious that such restrictions creates tailgating by less
than perfect truckers.
The lane restrictions are to reduce congestion by keeping some lanes free
from trucks blocking them.
bullshit.
Bullshit back at you.
Post by gringo
Get your ass out on the freeways in states that don't have
the restrictions, and notice how smoothly traffic flows.
Truckers don't obey the lane restrictions here, so I think I know what
it's like when they don't. Clogged. The trucks get side by side and
nobody can get through.
gringo
2006-11-26 20:05:36 UTC
Permalink
Brent, later in this very post, you suddenly begin to fling epitaphs at
me. Till now, we've been argumentative with one another, but polite.
If in your frustration, you're having to get personal--attacking the
opponent's character rather than their arguments, then you have already
lost.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job).
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
I don't need an excuse. Try reading the rules of the road. There is no
'yield to truckers because they are truckers'
there is such a thing still as common courtesy. Courtesy dictates that
one either moves over, speeds up to get out of the way, or changes lanes
to allow /any /vehicle on a get-on ramp to merge. (One also gives all
the room one can to a disabled vehicle, but that's another line of
debate.) There is also the fact that yielding is the action of a wise
man, a defensive driver. Or are you one of those that ain't gonna give
an inch regardless of the result if you think you're "in the right?"
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You don't like tailgating? Then write your congressman, demand that
truck lane restrictions be lifted.
As if the truck lane restrictions are obeyed as it is. The lane
restrictions are there to keep truckers from clogging up the road with
micropassing and pure 'me first fuck you' behavior.
bullshit. The lane restrictions create the very behavior you
denigrate.
Hey asshole.. stay out of the left lane. The sign says TRUCKS, USE RIGHT
2 LANES, stay the fuck over there instead of blocking up the road.
gladly. you stay the fuck out of my only legal passing lane, I'll give
you the entire left lane.
CA has the most restrictive lane restrictions in the country. On a
3-lane, truckers are restricted from even the middle lane except to
pass--and who fills up that lane? people like you with an attitude
against all truckers. Here's the deal. If moving to the left lane even
to quickly pass will get me a $295 ticket and crowding a lane hog in my
legal passing lane will earn me an equivalent ticket (if I am caught),
then I will crowd that dumb ass till he moves.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Our grandfathers wisely put up those signs, "Thru traffic
keep left!".
Around here it's SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT. And the law is KEEP RIGHT
EXCEPT TO PASS. As it should be.
yes. ignored in states with lane restrictions for trucks: they were
removed when those "trucks must use..." signs went up. In CA, I once was
ticketed for riding too long in the middle lane; I moved into that lane
to allow merging cars in, and they refused to allow me to move back
over. Nowadays, I do as you demand and keep right--as a result, I am
less courteous to you 4wheelers than I once was.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Commonsense dictates that traffic that will not be getting
off any time soon (i.e. thru-traffic) should travel as far as possible
from the 90% of freeway traffic that drives 10 miles form home to work
twice a day.
Common sense says KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS. Moron who never bothered to
learn how to drive properly makes up bullshit to justify his me first
fuck you behavior of squating in the left lanes.
Son, whenever I am in the left lanes, I am usually the fastest vehicle
on the road. Besides, commonsense dictates that 70-75' rigs filling the
right lane interfere with the easy flow of traffic, on and off the
road. Your grandfather was wiser than you are: he and his generation
all recognized that /all/ thru traffic should stay left and out of the way.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
It ain't speed that causes the majority of accidents.
It's the speed differential. 45 mph cars mixing it up with the 86% who
drive 70-80 and the 2% who try to drive 100.
That's why you need to KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS instead of scattering
slow drivers across all the lanes the way you'd have it.
wait a minute. don't attempt to put words into my mouth. I did not say
anything of the sort. In fact, I said just the opposite. That truck
lane restrictions create conflict between faster traveling trucks and
slow moving local traffic. See, the fact is that slow moving cars--and
slow moving trucks!--all seem to prefer to run in the middle lane, my
only legal passing lane. The slow trucks, we can reach on the CB, ask
or badger them till they move; the slow cars and campers and stepvans
driven on the clock all seem to have your attitude--they expect the
truck to pass (on the left) if they want to go faster. But, see, we
can't. Your lane restrictions keep us to the right. Where we are then
forced to tailgate and make sometimes dangerous lane changes into the
supposed slowest lane.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The right lane is used for ingress and egress, the middle lane of a
3-lane the primary travel lane.
This is not the case. All lanes are travel lanes. If you want to argue
the point produce some vehicle code to support your argument.
good god. don't be facetious. You yourself just mentioned the lane
restrictions.
Show me the law that says the right lane is not a travel lane but an
enter/exit lane.
sigh. quick on the trigger, slow on the comprehension. read on.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Connecticut does in fact have that in code form, but that
is not what I was referring to. I was referring--obviously--to normal
practice on 3-lane highways. You should get out on the roads more often
if you doubt that.
I drive in the right lane frequently I probably spend more time in the
right lane than any other. I keep right except to pass. I was
driving in the right lane of I294 tonight. It's as good a travel lane as
any for people who pay attention to the task of driving. State trooper
goes by doing about 85mph in the left most lane.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
When
thru trucks are not permitted to travel in the faster moving outside
"thru traffic lane," they will tailgate to get the 40 mph grannies to
move to the right out of their only legal passing lane--which the
grannies invariably are reluctant to do.
They will tailgate whomever and whenever they want to, not just '40mph
grannies'. I've been in a snow storm in the right lane going as fast as I
could keep traction making almost constant corrections only to have some
trucker up on my bumper. Safe drivers my ass. I've seen truckers tailgate
someone who was several vehicles back from the 'slow' driver as well.
no one has stated that all truckers are perfect.
Many here act like it.
they get their back up when they feel they're being attacked, sure. You
got your back up when you were attacked, didn't you?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
in fact, I said just
the opposite. But no one gives unsafe truckers a harder time than other
truckers. I must ask, however, just what you mean by that last line. I
do occasionally crowd a car that refuses to give up my only legal
passing lane--but only if the lane beside him is free--if he cannot move
faster or to a parallel lane, then he and I are both stuck, aren't we.
<car1 <car2 <car3<TRUCK
Car three is going the same speed as one and two, but the trucker is on
his ass.
obviously, #2 should not be pacing the #1 car. as he approached, the
trucker watched, probably from the middle lane, and judged that the
right lane was moving slightly faster. Or maybe he had been behind the
#2 car and it refused to budge...just kept stubbornly, sedately pacing
the right lane car. See, this would not happen if the truck could
legally move on to the left lane behind the faster car.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
To all with eyes and a brain,
it ought to be obvious that such restrictions creates tailgating by less
than perfect truckers.
The lane restrictions are to reduce congestion by keeping some lanes free
from trucks blocking them.
bullshit.
Bullshit back at you.
Post by gringo
Get your ass out on the freeways in states that don't have
the restrictions, and notice how smoothly traffic flows.
Truckers don't obey the lane restrictions here, so I think I know what
it's like when they don't. Clogged. The trucks get side by side and
nobody can get through.
Trucks obey lane restrictions in every state they're implemented--the
fines are stiff, stiffer than a speeding ticket. If nobody can get
through, bucko, it's because the traffic is stop and go, bottled up and
not by the trucks. Some trucks can go only 52, some can go 80; the
faster does not pace the slower by choice (unlike so many auto
drivers). now, approaching an accident or lane closing, yeah, trucks
may get side by side and block the lanes--and you and everyone else
benefits from it. I mean, isn't it better to move along at a snail's
pace than to be speeding up to 30 then slamming on brakes to a complete
stop? Trucks in such circumstances force traffic to safely merge into
the open lanes rather than running pell mell around everybody else to
the traffic cones and bullying their way in. In other words, we're
controlling the more aggressive "me first" driver you keep referring to.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 01:57:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job).
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
I don't need an excuse. Try reading the rules of the road. There is no
'yield to truckers because they are truckers'
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Oh, you mean like not needlessly delaying other drivers with
micro-passes?

Or does "courtesy" only work one way - towards you?
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
gringo
2006-11-27 04:34:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
then suddenly speed up to 90 again. At work you are on a schedule,
right? you have to get that project finished or else? Truckers are on a
schedule too; they can't rest till the load gets delivered (if it
doesn't, you or your boss will be on the horn, screaming about the
whatever it is you need to do YOUR job).
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
I don't need an excuse. Try reading the rules of the road. There is no
'yield to truckers because they are truckers'
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Oh, you mean like not needlessly delaying other drivers with
micro-passes?
Or does "courtesy" only work one way - towards you?
the key word in your rant, scott, is "needlessly." In your mind, only
you get to decide whether the truck is "needlessly" passing. You keep
repeating endlessly that all trucks should watch their mirrors closely
and if they see you or one of your arrogant pals coming, we should all
move on over into the grass beyond the shoulder, and wait, I suppose,
till 4 in the morning or until a few of your pals tie up the freeway
behind us with a 20-car pileup. Sorry, golden boy: you ain't all that
special. You take care of your driving and we will take care of ours.
Since you obviously don't feel compelled to extend any courtesy toward
anyone else, we will take the space we need. So, go ahead, scotty.
Shake your fists in the air, get all red in the face, cut in front of
trucks and slam your brakes like a fool with a death wish--it will
eventually be fulfilled.

you are an endless loop. Since, in your supreme egotism, you will not
ever even try to comprehend a dozen posters' replies, I will not waste
any more time with you. Keep out of my way, and I will do my best to
stay clear of your arrogant ass.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 06:04:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Oh, you mean like not needlessly delaying other drivers with
micro-passes?
Or does "courtesy" only work one way - towards you?
the key word in your rant, scott, is "needlessly."
Oh, that's right, I forgot. Truckers NEED to pass IMMEDIATELY because
they are on vital missions for the economy and if they are 5 minutes
late there won't be any food on the shelves at the grocery store when
I go there to buy dinner of my family and we'll all starve to death.

GMAFB!

If the speed differential between your truck and the one in front of
you is so low that it takes you 10 minutes to pass that truck, you can
bloody well slow down the 0.001 MPH and pace that guy until all the
faster traffic has gone by. THAT is common courtesy, not bullying your
way into the passing lane, forcing 20 other vehicles to slow down to
accommodate your Sloth micropass.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one). In
the grand scheme of things, it is better for one driver to wait for a
few seconds than 20 to wait for a few minutes. If I can delay the
onset of a pass to allow faster traffic to clear, why can't you?
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
gringo
2006-11-27 08:07:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Oh, you mean like not needlessly delaying other drivers with
micro-passes?
Or does "courtesy" only work one way - towards you?
the key word in your rant, scott, is "needlessly."
Oh, that's right, I forgot. Truckers NEED to pass IMMEDIATELY because
they are on vital missions for the economy and if they are 5 minutes
late there won't be any food on the shelves at the grocery store when
I go there to buy dinner of my family and we'll all starve to death.
GMAFB!
If the speed differential between your truck and the one in front of
you is so low that it takes you 10 minutes to pass that truck, you can
bloody well slow down the 0.001 MPH and pace that guy until all the
faster traffic has gone by. THAT is common courtesy, not bullying your
way into the passing lane, forcing 20 other vehicles to slow down to
accommodate your Sloth micropass.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one). In
the grand scheme of things, it is better for one driver to wait for a
few seconds than 20 to wait for a few minutes. If I can delay the
onset of a pass to allow faster traffic to clear, why can't you?
depends on how much traffic is out there. In heavy traffic that few
minutes could stretch into an eternity. And for you information, I am
not one of those you complain about. Actually, we too complain when a
63 mph truck passes a 61 mph truck. My governed speed is 78, fast
enough to fairly quickly pass most other trucks. But that is not the
point. That slightly faster truck has every right to pass a slightly
slower truck--and if I don't like it, then I can shake my fist and get
red in the face, or I can relax and wait it out. Whining like oyu
insist on doing won't change a thing.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-27 13:39:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
depends on how much traffic is out there. In heavy traffic that few
minutes could stretch into an eternity. And for you information, I am
not one of those you complain about. Actually, we too complain when a
63 mph truck passes a 61 mph truck. My governed speed is 78, fast
enough to fairly quickly pass most other trucks. But that is not the
point. That slightly faster truck has every right to pass a slightly
slower truck--and if I don't like it, then I can shake my fist and get
red in the face, or I can relax and wait it out. Whining like oyu
insist on doing won't change a thing.
What a hypocrite you are. You feel perfectly justified being pissed off
at some little old lady and using your truck to intimidate her,
tailgating her aging ford escort, puting your rig a few feet off her rear
bumper because she's passing 61mph traffic at 63mph while at the same
time thinking it's perfectly acceptable for truckers to do the same thing
while using a lane they aren't even supposed to be in. And if you don't
use the left lane of three, you want to punt granny into the left lane to
boot!

Yet, at the same time you'd chide me or Scott for tailgating granny after
you punted her into the left lane despite our cars being able to out-stop
her car calling us '90+ mph weavers' and the like.

You're a piece of work gringo.
gringo
2006-11-27 18:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
depends on how much traffic is out there. In heavy traffic that few
minutes could stretch into an eternity. And for you information, I am
not one of those you complain about. Actually, we too complain when a
63 mph truck passes a 61 mph truck. My governed speed is 78, fast
enough to fairly quickly pass most other trucks. But that is not the
point. That slightly faster truck has every right to pass a slightly
slower truck--and if I don't like it, then I can shake my fist and get
red in the face, or I can relax and wait it out. Whining like oyu
insist on doing won't change a thing.
What a hypocrite you are. You feel perfectly justified being pissed off
at some little old lady and using your truck to intimidate her,
tailgating her aging ford escort, puting your rig a few feet off her rear
bumper because she's passing 61mph traffic at 63mph while at the same
time thinking it's perfectly acceptable for truckers to do the same thing
while using a lane they aren't even supposed to be in. And if you don't
use the left lane of three, you want to punt granny into the left lane to
boot!
Yet, at the same time you'd chide me or Scott for tailgating granny after
you punted her into the left lane despite our cars being able to out-stop
her car calling us '90+ mph weavers' and the like.
You're a piece of work gringo.
little boy, you are projecting again. That little old lady has a
choice, bucko--she can go faster, she can move to the far left lane or
the far right and get the fuck out of the way of a passing truck. If
she gets in your way, hey, that is your problem, doofus: she could as
easily have gone to the far right, the slow lane, if she had so chosen.
The slow truck cannot do anything else in order to finally get by the
slower truck, you foolish puppy.

You're a whiny piece, all right.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-27 18:30:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
depends on how much traffic is out there. In heavy traffic that few
minutes could stretch into an eternity. And for you information, I am
not one of those you complain about. Actually, we too complain when a
63 mph truck passes a 61 mph truck. My governed speed is 78, fast
enough to fairly quickly pass most other trucks. But that is not the
point. That slightly faster truck has every right to pass a slightly
slower truck--and if I don't like it, then I can shake my fist and get
red in the face, or I can relax and wait it out. Whining like oyu
insist on doing won't change a thing.
What a hypocrite you are. You feel perfectly justified being pissed off
at some little old lady and using your truck to intimidate her,
tailgating her aging ford escort, puting your rig a few feet off her rear
bumper because she's passing 61mph traffic at 63mph while at the same
time thinking it's perfectly acceptable for truckers to do the same thing
while using a lane they aren't even supposed to be in. And if you don't
use the left lane of three, you want to punt granny into the left lane to
boot!
Yet, at the same time you'd chide me or Scott for tailgating granny after
you punted her into the left lane despite our cars being able to out-stop
her car calling us '90+ mph weavers' and the like.
You're a piece of work gringo.
little boy, you are projecting again.
Not projecting anything, you've posted it over and over again.
Post by gringo
That little old lady has a
choice, bucko--she can go faster, she can move to the far left lane or
the far right and get the fuck out of the way of a passing truck.
Yet if I were to say that as justification for tailgating an LLB, you'd
be all over me about how I am such a poor driver and it wasn't a good
reason.
Post by gringo
If
she gets in your way, hey, that is your problem, doofus: she could as
easily have gone to the far right, the slow lane, if she had so chosen.
She should move and slow down 2mph, but a trucker, no, a trucker doesn't
have to do that. The trucker can gout and micropass. You're a hypocrite
plain and simple. You defend micropassing, you defend forcing people out
of the way and cutting others off, yet when someone does that to you, you
don't like it. You're a hypocrite.
Post by gringo
The slow truck cannot do anything else in order to finally get by the
slower truck, you foolish puppy.
Neither can granny in her aging escort. Her physical limitations and her
underpowered, older vehicle in combination just can't go faster than
63mph safely.

But that doesn't stop you, mr. courteous and considerate trucker is going
to put his rig right on her bumper. Your idea of courtsey is everyone
bending over backwards for you and forcing submission from anyone that
doesn't.
Post by gringo
You're a whiny piece, all right.
You're the one whining here, trucker. You whine about how slow your
trucks are, how everybody else doesn't yield to you because they don't
see you as special as you see yourselves.
gringo
2006-11-28 09:13:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
depends on how much traffic is out there. In heavy traffic that few
minutes could stretch into an eternity. And for you information, I am
not one of those you complain about. Actually, we too complain when a
63 mph truck passes a 61 mph truck. My governed speed is 78, fast
enough to fairly quickly pass most other trucks. But that is not the
point. That slightly faster truck has every right to pass a slightly
slower truck--and if I don't like it, then I can shake my fist and get
red in the face, or I can relax and wait it out. Whining like oyu
insist on doing won't change a thing.
What a hypocrite you are. You feel perfectly justified being pissed off
at some little old lady and using your truck to intimidate her,
tailgating her aging ford escort, puting your rig a few feet off her rear
bumper because she's passing 61mph traffic at 63mph while at the same
time thinking it's perfectly acceptable for truckers to do the same thing
while using a lane they aren't even supposed to be in. And if you don't
use the left lane of three, you want to punt granny into the left lane to
boot!
Yet, at the same time you'd chide me or Scott for tailgating granny after
you punted her into the left lane despite our cars being able to out-stop
her car calling us '90+ mph weavers' and the like.
You're a piece of work gringo.
little boy, you are projecting again.
Not projecting anything, you've posted it over and over again.
again with the selective clipping. what the fuck are you referring to?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
That little old lady has a
choice, bucko--she can go faster, she can move to the far left lane or
the far right and get the fuck out of the way of a passing truck.
Yet if I were to say that as justification for tailgating an LLB, you'd
be all over me about how I am such a poor driver and it wasn't a good
reason.
anyone who is foolish enough to tailgate a truck is welcome to tailgate
mine--it's their life they're playing with, not mine (I'm riding 72'
from the rear of the trailer). Knock yourself out--but, uh, be careful
of blown trailer tires.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
If
she gets in your way, hey, that is your problem, doofus: she could as
easily have gone to the far right, the slow lane, if she had so chosen.
She should move and slow down 2mph, but a trucker, no, a trucker doesn't
have to do that. The trucker can gout and micropass. You're a hypocrite
plain and simple. You defend micropassing, you defend forcing people out
of the way and cutting others off, yet when someone does that to you, you
don't like it. You're a hypocrite.
she can slow 2 mph and in a car recover it in 1/100th of a second.
Of course I don't like having to wait for a Swift to pass a JB Hunt.
But I am a realist. I accept reality. I can't eliminate death and
taxes; I cannot order Swift off the roads. You're still too immature to
understand that there are aspects of life (and traffic in America) that
you cannot change.


Would you please just grow the hell up.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The slow truck cannot do anything else in order to finally get by the
slower truck, you foolish puppy.
Neither can granny in her aging escort. Her physical limitations and her
underpowered, older vehicle in combination just can't go faster than
63mph safely.
horseshit. And you really aren't crying all week about 63 mph passing,
are you? But it's only trucks you hate, isn't it? What's the matter?
your daddy catch your momma naked in a truck bunk?
Post by Brent P
But that doesn't stop you, mr. courteous and considerate trucker is going
to put his rig right on her bumper. Your idea of courtsey is everyone
bending over backwards for you and forcing submission from anyone that
doesn't.
yes I will, doofus. She has a choice: she can move left or she can move
right into the slow lane--out of my only legal passing lane. I
certainly will not sit back patiently while she paces the car to her
right all day long. Wouldn't be a problem for her, if I could legally
pass her on the left, now would there. Son, you've made your character
plain: you drive 85-90 on an urban freeway; you do not sit back
patiently while a granny blocks you in...you ride up on her ass, and if
she cannot/will not move though you are flashing your lights, you whip
out to the left or the right with an inch to spare--and as you admitted
months ago in another thread (no, brent, we haven't forgotten you)--you
then go hard on your brakes while shaking your fist to express your
annoyance. You've also admitted that you are often an ass when you're
driving. So don't try to claim you are somehow different from the most
aggravating truckers.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You're a whiny piece, all right.
You're the one whining here, trucker. You whine about how slow your
trucks are, how everybody else doesn't yield to you because they don't
see you as special as you see yourselves.
Hey, I ain't complaining: I happen to enjoy driving truck and seeing
America. I accept what is for what it is. You won't. Every few months
you show up here in misc.transport.trucking, cross-posting your immature
ass off, whining like a baby with a shitty diaper.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-28 14:41:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Yet if I were to say that as justification for tailgating an LLB, you'd
be all over me about how I am such a poor driver and it wasn't a good
reason.
anyone who is foolish enough to tailgate a truck is welcome to tailgate
mine--it's their life they're playing with, not mine (I'm riding 72'
from the rear of the trailer). Knock yourself out--but, uh, be careful
of blown trailer tires.
Nobody said anything about tailgating a truck.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
If
she gets in your way, hey, that is your problem, doofus: she could as
easily have gone to the far right, the slow lane, if she had so chosen.
She should move and slow down 2mph, but a trucker, no, a trucker doesn't
have to do that. The trucker can gout and micropass. You're a hypocrite
plain and simple. You defend micropassing, you defend forcing people out
of the way and cutting others off, yet when someone does that to you, you
don't like it. You're a hypocrite.
she can slow 2 mph and in a car recover it in 1/100th of a second.
Not any more than you can when there is traffic blocking the way.
Post by gringo
Of course I don't like having to wait for a Swift to pass a JB Hunt.
But I am a realist. I accept reality. I can't eliminate death and
taxes; I cannot order Swift off the roads. You're still too immature to
understand that there are aspects of life (and traffic in America) that
you cannot change.
Translation: You're a hyprocrite and part of the problem and know it.
Post by gringo
Would you please just grow the hell up.
I have, that's why I don't have the need to make trouble for other people
and can think of the system as a whole, while you are there trying to
defend your MFFY driving style while complaining about four-wheelers who
drive just like you do.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The slow truck cannot do anything else in order to finally get by the
slower truck, you foolish puppy.
Neither can granny in her aging escort. Her physical limitations and her
underpowered, older vehicle in combination just can't go faster than
63mph safely.
horseshit. And you really aren't crying all week about 63 mph passing,
are you? But it's only trucks you hate, isn't it? What's the matter?
your daddy catch your momma naked in a truck bunk?
Nonresponsive.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
But that doesn't stop you, mr. courteous and considerate trucker is going
to put his rig right on her bumper. Your idea of courtsey is everyone
bending over backwards for you and forcing submission from anyone that
doesn't.
yes I will, doofus.
Fuck you too, asshole.
Post by gringo
She has a choice: she can move left or she can move
right into the slow lane--out of my only legal passing lane. I
certainly will not sit back patiently while she paces the car to her
right all day long.
But we are supposed to sit there and wait patiently while you truckers do
the same damn thing. You're a hypocrite. Plain and simple. You want
everyone out of your way because you think you're special.
Post by gringo
Wouldn't be a problem for her, if I could legally
pass her on the left, now would there. Son, you've made your character
plain: you drive 85-90 on an urban freeway;
It's still clear you can't understand plain english. The ISP drives
85-90mph, I drive _SLOWER_ than the ISP. Do you know what SLOWER means?
Post by gringo
you do not sit back
patiently while a granny blocks you in...you ride up on her ass, and if
she cannot/will not move though you are flashing your lights, you whip
out to the left or the right with an inch to spare--and as you admitted
months ago in another thread (no, brent, we haven't forgotten you)--you
then go hard on your brakes while shaking your fist to express your
annoyance.
Find it, quote it, with URL to the google archive. Because you can't,
because I've never posted any such thing.

The only thing I mentioned that I do to an LLB, is flash them to move
over, and if they have been particularly annoying, I will let off the
accelerator or gently brake in front of them and give them a taste of their
own behavior. I don't want to be rear ended... I upgraded the brakes on
my car... if I go hard on my brakes anything short of a good driver in
porsche or vette or BMW or similiar car is going to have a very good
chance of hitting me. LLBs are proven incompetents. I will not have them
hitting my car.

And even if I did tailgate the way a trucker does, I don't get as close
as truckers do anyway... my car can stop faster than the vehicle I am
close to. Your rig can't do that.

Of course the only reason you are doing this is because you want to try
and put me on the defensive.
Post by gringo
You've also admitted that you are often an ass when you're
driving. So don't try to claim you are somehow different from the most
aggravating truckers.
Oh gee... moving over and giving a tailgater the boxed in spot I had.
and being an ass about it by signaling to them with my arm that the
space is all their's. oh I'm such a bad person.... On what planet does
that equal puting a big rig a few inches off someone's bumper?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
You're the one whining here, trucker. You whine about how slow your
trucks are, how everybody else doesn't yield to you because they don't
see you as special as you see yourselves.
Hey, I ain't complaining: I happen to enjoy driving truck and seeing
America. I accept what is for what it is. You won't. Every few months
you show up here in misc.transport.trucking, cross-posting your immature
ass off, whining like a baby with a shitty diaper.
You got that ass backwards, trucker. I reply to threads in
rec.autos.driving where some trucker... ie you. is whining about how
special they are and how they should be able to treat every other road
user like shit. You come into r.a.d with your whines about '4 wheelers'.
You stop doing that and you'll never see me again.
Brent P
2006-11-27 03:38:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Brent, later in this very post, you suddenly begin to fling epitaphs at
me. Till now, we've been argumentative with one another, but polite.
If in your frustration, you're having to get personal--attacking the
opponent's character rather than their arguments, then you have already
lost.
Gringo, you started it by calling me a "denigrate". I am not above
stooping to the level of an opponent when it comes to name calling. 739
lines? Ya think you could _trim_ ?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
I don't need an excuse. Try reading the rules of the road. There is no
'yield to truckers because they are truckers'
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Courtsey is following the rules as they are laid out.
Post by gringo
Courtesy dictates that
one either moves over, speeds up to get out of the way, or changes lanes
to allow /any /vehicle on a get-on ramp to merge.
Everyone following their own imaginary laws of courtesy. In my view,
courtesy is maintaining course and speed so the merger can time a gap in
front or behind as he chooses. See, courtesy varies from person to
person... it's made up law... which you seem to like. That's why it's
written down for everyone to know what the real rules are.
Post by gringo
(One also gives all
the room one can to a disabled vehicle, but that's another line of
debate.) There is also the fact that yielding is the action of a wise
man, a defensive driver.
And you've just made yourself proof that MFFY drivers count on, and
expect other drivers to yield to their aggressiveness, vehicle size, etc.
You've had so many people yield to you, that you now expect it. You don't
bother with the law you expect people to yield to you. When someone
doesn't you're offended. It's become an entitlement to you. Thanks for
being proof that 'just let them do it' only results in more MFFY behavior.
Post by gringo
Or are you one of those that ain't gonna give
an inch regardless of the result if you think you're "in the right?"
Last time I gave an inch to a trucker he took a mile and ran me off the
road.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
bullshit. The lane restrictions create the very behavior you
denigrate.
Hey asshole.. stay out of the left lane. The sign says TRUCKS, USE RIGHT
2 LANES, stay the fuck over there instead of blocking up the road.
gladly. you stay the fuck out of my only legal passing lane, I'll give
you the entire left lane.
If you've caught up to me, it's because I'm blocked in. I am a real ass
to drivers like you. You come up my ass when I am blocked I'll signal,
move over and put my hand out the window offering you the spot I was in.
The one that's BLOCKED.
Post by gringo
CA has the most restrictive lane restrictions in the country. On a
3-lane, truckers are restricted from even the middle lane except to
pass--and who fills up that lane? people like you with an attitude
against all truckers.
Um no. I'm long gone.
Post by gringo
Here's the deal. If moving to the left lane even
to quickly pass will get me a $295 ticket and crowding a lane hog in my
legal passing lane will earn me an equivalent ticket (if I am caught),
then I will crowd that dumb ass till he moves.
Well... why don't you just pass on the right, exactly what you expect us
to do.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Our grandfathers wisely put up those signs, "Thru traffic keep left!".
Around here it's SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT. And the law is KEEP RIGHT
EXCEPT TO PASS. As it should be.
yes. ignored in states with lane restrictions for trucks: they were
removed when those "trucks must use..." signs went up. In CA, I once was
ticketed for riding too long in the middle lane; I moved into that lane
to allow merging cars in, and they refused to allow me to move back
over. Nowadays, I do as you demand and keep right--as a result, I am
less courteous to you 4wheelers than I once was.
Poor baby... I once got to hear a bunch of truckers whine in court about
being ticketed on I294 for being in the left lane(s). 'they wouldn't let me
over' whine whine whine. The excuses I heard were lame. I was there for
a speeding ticket BTW... 89mph as I recall... That's when I learned not
to drive faster than the ISP, who that many years ago went 80-85mph. Now
they go more like 85-90mph.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Common sense says KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS. Moron who never bothered to
learn how to drive properly makes up bullshit to justify his me first
fuck you behavior of squating in the left lanes.
Son, whenever I am in the left lanes, I am usually the fastest vehicle
on the road.
You drive 90+ mph in that rig? Because in chicago, the fastest vehicles
are usually at 90+ on four wheels, 100-120mph on two.
Post by gringo
Besides, commonsense dictates that 70-75' rigs filling the
right lane interfere with the easy flow of traffic, on and off the
road.
The torqueless wondercar could do a 70mph merge...
Post by gringo
Your grandfather was wiser than you are: he and his generation
all recognized that /all/ thru traffic should stay left and out of the way.
Actually back in his day, people still practiced keep right except to
pass. The breakdown of keep right except to pass occured in the 1970s
with the double nickle.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
It ain't speed that causes the majority of accidents.
It's the speed differential.
That's why you need to KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS instead of scattering
slow drivers across all the lanes the way you'd have it.
wait a minute. don't attempt to put words into my mouth. I did not say
anything of the sort.
You very well did. No lane discipline, no restrictions, slow ass trucks
where ever they want to be.
Post by gringo
In fact, I said just the opposite. That truck
lane restrictions create conflict between faster traveling trucks and
slow moving local traffic.
Trucks are slow moving traffic.
Post by gringo
The slow trucks, we can reach on the CB, ask
or badger them till they move;
Around here a line of trucks form in the middle lane... up to a half a
dozen front to back... then one decides he wants to pass so he illegally
pulls into the left lane and begins a pass that takes about ten miles to
complete while cars stack up behind the blockage.
Post by gringo
the slow cars and campers and stepvans
driven on the clock all seem to have your attitude--they expect the
truck to pass (on the left) if they want to go faster.
Ahem... you don't have a clue how I drive. But I'll remind you, trucks
don't catch up to me unless I am A) blocked by a slow moving vehicle like
another truck. B) I'm in the rightmost lane. C) both.
Post by gringo
But, see, we
can't. Your lane restrictions keep us to the right. Where we are then
forced to tailgate and make sometimes dangerous lane changes into the
supposed slowest lane.
You're forced to tailgate.... hmm.. if I gave that excuse about
tailgating an LLB (which I try not to do) you wouldn't accept it, and I am
not going to accept it here.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Show me the law that says the right lane is not a travel lane but an
enter/exit lane.
sigh. quick on the trigger, slow on the comprehension. read on.
You didn't show it.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
<car1 <car2 <car3<TRUCK
Car three is going the same speed as one and two, but the trucker is on
his ass.
obviously, #2 should not be pacing the #1 car. as he approached, the
trucker watched, probably from the middle lane,
The <'s indicate direction they are all in the same lane.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Truckers don't obey the lane restrictions here, so I think I know what
it's like when they don't. Clogged. The trucks get side by side and
nobody can get through.
Trucks obey lane restrictions in every state they're implemented--the
fines are stiff, stiffer than a speeding ticket.
I don't know about the fines, but just about every trip on I90/94 and a
good percentage on I294 I see truckers violating them.
Post by gringo
If nobody can get
through, bucko, it's because the traffic is stop and go, bottled up and
not by the trucks.
When I finally get by the trucks, it's daylight. I can punch it up to
whatever speed my car can go or I want to go as the case may be.
Post by gringo
Some trucks can go only 52, some can go 80; the
faster does not pace the slower by choice (unlike so many auto
drivers).
What, the trucker doesn't know his own vehicle before he heads out on the
road? Guess that's pretty apparent by the driving I see.
gringo
2006-11-27 06:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Brent, later in this very post, you suddenly begin to fling epitaphs at
me. Till now, we've been argumentative with one another, but polite.
If in your frustration, you're having to get personal--attacking the
opponent's character rather than their arguments, then you have already
lost.
Gringo, you started it by calling me a "denigrate". I am not above
stooping to the level of an opponent when it comes to name calling. 739
lines? Ya think you could _trim_ ?
goddamnit. do you own a dictionary????

denigrate
—denigration, —denigrative, denigrator. —denigratory /-greuhtawree,
-tohree/, adj.
/den"i grayt'/, v.t., denigrated, denigrating.
1. to speak damagingly of; defame or disparage: to denigrate someone's
character.

So, you see now, don't you, that I did not call you a "denigrate". It
isn't a noun, it isn't a pronoun for a noun, it isn't a fruit related to
a pomegranate...it is as I applied it a verb. Shall I produce the
definition of "verb"?



Hey, some might say that with the above you have earned the appellation
"moron." I won't get down in the mud with you, child. I'll excuse it as
the frothing of a frustrated child.

No, son, I will not selectively trim. EVerything I write is related to
what has been previously written. One sentence leads into the next; each
paragraph builds on the prior paragraph. A scroll mouse will make it
easier to move within a posting, if it is a problem for your.

Your frustration is showing.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Poor baby, we all have places to be and things to get done, not just you.
glad you recognize that fact. Your dinner getting cold at home is no
excuse for refusing to yield to a truck on a get-on ramp.
I don't need an excuse. Try reading the rules of the road. There is no
'yield to truckers because they are truckers'
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Courtsey is following the rules as they are laid out.
Oh, okay. so who lays the rules out, hmmm? You? Or the common practice
of millions of American motorists?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Courtesy dictates that
one either moves over, speeds up to get out of the way, or changes lanes
to allow /any /vehicle on a get-on ramp to merge.
Everyone following their own imaginary laws of courtesy. In my view,
courtesy is maintaining course and speed so the merger can time a gap in
front or behind as he chooses. See, courtesy varies from person to
person... it's made up law... which you seem to like. That's why it's
written down for everyone to know what the real rules are.
your verbal knife is not sharp enough to split this hair. You know what
they say about "opinions?" Yours is self-serving and ridiculous.
Millions of times each day autos and trucks move out of the right lane
to allow a line of oncoming vehicles to more easily merge into the
orderly flow of traffic. In your opinion, it is more courteous to
stubbornly hang on to that lane. Sorry, young 'un, the vast majority of
American drivers disagree with you--and thank god for their commonsense
and courtesy!

Keep talking. Every word you utter ads to the weight sitting on your
shoulders as you try to climb out of the quicksand you stepped into when
you made this ridiculous, self-serving argument.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
(One also gives all
the room one can to a disabled vehicle, but that's another line of
debate.) There is also the fact that yielding is the action of a wise
man, a defensive driver.
And you've just made yourself proof that MFFY drivers count on, and
expect other drivers to yield to their aggressiveness, vehicle size, etc.
You've had so many people yield to you, that you now expect it. You don't
bother with the law you expect people to yield to you. When someone
doesn't you're offended. It's become an entitlement to you. Thanks for
being proof that 'just let them do it' only results in more MFFY behavior.
cute acronym there. Young man, there is an undeniable fact at play here.
All your harping will not change it one iota. A tractor trailer rig is
70-75' long, 13'6" tall and even empty it is ten times heavier than the
heaviest car on the road. Inside that 53' trailer we haul everything you
wear, eat and wipe your ass with. You cannot survive in today's world
without us. Look at the Gulf Coast of LA and MS: the recovery didn't
begin--hell, even the rescue didn't begin--until the truckers rolled in.
No, son, we don't claim to be any more special than the members of any
other occupation. But ain't nobody trying to pile on line workers at a
mfg plant. We are merely reiterating endlessly to you spoiled little
boys in your cute little sporty cars and your top-heavy, narrow
wheelbased SUVs and your bulky slow as a salted snail motorhomes that we
are a necessary part of American society. Due to our bulk and weight, we
have special needs. We need for you spoiled kiddies to yield to us a bit
more often than you'd yield to a stranger's car. In fact, we demand it.
What you won't give, sometimes we are forced to take.

So get over it, young man.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Or are you one of those that ain't gonna give
an inch regardless of the result if you think you're "in the right?"
Last time I gave an inch to a trucker he took a mile and ran me off the
road.
I'm sure. Son, an inch is never enough when you're dealing with a truck.
If you're beside a truck when his signal comes on, you have two choices:
gouge the gas pedal and get out of his way; slow down drastically and
when his trailer is clear of you, flash your lights on and off to let
him know he's clear. What you should not do is grip your steering wheel
tightly, gnash your teeth and maintain your present pace at the truck's
side. You'd be surprised at the fools who will slow down there beside
him instead of completing their pass.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
bullshit. The lane restrictions create the very behavior you
denigrate.
Hey asshole.. stay out of the left lane. The sign says TRUCKS, USE RIGHT
2 LANES, stay the fuck over there instead of blocking up the road.
gladly. you stay the fuck out of my only legal passing lane, I'll give
you the entire left lane.
If you've caught up to me, it's because I'm blocked in. I am a real ass
to drivers like you. You come up my ass when I am blocked I'll signal,
move over and put my hand out the window offering you the spot I was in.
The one that's BLOCKED.
Ah. you just admitted to being one of those aggressive helldrivers who
feel justified in driving 90, weaving like a snake in heat through
traffic. no damn wonder truckers piss you off. and, I do believe you:
you're a real ass to all other motorists.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
CA has the most restrictive lane restrictions in the country. On a
3-lane, truckers are restricted from even the middle lane except to
pass--and who fills up that lane? people like you with an attitude
against all truckers.
Um no. I'm long gone.
of course you are. weaving like a horny snake through traffic. And
goddamn any trucker who happens to get in your way for even a moment.
Sonny, it ain't the trucker that's inconsiderate in your case. Quite
obviously to all now, you are the problem. On your bike on a two-lane
truck route? Yeah, I understand now. You're claiming the entire lane (at
5 mph)--no damned wonder the drivers who finally are able to pass you
are tempted to shove you into a ditch.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Here's the deal. If moving to the left lane even
to quickly pass will get me a $295 ticket and crowding a lane hog in my
legal passing lane will earn me an equivalent ticket (if I am caught),
then I will crowd that dumb ass till he moves.
Well... why don't you just pass on the right, exactly what you expect us
to do.
As noted about 100 times to you already, son, the right lane is filled
with entering and exiting traffic. If to please short-sighted folks like
you, lane restrictions are in place, I cannot go to the left lane; I am
forced to crowd those who clog my passing lane going 50 mph.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Our grandfathers wisely put up those signs, "Thru traffic keep left!".
Around here it's SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT. And the law is KEEP RIGHT
EXCEPT TO PASS. As it should be.
yes. ignored in states with lane restrictions for trucks: they were
removed when those "trucks must use..." signs went up. In CA, I once was
ticketed for riding too long in the middle lane; I moved into that lane
to allow merging cars in, and they refused to allow me to move back
over. Nowadays, I do as you demand and keep right--as a result, I am
less courteous to you 4wheelers than I once was.
Poor baby... I once got to hear a bunch of truckers whine in court about
being ticketed on I294 for being in the left lane(s). 'they wouldn't let me
over' whine whine whine. The excuses I heard were lame. I was there for
a speeding ticket BTW... 89mph as I recall... That's when I learned not
to drive faster than the ISP, who that many years ago went 80-85mph. Now
they go more like 85-90mph.
that is precisely what you have been claiming, that trucks should wait
patiently wherever they are until the needed lane is vacant for two
miles in both directions. They would not have gotten the tickets, you
see, if they had TAKEN the lane, forcing aggressive, inconsiderate
assholes to yield.

Every posting you make is another stone astride your weak argument.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Common sense says KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS. Moron who never bothered to
learn how to drive properly makes up bullshit to justify his me first
fuck you behavior of squating in the left lanes.
Son, whenever I am in the left lanes, I am usually the fastest vehicle
on the road.
You drive 90+ mph in that rig? Because in chicago, the fastest vehicles
are usually at 90+ on four wheels, 100-120mph on two.
sigh. I visit chicago at most 2-3 times a year. I drive team with the
wife; we make west coast turns. I've been to chicago and the northeast
enough to know that the worst, most aggressive assholes in America are
found up there. And in IL, IN and OH, truck speeds are 30-50 mph slower
than you Andrettis. Can't you understand just how ludicrous, how
dangerous that speed differential is???? And, no, in most of the nation,
the average freeway speed through cosmo areas is about 75.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Besides, commonsense dictates that 70-75' rigs filling the
right lane interfere with the easy flow of traffic, on and off the
road.
The torqueless wondercar could do a 70mph merge...
My point, yes. But just how many dumbass 4wheelers have you seen come to
a complete stop at the end of a ramp, waiting for a vehicle approaching
a mile away to move to the next lane?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Your grandfather was wiser than you are: he and his generation
all recognized that /all/ thru traffic should stay left and out of the way.
Actually back in his day, people still practiced keep right except to
pass. The breakdown of keep right except to pass occured in the 1970s
with the double nickle.
Sigh. Again I am referring to 3 or more lanes. on 2 freeway lanes
wherever there are restrictions, signs are now posted that only restrict
TRUCKS to the right lane.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
It ain't speed that causes the majority of accidents.
It's the speed differential.
That's why you need to KEEP RIGHT EXCEPT TO PASS instead of scattering
slow drivers across all the lanes the way you'd have it.
wait a minute. don't attempt to put words into my mouth. I did not say
anything of the sort.
You very well did. No lane discipline, no restrictions, slow ass trucks
where ever they want to be.
No, I did not. I stated emphatically that *all* thru traffic should stay
left.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
In fact, I said just the opposite. That truck
lane restrictions create conflict between faster traveling trucks and
slow moving local traffic.
Trucks are slow moving traffic.
in your kind of state, yes. Two mph over can get a truck a ticket in IL.
But everywhere else, there is a wide range of truck speeds. JB Hunt,
about 62; US Xpress, 65-67; lots are restricted to 52-55; but most can
go 69-72. My top speed is 78, but some trucks are wide open, capable of
triple digits. Still, considerably slower than your sporty car can do.
We wouldn't be an impediment to you if we were permitted to drive 89+.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The slow trucks, we can reach on the CB, ask
or badger them till they move;
Around here a line of trucks form in the middle lane... up to a half a
dozen front to back... then one decides he wants to pass so he illegally
pulls into the left lane and begins a pass that takes about ten miles to
complete while cars stack up behind the blockage.
yeah, that is precisely my rant, that truck restrictions create the
problem in the first place. Trucks do not bunch up out of choice. I want
as much open space around me on all sides as I can get.

In IL moving to that left lane can get that driver a very steep fine. Do
you now understand why a truck might be tempted to tailgate traffic
clogging his only legal passing lane?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
the slow cars and campers and stepvans
driven on the clock all seem to have your attitude--they expect the
truck to pass (on the left) if they want to go faster.
Ahem... you don't have a clue how I drive. But I'll remind you, trucks
don't catch up to me unless I am A) blocked by a slow moving vehicle like
another truck. B) I'm in the rightmost lane. C) both.
sure I do; you have reiterated it often enough. You're overly
aggressive. Driving 90+ as you admit to, you'd have to be in order to
get through chicago traffic.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
But, see, we
can't. Your lane restrictions keep us to the right. Where we are then
forced to tailgate and make sometimes dangerous lane changes into the
supposed slowest lane.
You're forced to tailgate.... hmm.. if I gave that excuse about
tailgating an LLB (which I try not to do) you wouldn't accept it, and I am
not going to accept it here.
there's tailgating and then there's tailgating. When the lane to the
front is clear; when at least one of the other lanes is clear, the
motorhome clogging my only passing lane is driving 50, brother, you can
bet your dumb ass that I WILL tailgate him till he moves. First I will
attempt it politely, but if he will not move, I will gradually get more
aggressive with him till he gets the message. You're lying to us if you
are claiming that you never do likewise, flashing your lights, etc, when
a $%$^ truck or a $%$$%%^ car just will not allow you to maintain your
normal 90+ mph.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Show me the law that says the right lane is not a travel lane but an
enter/exit lane.
sigh. quick on the trigger, slow on the comprehension. read on.
You didn't show it.
It is difficult not to refer to you as at least a poor reader. For the
last time, young 'un, I did not once claim there is any such law
anywhere. What I did say is that in the state of CT, big freeway signs
do so designate the lanes. But that there, and everywhere else it is in
fact standard practice for the vast majority of drivers to employ the
middle lane as their primary travel lane. Don't act so dense. Don't be
so goddamned facetious. You ain't stupid, son, you understood what I said.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
<car1 <car2 <car3<TRUCK
Car three is going the same speed as one and two, but the trucker is on
his ass.
obviously, #2 should not be pacing the #1 car. as he approached, the
trucker watched, probably from the middle lane,
The <'s indicate direction they are all in the same lane.
duh. same different. If the other legal truck lane is traveling even
slower, some trucks will in fact crowd one car at a time to get the fuck
over or move the fuck on down the road. I myself have more patience--I
don't crowd a vehicle that cannot move out of my way; most of us do.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Truckers don't obey the lane restrictions here, so I think I know what
it's like when they don't. Clogged. The trucks get side by side and
nobody can get through.
Trucks obey lane restrictions in every state they're implemented--the
fines are stiff, stiffer than a speeding ticket.
I don't know about the fines, but just about every trip on I90/94 and a
good percentage on I294 I see truckers violating them.
yeah, I've been tempted too. But it sure as hell is not the average
trucker. Write congress, demand that the restrictions be rescinded and
the truck limit be increased, and lots of chicago backups will disappear
immediately. I guarantee it. Accident rate will also drop. Statistics
prove it.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
If nobody can get
through, bucko, it's because the traffic is stop and go, bottled up and
not by the trucks.
When I finally get by the trucks, it's daylight. I can punch it up to
whatever speed my car can go or I want to go as the case may be.
so, don't allow your state to make trucks rolling roadblocks. Up the
speed limit, eliminate the speed differential. It ain't our fault your
short-sighted public demanded that trucks be slowed down so much.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Some trucks can go only 52, some can go 80; the
faster does not pace the slower by choice (unlike so many auto
drivers).
What, the trucker doesn't know his own vehicle before he heads out on the
road? Guess that's pretty apparent by the driving I see.
are you merely tired or are you such a poor reader? I won't justify such
a silly statement with a reply. no, I will. I guess I will have to
explain it to you in terms a 3rd grader can understand. Some trucking
fleets are governed to only 52; others are not governed at all. The
driver is not asked for his input when he takes the job, he must drive
the truck he is assigned. And, yes, sonny, the truck is well aware of
his top speed.

But a truck that can drive 55 will not be content to be held back by a
53 mph truck; he will pass when he can. Ain't his fault. Blame it on the
laws, on the fleet he's driving for... on the tough tittie he is forced
to suckle. It's a fact that you and I both have to deal with, that slow
vehicles will move out to pass slower vehicles. Crying about will not
change the fact.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-27 08:05:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
goddamnit. do you own a dictionary????
denigrate
?denigration, ?denigrative, denigrator. ?denigratory /-greuhtawree,
-tohree/, adj.
/den"i grayt'/, v.t., denigrated, denigrating.
1. to speak damagingly of; defame or disparage: to denigrate someone's
character.
So, you see now, don't you, that I did not call you a "denigrate". It
isn't a noun, it isn't a pronoun for a noun, it isn't a fruit related to
a pomegranate...it is as I applied it a verb. Shall I produce the
definition of "verb"?
I read it as degenerate.

# pervert: a person whose behavior deviates from what is acceptable
especially in sexual behavior
# debauched: unrestrained by convention or morality; "Congreve draws a
debauched aristocratic society"; "deplorably dissipated and degraded";
"riotous living"; "fast women"

My mistake.
Post by gringo
Hey, some might say that with the above you have earned the appellation
"moron." I won't get down in the mud with you, child. I'll excuse it as
the frothing of a frustrated child.
Oh fuck off.
Post by gringo
No, son, I will not selectively trim. EVerything I write is related to
what has been previously written. One sentence leads into the next; each
paragraph builds on the prior paragraph. A scroll mouse will make it
easier to move within a posting, if it is a problem for your.
You trim the quoted material. Otherwise the posts become thousands of
lines long. Get your ass a threaded news reader if your so damned
concerned about context from 10 posts ago.
Post by gringo
Your frustration is showing.
Yes, when I am pulling all the weight of the menial work of the
discussion, I get irritated. But then again, what can I expect from
someone who is arguing that everyone else should yield to him because
it's just too much work for him to drive his own vehicle.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Courtsey is following the rules as they are laid out.
Oh, okay. so who lays the rules out, hmmm? You? Or the common practice
of millions of American motorists?
For IL, you can find them at http://www.ilga.gov/ if I remember the url
correctly. These are the agreed upon rules. When people like you make
things up, confusion is the result. Confusion leads to collisions.

This is why we have vehicle codes. Because your made up version of road
rules might not match my made up version.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Courtesy dictates that
one either moves over, speeds up to get out of the way, or changes lanes
to allow /any /vehicle on a get-on ramp to merge.
Everyone following their own imaginary laws of courtesy. In my view,
courtesy is maintaining course and speed so the merger can time a gap in
front or behind as he chooses. See, courtesy varies from person to
person... it's made up law... which you seem to like. That's why it's
written down for everyone to know what the real rules are.
your verbal knife is not sharp enough to split this hair. You know what
they say about "opinions?" Yours is self-serving and ridiculous.
Projection, mr. get out-of-my-way-or-else.
Post by gringo
Millions of times each day autos and trucks move out of the right lane
to allow a line of oncoming vehicles to more easily merge into the
orderly flow of traffic. In your opinion, it is more courteous to
stubbornly hang on to that lane.
I didn't say any such thing. I am pointing out the reason we have rules
of the road.
Post by gringo
Sorry, young 'un, the vast majority of
American drivers disagree with you--and thank god for their commonsense
and courtesy!
So who's going to cite me when I choose not to get out of your way? When
the lane next to me is occupied. When it's dangerous to change lanes?
When I just don't feel like it? Nobody, that's who. Roads are densely
packed where I drive. Why should I or anyone else move over you and
disturb the flow in the next lane? Your courtsey is what causes
congestion as the ripple your forced enterance onto the limited access
highway spreads left as people dodge you then people dodge the dodgers
and the more have to dodge the people that dodged the dodgers that dodged
your forced enterance on to the road. A brake wave across all lanes of
traffic because of your version of courtsey. You're probably one of these
morons who think letting the left turn conga line through is 'courtsey'
or that sitting there at a green signal to let someone out of a corner
gas station is 'courtsey'. Or maybe, you're the guy who stops his truck
for a bicyclist, blocking view of the lane behind him and blocking
traffic to boot!
Post by gringo
Keep talking. Every word you utter ads to the weight sitting on your
shoulders as you try to climb out of the quicksand you stepped into when
you made this ridiculous, self-serving argument.
You're really into projection and declarations. The vehicle code sides
with me. You have your imaginary get-out-the-way-of-trucks law.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
And you've just made yourself proof that MFFY drivers count on, and
expect other drivers to yield to their aggressiveness, vehicle size, etc.
You've had so many people yield to you, that you now expect it. You don't
bother with the law you expect people to yield to you. When someone
doesn't you're offended. It's become an entitlement to you. Thanks for
being proof that 'just let them do it' only results in more MFFY behavior.
cute acronym there.
The acronym is scott's.
Post by gringo
Young man, there is an undeniable fact at play here.
Old coot....
Post by gringo
All your harping will not change it one iota. A tractor trailer rig is
70-75' long, 13'6" tall and even empty it is ten times heavier than the
heaviest car on the road.
Might makes right. If I mount 30mm cannons on my car, that means you
yield to me, right?
Post by gringo
Inside that 53' trailer we haul everything you
wear, eat and wipe your ass with. You cannot survive in today's world
without us.
I can learn to drive a big truck. Can you design the products in the truck?
The truck itself? The road it drives upon? I don't think so. Without me
and my kind, you have no products to haul, no truck to drive, and no road
to drive it upon. Who needs who?
Post by gringo
Look at the Gulf Coast of LA and MS: the recovery didn't
begin--hell, even the rescue didn't begin--until the truckers rolled in.
You have an inflated view of your importance.
Post by gringo
No, son, we don't claim to be any more special than the members of any
other occupation.
You just did that very thing.
Post by gringo
We are merely reiterating endlessly to you spoiled little
boys in your cute little sporty cars and your top-heavy, narrow
wheelbased SUVs and your bulky slow as a salted snail motorhomes that we
are a necessary part of American society.
We pay for you to be on the road. We pay more than our fair share because
of the damage you do. We pay for your salaries, we pay for your fuel, we
pay for your trucks, and we pay for and die in the wars to fuel your trucks.
Post by gringo
Due to our bulk and weight, we have special needs.
Poor baby. If I were to complain about special needs while traveling by
bicycle you'd tell me to stuff it. So stuff it.
Post by gringo
We need for you spoiled kiddies to yield to us a bit
more often than you'd yield to a stranger's car. In fact, we demand it.
What you won't give, sometimes we are forced to take.
Suck an egg. You're not special, get over yourself.
Post by gringo
So get over it, young man.
You get over it old coot.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Last time I gave an inch to a trucker he took a mile and ran me off the
road.
I'm sure. Son, an inch is never enough when you're dealing with a truck.
It's a figure of speach, stupid acting old coot.
Post by gringo
gouge the gas pedal and get out of his way; slow down drastically and
when his trailer is clear of you, flash your lights on and off to let
him know he's clear. What you should not do is grip your steering wheel
tightly, gnash your teeth and maintain your present pace at the truck's
side. You'd be surprised at the fools who will slow down there beside
him instead of completing their pass.
An bow to the master trucker, the superior being of the road! Screw them.
I paid more than my fair share to use that road, I paid part of the
trucker's share. Trucker needs to learn he's not special, he's just
another road user.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
gladly. you stay the fuck out of my only legal passing lane, I'll give
you the entire left lane.
If you've caught up to me, it's because I'm blocked in. I am a real ass
to drivers like you. You come up my ass when I am blocked I'll signal,
move over and put my hand out the window offering you the spot I was in.
The one that's BLOCKED.
Ah. you just admitted to being one of those aggressive helldrivers who
feel justified in driving 90, weaving like a snake in heat through
you're a real ass to all other motorists.
Ah. you just admitted to being one of those grey little aliens that give
people anal probes. That's about as logically connected as the sentance
you made above.

Let me explain it slower to you. I'm going 60mph, stuck behind someone
going 60mph, while some self important trucker decides to ride my ass, to
make me go faster. I can't go faster, because there is a vehicle in front
of me doing 60mph. If I go faster, I will collide with that vehicle. When
I get an opening in the lane to the right, I move over and give the self
important trucker the spot I was in. Now he's still doing 60mph, unless
he hits the vehicle that was slowing me. I accelerate to the speed of
traffic provided all goes well and leave the trucker behind.

Understand now?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Um no. I'm long gone.
of course you are. weaving like a horny snake through traffic. And
goddamn any trucker who happens to get in your way for even a moment.
While you're running down people with your truck! You want to play this
way?
Post by gringo
Sonny, it ain't the trucker that's inconsiderate in your case.
Coot, you want to assume a lot of nonsense about my driving to attack my
character. I haven't yet personally said you do anything but what you
have clearly stated and agreed with after I did so. You want to have a
discussion or character attacks back and forth? I can do the later, and
if this continues it will start before this post is over.
Post by gringo
Quite
obviously to all now, you are the problem. On your bike on a two-lane
truck route? Yeah, I understand now. You're claiming the entire lane (at
5 mph)--no damned wonder the drivers who finally are able to pass you
are tempted to shove you into a ditch.
Now you're really hitting below the belt. Should I accuse you of ramming
people with your truck?

I don't ride in the middle of lane, and I rarely dip below 20mph on
arterial roads. Most people can pass me easily. Except retarded drivers
like yourself who get their rocks off by getting as close to killing
other road users. You practically admit there. You like threatening other
road users, giving them a good scare right. After all, you're an
important trucker. You got places to be. You got deadlines and the
economy is going in the toilet if you're 3 seconds late!

You sure you want to keep playing this way? Just a degenerate thread of
personal attacks? Sure about that coot?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Well... why don't you just pass on the right, exactly what you expect us
to do.
As noted about 100 times to you already, son, the right lane is filled
with entering and exiting traffic.
So where is the vehicle you're tailgating supposed to go? Block the left
lane so you can go a little faster until you end up tailgating the next
driver.
Post by gringo
If to please short-sighted folks like
you, lane restrictions are in place, I cannot go to the left lane; I am
forced to crowd those who clog my passing lane going 50 mph.
Poor baby. If they are passing traffic to their right, and you just said
they are, then tough cookies. Think of it this way, at least they aren't
micropassing. Oh that's right, we are supposed to live with you truckers
taking over the left lane to micropass. You're special... you can
micropass but nobody can micropass in front of you.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Poor baby... I once got to hear a bunch of truckers whine in court about
being ticketed on I294 for being in the left lane(s). 'they wouldn't let me
over' whine whine whine. The excuses I heard were lame. I was there for
a speeding ticket BTW... 89mph as I recall... That's when I learned not
to drive faster than the ISP, who that many years ago went 80-85mph. Now
they go more like 85-90mph.
that is precisely what you have been claiming, that trucks should wait
patiently wherever they are until the needed lane is vacant for two
miles in both directions. They would not have gotten the tickets, you
see, if they had TAKEN the lane, forcing aggressive, inconsiderate
assholes to yield.
They should have never been in those lanes in the first place. Not being
able to get back was just a whine.
Post by gringo
Every posting you make is another stone astride your weak argument.
Every time you make this declaration shows you know you're losing.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
You drive 90+ mph in that rig? Because in chicago, the fastest vehicles
are usually at 90+ on four wheels, 100-120mph on two.
sigh. I visit chicago at most 2-3 times a year. I drive team with the
wife; we make west coast turns. I've been to chicago and the northeast
enough to know that the worst, most aggressive assholes in America are
found up there. And in IL, IN and OH, truck speeds are 30-50 mph slower
than you Andrettis. Can't you understand just how ludicrous, how
dangerous that speed differential is???? And, no, in most of the nation,
the average freeway speed through cosmo areas is about 75.
Well wooptie do. So you aren't the fastest traffic. At just under 75mph
on I294 in lightish traffic one will be one of the slowest vehicles on
the road. I should know, I was in the rightmost lane last night... cop
was doing at ~85mph.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Besides, commonsense dictates that 70-75' rigs filling the
right lane interfere with the easy flow of traffic, on and off the
road.
The torqueless wondercar could do a 70mph merge...
My point, yes. But just how many dumbass 4wheelers have you seen come to
a complete stop at the end of a ramp, waiting for a vehicle approaching
a mile away to move to the next lane?
So your poor driving is justified by their poor driving. Weak argument.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Your grandfather was wiser than you are: he and his generation
all recognized that /all/ thru traffic should stay left and out of the way.
Actually back in his day, people still practiced keep right except to
pass. The breakdown of keep right except to pass occured in the 1970s
with the double nickle.
Sigh. Again I am referring to 3 or more lanes. on 2 freeway lanes
wherever there are restrictions, signs are now posted that only restrict
TRUCKS to the right lane.
Keep right except to pass and the breakdown of that behavior doesn't
depend on the number of lanes. That breakdown occured in the 1970s. Prior
to that, it was practiced contrary to your claim it was an LLBing
paradise of thru traffic keep left.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
You very well did. No lane discipline, no restrictions, slow ass trucks
where ever they want to be.
No, I did not. I stated emphatically that *all* thru traffic should stay
left.
Slow drivers are never thru traffic in your fantasy world?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
In fact, I said just the opposite. That truck
lane restrictions create conflict between faster traveling trucks and
slow moving local traffic.
Trucks are slow moving traffic.
in your kind of state, yes. Two mph over can get a truck a ticket in IL.
Doesn't stop them. They are moving well over 2 over, but still slow
moving traffic. Hell 20 over is often slow moving traffic.
Post by gringo
But everywhere else, there is a wide range of truck speeds. JB Hunt,
about 62; US Xpress, 65-67; lots are restricted to 52-55; but most can
go 69-72. My top speed is 78, but some trucks are wide open, capable of
triple digits. Still, considerably slower than your sporty car can do.
We wouldn't be an impediment to you if we were permitted to drive 89+.
Funny, in one instance you are claiming you need special consideration
for the poor braking and handling of your vehicles and here you are
saying you should be permitted to drive speeds that I wouldn't take my
'73 ford to except on an empty road and it handles and brakes a lot
better than your rig.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Around here a line of trucks form in the middle lane... up to a half a
dozen front to back... then one decides he wants to pass so he illegally
pulls into the left lane and begins a pass that takes about ten miles to
complete while cars stack up behind the blockage.
yeah, that is precisely my rant, that truck restrictions create the
problem in the first place. Trucks do not bunch up out of choice. I want
as much open space around me on all sides as I can get.
I want open space too... we can all dream.
Post by gringo
In IL moving to that left lane can get that driver a very steep fine. Do
you now understand why a truck might be tempted to tailgate traffic
clogging his only legal passing lane?
I wish the ISP would enforce it more. I understood from the get go,
doesn't make it right. You'd chide me up one side and down the other if I
said I had to tailgate, intimidate, etc some LLBing driver in a minivan.
But at least my car has better braking than anything I might be
tailgating. Can you say the same about your rig?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
the slow cars and campers and stepvans
driven on the clock all seem to have your attitude--they expect the
truck to pass (on the left) if they want to go faster.
Ahem... you don't have a clue how I drive. But I'll remind you, trucks
don't catch up to me unless I am A) blocked by a slow moving vehicle like
another truck. B) I'm in the rightmost lane. C) both.
sure I do; you have reiterated it often enough. You're overly
aggressive. Driving 90+ as you admit to, you'd have to be in order to
get through chicago traffic.
That's entirely false. In fact, if you paid attention to my posts you'd
note that I don't go 90mph or faster. I always say I drive slower than
the ISP drives. The ISP drives 85mph-90mph. that means I don't exceed
those speeds. I might be going 55mph or 75mph or 80mph, but certainly not
90+mph.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
But, see, we
can't. Your lane restrictions keep us to the right. Where we are then
forced to tailgate and make sometimes dangerous lane changes into the
supposed slowest lane.
You're forced to tailgate.... hmm.. if I gave that excuse about
tailgating an LLB (which I try not to do) you wouldn't accept it, and I am
not going to accept it here.
there's tailgating and then there's tailgating. When the lane to the
front is clear; when at least one of the other lanes is clear, the
motorhome clogging my only passing lane is driving 50, brother, you can
bet your dumb ass that I WILL tailgate him till he moves. First I will
attempt it politely, but if he will not move, I will gradually get more
aggressive with him till he gets the message. You're lying to us if you
are claiming that you never do likewise, flashing your lights, etc, when
a $%$^ truck or a $%$$%%^ car just will not allow you to maintain your
normal 90+ mph.
Again, I don't have a normal 90+ mph.

And falshing lights and tailgating are exclusive. I use the left turn
signal from pretty far back if you really must know.
Post by gringo
It is difficult not to refer to you as at least a poor reader. For the
last time, young 'un, I did not once claim there is any such law
anywhere.
Your made up road rules then.
Post by gringo
What I did say is that in the state of CT, big freeway signs
do so designate the lanes.
Yet you apply that to the whole nation. Hint: regulatory signs apply to
where they are. They are there because that's a special case there.
Post by gringo
But that there, and everywhere else it is in
fact standard practice for the vast majority of drivers to employ the
middle lane as their primary travel lane. Don't act so dense. Don't be
so goddamned facetious. You ain't stupid, son, you understood what I said.
There's the way things are supposed to work, and the way they have
degenerated because of people who play by made up rules like you. I've
driven the autobahn, where people actually obey what is the law here in
most the US too. It's wonderful. The truckers on the autobahn are rather
well behaved too.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
<car1 <car2 <car3<TRUCK
Car three is going the same speed as one and two, but the trucker is on
his ass.
obviously, #2 should not be pacing the #1 car. as he approached, the
trucker watched, probably from the middle lane,
The <'s indicate direction they are all in the same lane.
duh. same different. If the other legal truck lane is traveling even
slower, some trucks will in fact crowd one car at a time to get the fuck
over or move the fuck on down the road. I myself have more patience--I
don't crowd a vehicle that cannot move out of my way; most of us do.
So you tailgate someone who can't do a damn thing. That would be when
I've been tailgated by truckers. Guess what it's done to my opinon of
the people in your profession. Ever consider winning friends instead of
enemies?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I don't know about the fines, but just about every trip on I90/94 and a
good percentage on I294 I see truckers violating them.
yeah, I've been tempted too. But it sure as hell is not the average
trucker. Write congress, demand that the restrictions be rescinded and
the truck limit be increased, and lots of chicago backups will disappear
immediately. I guarantee it. Accident rate will also drop. Statistics
prove it.
Bullshit. The truckers don't obey the lane restrictions and the result is
congestion. If I write anything it will be for stronger enforcement. I am
tired of their lardass vehicles blocking the left lanes of I90/94 and I
certainly don't want them in the ryan express... not that some truckers
don't do it anyway.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
If nobody can get
through, bucko, it's because the traffic is stop and go, bottled up and
not by the trucks.
When I finally get by the trucks, it's daylight. I can punch it up to
whatever speed my car can go or I want to go as the case may be.
so, don't allow your state to make trucks rolling roadblocks. Up the
speed limit, eliminate the speed differential. It ain't our fault your
short-sighted public demanded that trucks be slowed down so much.
There's no separate speed limit through chicago. Effectively, there is no
speed limit at all. Of course given the way it's laid out, trucks cant go
much faster than they are going safely anyway. This is why they need to
stay right.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Some trucks can go only 52, some can go 80; the
faster does not pace the slower by choice (unlike so many auto
drivers).
What, the trucker doesn't know his own vehicle before he heads out on the
road? Guess that's pretty apparent by the driving I see.
are you merely tired or are you such a poor reader? I won't justify such
a silly statement with a reply. no, I will. I guess I will have to
explain it to you in terms a 3rd grader can understand. Some trucking
fleets are governed to only 52; others are not governed at all. The
driver is not asked for his input when he takes the job, he must drive
the truck he is assigned. And, yes, sonny, the truck is well aware of
his top speed.
And my response, since you didn't grasp it, is that he has to deal with
it. Not everyone else.
Post by gringo
But a truck that can drive 55 will not be content to be held back by a
53 mph truck; he will pass when he can. Ain't his fault. Blame it on the
laws, on the fleet he's driving for... on the tough tittie he is forced
to suckle. It's a fact that you and I both have to deal with, that slow
vehicles will move out to pass slower vehicles. Crying about will not
change the fact.
Again, you think you can inflict your woes on everyone else. NOw that
would be like riding a bicycle slowly in the middle of the lane.
gringo
2006-11-28 08:03:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
goddamnit. do you own a dictionary????
denigrate
?denigration, ?denigrative, denigrator. ?denigratory /-greuhtawree,
-tohree/, adj.
/den"i grayt'/, v.t., denigrated, denigrating.
1. to speak damagingly of; defame or disparage: to denigrate someone's
character.
So, you see now, don't you, that I did not call you a "denigrate". It
isn't a noun, it isn't a pronoun for a noun, it isn't a fruit related to
a pomegranate...it is as I applied it a verb. Shall I produce the
definition of "verb"?
I read it as degenerate.
# pervert: a person whose behavior deviates from what is acceptable
especially in sexual behavior
# debauched: unrestrained by convention or morality; "Congreve draws a
debauched aristocratic society"; "deplorably dissipated and degraded";
"riotous living"; "fast women"
My mistake.
Post by gringo
Hey, some might say that with the above you have earned the appellation
"moron." I won't get down in the mud with you, child. I'll excuse it as
the frothing of a frustrated child.
Oh fuck off.
your frustration is showing, little man.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
No, son, I will not selectively trim. EVerything I write is related to
what has been previously written. One sentence leads into the next; each
paragraph builds on the prior paragraph. A scroll mouse will make it
easier to move within a posting, if it is a problem for your.
You trim the quoted material. Otherwise the posts become thousands of
lines long. Get your ass a threaded news reader if your so damned
concerned about context from 10 posts ago.
sonny, my news reader is fine. But see, when I am writing, the only
post in front of me is the one I am responding to. Selective trimming,
as you do it, takes a comment out of context. Obviously, so that you
can then repeat a prior rant, completely ignoring the response I've
already given. The neo-CONS do the same thing. Unlike the right wing
talking heads, though, you can't shout me down. Your "trimming" is the
equivalent of trying to cut off your opponent's microphone. A cheap
trick.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Your frustration is showing.
Yes, when I am pulling all the weight of the menial work of the
discussion, I get irritated. But then again, what can I expect from
someone who is arguing that everyone else should yield to him because
it's just too much work for him to drive his own vehicle.
you're a fucking crybaby. You're throwing a hissy fit. I can picture
you screaming at the monitor in front of you, just as you scream and
shake your widdle fists at all them meanie truck drivers.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
there is such a thing still as common courtesy.
Courtsey is following the rules as they are laid out.
Oh, okay. so who lays the rules out, hmmm? You? Or the common practice
of millions of American motorists?
For IL, you can find them at http://www.ilga.gov/ if I remember the url
correctly. These are the agreed upon rules. When people like you make
things up, confusion is the result. Confusion leads to collisions.
This is why we have vehicle codes. Because your made up version of road
rules might not match my made up version.
you are becoming more emotional in your frustration, less rational.
Less able to argue your point. Actually, you've made your point and it
has been repeatedly shot down. BTW, thank you for providing the totally
irrelevant "road rules." Now go back into your newsreader and reread my
last half dozen postings. Perhaps, if you read my comment often enough
you'll come to accept that I never said one fucking thing about traffic
regulations; that I am still talking about the practical, commonsense
practices of the vast majority of all drivers on 3-lane interstates.

You are a stubborn fucker, I'll give you that.

Now, I am tiring of wiping your nose, son. Don't for one minute believe
that when I finally walk away and leave you to cry alone that this will
mean that you have "won" the argument. One of my grandsons was badly
spoiled as a three year old: my advice to the parent was to ignore his
little hissy fit until he tired of kicking and screaming and got up to
go play (without getting his way for once).
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Courtesy dictates that
one either moves over, speeds up to get out of the way, or changes lanes
to allow /any /vehicle on a get-on ramp to merge.
Everyone following their own imaginary laws of courtesy. In my view,
courtesy is maintaining course and speed so the merger can time a gap in
front or behind as he chooses. See, courtesy varies from person to
person... it's made up law... which you seem to like. That's why it's
written down for everyone to know what the real rules are.
your verbal knife is not sharp enough to split this hair. You know what
they say about "opinions?" Yours is self-serving and ridiculous.
Projection, mr. get out-of-my-way-or-else.
another trip on the merry-go-round?
you're fun!
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Millions of times each day autos and trucks move out of the right lane
to allow a line of oncoming vehicles to more easily merge into the
orderly flow of traffic. In your opinion, it is more courteous to
stubbornly hang on to that lane.
I didn't say any such thing. I am pointing out the reason we have rules
of the road.
sure you did. Since you cut it out in order to belittle my cogent
response, I'll quote your words back at you. You said, "In my view,
courtesy is maintaining course and speed so the merger can time a gap in
front or behind as he chooses. See, courtesy varies from person to person"


your verbal knife is not sharp enough to split this hair. You know what
they say about "opinions?" Yours is self-serving and ridiculous.
Millions of times each day autos and trucks move out of the right lane
to allow a line of oncoming vehicles to more easily merge into the
orderly flow of traffic. In your opinion, it is more courteous to
stubbornly hang on to that lane. Sorry, young 'un, the vast majority of
American drivers disagree with you--and thank god for their commonsense
and courtesy!


No, Brent, courtesy does not vary from person to person--one is either
courteous or one is not. Courtesy is looking out for the needs of other
drivers and courteously doing one's best to accommodate them.
Maintaining course and speed, making no effort to make the merge easier
and safer is in effect saying Fuck you to merging vehicles.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Sorry, young 'un, the vast majority of
American drivers disagree with you--and thank god for their commonsense
and courtesy!
So who's going to cite me when I choose not to get out of your way? When
the lane next to me is occupied. When it's dangerous to change lanes?
When I just don't feel like it? Nobody, that's who. Roads are densely
packed where I drive. Why should I or anyone else move over you and
disturb the flow in the next lane? Your courtsey is what causes
congestion as the ripple your forced enterance onto the limited access
highway spreads left as people dodge you then people dodge the dodgers
and the more have to dodge the people that dodged the dodgers that dodged
your forced enterance on to the road. A brake wave across all lanes of
traffic because of your version of courtsey. You're probably one of these
morons who think letting the left turn conga line through is 'courtsey'
or that sitting there at a green signal to let someone out of a corner
gas station is 'courtsey'. Or maybe, you're the guy who stops his truck
for a bicyclist, blocking view of the lane behind him and blocking
traffic to boot!
brent, I promised not to get personal in my responses to you, but, yeah,
I've been slipping. It's really difficult not to insult blockheads and
immature, know it all boys. Sonny, listen up. No one has been faulting
anyone for behaving in a safe, courteous manner. Like the spoiled,
self-centered brat you are, you have no grown up understanding of the
concept of courtesy. Allow me to educate you to a few facts you'll need
as an adult.


One is acting both courteously and safely when one accommodates another
vehicle's merge WHEN IT IS SAFE TO DO SO. See, the merging traffic WILL
enter the freeway--now or ten minutes from now when it incoveniences
even more people, creating a half hour backup when it could have been
handled relatively painlessly if a courteous adult had caused the
momentary "ripple effect" that so concerns you.

And you're complaining about someone letting a car out of a driveway?
Shit, you're a sillier, whinier bitch than I thought. If it causes me
only a momentary delay, why shouldn't I extend a one-second courtesy
that will save someone else 15 minutes of waiting???
Sonny, what you advocate is just plain rudeness. We have always been a
more caring, considerate, courteous nation than that. YOU benefit from
the courtesy of others all the time; only you never passes it on to
others. Bah! Humbug! Careful there, sonny, or you'll wake up one day
to find that everyone has labeled you a rude, crude, mama's boy who
never gets invited anywhere.

Grow up.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Keep talking. Every word you utter ads to the weight sitting on your
shoulders as you try to climb out of the quicksand you stepped into when
you made this ridiculous, self-serving argument.
You're really into projection and declarations. The vehicle code sides
with me. You have your imaginary get-out-the-way-of-trucks law.
put another 50 cents in the meter, sonny, if you're gonna continue to ride.

courtesy does not vary from person to person--one is either courteous or
one is not. Courtesy is looking out for the needs of other drivers and
courteously doing one's best to accommodate them. Maintaining course
and speed is in effect saying Fuck you to merging vehicles.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
And you've just made yourself proof that MFFY drivers count on, and
expect other drivers to yield to their aggressiveness, vehicle size, etc.
You've had so many people yield to you, that you now expect it. You don't
bother with the law you expect people to yield to you. When someone
doesn't you're offended. It's become an entitlement to you. Thanks for
being proof that 'just let them do it' only results in more MFFY behavior.
cute acronym there.
The acronym is scott's.
ah. I see. you two boys need backup against this one lone trucker.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Young man, there is an undeniable fact at play here.
Old coot....
Post by gringo
All your harping will not change it one iota. A tractor trailer rig is
70-75' long, 13'6" tall and even empty it is ten times heavier than the
heaviest car on the road.
Might makes right. If I mount 30mm cannons on my car, that means you
yield to me, right?
wipe your tears, son.

I yield to all autos whenever they adequately signal their intentions,
and I can do so safely. I yield to emergency vehicles and law
enforcement whenever they adequately signal their intentions and I can
do so safely. But run up behind me 90 mph rudely flashing your
lights...running off onto the shoulder to put the lights in my mirror, I
just might stubbornly slow down a bit and stay right there in your way
for the next ten miles. Now something just occurred to me--that might
be your entire problem with trucks! Be rude to me, demanding that I
move right now for you, I too might purposely hold you up.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Inside that 53' trailer we haul everything you
wear, eat and wipe your ass with. You cannot survive in today's world
without us.
I can learn to drive a big truck. Can you design the products in the truck?
The truck itself? The road it drives upon? I don't think so. Without me
and my kind, you have no products to haul, no truck to drive, and no road
to drive it upon. Who needs who?
you do, little man.

I seriously doubt that you can learn to drive a truck. You lack the
patience. You lack the humility necessary to learn true road skills.
As for me and most other truckers.... We come from all walks of life,
all levels of education. We are lawyers, retired physicians,
accountants, cops, engineers, factory workers--we are strong emotionally
and physically, we aren't afraid of being alone for weeks at a time, we
are confident of our abilities, we are a large, diverse family. We are
exceedingly polite and courteous. We stop to help stranded folks and
accident victims when people like you barrel on by: we are, in fact, the
knights of the highway. No, sonny, you cannot become a trucker. You
might pass the tests, but you wouldn't last long enough to be assigned a
truck of your own.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Look at the Gulf Coast of LA and MS: the recovery didn't
begin--hell, even the rescue didn't begin--until the truckers rolled in.
You have an inflated view of your importance.
I live down here, bucko. I witnessed it firsthand.

the recovery didn't
begin--hell, even the rescue didn't begin--until the truckers rolled in.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
No, son, we don't claim to be any more special than the members of any
other occupation.
You just did that very thing.
Goddam, you are a whining ass.
Re-read the following, since you couldn't comprehend it the first time.

Young man, there is an undeniable fact at play here. All your harping
will not change it one iota. A tractor trailer rig is 70-75' long, 13'6"
tall and even empty it is ten times heavier than the heaviest car on the
road. Inside that 53' trailer we haul everything you wear, eat and wipe
your ass with. You cannot survive in today's world without us. Look at
the Gulf Coast of LA and MS: the recovery didn't begin--hell, even the
rescue didn't begin--until the truckers rolled in.

No, son, we don't claim to be any more special than the members of any
other occupation.

But ain't nobody trying to pile on line workers at a mfg plant. We are
merely reiterating endlessly to you spoiled little boys in your cute
little sporty cars and your top-heavy, narrow wheelbased SUVs and your
bulky slow as a salted snail motorhomes that we are a necessary part of
American society. Due to our bulk and weight, we have special needs. We
need for you spoiled kiddies to yield to us a bit more often than you'd
yield to a stranger's car. In fact, we demand it. What you won't give,
sometimes we are forced to take. And there is not one damned thing you
can do to stop it.

So get over it, young man.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
We are merely reiterating endlessly to you spoiled little
boys in your cute little sporty cars and your top-heavy, narrow
wheelbased SUVs and your bulky slow as a salted snail motorhomes that we
are a necessary part of American society.
We pay for you to be on the road. We pay more than our fair share because
of the damage you do. We pay for your salaries, we pay for your fuel, we
pay for your trucks, and we pay for and die in the wars to fuel your trucks.
thank you very much. Sonny, the world is interconnected: we all need
one another. I am aware of that fact. Apparently you are not, since
you keep trying to belittle truckers' contributions to society.

Firefighters, in order to perform the services they provide society,
require station houses, fire trucks, sirens and special laws that say
that everyone must give them right of way. Truckers, in order to
deliver the freight you need in order to perform your job and the paper
you need to wipe your shitty ass, require certain dispensations from
society. To wit: We require extra room on the highways, we require the
patience of you 4wheelers when we slow you down, and sometimes we
require you to make it easier for us to merge.

Firefighters do not ask whether you like having to pull over and let
them pass, whether you like streets being blocked while they fight a
fire at the home of someone you don't even know. Truckers do not have
the time, energy or inclination to wait patiently till you're safely
home before we come onto the freeway on our way to deliver someone
else's Christmas presents.

You can'd do a goddamn thing but surrender to the greater needs of the
firetrucks. You cannot do a goddamn thing but surrender to the greater
needs of all other trucks as well. You don't like having to? Well,
that's just too damn bad. Buy a big box of kleenex to dry your tears,
and get on with life.

Grow the fuck up.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Due to our bulk and weight, we have special needs.
Poor baby. If I were to complain about special needs while traveling by
bicycle you'd tell me to stuff it. So stuff it.
we provide for the greater good of society. You on your bike
provide...what? BTW, allow me to set you straight. We don't ask for
your blessing, sonny. We don't need it. You are a tiny pissant, one of
millions of cars we encounter each day. sorry to hurt your feelings,
kid, but you just are not very important to us.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
We need for you spoiled kiddies to yield to us a bit
more often than you'd yield to a stranger's car. In fact, we demand it.
What you won't give, sometimes we are forced to take.
Suck an egg. You're not special, get over yourself.
Young man, there is an undeniable fact at play here. All your harping
will not change it one iota. A tractor trailer rig is 70-75' long, 13'6"
tall and even empty it is ten times heavier than the heaviest car on the
road. Inside that 53' trailer we haul everything you wear, eat and wipe
your ass with. You cannot survive in today's world without us. Look at
the Gulf Coast of LA and MS: the recovery didn't begin--hell, even the
rescue didn't begin--until the truckers rolled in. No, son, we don't
claim to be any more special than the members of any other occupation.
But ain't nobody trying to pile on line workers at a mfg plant. We are
merely reiterating endlessly to you spoiled little boys in your cute
little sporty cars and your top-heavy, narrow wheelbased SUVs and your
bulky slow as a salted snail motorhomes that we are a necessary part of
American society. Due to our bulk and weight, we have special needs. We
need for you spoiled kiddies to yield to us a bit more often than you'd
yield to a stranger's car. In fact, we demand it. What you won't give,
sometimes we are forced to take.

So get over it, young man.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
So get over it, young man.
You get over it old coot.
:) Did not: did too: did not! Golly, you're still into kids games, I see.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Last time I gave an inch to a trucker he took a mile and ran me off the
road.
I'm sure. Son, an inch is never enough when you're dealing with a truck.
It's a figure of speach, stupid acting old coot.
Post by gringo
gouge the gas pedal and get out of his way; slow down drastically and
when his trailer is clear of you, flash your lights on and off to let
him know he's clear. What you should not do is grip your steering wheel
tightly, gnash your teeth and maintain your present pace at the truck's
side. You'd be surprised at the fools who will slow down there beside
him instead of completing their pass.
An bow to the master trucker, the superior being of the road! Screw them.
I paid more than my fair share to use that road, I paid part of the
trucker's share. Trucker needs to learn he's not special, he's just
another road user.
You have no choice, sonny. You will yield. You can do so courteously,
and earn mutual respect from the trucker. You can do so when he forces
you to give him the needed room, and for the next 30 miles every other
trucker out there will interfere with you as much as they can.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
gladly. you stay the fuck out of my only legal passing lane, I'll give
you the entire left lane.
If you've caught up to me, it's because I'm blocked in. I am a real ass
to drivers like you. You come up my ass when I am blocked I'll signal,
move over and put my hand out the window offering you the spot I was in.
The one that's BLOCKED.
Ah. you just admitted to being one of those aggressive helldrivers who
feel justified in driving 90, weaving like a snake in heat through
you're a real ass to all other motorists.
Ah. you just admitted to being one of those grey little aliens that give
people anal probes. That's about as logically connected as the sentance
you made above.
Let me explain it slower to you. I'm going 60mph, stuck behind someone
going 60mph, while some self important trucker decides to ride my ass, to
make me go faster. I can't go faster, because there is a vehicle in front
of me doing 60mph. If I go faster, I will collide with that vehicle. When
I get an opening in the lane to the right, I move over and give the self
important trucker the spot I was in. Now he's still doing 60mph, unless
he hits the vehicle that was slowing me. I accelerate to the speed of
traffic provided all goes well and leave the trucker behind.
Understand now?
Sonny, if you moved over for the trucker, it's only logical that the car
that was holding you up will also move over, leaving him free to pass
the slower traffic. Do you now understand why he would do it?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Um no. I'm long gone.
of course you are. weaving like a horny snake through traffic. And
goddamn any trucker who happens to get in your way for even a moment.
While you're running down people with your truck! You want to play this
way?
Again, I am forced to reverse your "edit."

of course you are. weaving like a horny snake through traffic. And
goddamn any trucker who happens to get in your way for even a moment.
Sonny, it ain't the trucker that's inconsiderate in your case. Quite
obviously to all now, you are the problem. On your bike on a two-lane
truck route? Yeah, I understand now. You're claiming the entire lane (at
5 mph)--no damned wonder the drivers who finally are able to pass you
are tempted to shove you into a ditch.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Sonny, it ain't the trucker that's inconsiderate in your case.
Coot, you want to assume a lot of nonsense about my driving to attack my
character. I haven't yet personally said you do anything but what you
have clearly stated and agreed with after I did so. You want to have a
discussion or character attacks back and forth? I can do the later, and
if this continues it will start before this post is over.
Sonny, you are bringing it on yourself. You state a lot of nonsense
about your driving then get all het up when called on it. You act
rudely; you refuse to yield; you drive 90+ on busy city freeways; you
take it personally when people won't get out of your way, yet you whine
when anyone courteously allows a car to leave a gas station driveway.
You have admitted to all of the above. You are a rude, immature boy.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Quite
obviously to all now, you are the problem. On your bike on a two-lane
truck route? Yeah, I understand now. You're claiming the entire lane (at
5 mph)--no damned wonder the drivers who finally are able to pass you
are tempted to shove you into a ditch.
Now you're really hitting below the belt. Should I accuse you of ramming
people with your truck?
I don't ride in the middle of lane, and I rarely dip below 20mph on
arterial roads. Most people can pass me easily. Except retarded drivers
like yourself who get their rocks off by getting as close to killing
other road users. You practically admit there. You like threatening other
road users, giving them a good scare right. After all, you're an
important trucker. You got places to be. You got deadlines and the
economy is going in the toilet if you're 3 seconds late!
You sure you want to keep playing this way? Just a degenerate thread of
personal attacks? Sure about that coot?
:) we'll play however you like. You accuse truckers of taking a
personal dislike of you and purposely trying to kill you on your bike.
You don't for one moment consider the driver's point of view. Maybe he
couldn't see over the next hill, guy, and he is very aware of how long
it will take him to move into the oncoming lane and back; maybe he
didn't see your dumbass till he was on top of you.


Now, please explain to me how your above paragraph was any more
insulting to me and other truckers than every other paragraph you've
written. Forgive me now while I pause to wipe my tears.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Well... why don't you just pass on the right, exactly what you expect us
to do.
As noted about 100 times to you already, son, the right lane is filled
with entering and exiting traffic.
So where is the vehicle you're tailgating supposed to go? Block the left
lane so you can go a little faster until you end up tailgating the next
driver.
The car can move to the left lane, doofus: thanks to the lane
restrictions you favor, trucks cannot move to the left lane, regardless
of how fast they can go.

y'all can either learn to stay the fuck out of truckers' passing lane
when you don't want to drive the speed limit or complain till the
restrictions are lifted. See how simple that is?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
If to please short-sighted folks like
you, lane restrictions are in place, I cannot go to the left lane; I am
forced to crowd those who clog my passing lane going 50 mph.
Poor baby. If they are passing traffic to their right, and you just said
they are, then tough cookies. Think of it this way, at least they aren't
micropassing. Oh that's right, we are supposed to live with you truckers
taking over the left lane to micropass. You're special... you can
micropass but nobody can micropass in front of you.
I did not say they are passing anyone--I said quite plainly that they
are reluctant to ride the right lane with the other slow traffic because
at every exit, people are coming on and getting off. I don't blame
anyone for not wanting to interact with so much merging traffic.
However, I do blame them for hogging the only legal passing lane
available to trucks. They have two choices: they can move right where
they belong, or they can move left into the path of speed freaks like
you. They do not have the option of remaining till the end of time in
front of me unless they are willing to drive the speed limit. I didn't
legislate the damned lane restrictions lauded by you so frequently.
Perhaps if enough people bitch and moan about being pressed, they'll
insist the restrictions be lifted.

Now, if they are lifted, and trucks are permitted to drive the same
speed limit as cars, undoubtedly you would encounter more trucks in the
left lane. But those trucks would all be driving 70, the top speed YOU
are permitted to drive. If 70 is deemed the safest top speed by state
officials, then the effect of the changes mentioned would be to lower
the overall speed of traffic on the highway. Safer for all. YOU would
no longer be able to drive 90-100+, but you are real good at whining
already.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Poor baby... I once got to hear a bunch of truckers whine in court about
being ticketed on I294 for being in the left lane(s). 'they wouldn't let me
over' whine whine whine. The excuses I heard were lame. I was there for
a speeding ticket BTW... 89mph as I recall... That's when I learned not
to drive faster than the ISP, who that many years ago went 80-85mph. Now
they go more like 85-90mph.
that is precisely what you have been claiming, that trucks should wait
patiently wherever they are until the needed lane is vacant for two
miles in both directions. They would not have gotten the tickets, you
see, if they had TAKEN the lane, forcing aggressive, inconsiderate
assholes to yield.
They should have never been in those lanes in the first place. Not being
able to get back was just a whine.
you've never encountered lanes merging from the left, I take it? Left
exits, highway meldings, to avoid a damned 4wheeler who slams on brakes
in front of him...lots of reasons a truck might find himself in the left
lanes and unable to get over. Mainly because inconsiderate, smug, rude,
arrogant speed freaks refused to allow them to get back to the right.

They would not have gotten the tickets, you
see, if they had TAKEN the lane, forcing aggressive, inconsiderate
assholes to yield.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Every posting you make is another stone astride your weak argument.
Every time you make this declaration shows you know you're losing.
this is getting old. I'm tiring of the merry go round, little man. You
live in chicago; you apparently enjoy running in circles. You certainly
seem to be stuck for any other argument: you keep restating the same
silly whine in an endless loop.

My argument is in the right. Therefore, I am pushing your immature,
rude ass all around this here freeway.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
You drive 90+ mph in that rig? Because in chicago, the fastest vehicles
are usually at 90+ on four wheels, 100-120mph on two.
sigh. I visit chicago at most 2-3 times a year. I drive team with the
wife; we make west coast turns. I've been to chicago and the northeast
enough to know that the worst, most aggressive assholes in America are
found up there. And in IL, IN and OH, truck speeds are 30-50 mph slower
than you Andrettis. Can't you understand just how ludicrous, how
dangerous that speed differential is???? And, no, in most of the nation,
the average freeway speed through cosmo areas is about 75.
Well wooptie do. So you aren't the fastest traffic. At just under 75mph
on I294 in lightish traffic one will be one of the slowest vehicles on
the road. I should know, I was in the rightmost lane last night... cop
was doing at ~85mph.
You keep illustrating my points for me. Thanks. Andretti wannabes like
yourself driving 85-100, trucks restricted to 55. In your neighborhood,
restrictions make trucks into large, heavy, rolling roadblocks. Of
course we get in your way. Shit, your argument should not be with
truckers; place the blame where it belongs, on the fat cats in the limos
who created such asinine anti-truck, anti-traveler, unsafe legislation.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Besides, commonsense dictates that 70-75' rigs filling the
right lane interfere with the easy flow of traffic, on and off the
road.
The torqueless wondercar could do a 70mph merge...
My point, yes. But just how many dumbass 4wheelers have you seen come to
a complete stop at the end of a ramp, waiting for a vehicle approaching
a mile away to move to the next lane?
So your poor driving is justified by their poor driving. Weak argument.
don't be so fucking silly. again with the selective trimming. Your
above comment has nothing at all to do with the following statement you
were supposedly replying to.

My point, yes. But just how many dumbass 4wheelers have you seen come to
a complete stop at the end of a ramp, waiting for a vehicle approaching
a mile away to move to the next lane?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Your grandfather was wiser than you are: he and his generation
all recognized that /all/ thru traffic should stay left and out of the way.
Actually back in his day, people still practiced keep right except to
pass. The breakdown of keep right except to pass occured in the 1970s
with the double nickle.
Sigh. Again I am referring to 3 or more lanes. on 2 freeway lanes
wherever there are restrictions, signs are now posted that only restrict
TRUCKS to the right lane.
Keep right except to pass and the breakdown of that behavior doesn't
depend on the number of lanes. That breakdown occured in the 1970s. Prior
to that, it was practiced contrary to your claim it was an LLBing
paradise of thru traffic keep left.
sure it does, doofus. A truck may in fact be faster than the traffic in
the right and middle lane, but in far too many states nowadays, he is
not permitted to even PASS in the left lane for any reason whatsoever.
BTW, in several cities, and in portions of a highway in CA (the first
state to implement lane restrictions), trucks and all other *thru*
traffic is still instructed to "keep left."
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
You very well did. No lane discipline, no restrictions, slow ass trucks
where ever they want to be.
No, I did not. I stated emphatically that *all* thru traffic should stay
left.
Slow drivers are never thru traffic in your fantasy world?
The word "slow" is a relative term, isn't it. Downtown Shreveport,
allowed freeway speed is only
45 for a few miles. Freeways through cities are of necessity much
slower than open highway speeds. Through EL Paso, I take the left lane
and get the hell out of dodge, at speeds up to my own maximum of 78;
traffic does not back up behind me, and cops leave me alone--because I
am not impeding traffic. Out in the open desert of southern california
(truck speed 55), a driver can get a ticket for 59, but farther in where
traffic is much much heavier, we all know that we can get away with 70
or more.

But more directly to your question, where those signs existed, there
were usually 4 or more lanes. Two for thru traffic; two for locals. NJ
Turnpike and a few other places--incl parts of Chicago-- have special
trucker bypass lanes. Truckers MUST use them, but even there the
fucking cars won't leave us alone--there's usually more car traffic than
trucks in the separated truck "bypass" lanes.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
In fact, I said just the opposite. That truck
lane restrictions create conflict between faster traveling trucks and
slow moving local traffic.
Trucks are slow moving traffic.
in your kind of state, yes. Two mph over can get a truck a ticket in IL.
Doesn't stop them. They are moving well over 2 over, but still slow
moving traffic. Hell 20 over is often slow moving traffic.
We do what we can. We don't wake up every morning wondering, "Now, how
many four wheelers can I fuck with today!"
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
But everywhere else, there is a wide range of truck speeds. JB Hunt,
about 62; US Xpress, 65-67; lots are restricted to 52-55; but most can
go 69-72. My top speed is 78, but some trucks are wide open, capable of
triple digits. Still, considerably slower than your sporty car can do.
We wouldn't be an impediment to you if we were permitted to drive 89+.
Funny, in one instance you are claiming you need special consideration
for the poor braking and handling of your vehicles and here you are
saying you should be permitted to drive speeds that I wouldn't take my
'73 ford to except on an empty road and it handles and brakes a lot
better than your rig.
I didn't claim any reasonable person would actually drive a truck 89+ in
chicago traffic, merely that, hey if we were not so discriminated
against (restricted to 55), we would be less impediment to you.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Around here a line of trucks form in the middle lane... up to a half a
dozen front to back... then one decides he wants to pass so he illegally
pulls into the left lane and begins a pass that takes about ten miles to
complete while cars stack up behind the blockage.
yeah, that is precisely my rant, that truck restrictions create the
problem in the first place. Trucks do not bunch up out of choice. I want
as much open space around me on all sides as I can get.
I want open space too... we can all dream.
Post by gringo
In IL moving to that left lane can get that driver a very steep fine. Do
you now understand why a truck might be tempted to tailgate traffic
clogging his only legal passing lane?
I wish the ISP would enforce it more. I understood from the get go,
doesn't make it right. You'd chide me up one side and down the other if I
said I had to tailgate, intimidate, etc some LLBing driver in a minivan.
But at least my car has better braking than anything I might be
tailgating. Can you say the same about your rig?
Don't need it, actually. The size intimidation factor comes into play.
Only a fool tailgates a car that cannot get out of the way either ahead
or to the side--most truckers are not so foolish. But when a car rudely
chooses to chug away at 50 in trucks' only passing lane with an open
lane on either side and/or plenty of room ahead, the fact of the matter
is that he will be tailgated, either by another car or a truck. If it's
a truck, the sight of that tall grill in his rear view will most likely
encourage the fool to move to the slower lane. I do tailgate one of
these fools occasionally--on, say, I-75 in FL. But only very carefully
and as a last resort.

We truckers are not ogres. We do a hard job as safely and as
responsibly as we can. We take an immense pride in our job
performance--we work with no direct supervision, so if we didn't act
responsibly, the entire nation would pay the price.


Seriously, Brent, we'd all be driving little short, light stepvans
across country if it were our choice; we'd drive on our very own special
commercial traffic only highways. We'd never encounter a car or pickup
or camper or bicycle. But as you said, it ain't a perfect world. Sorry.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
the slow cars and campers and stepvans
driven on the clock all seem to have your attitude--they expect the
truck to pass (on the left) if they want to go faster.
Ahem... you don't have a clue how I drive. But I'll remind you, trucks
don't catch up to me unless I am A) blocked by a slow moving vehicle like
another truck. B) I'm in the rightmost lane. C) both.
sure I do; you have reiterated it often enough. You're overly
aggressive. Driving 90+ as you admit to, you'd have to be in order to
get through chicago traffic.
That's entirely false. In fact, if you paid attention to my posts you'd
note that I don't go 90mph or faster. I always say I drive slower than
the ISP drives. The ISP drives 85mph-90mph. that means I don't exceed
those speeds. I might be going 55mph or 75mph or 80mph, but certainly not
90+mph.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
But, see, we
can't. Your lane restrictions keep us to the right. Where we are then
forced to tailgate and make sometimes dangerous lane changes into the
supposed slowest lane.
You're forced to tailgate.... hmm.. if I gave that excuse about
tailgating an LLB (which I try not to do) you wouldn't accept it, and I am
not going to accept it here.
there's tailgating and then there's tailgating. When the lane to the
front is clear; when at least one of the other lanes is clear, the
motorhome clogging my only passing lane is driving 50, brother, you can
bet your dumb ass that I WILL tailgate him till he moves. First I will
attempt it politely, but if he will not move, I will gradually get more
aggressive with him till he gets the message. You're lying to us if you
are claiming that you never do likewise, flashing your lights, etc, when
a $%$^ truck or a $%$$%%^ car just will not allow you to maintain your
normal 90+ mph.
Again, I don't have a normal 90+ mph.
And falshing lights and tailgating are exclusive. I use the left turn
signal from pretty far back if you really must know.
How I normally pass on relatively open road: I'm looking far ahead.
Knowing that I am about to overtake a truck or car in my lane, I begin
to watch my mirrors. If in my judgment a line of approaching vehicles
will reach my side (but not have time to get past me) about the time I
get on the tail of the one in front, I will go ahead and move to the
passing lane. This stops me from having to slow drastically, which
means that I am less of an impediment to others. Oh yes, sometimes, the
cars do move to the right to pass me b4 I complete my pass, but because
I am able to maintain my speed, I don't have to "micro-pass," which as
you relate, slows both lanes drastically. I admit to being irritated by
trucks that wait till I am almost beside them to signal that they too
want to pass a slower vehicle. This last second move forces them (and
me) to drastically slow--and everyone coming up behind me to slow. I
think my method is far better for all concerned. A minor irritant to
the cars who are forced to pass me on the right, but if they (or those
coming up behind them) had to wait for me to build my speed back up
after being forced to slow, the tiny sty in the eye expands into a boulder.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
It is difficult not to refer to you as at least a poor reader. For the
last time, young 'un, I did not once claim there is any such law
anywhere.
Your made up road rules then.
sigh. get off the carnival ride, young man. I will not explain my
statement again.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
What I did say is that in the state of CT, big freeway signs
do so designate the lanes.
Yet you apply that to the whole nation. Hint: regulatory signs apply to
where they are. They are there because that's a special case there.
don't be an ass. if you bother to read the entire paragraph before
beginning your response, you might understand what I'm saying.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
But that there, and everywhere else it is in
fact standard practice for the vast majority of drivers to employ the
middle lane as their primary travel lane. Don't act so dense. Don't be
so goddamned facetious. You ain't stupid, son, you understood what I said.
There's the way things are supposed to work, and the way they have
degenerated because of people who play by made up rules like you. I've
driven the autobahn, where people actually obey what is the law here in
most the US too. It's wonderful. The truckers on the autobahn are rather
well behaved too.
it is in fact standard practice for the vast majority of drivers to employ the
middle lane as their primary travel lane. Don't act so dense. Don't be
so goddamned facetious. You ain't stupid, son, you understood what I said.

I didn't invent the general practice, I didn't implement the restrictions. Blame your citizenry who whine that trucks are an impediment to their 5 mile rides home from work (thereby making us an impediment).
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
<car1 <car2 <car3<TRUCK
Car three is going the same speed as one and two, but the trucker is on
his ass.
obviously, #2 should not be pacing the #1 car. as he approached, the
trucker watched, probably from the middle lane,
The <'s indicate direction they are all in the same lane.
duh. same different. If the other legal truck lane is traveling even
slower, some trucks will in fact crowd one car at a time to get the fuck
over or move the fuck on down the road. I myself have more patience--I
don't crowd a vehicle that cannot move out of my way; most of us do not.
So you tailgate someone who can't do a damn thing. That would be when
I've been tailgated by truckers. Guess what it's done to my opinon of
the people in your profession. Ever consider winning friends instead of
enemies?
can't you read child? Here is what I just said:

I myself have more patience--I
don't crowd a vehicle that cannot move out of my way; most of us do not.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I don't know about the fines, but just about every trip on I90/94 and a
good percentage on I294 I see truckers violating them.
yeah, I've been tempted too. But it sure as hell is not the average
trucker. Write congress, demand that the restrictions be rescinded and
the truck limit be increased, and lots of chicago backups will disappear
immediately. I guarantee it. Accident rate will also drop. Statistics
prove it.
Bullshit. The truckers don't obey the lane restrictions and the result is
congestion. If I write anything it will be for stronger enforcement. I am
tired of their lardass vehicles blocking the left lanes of I90/94 and I
certainly don't want them in the ryan express... not that some truckers
don't do it anyway.
Silly boy. Most of us do in fact obey the lane restrictions--but it
sure as hell ain't by choice. Any congestion around trucks ain't caused
by the trucks, you ninny. Examine if you will the word "congestion."
Congestion in the chest is caused by more mucuous being produced than
the lungs' tubes can get rid of. Traffic congestion is caused by a city
generating more traffic than its
tubes (freeways) can handle. About 12 million live and work within
fifty miles of the Chicago's heart. Your freeways are clogged at 2 am
for chrissakes! Sure, it takes a helluva lot of daily truckloads to
service you people. But for every truck on your highways at 8 am, there
are about 250 cars. You who live and work in Chicago create your own
congestion. If 80% of you took advantage of available mass transit,
bucko, the highways would be damned near empty during rush hour.


Forcing trucks to clog the right lanes creates a helluva congestion at
every exit in the city. Forcing trucks to become 55 mph roadblocks in a
sea of 80 mph cars rushing to/from work is the epitome of stupidity.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
If nobody can get
through, bucko, it's because the traffic is stop and go, bottled up and
not by the trucks.
When I finally get by the trucks, it's daylight. I can punch it up to
whatever speed my car can go or I want to go as the case may be.
so, don't allow your state to make trucks rolling roadblocks. Up the
speed limit, eliminate the speed differential. It ain't our fault your
short-sighted public demanded that trucks be slowed down so much.
There's no separate speed limit through chicago. Effectively, there is no
speed limit at all. Of course given the way it's laid out, trucks cant go
much faster than they are going safely anyway. This is why they need to
stay right.
Since the urban speed limit is 55, those driving 30-40 mph faster are a
far greater danger to the safety of everyone than the poor maligned
truckers.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Some trucks can go only 52, some can go 80; the
faster does not pace the slower by choice (unlike so many auto
drivers).
What, the trucker doesn't know his own vehicle before he heads out on the
road? Guess that's pretty apparent by the driving I see.
are you merely tired or are you such a poor reader? I won't justify such
a silly statement with a reply. no, I will. I guess I will have to
explain it to you in terms a 3rd grader can understand. Some trucking
fleets are governed to only 52; others are not governed at all. The
driver is not asked for his input when he takes the job, he must drive
the truck he is assigned. And, yes, sonny, the truck is well aware of
his top speed.
And my response, since you didn't grasp it, is that he has to deal with
it. Not everyone else.
Sure he does. So do you: you have no choice--you cannot ban the hauling
of freight on interstates. Can't you grasp that one unassailable fact????
Now, will you please stop whining and go play race car driver on your
sports car NG?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
But a truck that can drive 55 will not be content to be held back by a
53 mph truck; he will pass when he can. Ain't his fault. Blame it on the
laws, on the fleet he's driving for... on the tough tittie he is forced
to suckle. It's a fact that you and I both have to deal with, that slow
vehicles will move out to pass slower vehicles. Crying about will not
change the fact.
Again, you think you can inflict your woes on everyone else. NOw that
would be like riding a bicycle slowly in the middle of the lane.
you have no choice--you cannot ban the hauling of freight on
interstates. Can't you grasp that one unassailable fact????


Now, will you please stop whining and go play race car driver on your
sports car NG?
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-28 14:12:19 UTC
Permalink
In article <a3Sah.5524$***@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, gringo wrote:

I'm sorry, but I am not going to deal with a 3100 line post.

When you learn how to trim, learn how to express yourself in a concise
manner, and learn how to avoid always adding nonsense because you don't
have a leg to stand on, I will consider reading your posts.
Jason
2006-11-27 23:18:15 UTC
Permalink
There's defensive and offensive driving. Maybe 'legally' the car was
in the right, but now they're aren't the most physically active person
anymore. No amount of money really will ever change that. If they're
ever able to drive again maybe they'll have enough common-sense not to
pull in front of an 18-wheeler, and instead get behind the truck if
they want to go slower.
gringo
2006-11-25 22:25:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
Post by richard
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------
80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car driver
doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.
The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have time to
react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that the car
driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts. Outside
of falsifying his log books.
I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as they get
around, slow down. Bad move.
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do not pay
attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph while yacking
on the phone. During their conversation, not once looking to see what's
around them.
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.
Harry K
assuming? You're judging the trucker with few facts to go on. The fact
is that it is virtually impossible to maintain the proper following
distance in heavy traffic. Trying to maintain even a 1-second cushion
in heavy congestion is a losing proposition--leave a truck length open
to the front, I guarantee you that ten cars will rush to fill it (even
if they immediately have to hit their brakes and/or swerve back into the
lane they just left). Plus, there's the lookie-loo factor in this
incident: there had just been a traffic fatality in the westbound
lanes. You choose to ASSUME the trucker was at fault; I choose to give
the driver the benefit of the doubt, I ASSUME that the car driver
ghoulishly slammed on his brakes in order to look at some blood.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Harry K
2006-11-27 03:10:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by richard
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------
80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car driver
doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.
The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have time to
react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that the car
driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts. Outside
of falsifying his log books.
I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as they get
around, slow down. Bad move.
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do not pay
attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph while yacking
on the phone. During their conversation, not once looking to see what's
around them.
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.
Harry K
assuming? You're judging the trucker with few facts to go on. The fact
is that it is virtually impossible to maintain the proper following
distance in heavy traffic. Trying to maintain even a 1-second cushion
in heavy congestion is a losing proposition--leave a truck length open
to the front, I guarantee you that ten cars will rush to fill it (even
if they immediately have to hit their brakes and/or swerve back into the
lane they just left). Plus, there's the lookie-loo factor in this
incident: there had just been a traffic fatality in the westbound
lanes. You choose to ASSUME the trucker was at fault; I choose to give
the driver the benefit of the doubt, I ASSUME that the car driver
ghoulishly slammed on his brakes in order to look at some blood.
Inability to stop in space available = tailgating. Applies even if the
vehicle ahead bombs the brakes. The reason for it has nothing to do
with that fact. Don't beleive it? Try to avoid a ticket if you
rear-end someone.

Harry K
gringo
2006-11-27 06:52:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by richard
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------
80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car driver
doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.
The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have time to
react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that the car
driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts. Outside
of falsifying his log books.
I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as they get
around, slow down. Bad move.
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do not pay
attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph while yacking
on the phone. During their conversation, not once looking to see what's
around them.
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
Unless you can show that the car passed and _then_ suddenly slowed
(swoop and squat) your attempt at justification totally fails. You, as
a trucker, and me, as a car driver, are both required to maintain a
following distance such that we can stop before colliding when
unexpected things happening in front of us . Yes, that means that
trucks would have to maintain a 5 or 6 second (at least) following
distance. Assuming that the car had not just passed him, the trucker
was clearly at fault.
Harry K
assuming? You're judging the trucker with few facts to go on. The fact
is that it is virtually impossible to maintain the proper following
distance in heavy traffic. Trying to maintain even a 1-second cushion
in heavy congestion is a losing proposition--leave a truck length open
to the front, I guarantee you that ten cars will rush to fill it (even
if they immediately have to hit their brakes and/or swerve back into the
lane they just left). Plus, there's the lookie-loo factor in this
incident: there had just been a traffic fatality in the westbound
lanes. You choose to ASSUME the trucker was at fault; I choose to give
the driver the benefit of the doubt, I ASSUME that the car driver
ghoulishly slammed on his brakes in order to look at some blood.
Inability to stop in space available = tailgating. Applies even if the
vehicle ahead bombs the brakes. The reason for it has nothing to do
with that fact. Don't beleive it? Try to avoid a ticket if you
rear-end someone.
Harry K
a friend of mine just about a month ago rear-ended a car in that kind of
situation: the car driver got the ticket. Cops are not as dumb as you
might think.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Harry K
2006-11-27 15:28:06 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by gringo
assuming? You're judging the trucker with few facts to go on. The fact
is that it is virtually impossible to maintain the proper following
distance in heavy traffic. Trying to maintain even a 1-second cushion
in heavy congestion is a losing proposition--leave a truck length open
to the front, I guarantee you that ten cars will rush to fill it (even
if they immediately have to hit their brakes and/or swerve back into the
lane they just left). Plus, there's the lookie-loo factor in this
incident: there had just been a traffic fatality in the westbound
lanes. You choose to ASSUME the trucker was at fault; I choose to give
the driver the benefit of the doubt, I ASSUME that the car driver
ghoulishly slammed on his brakes in order to look at some blood.
Inability to stop in space available = tailgating. Applies even if the
vehicle ahead bombs the brakes. The reason for it has nothing to do
with that fact. Don't beleive it? Try to avoid a ticket if you
rear-end someone.
Harry K
a friend of mine just about a month ago rear-ended a car in that kind of
situation: the car driver got the ticket. Cops are not as dumb as you
might think.
And I drive a 4 cyl econobox that will do 150 mph.

Harry K
gringo
2006-11-28 08:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
<snip>
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by gringo
assuming? You're judging the trucker with few facts to go on. The fact
is that it is virtually impossible to maintain the proper following
distance in heavy traffic. Trying to maintain even a 1-second cushion
in heavy congestion is a losing proposition--leave a truck length open
to the front, I guarantee you that ten cars will rush to fill it (even
if they immediately have to hit their brakes and/or swerve back into the
lane they just left). Plus, there's the lookie-loo factor in this
incident: there had just been a traffic fatality in the westbound
lanes. You choose to ASSUME the trucker was at fault; I choose to give
the driver the benefit of the doubt, I ASSUME that the car driver
ghoulishly slammed on his brakes in order to look at some blood.
Inability to stop in space available = tailgating. Applies even if the
vehicle ahead bombs the brakes. The reason for it has nothing to do
with that fact. Don't beleive it? Try to avoid a ticket if you
rear-end someone.
Harry K
a friend of mine just about a month ago rear-ended a car in that kind of
situation: the car driver got the ticket. Cops are not as dumb as you
might think.
And I drive a 4 cyl econobox that will do 150 mph.
Harry K
what's so special about that? I've had my new 4-cyl Sentra up to 135
(and I wasn't even trying).
But, yeah, I know: that was an inane attempt to be sarcastic.

In the above situation, harry k., the 4wheeler ran like a bat out of
hell up to the cones, and suddenly whipped into the path of my pal, and
immediately had to jam his brakes due to other traffic trying to do the
same damn thing before the construction zone. The cop was wise enough
to understand that no one could have avoided hitting the stupid son of a
bitch.

Now on to the wider issue of tailgating. Even you are not stupid enough
to jam down on your brakes from highway speeds due to a truck getting a
little close (when you damn well ought to be somewhere other than a
truck's only legal passing lane--if you were, I think you'd be long buried.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Harry K
2006-11-28 15:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
<snip>
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by gringo
assuming? You're judging the trucker with few facts to go on. The fact
is that it is virtually impossible to maintain the proper following
distance in heavy traffic. Trying to maintain even a 1-second cushion
in heavy congestion is a losing proposition--leave a truck length open
to the front, I guarantee you that ten cars will rush to fill it (even
if they immediately have to hit their brakes and/or swerve back into the
lane they just left). Plus, there's the lookie-loo factor in this
incident: there had just been a traffic fatality in the westbound
lanes. You choose to ASSUME the trucker was at fault; I choose to give
the driver the benefit of the doubt, I ASSUME that the car driver
ghoulishly slammed on his brakes in order to look at some blood.
Inability to stop in space available = tailgating. Applies even if the
vehicle ahead bombs the brakes. The reason for it has nothing to do
with that fact. Don't beleive it? Try to avoid a ticket if you
rear-end someone.
Harry K
a friend of mine just about a month ago rear-ended a car in that kind of
situation: the car driver got the ticket. Cops are not as dumb as you
might think.
And I drive a 4 cyl econobox that will do 150 mph.
Harry K
what's so special about that? I've had my new 4-cyl Sentra up to 135
(and I wasn't even trying).
But, yeah, I know: that was an inane attempt to be sarcastic.
In the above situation, harry k., the 4wheeler ran like a bat out of
hell up to the cones, and suddenly whipped into the path of my pal, and
immediately had to jam his brakes due to other traffic trying to do the
same damn thing before the construction zone. The cop was wise enough
to understand that no one could have avoided hitting the stupid son of a
bitch.
Now on to the wider issue of tailgating. Even you are not stupid enough
to jam down on your brakes from highway speeds due to a truck getting a
little close (when you damn well ought to be somewhere other than a
truck's only legal passing lane--if you were, I think you'd be long buried.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
I was just pointing out the inanity of your thinking that an unusual
case means anything. Even in the case you cited, without good witnesses
or eveidence you would most likely loose. Even you should know that
when you say "never" you'll be wrong. Remember that I am replying to a
self-confessed tailgater.

Harry K
Jason
2006-11-27 23:14:04 UTC
Permalink
If truckers always put the 'correct' amount of space(following
distance) between them and the car in front, they'd never get anywhere;
everytime someone would pass the semi, the semi would have to slow to
allow the space to increase to the proper following distance. Instead
maybe all us stupid car drivers ought to realize the harder we make
driving a semi-truck, the more our goods and services will cost.
Harry K
2006-11-28 02:32:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason
If truckers always put the 'correct' amount of space(following
distance) between them and the car in front, they'd never get anywhere;
everytime someone would pass the semi, the semi would have to slow to
allow the space to increase to the proper following distance. Instead
maybe all us stupid car drivers ought to realize the harder we make
driving a semi-truck, the more our goods and services will cost.
That old saw again?

Strange that when I am driving and someone moves into my comfort zone
(minimum 2 sec, prefer 3), all I have to do is lift my foot for a
second or two and then go back to the original speed. I seem to get
where I am going just fine and on time.

Harry K
gringo
2006-11-28 09:37:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
Post by Jason
If truckers always put the 'correct' amount of space(following
distance) between them and the car in front, they'd never get anywhere;
everytime someone would pass the semi, the semi would have to slow to
allow the space to increase to the proper following distance. Instead
maybe all us stupid car drivers ought to realize the harder we make
driving a semi-truck, the more our goods and services will cost.
That old saw again?
Strange that when I am driving and someone moves into my comfort zone
(minimum 2 sec, prefer 3), all I have to do is lift my foot for a
second or two and then go back to the original speed. I seem to get
where I am going just fine and on time.
Harry K
harry, you ignore Jason's wise point. After you pick up your speed
again, the very next second, you'll have to slow again. An endless
cycle. And it is far easier and quicker for you in a car to recover
lost speed.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Harry K
2006-11-28 15:14:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by Jason
If truckers always put the 'correct' amount of space(following
distance) between them and the car in front, they'd never get anywhere;
everytime someone would pass the semi, the semi would have to slow to
allow the space to increase to the proper following distance. Instead
maybe all us stupid car drivers ought to realize the harder we make
driving a semi-truck, the more our goods and services will cost.
That old saw again?
Strange that when I am driving and someone moves into my comfort zone
(minimum 2 sec, prefer 3), all I have to do is lift my foot for a
second or two and then go back to the original speed. I seem to get
where I am going just fine and on time.
Harry K
harry, you ignore Jason's wise point. After you pick up your speed
again, the very next second, you'll have to slow again. An endless
cycle. And it is far easier and quicker for you in a car to recover
lost speed.
I haven't ignored anything. I have been there and done that and have
the t-shirt in heavyi traffic. People cutting in bunches is a
strawman, it just doesn't happen all that often.

Harry K
gringo
2006-11-28 19:01:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harry K
Post by gringo
Post by Harry K
Post by Jason
If truckers always put the 'correct' amount of space(following
distance) between them and the car in front, they'd never get anywhere;
everytime someone would pass the semi, the semi would have to slow to
allow the space to increase to the proper following distance. Instead
maybe all us stupid car drivers ought to realize the harder we make
driving a semi-truck, the more our goods and services will cost.
That old saw again?
Strange that when I am driving and someone moves into my comfort zone
(minimum 2 sec, prefer 3), all I have to do is lift my foot for a
second or two and then go back to the original speed. I seem to get
where I am going just fine and on time.
Harry K
harry, you ignore Jason's wise point. After you pick up your speed
again, the very next second, you'll have to slow again. An endless
cycle. And it is far easier and quicker for you in a car to recover
lost speed.
I haven't ignored anything. I have been there and done that and have
the t-shirt in heavyi traffic. People cutting in bunches is a
strawman, it just doesn't happen all that often.
Harry K
who the hell is talking about bunches? One at a time, the result is
still the same. A second lost is gone forever; the effect is cumulative.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-10 16:36:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by richard
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
While I share the complaints regarding the moron masses behind the wheel
of motor vehicles, truckers need to accept the facts that there are many
in their ranks who aren't exactly steller either.

Every one of these trucker threads there are truckers trying to tell me
to deny the reality I see everytime I drive on a chicago area interstate.

Truckers in the wrong lanes, Truckers tailgating... and I mean tailgating
as in following a car so close it would be too close for my Mustang with
it's upgraded brakes, truckers driving in typical a 'me first, f-you'
manner. I've even watched a trucker pull into an on ramp acceleration
pass me and a whole line of vehicles in front of me by continuing on the
shoulder. The trucker and his inability to accelerate then held
everything up when things cleared. The list goes on.
Roger Shoaf
2006-11-11 21:04:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Every one of these trucker threads there are truckers trying to tell me
to deny the reality I see everytime I drive on a chicago area interstate.
Truckers in the wrong lanes, Truckers tailgating... and I mean tailgating
as in following a car so close it would be too close for my Mustang with
it's upgraded brakes, truckers driving in typical a 'me first, f-you'
manner. I've even watched a trucker pull into an on ramp acceleration
pass me and a whole line of vehicles in front of me by continuing on the
shoulder. The trucker and his inability to accelerate then held
everything up when things cleared. The list goes on.
I have driven in Chicago and I suspect that anything that gets in your way
is subject to your scorn.

Have you considered what happens when a trucker attempts to leave a good
distance between him and the vehicle in front? What happens is that a bunch
of bozos that are stuck in the same traffic decide to gain an advantage and
shoot by the truck so they can pass some one on the right when they decide
that the person in the left lane that is trying to maintain their following
distance.

In the wrong lane? Often a truck will see someone entering the freeway and
if he can the driver will take the left lane to allow the driver entering
the freeway to merge. Other times it might be that a car is disabled on the
shoulder and the trucker will take the left to give then a little more room.
You seem to think nothing of this if you are the guy merging onto the
highway, but are bent all to hell when you may have to take your foot off
the throttle for a few seconds as you attempt to pass the truck on the right
only to find some slow poke on your nose so now you have to slam on your
brakes.

Other drivers seeing brake lights now tap their brakes and this causes the
flow of traffic to slow down because there are brake lights ahead.

Are there truck drivers behind the wheel that should not be there? Sure
there are. Heck, a few years back there was a big scandal where The
Illinois Department of Motor Vehicles were issuing commercial licenses to a
bunch of illegals for bribes.

But I would bet that if you were to take a look at the statistics, drivers
of Mustangs, Camaros, and all other pony cars cause a whole lot more wrecks
than truck drivers.

Drive safe.
--
Roger Shoaf

About the time I had mastered getting the toothpaste back in the tube, then
they come up with this striped stuff.
Brent P
2006-11-12 04:07:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Shoaf
Post by Brent P
Every one of these trucker threads there are truckers trying to tell me
to deny the reality I see everytime I drive on a chicago area interstate.
Truckers in the wrong lanes, Truckers tailgating... and I mean tailgating
as in following a car so close it would be too close for my Mustang with
it's upgraded brakes, truckers driving in typical a 'me first, f-you'
manner. I've even watched a trucker pull into an on ramp acceleration
pass me and a whole line of vehicles in front of me by continuing on the
shoulder. The trucker and his inability to accelerate then held
everything up when things cleared. The list goes on.
I have driven in Chicago and I suspect that anything that gets in your way
is subject to your scorn.
How is the semi truck 3 ft or less off my rear bumper in my way?
Post by Roger Shoaf
Have you considered what happens when a trucker attempts to leave a good
distance between him and the vehicle in front?
You mean the few feet that I see them crusing behind the same car mile after
mile?
Post by Roger Shoaf
In the wrong lane?
Yes wrong lane. Truckers can't read the signs that say:

TRUCKS RIGHT TWO LANES.

EXPRESS LANES NO TRUCKS.
Post by Roger Shoaf
Often a truck will see someone entering the freeway and
if he can the driver will take the left lane to allow the driver entering
the freeway to merge.
Then why the is he all the way to left when there are 3,4,and even
more lanes?
Post by Roger Shoaf
Other times it might be that a car is disabled on the
shoulder and the trucker will take the left to give then a little more room.
The right shoulder is 4 lanes over.
Post by Roger Shoaf
You seem to think nothing of this if you are the guy merging onto the
highway, but are bent all to hell when you may have to take your foot off
the throttle for a few seconds as you attempt to pass the truck on the right
only to find some slow poke on your nose so now you have to slam on your
brakes.
I think that knowing that I am correct you have decided to take this lame
route of attack on me personally.
Post by Roger Shoaf
Are there truck drivers behind the wheel that should not be there? Sure
there are. Heck, a few years back there was a big scandal where The
Illinois Department of Motor Vehicles were issuing commercial licenses to a
bunch of illegals for bribes.
And I'll wager it still goes on.
Post by Roger Shoaf
But I would bet that if you were to take a look at the statistics, drivers
of Mustangs, Camaros, and all other pony cars cause a whole lot more wrecks
than truck drivers.
John wayne gacy killed 30 something, the guy who killed 5 isn't so bad.
That's the argument you're making.
Post by Roger Shoaf
Drive safe.
I do, maybe truckers around here should learn how.
gringo
2006-11-26 01:24:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by richard
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
While I share the complaints regarding the moron masses behind the wheel
of motor vehicles, truckers need to accept the facts that there are many
in their ranks who aren't exactly steller either.
Every one of these trucker threads there are truckers trying to tell me
to deny the reality I see everytime I drive on a chicago area interstate.
Truckers in the wrong lanes, Truckers tailgating... and I mean tailgating
as in following a car so close it would be too close for my Mustang with
it's upgraded brakes, truckers driving in typical a 'me first, f-you'
manner. I've even watched a trucker pull into an on ramp acceleration
pass me and a whole line of vehicles in front of me by continuing on the
shoulder. The trucker and his inability to accelerate then held
everything up when things cleared. The list goes on.
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway. Seriously, do you expect him to come to a complete stop at the
end of the ramp, wait for a split second spacing, then try to accelerate
to freeway speed? Your auto will accelerate 0-60 in a few seconds; a
heavy truck can take four times as long. So which way will the trucker
create the least disruption to traffic flow? Obviously even to you, he
will create less off a ripple in traffic flow if he uses the
acceleration ramp they way it was intended--to get his speed up. Got
news for you and other short sighted 4-wheelers. Trucks are perfectly
in the right, acting properly for the benefit of those who are behind
them on the ramp and those who are 30 seconds down the road when they
force you to yield. The trucker would not have chosen to run up the
shoulder: he did so because neither you nor any of those following you
backed off and let the truck enter the highway. You don't like to share
the road with slow trucks? hell, son, we don't either. If you think
we're a problem now, just wait till the trucks are forcefully slowed
even further. The American Trucking Association has petitoned the FMCSA
to do just that. Wisely, AAA is opposing the new regulation: you should
too.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-26 01:37:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Me first fuck you attitude.
Post by gringo
Seriously, do you expect him to come to a complete stop at the
end of the ramp, wait for a split second spacing, then try to accelerate
to freeway speed?
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing his
way with might, as he does with everything.
Post by gringo
Your auto will accelerate 0-60 in a few seconds; a
heavy truck can take four times as long.
Not my problem. Never had a trucker yield when I was driving an
underpowered car. In fact, they've sped up to eliminate a gap I was
aiming for so I couldn't merge.

I never once had a trucker give way for me when I am on a bicycle. I've
had them intentionally nearly kill me a couple of times though.
Post by gringo
So which way will the trucker
create the least disruption to traffic flow? Obviously even to you, he
will create less off a ripple in traffic flow if he uses the
acceleration ramp they way it was intended--to get his speed up.
And time a gap in traffic like everyone else is supposed to.
Post by gringo
Got
news for you and other short sighted 4-wheelers. Trucks are perfectly
in the right, acting properly for the benefit of those who are behind
them on the ramp and those who are 30 seconds down the road when they
force you to yield.
Or when they decide to force people off the road too in your view I
suppose.
Post by gringo
The trucker would not have chosen to run up the
shoulder: he did so because neither you nor any of those following you
backed off and let the truck enter the highway.
The trucker I posted about wasn't entering the interstate. He was in the
right lane of said interstate, moved right into the acceleration lane to
PASS traffic then used the shoulder and forced his way back into traffic
up ahead when a bridge support blocked his progress on the shoulder.
Post by gringo
You don't like to share
the road with slow trucks? hell, son, we don't either. If you think
we're a problem now, just wait till the trucks are forcefully slowed
even further. The American Trucking Association has petitoned the FMCSA
to do just that. Wisely, AAA is opposing the new regulation: you should
too.
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.

Long distance freight should move by rail or air.
arachnid
2006-11-26 02:50:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.
You're going to subsidize the trucking industry one way or another because
you can't live without us and we aren't going to take a pay cut. Raise
taxes to pay for that wear and tear, and we'll either get reimbursed by
the warehouses or go find other jobs that pay better. The warehouses in
turn will pass this new expense on to consumers, meaning you.

Your only alternative would be to do without us. Hope you enjoy fighting
for survival with a few hundred million other starving people while the
economy collapses around your ears. If you survive that, you won't have to
worry about the damage the roads do to your car because you'll be riding a
horse. Then even as you eat the food they bring to town, you can whine
about the damage those big ol' freight wagons do to your precious little
dirt road.
Brent P
2006-11-26 02:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.
You're going to subsidize the trucking industry one way or another because
you can't live without us and we aren't going to take a pay cut.
Once the government gets the SPP going your wages are going to fall.
Post by arachnid
Raise
taxes to pay for that wear and tear, and we'll either get reimbursed by
the warehouses or go find other jobs that pay better. The warehouses in
turn will pass this new expense on to consumers, meaning you.
Fine by me. I pay a lot more in taxes than stuff I buy. Less taxes is a
net benefit to me.
Post by arachnid
Your only alternative would be to do without us. Hope you enjoy fighting
for survival with a few hundred million other starving people while the
economy collapses around your ears.
The economy won't collaspe if truckers have to pay their way. You'll just
have to compete with other forms on a even basis.
Post by arachnid
If you survive that, you won't have to
worry about the damage the roads do to your car because you'll be riding a
horse. Then even as you eat the food they bring to town, you can whine
about the damage those big ol' freight wagons do to your precious little
dirt road.
Horses are more expensive than cars and slower than my bicycle.

However trucker, since you have such an inflated view of your importance,
without my kind, you wouldn't have a truck, a road, a bridge, or even
products to haul.
arachnid
2006-11-26 20:16:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.
You're going to subsidize the trucking industry one way or another
because you can't live without us and we aren't going to take a pay cut.
Once the government gets the SPP going your wages are going to fall.
Ha! One reason I selected this career is that I don't have to fear being
replaced by cheap foreign labor. The trucking companies already tried that
and only got a bunch of wrecked trucks and some very big lawsuits for
their trouble. Go for a ride in Laredo and play dodge-em with all the
banged-up Mexican trucks coming over the border to pick up southbound
trailers. Then let's hear you gloat about American truck drivers being
replaced by foreign ones.
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Raise taxes to pay for that wear and tear, and we'll either get
reimbursed by the warehouses or go find other jobs that pay better. The
warehouses in turn will pass this new expense on to consumers, meaning
you.
Fine by me. I pay a lot more in taxes than stuff I buy. Less taxes is a
net benefit to me.
Most people manage their finances better.
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Your only alternative would be to do without us. Hope you enjoy fighting
for survival with a few hundred million other starving people while the
economy collapses around your ears.
The economy won't collaspe if truckers have to pay their way.
If you want to see who is responsible for trucking road wear, go look
in a mirror. All we're doing is providing the requested service of
transporting goods and equipment. If consumers didn't need/want our
services then we wouldn't be on the roads in the first place.
Post by Brent P
You'll just have to compete with other forms on a even basis.
What other forms? The only other heavy hauler is railroads, but they can't
go dock-to-dock everywhere in the US and they don't *begin* to know the
meaning of on-time delivery.
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
If you survive that, you won't have to worry about the damage the roads
do to your car because you'll be riding a horse. Then even as you eat
the food they bring to town, you can whine about the damage those big
ol' freight wagons do to your precious little dirt road.
Horses are more expensive than cars and slower than my bicycle.
Ok, so you can ride your bicycle on the dirt roads and complain about the
ruts left by the freight wagon that brought that bicycle from the
manufacturing plant to the store where you bought it.
Post by Brent P
However trucker, since you have such an inflated view of your importance,
without my kind, you wouldn't have a truck, a road, a bridge, or even
products to haul.
I can do other jobs but you have no alternative to trucks bringing in
all the things you need to survive and to enjoy your life.
--
"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the
exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them."
- Frederick Douglas
Matthew Russotto
2006-11-26 22:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Fine by me. I pay a lot more in taxes than stuff I buy. Less taxes is a
net benefit to me.
Most people manage their finances better.
ROTFL. There's a non-sequitur. The better you manage your finances,
the greater proportion goes into unavoidable expenses like taxes.
Unless you're filthy rich, run your own business, and can avoid taxes
too -- but that doesn't describe most people.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Brent P
2006-11-27 03:46:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Once the government gets the SPP going your wages are going to fall.
Ha! One reason I selected this career is that I don't have to fear being
replaced by cheap foreign labor. The trucking companies already tried that
and only got a bunch of wrecked trucks and some very big lawsuits for
their trouble. Go for a ride in Laredo and play dodge-em with all the
banged-up Mexican trucks coming over the border to pick up southbound
trailers. Then let's hear you gloat about American truck drivers being
replaced by foreign ones.
The SPP has you beat this time. The ships from china are unloading in
mexico and the mexican truckers will be taking the loads at least as far
as Kansas city if not all the way to canada.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Raise taxes to pay for that wear and tear, and we'll either get
reimbursed by the warehouses or go find other jobs that pay better. The
warehouses in turn will pass this new expense on to consumers, meaning
you.
Fine by me. I pay a lot more in taxes than stuff I buy. Less taxes is a
net benefit to me.
Most people manage their finances better.
By better you must mean spending all their income consuming crap.

Taxes are my greatest expense because I don't buy lots of crap and run
up credit cards and loans like most people.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Your only alternative would be to do without us. Hope you enjoy fighting
for survival with a few hundred million other starving people while the
economy collapses around your ears.
The economy won't collaspe if truckers have to pay their way.
If you want to see who is responsible for trucking road wear, go look
in a mirror.
No, if traffic were limited to SUVs and smaller vehicles the roads would
last centuries.
Post by arachnid
All we're doing is providing the requested service of
transporting goods and equipment. If consumers didn't need/want our
services then we wouldn't be on the roads in the first place.
You do it because your competition doesn't get a subsidy from every
single tax payer to the tune that the trucking industry does.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
You'll just have to compete with other forms on a even basis.
What other forms? The only other heavy hauler is railroads, but they can't
go dock-to-dock everywhere in the US and they don't *begin* to know the
meaning of on-time delivery.
You forgot about waterways. And as usual you think that the way something
is run now is the way it has to be.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
If you survive that, you won't have to worry about the damage the roads
do to your car because you'll be riding a horse. Then even as you eat
the food they bring to town, you can whine about the damage those big
ol' freight wagons do to your precious little dirt road.
Horses are more expensive than cars and slower than my bicycle.
Ok, so you can ride your bicycle on the dirt roads and complain about the
ruts left by the freight wagon that brought that bicycle from the
manufacturing plant to the store where you bought it.
Actually without trucks, the existing roads will last the rest of my
lifetime.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
However trucker, since you have such an inflated view of your importance,
without my kind, you wouldn't have a truck, a road, a bridge, or even
products to haul.
I can do other jobs but you have no alternative to trucks bringing in
all the things you need to survive and to enjoy your life.
I can live where there is lots of rail. Some businesses will have to
rebuild their sidings though.
arachnid
2006-11-28 05:28:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Once the government gets the SPP going your wages are going to fall.
Ha! One reason I selected this career is that I don't have to fear being
replaced by cheap foreign labor. The trucking companies already tried
that and only got a bunch of wrecked trucks and some very big lawsuits
for their trouble. Go for a ride in Laredo and play dodge-em with all
the banged-up Mexican trucks coming over the border to pick up
southbound trailers. Then let's hear you gloat about American truck
drivers being replaced by foreign ones.
The SPP has you beat this time. The ships from china are unloading in
mexico and the mexican truckers will be taking the loads at least as far
as Kansas city if not all the way to canada.
The above-mentioned trucking-company experiments have already shown what
happens when you put cheap foreign labor in trucks on American roads. Part
of the SPP's plan is to create a special highway just for trucks, the idea
being that Mexican drivers will be confined to that narrow corridor where
all they can kill is other Mexican and American truck drivers who, being
only truck drivers, don't count for anything.

It'll be interesting to see how many American drivers refuse routes along
that highway out of fear for their safety. I've already heard guys on the
CB refer to it as the "highway of death".
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Raise taxes to pay for that wear and tear, and we'll either get
Post by arachnid
reimbursed by the warehouses or go find other jobs that pay better.
The warehouses in turn will pass this new expense on to consumers,
meaning you.
Fine by me. I pay a lot more in taxes than stuff I buy. Less taxes is
a net benefit to me.
Most people manage their finances better.
By better you must mean spending all their income consuming crap.
Don't have a home? Don't have a car? Don't need clothes? Don't eat?
Don't have a computer? If the essentials and their maintenance are
taking less out of your bank account than taxes, then you need to go talk
to a good money manager.

And yes, I consider an computer to be an "essential" :o)
Post by Brent P
Taxes are my greatest expense because I don't buy lots of crap and run up
credit cards and loans like most people.
So you admit that you're an exception and not the rule. That means
that most people won't benefit from the shift. Good 'nuf.
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Your only alternative would be to do without us. Hope you enjoy
fighting for survival with a few hundred million other starving
people while the economy collapses around your ears.
The economy won't collaspe if truckers have to pay their way.
If you want to see who is responsible for trucking road wear, go look
in a mirror.
No, if traffic were limited to SUVs and smaller vehicles the roads would
last centuries.
Even if that were true, you still haven't come up with a practical
alternative to trucks.
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
All we're doing is providing the requested service of transporting
goods and equipment. If consumers didn't need/want our services then we
wouldn't be on the roads in the first place.
You do it because your competition...
The only competition is other trucking companies. No other heavy hauler
can pick up and deliver dock-to-dock anywhere in the US.
Post by Brent P
...doesn't get a subsidy from every single tax payer to the tune that
the trucking industry does.
I don't know what subsidies you're talking about, but whatever they are
they make no difference in the bottom line. Give trucking companies a
tax break and the heavy competition will push their shipping prices
down by that amount. Take away the tax break and their shipping
prices will rise to cover expenses again. All you're doing is shifting
money back and forth between taxes and the product's selling price.
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
You'll just have to compete with other forms on a even basis.
What other forms? The only other heavy hauler is railroads, but they
can't go dock-to-dock everywhere in the US and they don't *begin* to
know the meaning of on-time delivery.
You forgot about waterways. And as usual you think that the way
something is run now is the way it has to be.
Where's the waterway between, say, Pittsburgh PA and Tucson, AZ? Will
those California fruits and vegetables still be edible when you get them
from Southern California to Chicago via the Panama Canal?
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
If you survive that, you won't have to worry about the damage the
roads do to your car because you'll be riding a horse. Then even as
you eat the food they bring to town, you can whine about the damage
those big ol' freight wagons do to your precious little dirt road.
Horses are more expensive than cars and slower than my bicycle.
Ok, so you can ride your bicycle on the dirt roads and complain about
the ruts left by the freight wagon that brought that bicycle from the
manufacturing plant to the store where you bought it.
Actually without trucks, the existing roads will last the rest of my
lifetime.
"My lifetime"? Is this a "me first screw everyone else" thing?
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
However trucker, since you have such an inflated view of your
importance, without my kind, you wouldn't have a truck, a road, a
bridge, or even products to haul.
I can do other jobs but you have no alternative to trucks bringing in
all the things you need to survive and to enjoy your life.
I can live where there is lots of rail. Some businesses will have to
rebuild their sidings though.
That's like saying that the world doesn't need farms because you can just
move next to a grocery store and buy your food there.
--
"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the
exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them."
- Frederick Douglas
Brent P
2006-11-28 14:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Most people manage their finances better.
By better you must mean spending all their income consuming crap.
Don't have a home? Don't have a car? Don't need clothes? Don't eat?
Don't have a computer? If the essentials and their maintenance are
taking less out of your bank account than taxes, then you need to go talk
to a good money manager.
Yes, the essentials and then some take less money than taxes, because I
am not some moron consumer who goes out and buys things all the time. I
buy something, try to get a decent deal and make it something that will
last. I don't replace something because 'newer,faster,better' came out. I
don't replace something because the fashionable colors have changed. I
keep something until it no longer functions and is no longer worth my
time and money to repair. I hate shopping. I will spend an hour fixing
something instead of a hour to go buy a new one.

And no, I don't need a money manager. It's "consumers" who need money
managers. Taxes are a huge unavoidable expense. A 'good' money manager
will spend more of my money than he could possibly save me from the tax
man. Only the rich can afford to play all the games to hide income from
the IRS. Since my income is roughly almost entirely wages, he isn't going
to be able to do squat for me.

It is the wasteful idiots who buy all the crap from china you haul that
need a money manager.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Taxes are my greatest expense because I don't buy lots of crap and run up
credit cards and loans like most people.
So you admit that you're an exception and not the rule. That means
that most people won't benefit from the shift. Good 'nuf.
It's still no reason to prop up trucking with taxes. It's corporate
welfare. Those who want the goods should pay the true costs. Those true
costs are going to be smaller than what we pay after government has taken
a cut of the funds and the trucking companies take a hunk in profit.

What do I mean by that? It's simple, lets say business A gets a tax
subsidy that brings it's costs to be 20% less than business B. Business A
simply sets it's prices 5% less than business B and keeps the rest as
profit.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
The economy won't collaspe if truckers have to pay their way.
If you want to see who is responsible for trucking road wear, go look
in a mirror.
No, if traffic were limited to SUVs and smaller vehicles the roads would
last centuries.
Even if that were true, you still haven't come up with a practical
alternative to trucks.
Trucks are fine _locally_ no other way to do it. Should remove their tax
subsidy though. Long distance there are a number of alternatives.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
All we're doing is providing the requested service of transporting
goods and equipment. If consumers didn't need/want our services then we
wouldn't be on the roads in the first place.
You do it because your competition...
The only competition is other trucking companies. No other heavy hauler
can pick up and deliver dock-to-dock anywhere in the US.
That's because car drivers subsidize yor trucking. Trucking is the most
wasteful way to move tons of goods long distances. If you paid your fair
share, other forms of transport, much less wasteful per ton would bring
goods into hub for local delivery.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
...doesn't get a subsidy from every single tax payer to the tune that
the trucking industry does.
I don't know what subsidies you're talking about,
Trucking companies do not pay enough to cover the wear and tear they do to
the roads.
Post by arachnid
but whatever they are
they make no difference in the bottom line.
Must be that trucker math again.
Post by arachnid
Give trucking companies a
tax break and the heavy competition will push their shipping prices
down by that amount.
Because your competition has zero costs in trucker math.
Post by arachnid
Take away the tax break and their shipping
prices will rise to cover expenses again. All you're doing is shifting
money back and forth between taxes and the product's selling price.
It should be on the product's selling price.
1) those who buy the crap should pay for it.
2) it will discourage making crap in far away slave labor markets like
China.
3) Government waste and corruption will not take a bite out of it.
4) Government will have less money.
5) Government will have a more difficult time raising taxes for 'roads'
without trucks wearing out said roads so fast.
6) encourages local production of goods, employing more people in _this_
country.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
You'll just have to compete with other forms on a even basis.
What other forms? The only other heavy hauler is railroads, but they
can't go dock-to-dock everywhere in the US and they don't *begin* to
know the meaning of on-time delivery.
You forgot about waterways. And as usual you think that the way
something is run now is the way it has to be.
Where's the waterway between, say, Pittsburgh PA and Tucson, AZ? Will
those California fruits and vegetables still be edible when you get them
from Southern California to Chicago via the Panama Canal?
I forgot how truckers think... you can't grasp combinations of modes. It
has to be single mode transport door to door in your limited thought
process.
Post by arachnid
"My lifetime"? Is this a "me first screw everyone else" thing?
Not my fault you have trouble grasping the concept that trucks are what
destroy the pavement so fast.
Post by arachnid
Post by Brent P
Post by arachnid
I can do other jobs but you have no alternative to trucks bringing in
all the things you need to survive and to enjoy your life.
I can live where there is lots of rail. Some businesses will have to
rebuild their sidings though.
That's like saying that the world doesn't need farms because you can just
move next to a grocery store and buy your food there.
What's that? Trucker logic? Having a railroad siding is like having a
driveway. Or do you park your truck on the nearest road and then carry
the load in?
gringo
2006-11-26 07:52:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Me first fuck you attitude.
yep. Your you first fuck everyone else attitude.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Seriously, do you expect him to come to a complete stop at the
end of the ramp, wait for a split second spacing, then try to accelerate
to freeway speed?
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing his
way with might, as he does with everything.
you damn well better expect a truck entering a freeway to continue
entering the freeway; trucks in the right lane to move out of his way if
at all possible and if not to drastically slow for him. The truck
should not be expected to park at the end of a freeway ramp and wait for
permission.
Look, a turn signal is not a request: it is notification: I need to
change lanes. Southern California drivers are far more
courteous...usually they will either move or slow and flash the driver
over. I'd be surprised if statistics don't show that for miles driven,
CA has fewer accidents between cars and trucks than any other place in
the country. In New England, a truck gives a signal and hesitates a
tenth of a second, fifteen cars will jump into the lane to cut him off,
all the while flashing a finger. Buddy, I don't ask permission. If my
trailer has room to get into the lane, it is my lane. Speed up to cut
me off, you'll just have to slow down that much more when I continue coming.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Your auto will accelerate 0-60 in a few seconds; a
heavy truck can take four times as long.
Not my problem. Never had a trucker yield when I was driving an
underpowered car. In fact, they've sped up to eliminate a gap I was
aiming for so I couldn't merge.
You aren't my problem either. I'll do what I need to, even though it
forces you to get out of cruise control for a second. BTW, trucks do
not accelerate so fast that you could be blocked from a merge in a car.
Post by Brent P
I never once had a trucker give way for me when I am on a bicycle. I've
had them intentionally nearly kill me a couple of times though.
bullshit. pure bullshit. Trucks normally move to the left away from
anything/everything on a road shoulder--and when we do, a goodamn
4wheeler comes rushing up to cut him off and sometimes, to take the
broken down car's door off.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
So which way will the trucker
create the least disruption to traffic flow? Obviously even to you, he
will create less off a ripple in traffic flow if he uses the
acceleration ramp they way it was intended--to get his speed up.
And time a gap in traffic like everyone else is supposed to.
Timing that gap. let's talk about that. Timing that gap as you suggest
sometimes requires the ability to drastically speed up to match oncoming
traffic or to drastically reduce speed then quickly recover that speed,
all within, what, fifty or a hundred ft ramp? In a truck it ain't
physically possible. Therefore, the truck will wisely continue down the
ramp as if the lane is clear. Fortunately, most 4 wheelers act more
wisely than you and get out of the 80,000-lb truck's way, either by
speeding up, moving over or slowing down.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Got
news for you and other short sighted 4-wheelers. Trucks are perfectly
in the right, acting properly for the benefit of those who are behind
them on the ramp and those who are 30 seconds down the road when they
force you to yield.
Or when they decide to force people off the road too in your view I
suppose.
Post by gringo
The trucker would not have chosen to run up the
shoulder: he did so because neither you nor any of those following you
backed off and let the truck enter the highway.
The trucker I posted about wasn't entering the interstate. He was in the
right lane of said interstate, moved right into the acceleration lane to
PASS traffic then used the shoulder and forced his way back into traffic
up ahead when a bridge support blocked his progress on the shoulder.
that isn't what you said. you said: "I've even watched a trucker pull
into an on ramp acceleration pass me and a whole line of vehicles in
front of me by continuing on the shoulder." Or the way I understood
it. That's a different ball of wax. You sure as hell cannot condemn
truckers for the act of a dangerous fool.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You don't like to share
the road with slow trucks? hell, son, we don't either. If you think
we're a problem now, just wait till the trucks are forcefully slowed
even further. The American Trucking Association has petitoned the FMCSA
to do just that. Wisely, AAA is opposing the new regulation: you should
too.
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.
Long distance freight should move by rail or air.
then you'd be paying for more high overpasses and higher prices in the
stores, and you'd be undergoing hours' long waits at crossings. The
freeways were not constructed for the benefit of daily commuters and
twice-daily runs to the walmart. they were built for interstate
traffic--trucking freight-hauling traffic.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-26 08:24:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Me first fuck you attitude.
yep. Your you first fuck everyone else attitude.
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing his
way with might, as he does with everything.
you damn well better expect a truck entering a freeway to continue
entering the freeway; trucks in the right lane to move out of his way if
at all possible and if not to drastically slow for him.
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else. Well here in the
urban environment there often isn't anywhere to go and I am not going to
stand on the brakes and get rear ended. Threaten me all you want trucker
but be prepared to kill and carry out your threat.
Post by gringo
The truck
should not be expected to park at the end of a freeway ramp and wait for
permission.
Trucker should learn how to drive his vehicle to avoid that problem.
Post by gringo
Look, a turn signal is not a request: it is notification: I need to
change lanes.
Who the fuck cares about your needs? You need... you're special...
typical self-centered me first, fuck you bullshit. You think your turn
signal gives you right of way, but it doesn't. It's just that you intend
to move that direction when clear and safe to do so. Not everyone get the
fuck out out of your way. You're no better than the self-centered moronic
4-wheelers you complain about. Ever have a four wheeler going 20mph
slower than you flick on his signal and move in front of you way too
close for comfort? Bet you bitch a storm after you struggle to prevent
hitting him and jackknifing your rig. Well, read your words back to
yourself, you just endorsed and defended that very behavior.
Post by gringo
Southern California drivers are far more
courteous...usually they will either move or slow and flash the driver
over.
In IL, my turn signal has a wireless connection the accelerator pedal of
the car behind me and in the lane I just indicated towards regardless of
how far back it is. As I turn on the signal, that vehicle begins
accelerating.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Not my problem. Never had a trucker yield when I was driving an
underpowered car. In fact, they've sped up to eliminate a gap I was
aiming for so I couldn't merge.
You aren't my problem either. I'll do what I need to, even though it
forces you to get out of cruise control for a second. BTW, trucks do
not accelerate so fast that you could be blocked from a merge in a car.
You use the size of your rig to force other people out of your way,
you're a bully plain and simple.

BTW. I never use cruise control. I bought my car new, I don't even know if
the cruise control works. Could have been broken the day I picked up the
car.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I never once had a trucker give way for me when I am on a bicycle. I've
had them intentionally nearly kill me a couple of times though.
bullshit. pure bullshit.
Pure truth.
Post by gringo
Trucks normally move to the left away from
anything/everything on a road shoulder--and when we do, a goodamn
4wheeler comes rushing up to cut him off and sometimes, to take the
broken down car's door off.
I don't ride on shoulders even when they do exist because that's not part
of the roadway. Some truckers seem to take a preverse joy in coming as close
as possible. Especially the asshole whom I moved over on to the road edge
to let him by. He repaid me by brush passing me sending me off the road.
Got a scar from landing in the gravel as my bike landed in the ditch.
Then there was the trucker who blew the airhorn and then brush passed me
so he could get to a red light a few seconds sooner. I barely managed not
to get sucked under or crash into the ditch that time.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
So which way will the trucker
create the least disruption to traffic flow? Obviously even to you, he
will create less off a ripple in traffic flow if he uses the
acceleration ramp they way it was intended--to get his speed up.
And time a gap in traffic like everyone else is supposed to.
Timing that gap. let's talk about that. Timing that gap as you suggest
sometimes requires the ability to drastically speed up to match oncoming
traffic or to drastically reduce speed then quickly recover that speed,
all within, what, fifty or a hundred ft ramp? In a truck it ain't
physically possible.
Your vehicle, your problem.
Post by gringo
Therefore, the truck will wisely continue down the
ramp as if the lane is clear. Fortunately, most 4 wheelers act more
wisely than you and get out of the 80,000-lb truck's way, either by
speeding up, moving over or slowing down.
Speeding up is fine, nobody wants to be stuck behind your lardish
vehicle.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
The trucker I posted about wasn't entering the interstate. He was in the
right lane of said interstate, moved right into the acceleration lane to
PASS traffic then used the shoulder and forced his way back into traffic
up ahead when a bridge support blocked his progress on the shoulder.
that isn't what you said. you said: "I've even watched a trucker pull
into an on ramp acceleration pass me and a whole line of vehicles in
front of me by continuing on the shoulder." Or the way I understood
it. That's a different ball of wax. You sure as hell cannot condemn
truckers for the act of a dangerous fool.
Exactly what I wrote... pulled into an on ramp acceleration lane and pass
me and a whole line of vehicles in front of me by continuing on the
shoulder. He forced his way back into the right lane when a bridge
support blocked him.

And it's not one fool, but the average of them. Any time I am stuck
around a trucker long enough, some crap happens. I spend as little time
around an individual truck as possible.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You don't like to share
the road with slow trucks? hell, son, we don't either. If you think
we're a problem now, just wait till the trucks are forcefully slowed
even further. The American Trucking Association has petitoned the FMCSA
to do just that. Wisely, AAA is opposing the new regulation: you should
too.
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.
Long distance freight should move by rail or air.
then you'd be paying for more high overpasses and higher prices in the
stores, and you'd be undergoing hours' long waits at crossings.
Cheaper than repaving the dan-ryan every 5 years.
Post by gringo
The
freeways were not constructed for the benefit of daily commuters and
twice-daily runs to the walmart. they were built for interstate
traffic--trucking freight-hauling traffic.
Cite. I take that is nothing more than your creation like your version of
the rules of the road.
bbelly
2006-11-26 08:54:24 UTC
Permalink
Brent P ...

you may be the most ignorant poster seen on misc.transport.trucking in
over an hour.
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-26 18:48:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by bbelly
Brent P ...
you may be the most ignorant poster seen on misc.transport.trucking in
over an hour.
Wow, Brent, you must have hit pretty close to the mark to get them all
riled up like that...
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
Brent P
2006-11-27 03:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by bbelly
Brent P ...
you may be the most ignorant poster seen on misc.transport.trucking in
over an hour.
Wow, Brent, you must have hit pretty close to the mark to get them all
riled up like that...
Well I'll give them a break... no arsehole truckers encountered today for
a change.
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-26 18:47:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing his
way with might, as he does with everything.
you damn well better expect a truck entering a freeway to continue
entering the freeway; trucks in the right lane to move out of his way if
at all possible and if not to drastically slow for him.
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They
can Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn
well please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want
bare shelves in all of the stores.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
arachnid
2006-11-26 20:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Brent P
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing
his way with might, as he does with everything.
you damn well better expect a truck entering a freeway to continue
entering the freeway; trucks in the right lane to move out of his way
if at all possible and if not to drastically slow for him.
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They can
Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn well
please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want bare
shelves in all of the stores.
Nobody said that but you, troll.
--
"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the
exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them."
- Frederick Douglas
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 01:38:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by arachnid
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Brent P
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They can
Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn well
please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want bare
shelves in all of the stores.
Nobody said that but you, troll.
You obviously haven't been reading this thread very carefully...
Post by arachnid
Hope you enjoy fighting
for survival with a few hundred million other starving people while the
economy collapses around your ears.
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
arachnid
2006-11-28 05:28:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by arachnid
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Brent P
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They
can Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn well
please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want bare
shelves in all of the stores.
Nobody said that but you, troll.
You obviously haven't been reading this thread very carefully...
You're the one who needs to learn to read. I've been talking strictly
about taxing truckers to pay for wear and tear on the roads and have said
nothing in this thread about how 4-wheelers should drive around trucks or
vice versa.
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by arachnid
Hope you enjoy fighting
for survival with a few hundred million other starving people while the
economy collapses around your ears.
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Nowhere in that message did gringo say anything about trucks being
essential. You're taking two unrelated posts and combining them into
something that nobody said.

In other words, you're just a troll. So is Brent, but at least he manages
to be a little fun.
--
"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the
exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them."
- Frederick Douglas
gringo
2006-11-27 01:18:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Brent P
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing his
way with might, as he does with everything.
you damn well better expect a truck entering a freeway to continue
entering the freeway; trucks in the right lane to move out of his way if
at all possible and if not to drastically slow for him.
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They
can Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn
well please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want
bare shelves in all of the stores.
silly boy. not out of the goodness of your widdle heart. But out of
necessity, yes, you should just suck it up and stop your whining. That
you take it personally when a truck or car interferes with your
aggressive ass is just too damned bad. We will continue to do what we
must. We will enter the freeway as fast as we can (pretty damned slow);
we will move out to pass when the passing lane is clear, and if that
forces you to slow down, tough tit; we will generally drive however we
please and road conditions suggest we should. And the rest of you can
either suck it up or get all red faced and shake your little fists and
display your birdie finger and whip in front of us and risk life and
limb by slamming on brakes. Go ahead, knock yourself out. We are
sitting high and relatively safe from your girlish tirades.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 01:44:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Brent P
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They
can Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn
well please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want
bare shelves in all of the stores.
silly boy. not out of the goodness of your widdle heart. But out of
necessity, yes, you should just suck it up and stop your whining. That
you take it personally when a truck or car interferes with your
aggressive ass is just too damned bad.
Obeying the law (and expecting Truckers to do the same) is
"aggressive?"
Post by gringo
We will continue to do what we must. We will enter the freeway as
fast as we can (pretty damned slow);
The law says you will yield to traffic already on the freeway. But you
have no intention of following that law, do you? Your intention
instead is to take advantage of your larger size and mass and bully
your way in wherever you please. Me First, Fuck You.
Post by gringo
we will move out to pass when the passing lane is clear, and if that
forces you to slow down, tough tit
If you force someone else to slow down, then the passing lane wasn't
clear, now was it? Me First, Fuck You.
Post by gringo
we will generally drive however we please
Such arrogance.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
gringo
2006-11-27 06:57:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Brent P
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else.
Of course! You see, because the entire economy would collapse without
Truckers, they deserve special priority over all other traffic. They
can Sloth Merge, Sloth Pass, and generally drive however they damn
well please, and the rest of us should just suck it up unless we want
bare shelves in all of the stores.
silly boy. not out of the goodness of your widdle heart. But out of
necessity, yes, you should just suck it up and stop your whining. That
you take it personally when a truck or car interferes with your
aggressive ass is just too damned bad.
Obeying the law (and expecting Truckers to do the same) is
"aggressive?"
Post by gringo
We will continue to do what we must. We will enter the freeway as
fast as we can (pretty damned slow);
The law says you will yield to traffic already on the freeway. But you
have no intention of following that law, do you? Your intention
instead is to take advantage of your larger size and mass and bully
your way in wherever you please. Me First, Fuck You.
Post by gringo
we will move out to pass when the passing lane is clear, and if that
forces you to slow down, tough tit
If you force someone else to slow down, then the passing lane wasn't
clear, now was it? Me First, Fuck You.
Post by gringo
we will generally drive however we please
Such arrogance.
You, dear boy, are the arrogant ass. There are none so blind as those
who refuse to open their eyes.

I've outlined the facts for you. Now deal with it however you like.
continue to whine if it makes you feel better.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
gringo
2006-11-26 22:42:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Me first fuck you attitude.
yep. Your you first fuck everyone else attitude.
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
yes I am. When the /least invasive practice/ is for the truck to
continue down the ramp, he will in fact continue on down the ramp, and
you have no choice but to either yield to him or play russian roulette
with your own life.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I expect a merging to time a gap like everyone else instead of forcing his
way with might, as he does with everything.
you damn well better expect a truck entering a freeway to continue
entering the freeway; trucks in the right lane to move out of his way if
at all possible and if not to drastically slow for him.
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else. Well here in the
urban environment there often isn't anywhere to go and I am not going to
stand on the brakes and get rear ended. Threaten me all you want trucker
but be prepared to kill and carry out your threat.
sigh. the shoulder is wide enough to allow that one car to flow on past
that could not move or speed up to get out of the way. And there is
enough leeway in the oncoming truck's needed merge speed that he can
ease off the throttle for that critical second. However, a line of
vehicles that refuse to move? now that is a different story and it
requires a stronger response, the kind I previously mentioned. Get
this. You should expect to eventually be involved in a serious, bloody
accident if you insist on forcing trucks to park at the end of a get-on
ramp.

BTW, some drivers continue to stop on a shoulder to take a piss...then
they have to merge back into traffic. Dangerous as hell. You can rest
assured that other truckers give suck fools hell for making such a
stupid dangerous stop. I need a quick stop and rest areas are full and
no truckstops are available, I park on an off ramp, do my business then
use the on ramp to properly merge back into traffic.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The truck
should not be expected to park at the end of a freeway ramp and wait for
permission.
Trucker should learn how to drive his vehicle to avoid that problem.
:). True. That is exactly the instruction I am giving you. only you
are too stubborn to look at what is in your face.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Look, a turn signal is not a request: it is notification: I need to
change lanes.
Who the fuck cares about your needs? You need... you're special...
typical self-centered me first, fuck you bullshit. You think your turn
signal gives you right of way, but it doesn't. It's just that you intend
to move that direction when clear and safe to do so. Not everyone get the
fuck out out of your way. You're no better than the self-centered moronic
4-wheelers you complain about. Ever have a four wheeler going 20mph
slower than you flick on his signal and move in front of you way too
close for comfort? Bet you bitch a storm after you struggle to prevent
hitting him and jackknifing your rig. Well, read your words back to
yourself, you just endorsed and defended that very behavior.
sigh. I am attempting to give you the facts of the matter, and you want
to play word games.
Let's revisit CA. Eight lane freeway...trucks restricted to right two
lane... a driver new to the area, and suddenly, his highway exists to
the left, he's got half a mile to move across 4 or more lanes. Sir,
turn signals in CA are not requests: they are instruction. They say, "I
am changing lane now." Now before you get diarrhea, I am not advocating
shoving people out of the way. But, the truck (or CAR) gives the
signal, looks in his blind spot and alongside his vehicle, and if he
believes that he has enough clear space to make the change safely, he
will do so. In the case of a truck restricted to 55 in the midst of
cars going 70-80, this safe move may seriously inconvenience a few cars
far back in the empty lane but coming on fast. Tough tittie. what is
the alternative? stop in the lane and wait for someone to stop in the
other lane and invite him over? you'd probably suggest that.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Southern California drivers are far more
courteous...usually they will either move or slow and flash the driver
over.
In IL, my turn signal has a wireless connection the accelerator pedal of
the car behind me and in the lane I just indicated towards regardless of
how far back it is. As I turn on the signal, that vehicle begins
accelerating.
yes. this happens a hundred times a day to most truckers. That's why I
said earlier that if my trailer has room to get into the lane, that lane
is mine. Look, stupid trucker tricks are every bit as irritating to
truckers as are the far more numerous stupid 4 wheeler tricks.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Not my problem. Never had a trucker yield when I was driving an
underpowered car. In fact, they've sped up to eliminate a gap I was
aiming for so I couldn't merge.
You aren't my problem either. I'll do what I need to, even though it
forces you to get out of cruise control for a second. BTW, trucks do
not accelerate so fast that you could be blocked from a merge in a car.
You use the size of your rig to force other people out of your way,
you're a bully plain and simple.
I will do what I deem the safest action for a given situation. Just a
moment ago you complained about other cars speeding up to cut you off
when they know you need to change lanes. Do you always slam on your
brakes, or do you on the occasions when you deem it safe go ahead and
take the lane, forcing the other car to slam /his /brakes? You, in your
tiny car and rapid acceleration, have far more options than the
trucker. Consider this. If I /have to/ change lane for whatever reason
and behind the fool who is trying to cut me off is a very long line of
closely packed cars, then the safest action I can take may be to go
ahead and claim the lane--the fool be damned.

Look, Brent, from other threads you've been involved in, I believe you
to be both considerate of others and above average in intellect. But
you've been pushed into offering blanket condemnation of all truckers'
actions, and some drivers have likewise been pushed into denigrating all
4wheelers. Well, we live in a colorful world; few things are just black
and white.

The truth is, some truckers act like bullying assholes--and the rest of
us rag the hell out of them for it. Most of us drive safely, as do the
majority of auto drivers. But even the best of us occasionally
misjudges a situation and reacts badly. But due to the experience
factor (and the trucker's increased visibility), a minuscule percentage
of truckers ever makes an error in judgment that results in a serious
accident.


Like the majority of truckers, I don't bully. I do take my due. And
sometimes that inconveniences a 4wheeler. I apologize. But I will
react as I deem I should in a given situation. I will change lanes,
speed up, slow down, whatever it takes to lessen the dangerous mylong,
heavy rig presents to myself and all other vehicles.
Post by Brent P
BTW. I never use cruise control. I bought my car new, I don't even know if
the cruise control works. Could have been broken the day I picked up the
car.
don't know why it'd be a problem for you. Cruise decreases needless
speed changes. It decreases the likelihood that a car, after passing,
will gradually bleed off speed and a few miles down the road get re-passed.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I never once had a trucker give way for me when I am on a bicycle. I've
had them intentionally nearly kill me a couple of times though.
bullshit. pure bullshit.
Pure truth.
pardon me, but this sounds suspiciously as if you have a persecution
complex.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Trucks normally move to the left away from
anything/everything on a road shoulder--and when we do, a goodamn
4wheeler comes rushing up to cut him off and sometimes, to take the
broken down car's door off.
I don't ride on shoulders even when they do exist because that's not part
of the roadway. Some truckers seem to take a preverse joy in coming as close
as possible. Especially the asshole whom I moved over on to the road edge
to let him by. He repaid me by brush passing me sending me off the road.
Got a scar from landing in the gravel as my bike landed in the ditch.
Then there was the trucker who blew the airhorn and then brush passed me
so he could get to a red light a few seconds sooner. I barely managed not
to get sucked under or crash into the ditch that time.
just how quickly do you think a truck can stop? You have no business
driving down the middle of a road on a bike. on a freeway, it's
illegal. on an urban street or road, there's curves and hills and high
bushes and buildings--lots of obstructions to view. And there's probably
only two lanes. A truck is long and wide and tall and slow and heavy.
For him to take the oncoming lane is dangerous, something not to be done
suddenly and without a very long view ahead. If there's a paved
shoulder, why wouldn't you ride your bike on it? and why facing away
from the traffic behind you? during my biking days, I wisely rode on
the opposite shoulder, for a clear view of approaching traffic. but no,
don't pin me down to defending whatever some unknown driver may have
once done to you. I am merely pointing out, my friend, that there are
two sides to every story.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
So which way will the trucker
create the least disruption to traffic flow? Obviously even to you, he
will create less off a ripple in traffic flow if he uses the
acceleration ramp they way it was intended--to get his speed up.
And time a gap in traffic like everyone else is supposed to.
Timing that gap. let's talk about that. Timing that gap as you suggest
sometimes requires the ability to drastically speed up to match oncoming
traffic or to drastically reduce speed then quickly recover that speed,
all within, what, fifty or a hundred ft ramp? In a truck it ain't
physically possible.
Your vehicle, your problem.
your problem too. because you have no choice whatsoever but to share
the road with trucks and all our problems. Get over it. Get over
yourself. Get along. Or are you the kind of guy that refuses to yield
the sidewalk to a couple approaching you hand in hand. for you it's the
principle of the thing, and to hell with the consequences, right?
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Therefore, the truck will wisely continue down the
ramp as if the lane is clear. Fortunately, most 4 wheelers act more
wisely than you and get out of the 80,000-lb truck's way, either by
speeding up, moving over or slowing down.
Speeding up is fine, nobody wants to be stuck behind your lardish
vehicle.
Tough. whyn't you fix yourself a little sugar tit, keep it in your
pocket for those times that a big meanie truck driver inconveniences you
in some small way.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
The trucker I posted about wasn't entering the interstate. He was in the
right lane of said interstate, moved right into the acceleration lane to
PASS traffic then used the shoulder and forced his way back into traffic
up ahead when a bridge support blocked his progress on the shoulder.
that isn't what you said. you said: "I've even watched a trucker pull
into an on ramp acceleration pass me and a whole line of vehicles in
front of me by continuing on the shoulder." Or the way I understood
it. That's a different ball of wax. You sure as hell cannot condemn
truckers for the act of a dangerous fool.
Exactly what I wrote... pulled into an on ramp acceleration lane and pass
me and a whole line of vehicles in front of me by continuing on the
shoulder. He forced his way back into the right lane when a bridge
support blocked him.
And it's not one fool, but the average of them. Any time I am stuck
around a trucker long enough, some crap happens. I spend as little time
around an individual truck as possible.
bullshit. You're not only being facetious now you are also being
outright untruthful. It most certainly is not "the average of them."
The last two lines, though, confirm that you are actually wiser than you
are presenting yourself here. I advise family and friends and any other
non-trucker I think is wise enough to listen to never dawdle in the
safety zone of a truck--to either pass quickly as possible or back off
from the trucker, but to never ever pace a truck either from its front
or along its side.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You don't like to share
the road with slow trucks? hell, son, we don't either. If you think
we're a problem now, just wait till the trucks are forcefully slowed
even further. The American Trucking Association has petitoned the FMCSA
to do just that. Wisely, AAA is opposing the new regulation: you should
too.
I oppose subsidizing the trucking industry with my tax dollars and wear
and tear on my vehicle thanks to the damage they do the roads.
Long distance freight should move by rail or air.
then you'd be paying for more high overpasses and higher prices in the
stores, and you'd be undergoing hours' long waits at crossings.
Cheaper than repaving the dan-ryan every 5 years.
hey, blame your overweight local freight haulers that never cross a
scale; out of state trucks are not overweight or unsafe mechanically.
Also blame the mafia involvement in IL highway construction contracts
that you people continue to tolerate. Fix it right the first time.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The
freeways were not constructed for the benefit of daily commuters and
twice-daily runs to the walmart. they were built for interstate
traffic--trucking freight-hauling traffic.
Cite. I take that is nothing more than your creation like your version of
the rules of the road.
How old are you? fifteen? did you not study any history of America?
Eisenhower as a lieutenant undertook the first roadtrip across America
in a military convoy. It took about two months. This convinced him
that for national defense and to promote interstate trade, an interstate
highway should be built. The rest, they say, is history.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-27 04:24:58 UTC
Permalink
In article <HLoah.12831$***@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, gringo wrote:

971 lines.... obviously you want me to do all the work of the thread
branch. Of course what can I expect from a MFFY person?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
yes I am. When the /least invasive practice/ is for the truck to
continue down the ramp, he will in fact continue on down the ramp, and
you have no choice but to either yield to him or play russian roulette
with your own life.
100% me,first, fuck you, might makes right. So if a driver of another
vehicle has passengers armed with automatic rifles you'll just have to
yield or "play russian roulette with your own life"? Is that really the
way you want the roads to be? Might makes right?
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else. Well here in the
urban environment there often isn't anywhere to go and I am not going to
stand on the brakes and get rear ended. Threaten me all you want trucker
but be prepared to kill and carry out your threat.
sigh. the shoulder is wide enough to allow that one car to flow on past
that could not move or speed up to get out of the way. And there is
enough leeway in the oncoming truck's needed merge speed that he can
ease off the throttle for that critical second. However, a line of
vehicles that refuse to move? now that is a different story and it
requires a stronger response, the kind I previously mentioned. Get
this. You should expect to eventually be involved in a serious, bloody
accident if you insist on forcing trucks to park at the end of a get-on
ramp.
I don't insist on anything but good driving. You are against that, and
favor get-the-fuck-out-of-my-way-might-makes-right driving.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Trucker should learn how to drive his vehicle to avoid that problem.
:). True. That is exactly the instruction I am giving you. only you
are too stubborn to look at what is in your face.
I know how to drive my vehicle, you're expecting everyone to compensate for
yours and your inability to do so.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Look, a turn signal is not a request: it is notification: I need to
change lanes.
Who the fuck cares about your needs? You need... you're special...
typical self-centered me first, fuck you bullshit. You think your turn
signal gives you right of way, but it doesn't. It's just that you intend
to move that direction when clear and safe to do so. Not everyone get the
fuck out out of your way. You're no better than the self-centered moronic
4-wheelers you complain about. Ever have a four wheeler going 20mph
slower than you flick on his signal and move in front of you way too
close for comfort? Bet you bitch a storm after you struggle to prevent
hitting him and jackknifing your rig. Well, read your words back to
yourself, you just endorsed and defended that very behavior.
sigh. I am attempting to give you the facts of the matter, and you want
to play word games.
Not a word game at all. You said you flick on your signal and the red sea
of traffic should part for you, the trucker, the most important person on
the road. Self centered crap that occasionally I see from some self
centered princess. Same thing, different vehicle.
Post by gringo
Let's revisit CA. Eight lane freeway...trucks restricted to right two
lane... a driver new to the area, and suddenly, his highway exists to
the left, he's got half a mile to move across 4 or more lanes. Sir,
turn signals in CA are not requests: they are instruction. They say, "I
am changing lane now."
No they are not. Nobody has to yield to you because you flicked on a
turn signal. This is again, your made up version of the rules of the
road.
Post by gringo
Now before you get diarrhea, I am not advocating
shoving people out of the way. But, the truck (or CAR) gives the
signal, looks in his blind spot and alongside his vehicle, and if he
believes that he has enough clear space to make the change safely, he
will do so. In the case of a truck restricted to 55 in the midst of
cars going 70-80, this safe move may seriously inconvenience a few cars
far back in the empty lane but coming on fast. Tough tittie. what is
the alternative? stop in the lane and wait for someone to stop in the
other lane and invite him over? you'd probably suggest that.
If you can't manage to make safe lane changes and need to force other
people out of your way and yield to you, you're either a piss poor
driver, a rude self centered arsehole, or both. I've had to 'come to a
stop' because the lane I was in came to a stop there wasn't a sufficent
gap to make a lane change. Hell sometimes I had to stop because even
though there was a suficent gap that wireless connection between my turn
signal lever and another vehicle's throttle kicked in to close it.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Southern California drivers are far more courteous...usually they
will either move or slow and flash the driver over.
In IL, my turn signal has a wireless connection the accelerator pedal of
the car behind me and in the lane I just indicated towards regardless of
how far back it is. As I turn on the signal, that vehicle begins
accelerating.
yes. this happens a hundred times a day to most truckers. That's why I
said earlier that if my trailer has room to get into the lane, that lane
is mine. Look, stupid trucker tricks are every bit as irritating to
truckers as are the far more numerous stupid 4 wheeler tricks.
Cept four wheelers often pass the traffic they were just behind. Truckers
more often don't IME.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You aren't my problem either. I'll do what I need to, even though it
forces you to get out of cruise control for a second.
You use the size of your rig to force other people out of your way,
you're a bully plain and simple.
I will do what I deem the safest action for a given situation. Just a
moment ago you complained about other cars speeding up to cut you off
when they know you need to change lanes.
I didn't complain. I mentioned an apparent wireless connection between my
turn signal and their throttle. I have my own right foot that solves the
problem 90%+ of the time.
Post by gringo
Do you always slam on your
brakes, or do you on the occasions when you deem it safe go ahead and
take the lane, forcing the other car to slam /his /brakes?
I haven't cut off or forced anyone out of the way the way you do to
people who didn't even do anything to block you but were just unlucky to
be near you.
Post by gringo
You, in your
tiny car and rapid acceleration, have far more options than the
trucker.
Poor baby... get a better vehicle then. Not my problem.
Post by gringo
Look, Brent, from other threads you've been involved in, I believe you
to be both considerate of others and above average in intellect. But
you've been pushed into offering blanket condemnation of all truckers'
actions, and some drivers have likewise been pushed into denigrating all
4wheelers. Well, we live in a colorful world; few things are just black
and white.
I am simply refering to the actions of so many truckers I encounter on
the roads. There are many that might be fine drivers, but every time my
interaction with them is more than me passing them as quickly as possible
and never seeing them again there is an uncomfortably high percentage of
something happening, even if it doesn't involve me directly. Like one
truck on I294... I just finished passing it when some fairly good sized
hunk of metal came off it and landed in the lane behind me. Thankfully,
despite the heavy traffic the driver behind me was waiting for me to
clear the cab before he started his pass. Something that I do, because
too many morons will sit next to the truck for miles. The trucks are a
hazard... it's like sitting next to a bomb as the timer ticks down. Stay
around them long enough and something bad is going to happen. I limit my
exposure to trucks to the minimum possible. But when the trucks spread
themselves out across all lanes, blocking up the road, I can't get by
them. I am stuck there, in their presence.
Post by gringo
The truth is, some truckers act like bullying assholes--and the rest of
us rag the hell out of them for it. Most of us drive safely, as do the
majority of auto drivers. But even the best of us occasionally
misjudges a situation and reacts badly. But due to the experience
factor (and the trucker's increased visibility), a minuscule percentage
of truckers ever makes an error in judgment that results in a serious
accident.
And the last bad thing that happened when heavy traffic forced me to be
around trucks longer than I wanted to be was not even the trucker's
fault... but the fault of the smaller commerical vehicle driver. White
commerical cargo van... Van was in the lane that ended decided to play
first to the closure with the semi. Something got crunched but not badly
enough to see in the dark and poor lighting as I went by.
Post by gringo
don't know why it'd be a problem for you. Cruise decreases needless
speed changes. It decreases the likelihood that a car, after passing,
will gradually bleed off speed and a few miles down the road get re-passed.
I haven't driven in traffic light enough to use cruise control. I don't
like it much. I used it when I was doing my drive-the-speed-limit
experiment with the torqueless wonder car though, but I wouldn't use it
in normal driving. Most of my driving is accelerating or deaccelerating
as the case may be. Just not enough open road to hold a constant speed
unless I am driving slower than everybody.... (ie the 55mph speed limit)
Post by gringo
pardon me, but this sounds suspiciously as if you have a persecution
complex.
Not at all. If you were a bicyclist you'd have similiar stories. Oddly
someone I worked with years ago rode the same roads I did and had nearly
identical stories. That was my sanity check, it had nothing to do with me
personally, just being a bicyclist.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Trucks normally move to the left away from
anything/everything on a road shoulder--and when we do, a goodamn
4wheeler comes rushing up to cut him off and sometimes, to take the
broken down car's door off.
I don't ride on shoulders even when they do exist because that's not part
of the roadway. Some truckers seem to take a preverse joy in coming as close
as possible. Especially the asshole whom I moved over on to the road edge
to let him by. He repaid me by brush passing me sending me off the road.
Got a scar from landing in the gravel as my bike landed in the ditch.
Then there was the trucker who blew the airhorn and then brush passed me
so he could get to a red light a few seconds sooner. I barely managed not
to get sucked under or crash into the ditch that time.
just how quickly do you think a truck can stop?
In both cases, they accelerated at me with clear sightlines.
Post by gringo
You have no business
driving down the middle of a road on a bike.
Who said anything about 'middle of the road'? I ride per the IL vehicle
code.
Post by gringo
on a freeway, it's illegal.
Nothing said about a freeway either.
Post by gringo
on an urban street or road, there's curves and hills and high
bushes and buildings--lots of obstructions to view.
Sight lines were clear.
Post by gringo
And there's probably only two lanes.
A truck is long and wide and tall and slow and heavy.
For him to take the oncoming lane is dangerous, something not to be done
suddenly and without a very long view ahead.
Or maybe he didn't have to accelerate so hard in stop and go traffic to get
to a red signal a couple seconds faster.
Post by gringo
If there's a paved shoulder, why wouldn't you ride your bike on it?
Shoulders are often very poor pavement surfaces. Shoulders are littered
with debris. And most importantly, don't last more than few hundred feet
at a time requiring merges with traffic. A very inconsistant and unsafe
in and out riding style.
Post by gringo
and why facing away from the traffic behind you?
Because that's the way traffic goes. That's the law. That's what's
safest.
Post by gringo
during my biking days, I wisely rode on
the opposite shoulder, for a clear view of approaching traffic.
That's entirely unsafe, especially at upwards of 35mph.
Post by gringo
but no,
don't pin me down to defending whatever some unknown driver may have
once done to you. I am merely pointing out, my friend, that there are
two sides to every story.
There is no excuse for geting so close that I fought being sucked under
and was a few inches from the truck on an empty road or in the other case
where he just did it to get to a red light sooner. We had both been at a
dead stop prior to him doing it.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Timing that gap. let's talk about that. Timing that gap as you suggest
sometimes requires the ability to drastically speed up to match oncoming
traffic or to drastically reduce speed then quickly recover that speed,
all within, what, fifty or a hundred ft ramp? In a truck it ain't
physically possible.
Your vehicle, your problem.
your problem too. because you have no choice whatsoever but to share
the road with trucks and all our problems. Get over it. Get over
yourself. Get along. Or are you the kind of guy that refuses to yield
the sidewalk to a couple approaching you hand in hand. for you it's the
principle of the thing, and to hell with the consequences, right?
Get along in your mind is everyone yielding to you. Why don't you get
along? And here you are with the threats again. And yes, couples hand in
hand are selfish blockers of bike paths everywhere, another reason I
don't often use them.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Therefore, the truck will wisely continue down the
ramp as if the lane is clear. Fortunately, most 4 wheelers act more
wisely than you and get out of the 80,000-lb truck's way, either by
speeding up, moving over or slowing down.
Speeding up is fine, nobody wants to be stuck behind your lardish
vehicle.
Tough. whyn't you fix yourself a little sugar tit, keep it in your
pocket for those times that a big meanie truck driver inconveniences you
in some small way.
Pot-kettle-black.

I grow tired of editing.
gringo
2006-11-27 09:08:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
971 lines.... obviously you want me to do all the work of the thread
branch. Of course what can I expect from a MFFY person?
if you don't own a scroll wheel and moving down the line of the thread
is such a problem for you, why do you keep this up? You are not going
to convince me that you are the perfect driver you claim to be; you will
not give up the notion that trucks were put on this Earth bygod just to
annoy people like you. I will not suddenly decide to call ahead to find
out if you're going to be on the freeway the day I need to come through.

This is all pointless, you know. As it was the last time you got into
this very same rant here on misc.transport.trucking. You are a glutton
for punishment, my friend.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
I follow the rules of the road. Those entering don't have right of way.
Truckers take right of way by force when they don't have it and you're
defending that practice.
yes I am. When the /least invasive practice/ is for the truck to
continue down the ramp, he will in fact continue on down the ramp, and
you have no choice but to either yield to him or play russian roulette
with your own life.
100% me,first, fuck you, might makes right. So if a driver of another
vehicle has passengers armed with automatic rifles you'll just have to
yield or "play russian roulette with your own life"? Is that really the
way you want the roads to be? Might makes right?
don't be such a fucking ninny. I won't keep repeating myself. When you
repeat an argument, I'll just paste in a former reply till you get the
message or go hide your head in your bucket seat.


Once again: When the *least disruptive practice* is for the truck to
continue down the ramp, he will in fact continue on down the ramp, and
you have no choice but to either yield to him or play russian roulette
with your own life.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
See, there you go, truckers first, fuck everyone else. Well here in the
urban environment there often isn't anywhere to go and I am not going to
stand on the brakes and get rear ended. Threaten me all you want trucker
but be prepared to kill and carry out your threat.
sigh. the shoulder is wide enough to allow that one car to flow on past
that could not move or speed up to get out of the way. And there is
enough leeway in the oncoming truck's needed merge speed that he can
ease off the throttle for that critical second. However, a line of
vehicles that refuse to move? now that is a different story and it
requires a stronger response, the kind I previously mentioned. Get
this. You should expect to eventually be involved in a serious, bloody
accident if you insist on forcing trucks to park at the end of a get-on
ramp.
I don't insist on anything but good driving. You are against that, and
favor get-the-fuck-out-of-my-way-might-makes-right driving.
The above scenario is an example of wise, skillful driving.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Trucker should learn how to drive his vehicle to avoid that problem.
:). True. That is exactly the instruction I am giving you. only you
are too stubborn to look at what is in your face.
I know how to drive my vehicle, you're expecting everyone to compensate for
yours and your inability to do so.
silly boy.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Look, a turn signal is not a request: it is notification: I need to
change lanes.
Who the fuck cares about your needs? You need... you're special...
typical self-centered me first, fuck you bullshit. You think your turn
signal gives you right of way, but it doesn't. It's just that you intend
to move that direction when clear and safe to do so. Not everyone get the
fuck out out of your way. You're no better than the self-centered moronic
4-wheelers you complain about. Ever have a four wheeler going 20mph
slower than you flick on his signal and move in front of you way too
close for comfort? Bet you bitch a storm after you struggle to prevent
hitting him and jackknifing your rig. Well, read your words back to
yourself, you just endorsed and defended that very behavior.
sigh. I am attempting to give you the facts of the matter, and you want
to play word games.
Not a word game at all. You said you flick on your signal and the red sea
of traffic should part for you, the trucker, the most important person on
the road. Self centered crap that occasionally I see from some self
centered princess. Same thing, different vehicle.
young 'un, you will eventually have to grow up and accept fact. All
traffic wisely yields to people (cars or trucks) who need to change
lanes in a very short space--it's called defensive driving. Taking your
fuck-you attitude is begging for an accident. When blood is soaking
into the pavement, bucko, who is in the right won't matter worth a damn:
dead is dead.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Let's revisit CA. Eight lane freeway...trucks restricted to right two
lane... a driver new to the area, and suddenly, his highway exists to
the left, he's got half a mile to move across 4 or more lanes. Sir,
turn signals in CA are not requests: they are instruction. They say, "I
am changing lane now."
No they are not. Nobody has to yield to you because you flicked on a
turn signal. This is again, your made up version of the rules of the
road.
young 'un, you will eventually have to grow up and accept fact. All
traffic wisely yields to people (cars or trucks) who need to change
lanes in a very short space--it's called defensive driving. Taking your
fuck-you attitude is begging for an accident. When blood is soaking
into the pavement, bucko, who is in the right won't matter worth a damn:
dead is dead.
Post by Brent P
If you can't manage to make safe lane changes and need to force other
people out of your way and yield to you, you're either a piss poor
driver, a rude self centered arsehole, or both. I've had to 'come to a
stop' because the lane I was in came to a stop there wasn't a sufficent
gap to make a lane change. Hell sometimes I had to stop because even
though there was a suficent gap that wireless connection between my turn
signal lever and another vehicle's throttle kicked in to close it.
Now before you get diarrhea, I am not advocating shoving people out of
the way. But, the truck (or CAR) gives the signal, looks in his blind
spot and alongside his vehicle, and if he believes that he has enough
clear space *to make the change safely*, he will do so. In the case of
a truck restricted to 55 in the midst of cars going 70-80, this *safe
move* may seriously inconvenience a few cars far back in the empty lane
but coming on fast. Tough tittie. what is the alternative? stop in the
lane and wait for someone to stop in the other lane and invite him
over? you'd probably suggest that.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Southern California drivers are far more courteous...usually they
will either move or slow and flash the driver over.
In IL, my turn signal has a wireless connection the accelerator pedal of
the car behind me and in the lane I just indicated towards regardless of
how far back it is. As I turn on the signal, that vehicle begins
accelerating.
yes. this happens a hundred times a day to most truckers. That's why I
said earlier that if my trailer has room to get into the lane, that lane
is mine. Look, stupid trucker tricks are every bit as irritating to
truckers as are the far more numerous stupid 4 wheeler tricks.
Cept four wheelers often pass the traffic they were just behind. Truckers
more often don't IME.
just what does that mean? Brent, we do not change lanes for the
pleasure of exercising our wrists; we change lanes in order to pass (or
to yield to someone else who is trying to change a lane).
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You aren't my problem either. I'll do what I need to, even though it
forces you to get out of cruise control for a second.
You use the size of your rig to force other people out of your way,
you're a bully plain and simple.
I will do what I deem the safest action for a given situation. Just a
moment ago you complained about other cars speeding up to cut you off
when they know you need to change lanes.
I didn't complain. I mentioned an apparent wireless connection between my
turn signal and their throttle. I have my own right foot that solves the
problem 90%+ of the time.
word games. it was a complaint. that you have a car passing gear is
nice for you. Trucks don't. We have to react within the limits of our
equipment. That this often displeases you, well, that is just too
damned bad.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Do you always slam on your
brakes, or do you on the occasions when you deem it safe go ahead and
take the lane, forcing the other car to slam /his /brakes?
I haven't cut off or forced anyone out of the way the way you do to
people who didn't even do anything to block you but were just unlucky to
be near you.
:) you whined awhile ago that I was judging your driving without ever
having witnessed it--on the actions of other 4wheelers. Here you go
again, coloring all truckers with the same brush.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
You, in your
tiny car and rapid acceleration, have far more options than the
trucker.
Poor baby... get a better vehicle then. Not my problem.
oh hell yes it is, crybaby. You don't have a choice in the matter: you
have to deal with us AND all our limitations.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Look, Brent, from other threads you've been involved in, I believe you
to be both considerate of others and above average in intellect. But
you've been pushed into offering blanket condemnation of all truckers'
actions, and some drivers have likewise been pushed into denigrating all
4wheelers. Well, we live in a colorful world; few things are just black
and white.
I am simply refering to the actions of so many truckers I encounter on
the roads. There are many that might be fine drivers, but every time my
interaction with them is more than me passing them as quickly as possible
and never seeing them again there is an uncomfortably high percentage of
something happening, even if it doesn't involve me directly. Like one
truck on I294... I just finished passing it when some fairly good sized
hunk of metal came off it and landed in the lane behind me. Thankfully,
despite the heavy traffic the driver behind me was waiting for me to
clear the cab before he started his pass. Something that I do, because
too many morons will sit next to the truck for miles. The trucks are a
hazard... it's like sitting next to a bomb as the timer ticks down. Stay
around them long enough and something bad is going to happen. I limit my
exposure to trucks to the minimum possible. But when the trucks spread
themselves out across all lanes, blocking up the road, I can't get by
them. I am stuck there, in their presence.
time for your diaper change yet? pickups and small rental trucks and
junker cars and tied down trunk lids strew far more debris across the
roads than trucks. But yes you are wise to stay as clear of trucks as
you can. I too stay as clear of other trucks as I can.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
The truth is, some truckers act like bullying assholes--and the rest of
us rag the hell out of them for it. Most of us drive safely, as do the
majority of auto drivers. But even the best of us occasionally
misjudges a situation and reacts badly. But due to the experience
factor (and the trucker's increased visibility), a minuscule percentage
of truckers ever makes an error in judgment that results in a serious
accident.
And the last bad thing that happened when heavy traffic forced me to be
around trucks longer than I wanted to be was not even the trucker's
fault... but the fault of the smaller commerical vehicle driver. White
commerical cargo van... Van was in the lane that ended decided to play
first to the closure with the semi. Something got crunched but not badly
enough to see in the dark and poor lighting as I went by.
cars do that sort of thing to trucks thousands of times every day. we
are apparently expected to stop on a dime.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
don't know why it'd be a problem for you. Cruise decreases needless
speed changes. It decreases the likelihood that a car, after passing,
will gradually bleed off speed and a few miles down the road get re-passed.
I haven't driven in traffic light enough to use cruise control. I don't
like it much. I used it when I was doing my drive-the-speed-limit
experiment with the torqueless wonder car though, but I wouldn't use it
in normal driving. Most of my driving is accelerating or deaccelerating
as the case may be. Just not enough open road to hold a constant speed
unless I am driving slower than everybody.... (ie the 55mph speed limit)
Post by gringo
pardon me, but this sounds suspiciously as if you have a persecution
complex.
Not at all. If you were a bicyclist you'd have similiar stories. Oddly
someone I worked with years ago rode the same roads I did and had nearly
identical stories. That was my sanity check, it had nothing to do with me
personally, just being a bicyclist.
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Trucks normally move to the left away from
anything/everything on a road shoulder--and when we do, a goodamn
4wheeler comes rushing up to cut him off and sometimes, to take the
broken down car's door off.
I don't ride on shoulders even when they do exist because that's not part
of the roadway. Some truckers seem to take a preverse joy in coming as close
as possible. Especially the asshole whom I moved over on to the road edge
to let him by. He repaid me by brush passing me sending me off the road.
Got a scar from landing in the gravel as my bike landed in the ditch.
Then there was the trucker who blew the airhorn and then brush passed me
so he could get to a red light a few seconds sooner. I barely managed not
to get sucked under or crash into the ditch that time.
just how quickly do you think a truck can stop?
In both cases, they accelerated at me with clear sightlines.
Post by gringo
You have no business
driving down the middle of a road on a bike.
Who said anything about 'middle of the road'? I ride per the IL vehicle
code.
Post by gringo
on a freeway, it's illegal.
Nothing said about a freeway either.
Post by gringo
on an urban street or road, there's curves and hills and high
bushes and buildings--lots of obstructions to view.
Sight lines were clear.
you complain about all the lines, yet you continue to split paragraphs
by sentence and enter a few word comment to each. Leave the paras
intact, it'll take less space and be easier to follow.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
And there's probably only two lanes.
A truck is long and wide and tall and slow and heavy.
For him to take the oncoming lane is dangerous, something not to be done
suddenly and without a very long view ahead.
Or maybe he didn't have to accelerate so hard in stop and go traffic to get
to a red signal a couple seconds faster.
Post by gringo
If there's a paved shoulder, why wouldn't you ride your bike on it?
Shoulders are often very poor pavement surfaces. Shoulders are littered
with debris. And most importantly, don't last more than few hundred feet
at a time requiring merges with traffic. A very inconsistant and unsafe
in and out riding style.
I repeat: bikes belong in parks or trails, not on highways.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
and why facing away from the traffic behind you?
Because that's the way traffic goes. That's the law. That's what's
safest.
what is safest is to stay the hell off the highways with an unpowered bike.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
during my biking days, I wisely rode on
the opposite shoulder, for a clear view of approaching traffic.
That's entirely unsafe, especially at upwards of 35mph.
sure it is. being able to see the traffic coming at you so that you can
avoid getting hit, yeah, I can see that'd be unsafe.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
but no,
don't pin me down to defending whatever some unknown driver may have
once done to you. I am merely pointing out, my friend, that there are
two sides to every story.
There is no excuse for geting so close that I fought being sucked under
and was a few inches from the truck on an empty road or in the other case
where he just did it to get to a red light sooner. We had both been at a
dead stop prior to him doing it.
99.999% of drivers take it out of gear and coast to a light that is
red. no trucker that I know of speeds up in order to slow down. I
think you misjudge the man.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Timing that gap. let's talk about that. Timing that gap as you suggest
sometimes requires the ability to drastically speed up to match oncoming
traffic or to drastically reduce speed then quickly recover that speed,
all within, what, fifty or a hundred ft ramp? In a truck it ain't
physically possible.
Your vehicle, your problem.
your problem too. because you have no choice whatsoever but to share
the road with trucks and all our problems. Get over it. Get over
yourself. Get along. Or are you the kind of guy that refuses to yield
the sidewalk to a couple approaching you hand in hand. for you it's the
principle of the thing, and to hell with the consequences, right?
Get along in your mind is everyone yielding to you. Why don't you get
along? And here you are with the threats again. And yes, couples hand in
hand are selfish blockers of bike paths everywhere, another reason I
don't often use them.
apparently it is everyone staying out of your way. even when you're on
an unpowered bike. you admit that the state built bike paths at great
cost for you. so use them and trucks on public designated truck routes
won't be a problem for you.
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Therefore, the truck will wisely continue down the
ramp as if the lane is clear. Fortunately, most 4 wheelers act more
wisely than you and get out of the 80,000-lb truck's way, either by
speeding up, moving over or slowing down.
Speeding up is fine, nobody wants to be stuck behind your lardish
vehicle.
Tough. whyn't you fix yourself a little sugar tit, keep it in your
pocket for those times that a big meanie truck driver inconveniences you
in some small way.
Pot-kettle-black.
I grow tired of editing.
You "edit" in order to cut the impact of my postings. You don't "edit"
your own, I have noticed.


It's time now, I think, for you to go beddy-by.
Seriously, since you won't listen to the wisdom of far more experienced
drivers, why don't you confine your repetitious whine to your own
newsgroups?
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-27 13:31:49 UTC
Permalink
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060600020004070709040308
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Post by Brent P
971 lines.... obviously you want me to do all the work of the thread
branch. Of course what can I expect from a MFFY person?
if you don't own a scroll wheel and moving down the line of the thread
is such a problem for you, why do you keep this up?
You just posted a 1350 line post. The problem isn't reading it, it's
doing all the work of editing, of trimming to keep it managable.

Fine, you want to 'win' at all costs apparently, including being a lazy
ass. I don't have the time to do all the work. So, here, have your last
word.
You are not going
to convince me that you are the perfect driver you claim to be;
Made no such claim, strawman.
you will
not give up the notion that trucks were put on this Earth bygod just to
annoy people like you. I will not suddenly decide to call ahead to find
out if you're going to be on the freeway the day I need to come through.
Strawman.
This is all pointless, you know. As it was the last time you got into
this very same rant here on misc.transport.trucking. You are a glutton
for punishment, my friend.
I'm tired of your strawmen, your choice of constant attack on me
personally because you cannot find any legal or moral justification for
your self centered truckers first, all yield to truckers view.

<snip, unread>
Arif Khokar
2006-11-27 20:20:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
971 lines.... obviously you want me to do all the work of the thread
branch. Of course what can I expect from a MFFY person?
if you don't own a scroll wheel and moving down the line of the thread
is such a problem for you, why do you keep this up?
You just posted a 1350 line post. The problem isn't reading it, it's
doing all the work of editing, of trimming to keep it managable.
Not only that, but some news servers filter out large posts (they didn't
show up on mine as illustrated by the commands below).

Via telnet:

article <HLoah.12831$***@bignews6.bellsouth.net>
430 No Such Article

article <lWxah.12275$***@bignews3.bellsouth.net>
430 No Such Article
gringo
2006-11-28 08:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arif Khokar
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Brent P
971 lines.... obviously you want me to do all the work of the
thread branch. Of course what can I expect from a MFFY person?
if you don't own a scroll wheel and moving down the line of the
thread is such a problem for you, why do you keep this up?
You just posted a 1350 line post. The problem isn't reading it, it's
doing all the work of editing, of trimming to keep it managable.
Not only that, but some news servers filter out large posts (they
didn't show up on mine as illustrated by the commands below).
430 No Such Article
430 No Such Article
your problem, ain't it?
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Arif Khokar
2006-11-28 08:40:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
your problem, ain't it?
Nope. The primary purpose of posting a message is to convey one's
point. You can't do that if your posts are getting filtered due to
excessive length along the way. Whether I get to see them or not is of
no consequence to me. OTOH, your effort to convey your point was wasted
since at least some of your potential audience never even sees it.
gringo
2006-11-28 10:28:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arif Khokar
Post by gringo
your problem, ain't it?
Nope. The primary purpose of posting a message is to convey one's
point. You can't do that if your posts are getting filtered due to
excessive length along the way. Whether I get to see them or not is
of no consequence to me. OTOH, your effort to convey your point was
wasted since at least some of your potential audience never even sees it.
Few potential readers encounter your problem. And it isn't one I added
to. Brent P split every paragraph of my posts into sentences, then
replied separately to each, each time creating unnecessary white space.
In order to counter his rambling, repetitious rants, I had no choice but
to take on each of his sentences separately, again creating unnecessary
white space and needless repetition.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-28 14:20:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Arif Khokar
Post by gringo
your problem, ain't it?
Nope. The primary purpose of posting a message is to convey one's
point. You can't do that if your posts are getting filtered due to
excessive length along the way. Whether I get to see them or not is
of no consequence to me. OTOH, your effort to convey your point was
wasted since at least some of your potential audience never even sees it.
Few potential readers encounter your problem. And it isn't one I added
to. Brent P split every paragraph of my posts into sentences, then
replied separately to each, each time creating unnecessary white space.
In order to counter his rambling, repetitious rants, I had no choice but
to take on each of his sentences separately, again creating unnecessary
white space and needless repetition.
'It's not my fault, it's the fault of those nasty 4-wheelers who wouldn't
let me in.'

Whine whine whine. If you don't like the way usenet works, I suggest you
find a web forum. They'll be more your speed. Given your previous reply
to me, I would suggest myspace forums where HS level behavior is the
norm.
Harry K
2006-11-28 15:20:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
Post by gringo
Post by Arif Khokar
Post by gringo
your problem, ain't it?
Nope. The primary purpose of posting a message is to convey one's
point. You can't do that if your posts are getting filtered due to
excessive length along the way. Whether I get to see them or not is
of no consequence to me. OTOH, your effort to convey your point was
wasted since at least some of your potential audience never even sees it.
Few potential readers encounter your problem. And it isn't one I added
to. Brent P split every paragraph of my posts into sentences, then
replied separately to each, each time creating unnecessary white space.
In order to counter his rambling, repetitious rants, I had no choice but
to take on each of his sentences separately, again creating unnecessary
white space and needless repetition.
'It's not my fault, it's the fault of those nasty 4-wheelers who wouldn't
let me in.'
Whine whine whine. If you don't like the way usenet works, I suggest you
find a web forum. They'll be more your speed. Given your previous reply
to me, I would suggest myspace forums where HS level behavior is the
norm.
Yep, his attitude toward posting is the same as his attitude to
driving. "Do what I want to do and to hell with society".

Harry K
Arif Khokar
2006-11-28 21:19:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Brent P split every paragraph of my posts into sentences, then
replied separately to each,
That's how one is supposed to post. One takes a sentence, or short
paragraph and responds to it by typing text below it. One isn't
obligated to respond to every single paragraph or sentence in a given
post. Quoted text that's not addressed is deleted from the response.
That's how posts are kept at manageable lengths.

gringo
2006-11-28 08:23:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent P
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060600020004070709040308
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Post by Brent P
971 lines.... obviously you want me to do all the work of the thread
branch. Of course what can I expect from a MFFY person?
if you don't own a scroll wheel and moving down the line of the thread
is such a problem for you, why do you keep this up?
You just posted a 1350 line post. The problem isn't reading it, it's
doing all the work of editing, of trimming to keep it managable.
Fine, you want to 'win' at all costs apparently, including being a lazy
ass. I don't have the time to do all the work. So, here, have your last
word.
You are not going
to convince me that you are the perfect driver you claim to be;
Made no such claim, strawman.
you will
not give up the notion that trucks were put on this Earth bygod just to
annoy people like you. I will not suddenly decide to call ahead to find
out if you're going to be on the freeway the day I need to come through.
Strawman.
This is all pointless, you know. As it was the last time you got into
this very same rant here on misc.transport.trucking. You are a glutton
for punishment, my friend.
I'm tired of your strawmen, your choice of constant attack on me
personally because you cannot find any legal or moral justification for
your self centered truckers first, all yield to truckers view.
<snip, unread>
bye bye, honey. Your boyfriends are waiting at rec.autos or some such
boytown.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Brent P
2006-11-28 14:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
bye bye, honey. Your boyfriends are waiting at rec.autos or some such
boytown.
OOh... insult by implying homosexuality... is that why you drive a truck?
To show what a man you are? Big vehicle, chest pounding, the whole ape
like thing... grow up.
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-26 05:30:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Sure, no problem. In return, all I ask is that Truckers *never* block
other traffic while they perform their mile-long micro-passes. Wait
until ALL other vehicles in range have completed their passes before
beginning your own.

Let me know if we have a deal.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
gringo
2006-11-26 22:59:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Sure, no problem. In return, all I ask is that Truckers *never* block
other traffic while they perform their mile-long micro-passes. Wait
until ALL other vehicles in range have completed their passes before
beginning your own.
Let me know if we have a deal.
you are superglued to a particular mindset. Pour a little fingernail
polish remover in your ears.
You will not inconvenience me at a ramp, scott--I will enter the freeway
and you will have to deal with it. When the left lane is empty, I will
pass slower vehicles when I need to and there is not one damn thing you
can do about it except whine and shake your widdle fist. I too am
annoyed when a Swift attempts to pass another Swift, but there's nothing
I can do about it either, other than bitch to myself in the privacy of
my truck.

Life sometimes sucks. Deal with it.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 01:54:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by gringo
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Sure, no problem. In return, all I ask is that Truckers *never* block
other traffic while they perform their mile-long micro-passes. Wait
until ALL other vehicles in range have completed their passes before
beginning your own.
Let me know if we have a deal.
you are superglued to a particular mindset.
You're projecting again, Gringo.
Post by gringo
You will not inconvenience me at a ramp, scott--I will enter the freeway
and you will have to deal with it.
And when the cops come to the scene of the collision, it is YOU who
will be cited for failure to yield, and it is YOUR company that will
be paying for the damages you caused to my car. Hope that's OK.
Post by gringo
When the left lane is empty, I will
pass slower vehicles when I need to and there is not one damn thing you
can do about it
I see you can't even agree to the more-than-fair compromise that I
proposed. Apparently you aren't interested in a win-win scenario - you
simply have to WIN at all costs and everyone else be damned. Me First,
Fuck Everyone Else. Might makes right, and there's not a damned thing
we can do about it.

Thanks for the fascinating insight into the Trucker mentality. I think
we have all learned a lot from you today.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
ken
2006-11-27 04:45:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
You will not inconvenience me at a ramp, scott--I will enter the freeway
and you will have to deal with it.
And when the cops come to the scene of the collision, it is YOU who
will be cited for failure to yield, and it is YOUR company that will
be paying for the damages you caused to my car. Hope that's OK.
and it will be YOU that is dead. and personally i wont lose much sleep
over your death. the ticket on my record might bother me for a bit.
and higher insurance premiums i'll have my whole life to recover from.
a life you no longer have after becoming one with your engine compartment.

what part of being squashed like a bug fails to invoke a common sense
of survival in your pea brain? or do you really believe being whacked
by 80 or more thousand pounds will just "damage your car?"

-k
Arif Khokar
2006-11-27 05:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by ken
and it will be YOU that is dead. and personally i wont lose much sleep
over your death. the ticket on my record might bother me for a bit.
If a driver ends up killing someone while violating a traffic law, the
punishment is not limited to a citation. IOW, a failure to yield
citation would be the least of your worries if you kill someone with
your tractor-trailer.
Roughrider50
2006-11-27 13:45:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arif Khokar
Post by ken
and it will be YOU that is dead. and personally i wont lose much sleep
over your death. the ticket on my record might bother me for a bit.
If a driver ends up killing someone while violating a traffic law, the
punishment is not limited to a citation. IOW, a failure to yield citation
would be the least of your worries if you kill someone with your
tractor-trailer.
Not necessarily:


LOS ANGELES -- George Weller, who drove his car through the Santa Monica
Farmers' Market, killing 10 and injuring 63, was sentenced yesterday to five
years of probation and will not serve time in prison.Weller, who will be 90
next month, did not attend the sentencing because he was too ill.Los Angeles
County Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson made it clear that Weller
deserved a harsh prison sentence after being convicted of 10 felony counts
of manslaughter in the July 2003 deaths. But he said that little would be
served in sending the frail, elderly man to jail."Today, Mr. Weller stands
convicted of 10 serious felonies, and he is asking for leniency in
sentencing," Johnson said. "Yet, he has never once expressed in court any
remorse for his actions."I will never understand his stubborn and bullheaded
refusal to accept responsibility to put this matter to rest for everyone,
including himself," Johnson said.

A good lawyer helps immensely.

Besides its a proven fact that between cars & trucks in crashes the vast
majority of the time its the car that caused it.To limit their liability
most companies & their insurance carrier will put their vast legal resources
to work for the driver
--
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety is a
miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so
by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 14:25:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roughrider50
Post by Arif Khokar
Post by ken
and it will be YOU that is dead. and personally i wont lose much sleep
over your death. the ticket on my record might bother me for a bit.
If a driver ends up killing someone while violating a traffic law, the
punishment is not limited to a citation. IOW, a failure to yield citation
would be the least of your worries if you kill someone with your
tractor-trailer.
LOS ANGELES -- George Weller, who drove his car through the Santa Monica
Farmers' Market, killing 10 and injuring 63, was sentenced yesterday to five
years of probation and will not serve time in prison.
Russ is also paying at least $100,000 in fines and restitution.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-27 05:55:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by ken
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
You will not inconvenience me at a ramp, scott--I will enter the freeway
and you will have to deal with it.
And when the cops come to the scene of the collision, it is YOU who
will be cited for failure to yield, and it is YOUR company that will
be paying for the damages you caused to my car. Hope that's OK.
and it will be YOU that is dead. and personally i wont lose much sleep
over your death.
OK, let's recap:

* 4-wheeler obeys the law (but refuses to do what Trucker demands).
* Trucker barrels ahead anyway, collides with 4-wheeler, killing
4-wheeler driver.
* Trucker doesn't give two hoots that his violation of the law has
just killed someone. After all, death is a just and appropriate
punishment for not being "courteous" to an almighty Trucker.

Does that about sum it up?
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
gringo
2006-11-27 07:04:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
The answer to that is simple: yield to the trucker trying to get on the
freeway.
Sure, no problem. In return, all I ask is that Truckers *never* block
other traffic while they perform their mile-long micro-passes. Wait
until ALL other vehicles in range have completed their passes before
beginning your own.
Let me know if we have a deal.
you are superglued to a particular mindset.
You're projecting again, Gringo.
Post by gringo
You will not inconvenience me at a ramp, scott--I will enter the freeway
and you will have to deal with it.
And when the cops come to the scene of the collision, it is YOU who
will be cited for failure to yield, and it is YOUR company that will
be paying for the damages you caused to my car. Hope that's OK.
goddamn, you are tiresome. Sonny, if you are in a long pack of cars
that just will not yield into an *open lane* to your left, and a truck
has no more running room, you should expect to get hit. But you won't
be--you will yield; there are simpler ways for fools to committ suicide.
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by gringo
When the left lane is empty, I will
pass slower vehicles when I need to and there is not one damn thing you
can do about it
I see you can't even agree to the more-than-fair compromise that I
proposed. Apparently you aren't interested in a win-win scenario - you
simply have to WIN at all costs and everyone else be damned. Me First,
Fuck Everyone Else. Might makes right, and there's not a damned thing
we can do about it.
Thanks for the fascinating insight into the Trucker mentality. I think
we have all learned a lot from you today.
You're welcome, little man. now go whine to your high school pals.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Red Herring
2006-11-12 04:14:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by richard
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------
80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car driver
doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.
Richard "the st00pid" Bullis is a pedophile.
Source: Usenet


Ever think of maybe backing up your bullshit with URLs, Bullis?
Post by richard
The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have time to
react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that the car
driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts. Outside
of falsifying his log books.
And of course we all know how you feel about falsifying log books.
Post by richard
I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as they get
around, slow down. Bad move.
Why the fuck is that a bad move, you moron? Because you're such a poor
driver?
Post by richard
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do not pay
attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph while yacking
on the phone. During their conversation, not once looking to see what's
around them.
So, wait a minute. You say that people aren't paying attention when
yakking on their cell phones while driving yet in the same statement
you admit that you watch them when they do so, which thusly means YOU
TOO are not paying attention?


Am I right or did I miss something there?
Post by richard
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast majority
of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it. Now if you would
apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot safer for all.
Not as long as a menace like you is behind the wheel.
gringo
2006-11-25 22:17:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by richard
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
According to court documents, Kenneth Virgil Howard was driving a
Little Bear Transport tractor-trailer rig west on Interstate 10 near
Bowie, which is about 25 miles east of Willcox, when he swerved into
the median and struck several vehicles involved in an earlier fatal
crash that had closed one of the westbound lanes.
Article doesn't say if the trucker was prosecuted criminally as he
should have been. Prolly not. Cops usually just say "hell with it -
let the insurance companies sort this out."
---------------------------------------------------------
80% of all crashes involving semis and cars are the result of the car
driver doing something wrong.
Source: NTSB.
The trucker stated that the car had slowed down and he did not have
time to react properly before the crash.
A car will naturally slow down faster than a semi.
From what I read in the article, the lawsuit was over the fact that
the car driver had lost a leg in the incident.
Not from the fact that the trucker had committed any criminal acts.
Outside of falsifying his log books.
I have seen car drivers way to many times pass me, then as soon as
they get around, slow down. Bad move.
Now with cell phones in hand, car drivers who yack while driving do
not pay attention to their speed. I've seen cars drop as much as 10mph
while yacking on the phone. During their conversation, not once
looking to see what's around them.
Most truck drivers are 10 times more safety conscious than the vast
majority of car drivers. They have to be. Their life depends on it.
Now if you would apply that same practice, the roads would be a lot
safer for all.
Richard, I agree with you 100% on this one. My guess is that the car
just about parked in front of him in order to spot a few drops of blood
from the westbound multi-car fatality that was still being cleaned up.
His logbook violation may have been nothing more than laziness about
keeping it up to date, or inability to keep it straight.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
Dave
2006-11-10 11:44:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/155128
Jury awards $15M to truck-wreck victim
Punitive damages based on falsification of driver's log, disregard for
public safety
By Kim Smith
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 11.09.2006
A Bowie man who lost his leg after being hit by an 18-wheeler on
Christmas Eve four years ago was awarded $15 million Wednesday by a
federal jury.
The jury ordered Little Bear Transport of Utah to pay 58-year-old
Bruce Austin $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in
punitive damages following a five-day trial in U.S. District Court in
Tucson.
"First and foremost, the verdict absolutely does justice to Mr.
Austin, and, having talked to the jury afterward, they wanted to send
a message to the trucking industry," said Austin's attorney, Richard
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
(snip)

So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck? Oh wait,
everything is shipped by truck and there never will be a viable alternative
solution. -Dave
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-10 15:36:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck?
How about more realistic working conditions for Truckers? You know,
stuff like eight hour days, 40 hour weeks, that sort of thing? The
trucking industry today consists of millions of rolling sweatshops
with the most miserable working conditions imaginable. No wonder
Truckers are stressed-out and crashing their rigs all over the place.
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
Reality Tanker
2006-11-10 16:35:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Dave
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck?
How about more realistic working conditions for Truckers? You know,
stuff like eight hour days, 40 hour weeks, that sort of thing? The
trucking industry today consists of millions of rolling sweatshops
with the most miserable working conditions imaginable. No wonder
Truckers are stressed-out and crashing their rigs all over the place.
I doubt that a stricter enforcement on the screwed up HOS is the answer.
Drivers need a way to take a safety break without it counting against them,
especially if they have lost too much time loading or unloading.

For a while, after Hurricane Katrina, the HOS rules were lifted for tanker
drivers transporting gas or fuel. Do you think they were in more or less
wrecks when that was done? I know a few tanker drivers that made a fortune
during that time and never heard of any roll overs while they were working
20 hour days.
Dave
2006-11-10 16:51:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Dave
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck?
How about more realistic working conditions for Truckers? You know,
stuff like eight hour days, 40 hour weeks, that sort of thing? The
trucking industry today consists of millions of rolling sweatshops
with the most miserable working conditions imaginable. No wonder
Truckers are stressed-out and crashing their rigs all over the place.
OK, let's see you start a trucking company with 8 hour days and 40 hour
work weeks. At the end of each 8 hour shift, when your trucks are parked
on the side of the road in bufu, egypt and your customers are screaming for
their loads to be delivered, how are you going to handle that situation?

Your idea is totally unrealistic. In order for it to work, you (as a
trucking company CEO) would have to control things that are totally out of
your control. You know...thinks like WEATHER, TRAFFIC, ROAD DESTRUCTION,
etc. As a trucking company CFO, you would also find it impossible to plan
for an 8-hour day in any manner that would not give your competitors a huge
advantage. -Dave
--
Dave
Scott en Aztlán
2006-11-11 03:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Dave
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck?
How about more realistic working conditions for Truckers? You know,
stuff like eight hour days, 40 hour weeks, that sort of thing? The
trucking industry today consists of millions of rolling sweatshops
with the most miserable working conditions imaginable. No wonder
Truckers are stressed-out and crashing their rigs all over the place.
OK, let's see you start a trucking company with 8 hour days and 40 hour
work weeks. At the end of each 8 hour shift, when your trucks are parked
on the side of the road in bufu, egypt and your customers are screaming for
their loads to be delivered, how are you going to handle that situation?
No doubt the robber barons of the early twentieth century had similar
concerns when their workers demanded a 5 day work week instead of six
and an 8 hour day instead of 10 or 12.
Post by Dave
Your idea is totally unrealistic.
Tell us, which trucking company do you own?
--
I'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it!
gringo
2006-11-26 01:28:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Post by Dave
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck?
How about more realistic working conditions for Truckers? You know,
stuff like eight hour days, 40 hour weeks, that sort of thing? The
trucking industry today consists of millions of rolling sweatshops
with the most miserable working conditions imaginable. No wonder
Truckers are stressed-out and crashing their rigs all over the place.
OK, let's see you start a trucking company with 8 hour days and 40 hour
work weeks. At the end of each 8 hour shift, when your trucks are parked
on the side of the road in bufu, egypt and your customers are screaming for
their loads to be delivered, how are you going to handle that situation?
Your idea is totally unrealistic. In order for it to work, you (as a
trucking company CEO) would have to control things that are totally out of
your control. You know...thinks like WEATHER, TRAFFIC, ROAD DESTRUCTION,
etc. As a trucking company CFO, you would also find it impossible to plan
for an 8-hour day in any manner that would not give your competitors a huge
advantage. -Dave
The idea is entirely realistic if all truck fleets are required to run
their trucks the same way.
--
*fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.
-- The American Heritage Dictionary



"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is...I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
------George W. Bush to the Houston Chronicle, April 9th, 1999
realitytrucker
2006-11-10 17:01:53 UTC
Permalink
Roger Shoaf
2006-11-10 15:59:09 UTC
Permalink
"Dave" <***@not.invalid> wrote in message news:4554661e$0$97240$***@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
"They want the trucking industry to stop playing
Post by Dave
Post by Scott en Aztlán
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
(snip)
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck? Oh wait,
everything is shipped by truck and there never will be a viable
alternative > solution. -Dave
The solution is to raise rates enough so that drivers can be paid enough
doing it the right way. Some ideas include mandated pay for detention.
the 10 million in punitive damages was the juries way of suggesting that
this is probably a good idea.
--
Roger Shoaf

About the time I had mastered getting the toothpaste back in the tube, then
they come up with this striped stuff.
Dave
2006-11-10 16:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Shoaf
Post by Dave
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck? Oh wait,
everything is shipped by truck and there never will be a viable
alternative > solution. -Dave
The solution is to raise rates enough so that drivers can be paid enough
doing it the right way. Some ideas include mandated pay for detention.
the 10 million in punitive damages was the juries way of suggesting that
this is probably a good idea.
The award would have to be closer to 10 billion before it would prompt
trucking companies to pay truck drivers more money. Right now, it is much
cheaper to pay the 10 million dollar punitive damage award and continue
encouraging business as usual. -Dave
--
Dave
DTJ
2006-11-12 03:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave
Post by Scott en Aztlán
Gonzales. "They want the trucking industry to stop playing
cat-and-mouse with the public's safety."
Specifically, Gonzales said the trucking industry needs to stop
pushing its employees to drive longer hours than are allowed by law
and falsify their log books.
(snip)
So what's the solution . . . stop shipping things by truck? Oh wait,
everything is shipped by truck and there never will be a viable alternative
solution. -Dave
Skipped remedial reading in college I see...
Loading...