Microblog Memes

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago*

Almost got into an accident last night on this. Car 1 stopped at a 4way to my right, Car 2 opposite me stopped, then I stopped. Distinctly. Whole ass seconds between all stops. Me and 2 are waiting for 1 to go. It's 11:00pm. I can't say for sure, but I just KNOW Car 1 was waving his hands at us, who can't see through his windshield because that's how night time works. Way too much time passes, and me and 2 are like, fuck it and start going, then 1 flashes his brights and goes narrowly missing both of us. Was he just really wanting to be an a car accident? Is he drunk? Who knows, but half the accidents I've narrowly avoided involve a 4 way stop and an idiot.

parent

[–] CoolMatt@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 years ago

In my city there is a very popular good samaritan trap on the main drag into town, and I am waiting for the day something nasty happens at that particular parking lot entrance, so then they maybe redesign that section of the street or something.

parent

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I first thought you were talking about waving to pedestrians to cross when you stop to let them go. Which (edit: stopping and waiting) is a correct and expected behaviour, afaik

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

Stopping for pedestrians at cross walks is correct, but you should never be waving at anyone to go.

When you wave at people to go they are less likely to check that the other lanes are safe for them to cross. You stop and look right at them so they know you see them and wait until they go on their own.

parent

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 point 2 years ago

That was about what I meant, but thanks for expressing this, sorry I was vague.

parent

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago

That's fine. That's telling a pedestrian you have seen them and are obeying the rules of the road. That's reasonable.

parent

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Drivers that want to queue in single file when you should use all available lanes and then merge in turn at the front.

REEEEEEEEEE!!!

Edit: I really want to know the thoughts of the people that downvoted this lol

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] Magnergy@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

Simple, orderly zippering when a lane actually ends is the way. Wasting that useful pavement to create slower traffic and more traffic jam is insane and should be ticketed.

parent

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

The most infuriating are the wannabe policeman that straddle both lanes to stop people passing.

Like, if you wanna sit in a queue for no reason then good for you, don't stop people passing that have actually bothered to read the highway code.

parent

[–] Magnergy@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago

Yeah. It isn't about cheating, fairness, who got in a lane first. Isn't territory to defend. We don't have to enforce rules on each other. The traffic planners and road crews went through a bit of effort with like signs and cones and shit to tell us where they want us to merge. Zippering helps everyone go faster. Kinda why the planners want us to do it.

parent

[–] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago

I didn't even know this could be controversy...

parent

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago

I fucking hate this because it creates ambiguity, usually at times when things need to happen very quickly. It always seems to happen at busy intersections when I've got mere seconds to get through, usually a left hand turn. I'm waiting because I need to make the turn, there's a person across from me going straight who will have the right of way and I can't go til they go, but I'm looking back and forth waiting for an opening for when that person will go (and then me). The opening comes... and I wait... and they wait, and then I see this fucking person is looking at me like a jackass like they were doing me a favor. The favor would've been them following the goddamn right of way, then we both could've gone to where we needed to go, now I have to wait again.

parent

[–] Bertuccio@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Misunderstanding "right of way" is half the problem.

Right of way is ability to make a road, or the road itself by extension. You can't have the right of way - it's usually the government's - and you can't give it away. This is why wording is consistently who must yield the right of way, and not who has the right of way.

If it's a driver's turn to act, they are obligated to act. It's not their option or right to act.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] elephantium@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

I've usually heard "right of way" used in terms of sense 3 of the dictionary. I've never heard it used to refer to the ability to make a road -- that just makes me think you have a skilled construction crew on speed dial.

parent

[–] Bertuccio@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Dictionaries list common usage - even if incorrect. Look up the definition of right of way for your state or other government and I'm certain it will be the thing on which you travel or the right to create and manage it, not your "rights" while traveling on it.

I couldn't find a list of all definitions by state but the three states I checked all use that.

It would be weird if they didn't, since that's been the term since before automobiles existed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_way

parent

[–] beaiouns@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

Am I out of touch? No, it's the dictionaries that are wrong.

parent

[–] Bertuccio@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

Looks like someone looked up their state definition and was annoyed at being wrong 😉

parent

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 point 2 years ago

Indeed, in the boating world, the words are "stand-on" or "burdened" vessel, which makes it clear that the vessel that should continue its course has the obligation to do so under the collision regulations. The "give way" vessel should alter its course or intentions to "keep clear." Nobody — nobody! — has the "right of way."

parent

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

There's actually no legal definition for "right of way" in the UK. Despite it being a widely understood concept, if you go to court to defend yourself in a road traffic accident and your defence is "it was my right of way, your honour", you could find yourself in trouble.

parent

https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-rights-of-way

[–] Bertuccio@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

Weird. I found one in seconds on Google and it's about whether you can use the way, not the rules governing turn order while driving.

Did you look it up before making that comment?

parent

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago*

Ok. I was referring to the commonly known and understood "right of way" in regards to road traffic, I thought that was obvious but perhaps I could have made it clearer, but thanks for letting me know of the term in regards to access to land and public rights of way.