🚀 go-pugleaf

From whorning@pipeline.com Wed Jan  6 10:54:16 1999:

>Seen the propaganda Maryland put up on one of its electric beltway 
signs? It says "tailgating is deadly".

>Well, this is a crock. 

         You're entitled to your opinion, of course.  IMHO the only 
thing more dangerous than tailgating is running red lights.  It's quite 
true that the delta-v here is small and you're not going to do much 
direct damage.  What's going to happen is that someone, maybe a couple 
of someones, will spin out of control, and it really doesn't take much 
to cause that. Sounds like a situation where lots of hardware gets 
crinkled and drivers' days get ruined.  What's the delta-v between an 
out-of-control tailgater and a bridge abutment?  

>First, we have a bunch of ninnies in the left lane that won't pass and 
they piss people off, so others tailgate them. Seems the state is to 
blame for not ticketing people for impeding the flow and not staying to 
the right, so the state is to blame for the tailgating.

          Can't argue with that.  

>Second, we have a bunch of cops trying to ticket people in the left 
lane who are over the limit, and so drivers won't pass for fear of 
getting a ticket. Seems that state speed limit is partially to blame for 
tailgating.

        I do see people pulled over on the Beltway now and then.  What 
they have been doing I have no idea.  I try to keep it under a steady 70 
and once in a while jack it up to 75-80 to clear for overtaking traffic 
and I don't worry much about being stopped.  Could happen if a cop had 
me in his sights at the wrong time; he wouldn't be able to tell it was a 
temporary thing.  I wonder what people are getting stopped for?  I don't 
detect any serious effort to discourage speeding.    

>Third, the DC area is the second most congested area in the country per 
a recent news report. This compels people to drive in "compressed 
formations". This is the states fault, not drivers, for failure to 
provide uncongested highways.

        No, not the State's fault.  This is the result of a societal 
decision reached pretty much by default.  Everyone would like to have a 
2000 acre ranch located just where the White House is.  Failing that, 
they'll settle for something with 3 baths and a 2-car garage "out in the 
country".  This understandable desire and its consequences are what 
creates the congestion you bemoan.  You want to stop [new buzzword 
alert] enticed traffic? Simple as hell: forbid building outside a core 
area.  Something else that can be done: build city bypasses with no 
interchanges.  Think it will ever happen?  Har dee har har.  

>Fourth 95% of commuters are *never* at 1 car length per 10 mph. It
seems that if a driver does this, he will appear to be making no
effort to pass, so others cut in front of him from the right lane. If
he backs off to 1 car length for 10 mph, yet again, the driver behind
will just go around and then cut this person off again. So he gets
frustrated. Multiple this a half a million times and commuters will
drive "defensively", that is, they tailgate in order to "hold their
turf". No one can usually squeeze in if one is just half a car length
behind at 60 mph (though people try). Now if people were actually
passing and not "hovering" due to fear of being ticketed, then people
might be more patient and allow for more car lengths, but seeing how
speed limits are causing the problem, the state is at fault again.

        This business of "holding the turf" is only occasionally a good 
idea.  There are lots of legitimate reasons for changing lanes, and 
doing so should be made as safe and easy as possible.  It's in 
everyone's interest.  Sure, close up that lane so that the mooches in 
the passing lane can't get out of it in the unlikely event they would 
want to.  Close up that other lane so that no one can reach their exits.  
Good thinking.  

-- 
Kenneth T. Cornelius  
kencorn@clark.net