🚀 go-pugleaf

sanjian wrote:

>"Brandon Sommerville" <gti@null.net.gov> wrote in message
>news:5bnq8t4aqgenqohd9ev46g0u7no55n3kk5@4ax.com...
>> sanjian wrote:
>>
>> >"John Henry" <johnshenry@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:3A8BEC52.155A3550@sprintmail.com...
>>
>> >> > Lane squatters are a significant problem.  If I'm in the left lane, and
>> >> > someones closing up on me (which is seldom, as I don't tend to go slow as it
>> >> > is), I'll move over to let him through, then go back to where I was. Not a
>> >> > problem.
>> >>
>> >> But go back to where you were, ie in the left lane, when you aren't passing
>> >> anyone?  If so, you are part of the problem.  People need to think of that
>> >> passing lane as though it is one with oncoming traffic.  You don't stay there
>> >> unless you NEED to be there.
>> >
>> >And if the lane is clear, I see absolutely no reason why I shouldn't use it.
>>
>> If there's room enough in the right lane for you to be there, why
>> aren't you there?  It's courtesy.
>
>It's not seen that way anymore.

By who?  Holding doors and pulling out chairs for ladies isn't done
much anymore either, that doesn't mean it isn't a courtesy.

>> >I don't see it as an effective use of all lanes.  First of all, for those
>> >traveling faster, it requres constantly changing speed and lanes to go back
>> >into the right lane when they're just going to be in the left lane again.
>> >Second, I doubt the benefits of restricting lane usage.
>>
>> If traffic isn't heavy, all lanes don't need to be used.  Traffic
>> flows much more smoothly when lane discipline is used.
>
>If traffic is light enough, who gives a crap what lane I'm in?  

As traffic gets heavier, the more people in the wrong lanes means
traffic won't flow as well.

>All the argument I've seen comes down to:
>
>"You should be in the right lane"
>"Why"
>"Because you should"
>"Why"

It's courtesy.  It means most if not all passing is done on the left
which makes driving much more predictable and thus safer.

>"Because that's what they do in Europe"
>"This isn't Europe, Who cares"

Such a typical American POV.  Sad.  Regardless, no one has said you
should do it because they do it in Europe.  What we are saying is that
European countries that enforce this tend to have higher travel speeds
and roads that are at least as safe as American roads.  The system
works.  The fact that it is proven across the pond seems to offend
you.  Any reason why?

>"Because it's a passing lane"
>"Now it's a driving lane"

Only since the NMSL was implemented.  Now it's been removed, as should
it's corollaries.

>> >> We're still not there.  It has *nothing* to do with "how fast that lane is
>> >> going!!! Or if you can "handle" the 150 mph!!! It is not the 150mph lane!! It is
>> >> the PASSING lane!!!!  If you are going 17  mph, but still passing other cars,
>> >> you have every right to be there.  How hard is that to understand!?
>> >
>> >That's not very effective use of the lanes.
>>
>> Sure it is.  It allows the maximum flow of traffic at comfortable
>> speeds.  Surely you can see the advantages of having three cars
>> traveling in the right lane vs three cars traveling side by side to
>> everyone coming up behind them?
>
>If someone's coming up behind you, get out of the way.  If not, who cares?

Why move back?  In fact, why move left if you don't have to?
-- 
Brandon

"You'll never prove a thing, copper.  I'm just a 
 part time electrician.  I..., I..., BAD IS GOOD 
 BABY!  DOWN WITH GOVERNMENT!"
    - The Evil Midnight Bomber That Bombs at Midnight

Remove ".gov" to e-mail