It also helps to drive a 20 year old pickup for those who want to up the ante when their lane runs out, plus my 4 years of martial arts classes for any real problems afterwords.
Use Both Lanes To Merge Point?
- Thread starter flashlite
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
- Status
It also helps to drive a 20 year old pickup for those who want to up the ante when their lane runs out, plus my 4 years of martial arts classes for any real problems afterwords.
kitelights
Flashlight Enthusiast
At first I thought you had a legitimate point until I read your last post. For others that might also be concrete, anal thinkers, my statement about utilizing real estate refers directly to the OPs post regarding using a lane that is closing down or not using it.
I do not tailgate, to a fault, and those that do irritate the hell out of me. The reason is my own safety, because I know that if there were some even slight braking for whatever reason, there is no possible way that they could stop in time without some type of mishap. Again, this is based on their ignorance, because if they knew the facts (stopping distance vs travel distance and reaction time) no sane person would do it. Again, my statement is based on your statement regarding 3 feet behind your bumper at hwy speed.
Seems you still have much to learn, so it's a good thing that you're still willing to learn.You must be the first considerate aggressive driver I have ever know, because up to this point I did not know that such a thing existed.
How the hell you ever got this assumption out of what's been said is beyond me, but certainly colored my first response in this post above.
Now for an update to my original post. I checked with VA State Police and got some interesting information. VA's laws are contradictory and at the very least conflicting and confusing.
It is legal to use the closing lane up the point that it ends. The non closing lanes, however, have the right of way and have no obligation to let traffic from the closing lane in.
This creates a serious conflict to me and I've written in detail to both my Delegate and Senator in my state's legislature regarding the issue with my own suggestions and asking that, at the very least, the conflict is eliminated.
So, (in the State of VA) those of you that think that the individuals that use the closing lane are inconsiderate, why is obeying the law deemed inconsiderate? I can just as easily think (and I do) that those in the travel lane that don't let others in, are the ones that are inconsiderate.
This was an excellent topic to post and should be a great example for us to realize that not every situation is black and white.
kitelights
Flashlight Enthusiast
I remember years ago when I was much younger, thought I was invincible, was an extremely aggressive driver w/o the consideration part, and drove an old full sized Dodge PU that barely had paint on it.It also helps to drive a 20 year old pickup for those who want to up the ante when their lane runs out, plus my 4 years of martial arts classes for any real problems afterwords.
I got giddy if someone wanted to challenge me in traffic. I think I paid $300 for the truck. It was like driving a wrecking ball. You're right, it really does color your attitude.
I had the same attitude as you w/o the martial arts. Had we met, I might have gotten my *** kicked. These days, I'm much older and like to think that I've matured. My attitude in driving has drastically changed. I'm a considerate and defensive driver, but I still consider myself aggressive. Maybe my definition of aggressive is different from others.
I'm not as likely to be confrontational as I used to be. I consider it maturity and maybe necessary these days. I can tell you that if you approached my car in anger with an attitude, you'd need a lot more than 4 years of martial arts, unless you're from the Matrix.
EndOfTheTunnel
Newly Enlightened
More often than not, I'll wait in line. But if I'm in the wrong mood, I'll take the closing lane because I don't feel like watching a couple dozen cars get ahead of me because of the 'polite' motorists ahead of me who will let them in.
I've watched this phenomenon many times, and without exception the closing lane moves faster than the lane adjacent to the closing lane. If each driver in the adjacent lane allowed exactly one vehicle from the closing lane to merge, then both lanes should theoretically proceed at the same rate. But that's not what happens. The only way the closing lane can move faster is if, on average, drivers in the adjacent lane allow more than one vehicle in from the closing lane. I try to lower that average by usually letting in zero vehicles.
I feel that drivers who let anyone in are truly impolite. They may feel good about themselves for letting one guy go, but I doubt they realize or care that they've delayed countless people behind them.
I've watched this phenomenon many times, and without exception the closing lane moves faster than the lane adjacent to the closing lane. If each driver in the adjacent lane allowed exactly one vehicle from the closing lane to merge, then both lanes should theoretically proceed at the same rate. But that's not what happens. The only way the closing lane can move faster is if, on average, drivers in the adjacent lane allow more than one vehicle in from the closing lane. I try to lower that average by usually letting in zero vehicles.
I feel that drivers who let anyone in are truly impolite. They may feel good about themselves for letting one guy go, but I doubt they realize or care that they've delayed countless people behind them.
When I was younger I was alot more mellow, as I have gotten a bit older my tolerance for peoples crap has diminished greatly (perhaps the reverse of most), this is mostly true toward the way these s*hitheads drive today, anyone who drives alot and isnt one of these needs no explanation. I dont speed, cut over at the last second or just drive onto the highway without "merging", the list go on.
The things I see on the road everyday are unbelievable!
Kite you are about as wrong headed as most miscreants that think the world is their playground. According to your research you have found that it is perfectly legal to travel in the blocked lane until you reach the block. Having chosen to be in that lane it is your civic responsibility to remain in that position until traffic clears or enough of a break develops for you to safely merge into that lane. And the legal definition of safely merging is to not hinder or cause the person coming to slow down.If you force your way in or cause me to slow down in your attempt to merge you have broken the law and deserve prosecution. I on the other hand will obey the law, which you admit has no compulsion for me to show you any consideration. On the manners front I will show you the same respect and that you have shown others by letting you set in your chosen lane until you can merge legally. It is the same concept of cutting into line ahead of others. It is the equivalent of an eye for an eye. This is one step above of the selfishness you show. However my preferred mode of operation is to be kind and courteous to all drivers, but my baser human instincts surface when someone takes advantage or believes it is their right and not my kindness that has given them a break. I simply retract my kindness and stand firmly on equal inconsideration as the aggressor. In other words they usually get pissed because they get treated in the same manner they treat others. In another trite cliche, you have made your bed now sleep in it. Which If I were a police officer I would place myself bodily in your way, with my hand on my weapon, and force you to stay in your selected position until I was satisfied you had lost more time than your inconsideration had gained you by at least double. And smiled the entire time.
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
You said this:
kitelights said:
Forming a single line well ahead of the merge is essentially the state of high awareness among drivers, whether because they are familiar with the area, see the signs for upcoming construction, or were paying attention and saw an accident/disabled motorist up ahead.
Think if you were going to check out at a store. One line has two people, the one right next to it has none. Some walk right up for service, some say "after you" and let another person who has been waiting longer go first.
jtr1962
Flashaholic
Count me in as one of those who has less tolerance for people's stupidity as I get older. Not a car driver here, only a cyclist, but I fully agree the stuff you see on the roads each day defies belief. Oh, and the stories my brother and sister, who both drive, tell me! Suffice it to say the jerks are the majority, at least in this part of the country.
kitelights
Flashlight Enthusiast
Wow, you sure put me in my place. And BTW, if bullfrogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ***.
Bottom line is the law states that the non ending lane has the right of way and that appears to be the rule rather than the exception. The exception does exist b/c I have experienced it (alternate merge) and it is my opinion that the alternate merge is the best solution for the situation being discussed. That is, however, my opinion, of which I am entitled to and it isn't right or wrong.
The law (in my state) also states that it is legal for me to travel in an ending lane until its end, so while it may be your opinion that if I use it, I am inconsiderate, that is your opinion and not fact. It is my place to yield to the other lane and I can only enter when doing so safely. It is not illegal for me to be there. Some here think that there should be a single lane and that is their opinion. It is an opinion b/c the law allows for the ending lane to be occupied, therefore, it is fact, not an opinion.
In a similar vein, traffic entering a highway via an acceleration lane is required to yield to traffic on the hwy, yet we are taught to accelerate to the speed of the traffic and merge at the same speed. While the traffic on the highway knows that they have the right of way, they are taught to cooperate with the merging traffic. Some drivers adamantly maintain the attitude that 'I have the right of way' and go out of their way to make it difficult for drivers entering the hwy. On the other hand, there are drivers entering with attitudes that are determined to force their way in, no matter what and I certainly don't agree with that. It is, however, a dangerous situation when acceleration lanes have stopped traffic and can't allow acceleration when hwy traffic is moving at a normal speed.
I've already stated that I believe that it is in everyone's best interest (efficiency) for the real estate available to be used to reduce the back up. If the alternate merge law was the rule rather than the exception, I believe that it would be the most efficient way to handle merging traffic, not only for the physical logistics, but for the obvious conflicting attitudes for dealing with this situation. If alternate merging were the norm, the hostile attitudes would be eliminated. It's a no brainer to me, but that's my opinion.
I do find it interesting that the hostile attitudes and name calling seem to be coming from those that consider others to be inconsiderate and selfish. The mere presence of the heated emotions that have emerged in this thread are justification for the alternate merge to me.
If I'm already in the closing lane traveling faster than the prevailing speed in the through lane, and there's an available gap (that means one vehicle length and two safe following distances, naturally), I most certainly will merge late to get in that slot without hindering anyone else's travel.
If I'm traveling at or below the prevailing speed in the through lane and there are no visible gaps ahead, I won't race ahead and hope someone lets me in.
(Of course, now that I'm a full-time cyclist, this situation doesn't really affect me...)
For situations in between, it might go either way. As a general rule, the farther people use both lanes without causing a slow-down at the merge point, the more efficient things will run, but that doesn't make merging late automatically better. IMO anyone who either always merges early or always merges late will wind up causing trouble both for themselves and others, and is therefore both foolish and inconsiderate, no matter their claims to the contrary. Way too many of them on the roads, as well...
If I'm traveling at or below the prevailing speed in the through lane and there are no visible gaps ahead, I won't race ahead and hope someone lets me in.
(Of course, now that I'm a full-time cyclist, this situation doesn't really affect me...)
For situations in between, it might go either way. As a general rule, the farther people use both lanes without causing a slow-down at the merge point, the more efficient things will run, but that doesn't make merging late automatically better. IMO anyone who either always merges early or always merges late will wind up causing trouble both for themselves and others, and is therefore both foolish and inconsiderate, no matter their claims to the contrary. Way too many of them on the roads, as well...
kitelights
Flashlight Enthusiast
Some of you guys sure are into the 'what if' scenario and I'm still talking about the 'what is' that the OP opened with. I don't disagree with any of the reasons that you stated, but you just arbitrarily injected them into the conversation. That's not the situation that the OP stated.
Your check out example is a good one and presents an even stronger case for alternate merge. One of my pet peeves is to be standing in a check out line for a long time and then an unused register opens. Most often those at the back of lines run to the newly open register and go through first. The ones waiting the longest wait longer and those waiting the least amount of time, go first. Some stores take the approach, "I'll take the next person in line," and that's the way that it should be. Best Buy at busy times forms a single line with ropes, like banks, and the next open register takes the next person in line.
If all traffic lanes are utilized and traffic merges alternately, it is the fastest and fairest way to move traffic in a situation when eliminating a lane of traffic.
If we form a single line, as some suggest, we create two to three times the back up. If that's what DOT wants, cut off the lane. Wait, that is what they've done. The argument here is when it ends and the law says it's a travel lane until it ends. The conflict can ONLY be resolved fairly by how the merge takes place, and my opinion is that can be easily accomplished by alternate merges.
The only other solution that I can see is to make a law that states 'in a merge situation once a single line is formed and the ending lane is not being utilized, it is illegal to travel in that lane' even if that line is 5 miles long, which is exactly what you guys are saying. The conversation now becomes, 1 mile is OK, but not 3/4 mile, or 1/2 mile is OK, but not 1/4 mile or if the 5 mile rule is OK, why not 10 miles? Starting to sound like a bunch of socialists.
OCD
Enlightened
So, if it is about using all the lanes up to the merge point, then I guess the same would hold true for a lenghty exit lane on an interstate? My route to and from work has several long exit lanes in which MANY drivers will actually move over to that lane and speed up, only to expect to be let in right before the lane exits.
By this argument, traffic should flow faster, right? :shakehead Sure they know the lane ends, but they will get where their going faster and that's all that counts to them.
IMHO, anyone who knows the lane they are traveling in ends and decides to pass a long line of cars, without making any effort beforehand to merge, feels they are more important than anyone else going the same direction and the ones who have already merged deserved to be passed.
By this argument, traffic should flow faster, right? :shakehead Sure they know the lane ends, but they will get where their going faster and that's all that counts to them.
IMHO, anyone who knows the lane they are traveling in ends and decides to pass a long line of cars, without making any effort beforehand to merge, feels they are more important than anyone else going the same direction and the ones who have already merged deserved to be passed.
Last edited:
The traffic can best be served by keeping the flow moving as quickly and smoothly as possible. A smooth flowing singe file is the quickest and safest method for moving traffic through a single lane restriction. If the intent of dot was to have everyone fill up all lanes and merge by alternate lanes then they would not bother with the merge warning signs. A simple barricade would be all that is necessary. The line of traffic may be shorter but the number of cars waiting will be higher because you have slowed traffic by using the alternate lane merging. The goal of dot is to get people where they are going. The length of the lines is not as important as the number of cars that pass through the restriction. Your basic premise is flawed. Getting the highest flow rate is done by a single line moving in a steady rate. If you can realize that the shorter lines you see contain more cars and therefore are less efficient. The law in most cases recognise this fact and give the right of way to the lane without the restriction. Making the onus of safe merging on the cars that failed to merge in proper time. The law system realizes the best way to move traffic and protects that method by law.
Suppose for a moment you were at a supermarket with three checkout lanes. If 2 of the lanes were closed would you walk up to the first closed lane (with no line) and expect the patrons in the open lane to let you merge? Why do you expect that on the road? I hope your next wait is as long as the wait you would expect in the closed supermarket lane.
TedTheLed
Flashlight Enthusiast
this happened to me exactly once in my life.
there was no warning, and by the time I noticed the line to my left the cars were bumper to bumper..
at the time I assumed, as I continued on in my lane, that these cars were lined up preparing to make a left turn into a driveway on the opposite side of the highway, for a wedding perhaps; I had seen this happen before.
when I got to the 'merge point' a cop there went absolutely BERSERK, screaming something like -- "when you see cars forming a line do you not follow suit?" I quite honestly replied "no." another cop tried to calm the first by suggesting maybe I had emerged from a driveway to find the line already formed -- officer berserk had me sit until the whole line went through, and then allowed me to continue on my way.
emotionally immature, stupid, irrational inconsiderate cops like that are more dangerous than some innocent guy who failed to merge soon enough.
there was no warning, and by the time I noticed the line to my left the cars were bumper to bumper..
at the time I assumed, as I continued on in my lane, that these cars were lined up preparing to make a left turn into a driveway on the opposite side of the highway, for a wedding perhaps; I had seen this happen before.
when I got to the 'merge point' a cop there went absolutely BERSERK, screaming something like -- "when you see cars forming a line do you not follow suit?" I quite honestly replied "no." another cop tried to calm the first by suggesting maybe I had emerged from a driveway to find the line already formed -- officer berserk had me sit until the whole line went through, and then allowed me to continue on my way.
emotionally immature, stupid, irrational inconsiderate cops like that are more dangerous than some innocent guy who failed to merge soon enough.
People that drive to the last moment are generally uneducated. Barely evolved beyond swinging in the tree tops. Really should not be behind the wheel of a tricycle let alone a car.
They think the word "merge" means go like hell to the last moment then beg. Same type of brain that confuses unemployment compensation with paid vacation.
They feel that "merge" only applies to everyone else...again...a little slow upstairs.
I sometimes let them in...cause I would rather have them in front of me than behind me...a slow mind might not remember which peddle is the brake or gas. Safety first
They think the word "merge" means go like hell to the last moment then beg. Same type of brain that confuses unemployment compensation with paid vacation.
They feel that "merge" only applies to everyone else...again...a little slow upstairs.
I sometimes let them in...cause I would rather have them in front of me than behind me...a slow mind might not remember which peddle is the brake or gas. Safety first
Last edited:
kitelights
Flashlight Enthusiast
And your guess would be wrong. An absolute idiotic 'example' to inject into this topic and doesn't even warrant a response. Your opinion does not appear to be humble and is certainly wrong in regards to how I 'feel' and what my actions indicate that I think.
If this was referring to smooth flowing traffic, I don't think that this topic would have been posted and commented on. The scenario that I see is that traffic is start and stop and backed up.
Since my basic premise is flawed, do you have any facts to back your statements? We're not talking about physics, nozzles or water pressure. We're talking about traffic. Cars, people, actions and reactions.
When you start examples of getting in closed check out lanes and expecting service as parallels you lose my willingness to attempt to participate in an intelligent exchange.
Come on people. Can't there be some meaningful, intelligent discussion of the topic without cruel attacks?
I thought that I've presented some compelling reasons to consider alternate merge. Does anyone else have thoughts on the matter out side of attacking me and accusing me of being selfish and inconsiderate?
This would have been better as a part of the Pet Peeves thread. By itself, there's only so many posts that can be made before it devolves into poster vs poster, rather than thoughts vs thoughts. It's become acts of road rage, and we're not even on the road. It's time to take a breather.
- Status
