Lunatic Stops His Car In The Middle Of A Freeway To Attack Other Driver

[C5driver]

Originally Posted by Em135eye

We get the occasional despairing farmer turning a shotgun on himself but apart from that, gun suicide is as good as non existent in the UK. And most other civilised nations.

Ah yes...civilized

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by C5driver

Ah yes...civilized

You post a link to a horrific but isolated murder (albeit ONE life taken) then stick a "lol" at the end? Meanwhile over 12000 gun related deaths in the US...

Case dismissed.

[rcoccultwar]

Following US politics closely, it still is a popularity contest.

Political correctness and civility odds on likely should win though. Thank goodness we have internet conflict! Not to mention some troglodytic local economies.

[WHL102]

Holy black hole of a thread, it's time to leave work now.

Thank you all for the road rage videos and the entertaining conversation!

[WHL102]

Originally Posted by Em135eye

I'm British Army trained with high APWT scores

OPERATOR AS F***, DUDE...

Originally Posted by Em135eye

my bro in law is an ex sniper and Army weapons tester. So you have your handgun and you come up against him. Or even me.

COOL STORY, BRO...

[Blksnowflake]

Originally Posted by WHL102

OPERATOR AS FUCK, DUDE...



COOL STORY, BRO...

Thank you.

[GeorgeA]

The problem here is that slow traffic isn't moving to the right. Get this a lot in Los Angeles and it is the most annoying thing when you're traveling 80 in the left lane and someone in their Prius goes to the leftmost lane and puts cruise control at 65.. You don't need the left lane if you're going 65! Keep it to the right with slower traffic, this is a concept thats in place in Europe and really needs to be enforced in the states.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by GeorgeA

The problem here is that slow traffic isn't moving to the right. Get this a lot in Los Angeles and it is the most annoying thing when you're traveling 80 in the left lane and someone in their Prius goes to the leftmost lane and puts cruise control at 65.. You don't need the left lane if you're going 65! Keep it to the right with slower traffic, this is a concept thats in place in Europe and really needs to be enforced in the states.

That is the problem attitude right there IMO. If traffic is moving faster than the speed limit, great, but if someone is going the speed limit, I don't get mad about it. Why would you? Why is your right to go faster than the speed limit more important?

[Gesler]

I don't think so. If one person wants to go 10 or 20 over the limit on the freeway, it shouldn't matter if you are going at the limit or not, get out of the left lane, it's (un)common sense. If he/she is willing to risk getting a ticket, it's their choice. Moving out of someone else's way in the left lane is safer and sensible even if you are already going over the limit, compared to the alternative of having to pass on the right.

Had a guy abruptly slow down to the 60s today on the left lane, with a semi in the middle lane right next to him going at the same speed. Passed the db in the HOV lane and he was busy texting.

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

That is the problem attitude right there IMO. If traffic is moving faster than the speed limit, great, but if someone is going the speed limit, I don't get mad about it. Why would you? Why is your right to go faster than the speed limit more important?

[GeorgeA]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

That is the problem attitude right there IMO. If traffic is moving faster than the speed limit, great, but if someone is going the speed limit, I don't get mad about it. Why would you? Why is your right to go faster than the speed limit more important?

But you have the right to go faster as well, you just don't choose to. Why would you limit someone else from doing so if you can simply just switch a lane.

This system works great in Germany. Yes there is a speed limit but realistically, people go about 80mph without any hassle from the highway patrol (mostly). Now if there are 4 other lanes with people going about 65-75, why is it necessary to block people who are going faster then you? This not only causes traffic and extra wear on that persons car, but it isn't even efficient.

Left lane is for faster traffic and the right lane is for slower. I have gone 70 on the left and when someone comes up behind me traveling faster, I simply move a lane over so they pass and done, simple as that.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Em135eye

Maybe I wasn't replying to you specifically?
Or did your ego automatically assume it was all about you?

I'm intrigued that a suicide involving a gun is not a gun related death? Without a gun, it's quite hard to shoot yourself.

We get the occasional despairing farmer turning a shotgun on himself but apart from that, gun suicide is as good as non existent in the UK. And most other civilised nations.

Not that I need to chime in here, because the gun debate in my mind is related to people acting irresponsible, rather than discussion regarding the ownership of an inanimate object. But since you have a hair up your butt about how bad it here is in America, where apparently you think there is massive gun fire going on in the streets in every major metropolitan area (I'll leave Chicago out as an anomaly - run by ex O'Bama administration officials), let's rewind a bit.

If I recall correctly, our little country over here started out as a safe haven for a some Brits who wanted a bit of religious freedom. They decided that some asshole, who claimed to be "Royal", decided that he didn't like the Pope anymore and declared a state religion in the British isles. Well low and behold, those Pilgrims brought with them guns to hunt food and protect themselves. And a bunch more Brits soon figured out there was prosperity over here and brought their guns along too, and the means to manufacture them here (I guess guns rust up a bit on the trip over). And a few folks along the way, not too distant from their cousins who came over from the Kingdom, and possibly better educated than you, decided that maybe owning a firearm was a good way to keep some Royal ass from declaring what religion one had to belong to, and in general, keep the government in check. I've read there was a big fight about it...

So most of us Yanks take the right to bear arms a bit seriously, and if that means a bunch of miscreants shoot each other in the Place that Smells of Onions, or Baltimore even, then so be it. Statistically, per capita, the US doesn't rank the highest in the would for mass shootings, as you may think.

Thanks for your service to your country.

Cheers Mate.

[wdb]

There are idiots and maniacs everywhere you go. Best learn to cope.

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Not that I need to chime in here, because the gun debate in my mind is related to people acting irresponsible, rather than discussion regarding the ownership of an inanimate object. But since you have a hair up your butt about how bad it here is in America, where apparently you think there is massive gun fire going on in the streets in every major metropolitan area (I'll leave Chicago out as an anomaly - run by ex O'Bama administration officials), let's rewind a bit.

If I recall correctly, our little country over here started out as a safe haven for a some Brits who wanted a bit of religious freedom. They decided that some asshole, who claimed to be "Royal", decided that he didn't like the Pope anymore and declared a state religion in the British isles. Well low and behold, those Pilgrims brought with them guns to hunt food and protect themselves. And a bunch more Brits soon figured out there was prosperity over here and brought their guns along too, and the means to manufacture them here (I guess guns rust up a bit on the trip over). And a few folks along the way, not too distant from their cousins who came over from the Kingdom, and possibly better educated than you, decided that maybe owning a firearm was a good way to keep some Royal ass from declaring what religion one had to belong to, and in general, keep the government in check. I've read there was a big fight about it...

So most of us Yanks take the right to bear arms a bit seriously, and if that means a bunch of miscreants shoot each other in the Place that Smells of Onions, or Baltimore even, then so be it. Statically, per capita, the US doesn't rank the highest in the would for mass shootings, as you may think.

Thanks for your service to your country.

Cheers Mate.

So because of some history a few hundred years ago, it's all okay? And no as many mass shootings as I think? I didn't think, I looked it up; it was called a "fact."

Hey, we used to roam about invading everyone and created a huge empire; but we don't do that any more.
We used to execute people.
We used to not allow women to vote.
We used to burn witches.

We used to do a lot of things that are no longer legal or appropriate. Maybe the US could consider a bit of change too? Especially as your modern "history" isn't very old.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by GeorgeA

But you have the right to go faster as well, you just don't choose to. Why would you limit someone else from doing so if you can simply just switch a lane.

This system works great in Germany. Yes there is a speed limit but realistically, people go about 80mph without any hassle from the highway patrol (mostly). Now if there are 4 other lanes with people going about 65-75, why is it necessary to block people who are going faster then you? This not only causes traffic and extra wear on that persons car, but it isn't even efficient.

Left lane is for faster traffic and the right lane is for slower. I have gone 70 on the left and when someone comes up behind me traveling faster, I simply move a lane over so they pass and done, simple as that.

That's not the point.

The point is that getting mad about it should be about the last thing on earth you'd get mad at. If the person going 66 is going to pass someone going 65, the limit, they have just as much right to be in the "fast" lane as you. You are not special.

Seriously?

[David70]

I am surprised at the answers of "if it had been me I would have shot him" as if not taking it to the level it was taken isn't even something that they would consider.

I'll say it, if it had been me whatever started the problem would have been over miles before because I am not interested in having my daily commute include a wreck, fight, or shooting. The odds this wasn't going on for miles before the video started are close to zero.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

That is the problem attitude right there IMO. If traffic is moving faster than the speed limit, great, but if someone is going the speed limit, I don't get mad about it. Why would you? Why is your right to go faster than the speed limit more important?

You do realize that in most states, the leftmost lane is designated as a passing lane? It is, in fact, illegal to simply drive in the leftmost or designated, 'passing' lane in nearly all states.

On the drive to FL for this years' New Years celebration, I saw a FL HP Officer pull over a driver for what...blocking the left lane. He was a rolling chicane.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

You do realize that in most states, the leftmost lane is designated as a passing lane? It is, in fact, illegal to simply drive in the leftmost or designated, 'passing' lane in nearly all states.

On the drive to FL for this years' New Years celebration, I saw a FL HP Officer pull over a driver for what...blocking the left lane. He was a rolling chicane.

Not if you are going the speed limit.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Not if you are going the speed limit.

YOU ARE SO WRONG.

Impeding traffic is typically defined when not operating a vehicle reasonably, so as to block the normal flow of traffic. It typically is used in cases where a person is blocking an intersection or driving too slow and causing a log jam. Laws vary by jurisdiction, but are generally follow a standard of "reasonable operation".

It is unreasonable to drive a car in the, 'fast' or 'passing' lane when there are other vehicles attempting to pass you.

It is also stupid and a bit of a dick move.

[RM7]

Probably easier just to shoot them, right?

In any court, it'd be thrown out faster than you can say "mistrial", if the person in the lane was going the speed limit and you wanted to go around them to break the law.

See, this is what I mean, getting all bent out of shape.

[aerostar]

It's illegal in most countries to even BE in the passing lane when you're not passing. You need to pass and LEAVE the lane.

Countries like Denmark actually have a pretty strict point system and will revoke your license completely if you are caught passing on the right.

[Andrew115]

Looks like a good way to get shot in the south...

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Probably easier just to shoot them, right?

In any court, it'd be thrown out faster than you can say "mistrial", if the person in the lane was going the speed limit and you wanted to go around them to break the law.

See, this is what I mean, getting all bent out of shape.

Lol...ok.
I am speaking specifically of the act of driving in the fast or passing lane. It is patently illegal in most states.

I have a long drive today. If you wish, I can count the signs that say, "Keep Right Except for Passing" or some variation thereof in the 4 states that I will pass through.