Started By
Message
Driving "Morally"? What do you think?
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:31 pm
Driving is one of those activities in life that is highly regulated, to the point where almost every action you undertake has a rule guiding it. But I have noticed that we as a society have another set of implied rules that separate "moral driving" vs amoral driving. Where do you stand on these potential driving situations?
Situation 1: An upcoming highway exit has a dedicated lane that will force a driver in it off the highway, but that lane is empty and the rightmost lane next to it is clogged with traffic. Do you think it is "moral" if someone gets in the exit lane and uses it to get ahead of the line of traffic in the right lane via merging back in right before the exit lane exits?
Situation 2: Consecutive exits on a highway don't have a stoplight between them and the main highway is clogged with traffic. Do you think it is "moral" if a driver exits on the first exit then immediately gets back on and then immediately exits and then immediately gets back on and merges in as a way to jump ahead in traffic?
Situation 3: A lane is about to end and the signs are clearly marketed during rush hour. As some cars try to merge in early, in another the driver goes all the way down the ending road (blowing past standstill traffic on the merging into lane) to the point of the merge then forces his way in at the end via a zipper merge. Is this driver being amoral?
I am curious to hear what people say about those situations.
Thank you in advance.
Situation 1: An upcoming highway exit has a dedicated lane that will force a driver in it off the highway, but that lane is empty and the rightmost lane next to it is clogged with traffic. Do you think it is "moral" if someone gets in the exit lane and uses it to get ahead of the line of traffic in the right lane via merging back in right before the exit lane exits?
Situation 2: Consecutive exits on a highway don't have a stoplight between them and the main highway is clogged with traffic. Do you think it is "moral" if a driver exits on the first exit then immediately gets back on and then immediately exits and then immediately gets back on and merges in as a way to jump ahead in traffic?
Situation 3: A lane is about to end and the signs are clearly marketed during rush hour. As some cars try to merge in early, in another the driver goes all the way down the ending road (blowing past standstill traffic on the merging into lane) to the point of the merge then forces his way in at the end via a zipper merge. Is this driver being amoral?
I am curious to hear what people say about those situations.
Thank you in advance.
13
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:36 pm to cardboardboxer
1 and 2 are fricked up. People that do those maneuvers without some kind of extenuating circumstances can go frick themselves.
3 isn't as bad, but I still try to avoid it. That's what causes traffic a lot of the time.
3 isn't as bad, but I still try to avoid it. That's what causes traffic a lot of the time.
This post was edited on 6/2/16 at 2:37 pm
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:37 pm to cardboardboxer
I have a morning nemesis that does #3 every morning I see him. I always want to run him off the road.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:39 pm to cardboardboxer
All of these situations are drivers making efficient use of the road provided. As long as no laws are being broken, none of the sound immoral.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:46 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
3 isn't as bad, but I still try to avoid it. That's what causes traffic a lot of the time.
Actually the evidence shows that aggressive late merging makes traffic better not worse:
quote:
If roads are clear enough that everyone is already driving close to the speed limit, zipper merging isn't as effective, but in the case of congestion, Johnson said that this method reduces backups by a whopping 40 percent on average, since both lanes approach the merge with equal stake in maintaining speed.
LINK
But thank you for the post, that kind of "common sense" driving that is actually based on wrong assumptions is the exact mystery I am trying to work through.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 2:57 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
But thank you for the post, that kind of "common sense" driving that is actually based on wrong assumptions is the exact mystery I am trying to work through.
I'm talking about when there are a lot of cars moving at a reasonable speed. Person merges late, person they move in front of gets squeamish and hits brakes, chain reaction of brakes behind them ...
Boom. Traffic.
I watch it happen like everyday on my morning commute. I agree that if there is already traffic, you want to have as few merge points as possible, making the end the best way.
This post was edited on 6/2/16 at 2:58 pm
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:07 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
1 and 2 are fricked up. People that do those maneuvers without some kind of extenuating circumstances can go frick themselves.
3 isn't as bad, but I still try to avoid it. That's what causes traffic a lot of the time.
i'm this but i freaking rage over 3 and will get in an accident before i let them in my lane.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:11 pm to 3nOut
Worse is when the right lane is backed up with people making a right onto another road, and some shitbird proceeds down the left lane all the way to the turn and tries to merge over. I want to stab that guy in the neck.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:15 pm to The Spleen
The actual worst is when people drive on the shoulder of the interstate to get around bumper to bumper traffic. Nothing makes me happier than finally catching up to them after they get pulled over. Makes my day.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:29 pm to 3nOut
quote:
i freaking rage over 3 and will get in an accident before i let them in my lane.
Ditto
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:35 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
The actual worst is when people drive on the shoulder of the interstate to get around bumper to bumper traffic. Nothing makes me happier than finally catching up to them after they get pulled over. Makes my day.
Yeah I think actually breaking the law is a different thing completely. The laws are in place for a reason. I see a distinction between illegal driving and "that guy is an a-hole" driving because if what the a-hole was doing was really a problem a law eventually would be made to prevent it.
To me the most interesting part of all of this is how people will come up with semi-arbitrary rules for their own driving behavior (aka "I won't merge late.") and then try to enforce their personal rules against other individuals, aka "will get in an accident before i let them in my lane." (which IS illegal).
I am just wondering where the line is between amoral and moral driving, and if there is consistency between the personal rules of one person and the personal rules of another. I also wonder when does the moral obligation to drive correctly outdo the need for follow the legal obligation- "I won't let the a-hole merge in" is a great example of that.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:56 pm to cardboardboxer
Situation 3 used to really piss me off until I read a study that proved allowing zipper merges keeps the flow of traffic moving. It'd take some astronomical number of cars to do it for you to even be a minute or 2 later than what you would have been. I'll try to find it.
It still pisses me off though because these drivers didn't read the study. They're just being selfish and I hope they catch a bad cold that lingers for months.
It still pisses me off though because these drivers didn't read the study. They're just being selfish and I hope they catch a bad cold that lingers for months.
This post was edited on 6/2/16 at 3:57 pm
Posted on 6/2/16 at 3:57 pm to cardboardboxer
You beat me to it.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 4:25 pm to cardboardboxer
It varies depending on the age, sex and attractiveness of said driver... Race isnt important cause I don't discriminate.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 4:43 pm to reggierayreb
quote:
It varies depending on the age, sex and attractiveness of said driver..
I will go ahead and spill the beans: I do all these things- almost daily.
In fact my whole curiosity is in my mind I wasn't doing anything wrong because I wasn't doing anything illegal- I was using the roads available. It wasn't until a friend rode with me one day and gave me shite about my tactics that I even considered that other people might have a different (higher?)standard for driving than what the law allows. I also uncovered a intense hatred (as seen in this thread) for people who break this uncodifed set of moral driving laws, and I just wanted to see if others outside my circle would react the same way. Apparently so.
This post was edited on 6/2/16 at 4:48 pm
Posted on 6/2/16 at 4:57 pm to cardboardboxer
1 is only an issue if he goes beyond the dotted line into the actual exit then forces in.
2 is not really an issue if it works, but it is hard to see it working to advantage in most places.
3 is like 1to me you keep going until you get to a spot where you can ease into traffic as far along as you can. I do it at a couple places regularly, but I try to match speed and get in respectfully, not drive to the last 20 feet and barge in.
I have one more scenario - backed up turn onto an interstate/side road with a light, go past the turn lane to the next median cut, make a u-turn and come back to make a right turn to avoid waiting through 2-4 red light cycles.
I do this every time I get on I 10 here. I actually go 2 median cuts since the first is no u-turn.
If it is legal and you are respectful, then driving smart is not amoral.
2 is not really an issue if it works, but it is hard to see it working to advantage in most places.
3 is like 1to me you keep going until you get to a spot where you can ease into traffic as far along as you can. I do it at a couple places regularly, but I try to match speed and get in respectfully, not drive to the last 20 feet and barge in.
I have one more scenario - backed up turn onto an interstate/side road with a light, go past the turn lane to the next median cut, make a u-turn and come back to make a right turn to avoid waiting through 2-4 red light cycles.
I do this every time I get on I 10 here. I actually go 2 median cuts since the first is no u-turn.
If it is legal and you are respectful, then driving smart is not amoral.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 5:18 pm to cardboardboxer
I don't think morality enters the picture until you are trying to decide whether to pull the trigger or not.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 5:18 pm to cardboardboxer
1 - Get in line with everyone else. That exit lane will get clogged when more people do the same thing. Also, passing on the right, etc.
2 - Again, this will cause more delays because now cars ahead of you are gonna have to slow/stop to allow people to merge back on. Back to square 1.
3 - You are supposed to use the full lane to merge. One car pass, one car merge, and so on. That is the preferred zipper method that no one uses. Merging early causes delays and potentially wrecks from people slamming on their brakes.
2 - Again, this will cause more delays because now cars ahead of you are gonna have to slow/stop to allow people to merge back on. Back to square 1.
3 - You are supposed to use the full lane to merge. One car pass, one car merge, and so on. That is the preferred zipper method that no one uses. Merging early causes delays and potentially wrecks from people slamming on their brakes.
Posted on 6/2/16 at 6:17 pm to blue_morrison
Good pics, but your example isn't what drives people nuts. Typically traffic is bumper-to-bumper going 20mph or often slower in the target lane for a mile or more before the forced lane change. And assholes zip ahead expecting the 100 cars they've just passed to let them in. To hell with that!
Posted on 6/2/16 at 8:12 pm to cardboardboxer
All three drivers should be stopped by the cops, removed from their vehicle and tazed for the entertainment of the people stuck in traffic. I'd throw the cops a C-note as I slowly passed.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News