Effectively there are a number of all-way stop stop-sign controlled intersections in town, most of which are single lane, but the roads are wide enough for parking that cars can often go two wide if they want to. And most people do because, well, they're not very bright. Just as most people break the right of way and attempt to let people in when it's not safe to, and roll through stop signs, and don't use their turn signals, etc.

Anyway, I used to conform to this unwritten rule as well of squeezing over to let people go two-wide when the intersection isn't made for it, but it always made my life more difficult and the intersection more complicated, and it usually forced me to have to wait for cars that began behind me to go first. The problem is that if you let people go two-wide in a single lane at an intersection then you are invariably going to block each other's view of the intersection! So then what do people do? Crawl further and further into the intersection attempting to look around the other car! Christ.

I basically had enough of it a year or so ago when I found myself having to wait for 3 cars that started behind me to clear the intersection before I could even see if it was safe for me to go (so waiting like 5 extra minutes that I shouldn't have had to). So now what I do is I go straight up the middle and attempt to block these assholes from getting around me on either side. It works wonders. Usually. Intersections that are known for being bad suddenly become pretty simple when you use them as they were engineered to be used.

Moving on to today, I'm on my way home from work, and I pull up to just such an intersection. It's known for being a bad intersection because there's a hill right next to it and traffic comes flying up it so you don't have good visibility. To make matters worse, a lot of people use the adjacent road as a fast way to cross that part of town since there are few traffic lights on it. Most traffic makes a right where I was, but since I don't let these assholes come up beside me anymore they have to wait to do so until the intersection is clear for me to go through it.

Except for this one asshole today, that was in such a short-bus motherfucking hurry that he pulled out on our left around a couple of us into the opposing lane, pulled into the intersection almost slamming head-on into a car that was making a left onto our street, and then cut in front of me and made his right turn ahead of us. OMFG, I could follow him home and murder his whole family it's so infuriating. FUCK YOU! Eat a bullet, asshole!

/endrant

You really need to stop driving. A road rage incident waiting to happen.

Sorry, it was me. I was trying to remember how to get to the hospital after getting my balls busted.

Seriously, you can't control the idiots out there. You can only control yourself. He will be in a wreck and dead or severely injured one day pulling that stunt. Don't let their stupidity ruin your day, get home, relax, grab a few entertainment drinks, and enjoy the hard part of your day being over.

this thread could use a video/diagram, there's a lot of text

Most intersections you would go two wide at, at least around me, are ones where there's something holding up the single lane (a person turning left, cars stopped at a red light where right-on-red is permitted, etc.). I've never had an issue with running an intersection double wide like that.

For our literacy impaired members:

{"name":"606292","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/f\/c\/fc0deee3baabf4bfcf115e9e5a30ec6b.png","w":931,"h":637,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/f\/c\/fc0deee3baabf4bfcf115e9e5a30ec6b"}

There's a parking lot where we park cabs at, it has an entrance with an entry lane and an exit lane with a stop sign at the exit lane. At one time, there were arrows specifying that the entrance was one way, and the exit was divided in two with left turn arrows and right turn arrows. The paint is gone now. Oh, yeah, the entrance and exit are separated by a strip of grass that's wide as the lanes. Yet, almost half the people enter/exit the wrong way, and the ones who do exit in the exit lane and want to turn left block the right hand lane as if they expect people to enter to their immediate left. How these people remember to breathe is beyond me. OTOH, even the cops mess it up. One of them sat in the entrance lane facing the wrong way with NO lights on for a half hour last fall, I asked him if he was broke down and he mumbled something unintelligible. Typical.

Nice, Arthur, but his other left. i.e., the innocent driver (other than me) came from the opposite side.

k, now animate that that picture

Right click it, select "Save As" and rename the extension to gif.

Is it bad I don't really consider this a major thing?

Depends on the angle you look at it from. The fact that he could have wrecked and hurt or killed others..yes it is a bad thing. He is an inconsiderate prick..no it isn't a bad thing.

{"name":"useparagraphs!.png","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/e\/0ed7f7b6a37e984ee396dacaec06eb86.png","w":400,"h":300,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/e\/0ed7f7b6a37e984ee396dacaec06eb86"}

Well, I kinda gotten desensitized to driving like this.

And somewhere in a nearby galaxy, somebody is complaining about a moron who blocks two lanes of traffic, thus preventing people from making easy right turns.

Well you and your 10hp motorcycle can just go between the cars.

Except they do it at the expense of everybody else. Especially the opposing traffic that wants to make a left turn, but has to yield to them. The intersection in question isn't actually an all-way stop. I probably misrepresented that... Only the street I was on has to stop. The perpendicular street has no stop signs.

In practice, right turners aren't supposed to get to budge in front of everybody else. They are supposed to wait their turn. Sure, they might be able to go a lot sooner since they are higher on the right-of-way food chain, but at a busy intersection where there's only a small opportunity for other people to cross, and a steady stream of people that want to turn right, if you let the people turning right budge in front of everybody else then they can completely halt the progress of everybody else, and inevitably lead to chaos. That's what causes accidents (and this is a bad intersection for accidents). Eventually the people trying to go through or turn left get fed up being blocked and get more bold and inevitably the risks they take don't pay off all of the time. They shouldn't have to take those risks though. The idea of an intersection is to get everybody through safely and keep traffic flowing. Right turners have it easy as it is. They should be patient or use another route.

I've probably said this before, but here in Jacksonville, N.C. the traffic lights are timed to cause the most congestion possible. They've promised for many many years to "computerize" the traffic lights, but more than 25 years ago I noticed Johnson Boulevard always had a light turn red right as you got to it, and one night a thunderstorm knocked out the power for 15 minutes. When the power came back on, you could breeze right through one green light after another, but then I saw some fat guy in an orange jump suit with an unmarked white van fiddling with the yellow control boxes, and then you had to stop for each and every light again. Rumor has it that this town makes tens of thousands of dollars each month from tickets given to people running red lights. Too bad some people have to die for empire building.

I think here they time them so you get green lights out of the city but red lights into the city.

After my holiday in Florida I can vouch that despite the good maintenance of roads, the high volume of signs and proper road markings, the number of lanes and size of roads and the strictness of police, etc. American driving standards are really dreadful.

It is way too easy to get a driver's license here. You guys in the UK would freak if you saw how short the written test (theory) is here. Anyone who can read will pass the test. Then in the driving test, if you show that you can operate the vehicle and not do anything to cause an accident, BAM they take your picture and print out your license.
{"name":"driving-fail-epicloserscom.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/2\/a\/2a4c1f6bf012f7fe1478a0c6b4bf84ae.jpg","w":500,"h":375,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/2\/a\/2a4c1f6bf012f7fe1478a0c6b4bf84ae"}

Getting your license here was more or less like that for a long time. Few years ago it got rather strict. Now you're stuck on a learners for 1 year, where you can't drive at night, or without another licensed individual with you (who can also legally drive, isn't drunk, etc). After that you get a probationary license which you have to be on for two years, where the rules are quite strict, 0% blood alcohol level, 8 demerits instead of 15, and you can be kept on the probationary license indefinitely if you do something stupid enough. Oh, and you also cant drive at night. You have to take a written test for the learners, a basic driving test for the probationary license, and an advanced drivers test for the full license.

The timing of when I took my driver's ed, I heard it was the last one (at least for what was offered at my school) before laws went into place that was similar to what Thomas described.

Here you have to:
Pass a theoretical test (even if you know everything it can be difficult because some questions make no sense or are worded very misleadingly)
Take at least 28 driving lessons before you are allowed to take a practical test
Pass practical test
For the first three months you are not allowed to drive without a licensed driver accompanying you (and he has to be either over 24 years old with 5 years of experience or over 30 with 3 years of experience)
For the first two years you are a new driver and are subject to increased penalties for traffic violations and as long as you are under 21 you may only drive two passengers (unless you have an experienced driver)
Until the age of 24 you must have 0% blood alcohol level whenever you drive. (and also insurance is much more expensive, but that's an aside )

Over here you have to pass a theory test comprising 50 questions (85% to pass) with questions ranging from road signs to how to perform CPR. Then you are in a simulation and have to spot hazards before they unfold.

Then there's the road test (about an hour) testing most aspects of driving and they are very strict (e.g. slight hesitation, bad road position, etc).

On a motorbike you have to pass an additional test where you are on a test track and have to perform slaloms, figure of eight's, u-turns, swerve/emergency stops, etc.

I remember a top gear when they were in Pakistan (or India, I can't remember) and passing your test involved riding your bike for 10 seconds round a painted course

I just got my M2 license today

The 'M2' license basically lets me drive a full speed motorcycle without any conditions / restrictions aside from having a zero blood alcohol level. On August 9th I'm booked to take my 'M' test which will be permanent and will remove the 0.00 blood alcohol condition (although I still have to abide by the legal limit of 0.08).

The motorcycle license system works the same way as Thomas described for cars. You do a written test (which incorporates street signs) which assuming you pass gets you your M1 for 90 days. The M1 has restrictions about not driving after dark, not carrying a passenger and having a 0 B.A.C. Within the 90 days of M1 you have to take the M1 Exit test to get your M2 license. The exit test is a combination of parking-lot and road test. I lost points on the parking lot portion because the motorcycle I'm riding has crash bars which made the bike too wide for the narrow row of cones they wanted me to ride through. So I rode 'straight as an arrow' according to the tester but since I knocked more than two cones down (I knocked them all down) she had to give me a point. The second part of the test is riding around a couple of blocks in traffic doing your mirror checks and signalling etc. The second part was easy and no points were lost there (which is where it counts if you ask me).

Normally I'd need to wait 22 months before doing my road test for my M license but since I already have my M license (albeit it has a low speed restriction preventing me from driving anything capable of going faster than 65km/h) they said I don't have to wait

Careful! I think the legal limit is 0.05 now (nearly half of what it used to be). Albeit, I generally refuse to drive when I've had anything to drink. Even if I might be OK, it's hard to be sure, and it's not worth the risk. Under certain circumstances I'll allow a single beer in a 1-2 hour span, or 2 beers in a 3-4 hour span and then drive (and for at least the last hour of which I haven't had any alcohol). Any more than that and I plan to spend the night, cab it, or walk; regardless of how long it's been since I had a drink (of course, after you've had 3 beers you don't really want to stop until you've had 8 ).

Yeah! 0.05 is nearly half of 0.08! (more like 1/3 and a bit).

Well 0.05% to 0.08% is the 'warning range' where they can temporarily suspend your license and fine you $150 (but they can't actually charge you with impaired since you technically haven't broken the law). A B.A.C greater than 0.08% is still the criminal limit in Canada and testing over 0.08% will see you charged with impaired driving.

"First the man takes a drink, then the drink takes a drink, then the drink takes the man". Very bad.

Well, if you haven't broken the law, what's to stop you from taking your license back and refusing to pay? Because a cop "said to do that"?

Once your license is suspended, its the same thing as not having a license, with all of the concequences involved.

And generally not paying a fine gets you a court date.

So lawyer up and make them give the license and money back. Or make it illegal to drive < 0.08. You pick.

This is what I'd rather they do, but no, they want to have their warning thing.

You can try. But I doubt you'll get much leeway from most judges if there's definite proof that you were driving over the limits. What makes you think that they don't have the rules behind them?

Right now if you're 0.08 or over, you can have your license revoked on the spot in Alberta. You want the full rules, see here.

Most countries do make it illegal to drive lower than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_alcohol_content

Though, there are some cities that have zero tolerance in place and that means you will get in trouble even if you have a sip of alcohol and drive. If you are pulled over and even read as having alcohol they will ticket you or take you to jail. Got to be careful though, some cops are crooked though, I had a friend that was telling me one night him and his brother were pulled over. His brother was arrested for DUI and the officers didn't want to bother with a tow truck because they would had to wait for it, so they told the brother to take it to their house (they were pulled over less than 10 feet from their house) and swore they wouldn't give him a hard time over having no license. As soon as he turned it off and got out they busted him for driving with no license and DUI. Scared them bad enough that they haven't even casually drank since.

If right turners are slowing down those who have to cross traffic, then someone's doing something wrong. I've never seen/had an issue with people going around cars waiting to go left or straight to turn right (as long as it's not an all way stop).

And that friend's brother sounds like an idiot. If the cops knew he was unlicensed, and he was drunk, then no matter what the asshole in the suit says, it's not a good idea to drive the car even 10 feet. Me personally, I would have told the cop to fuck off and call a tow truck, then report him for attempted entrapment.

If a cop tells me I can break a minor law (i.e., go ahead and do a u-turn to get back on an expressway after recognizing I exited to make the environment safer when getting pulled over), then that's fine, but it's not a good idea to believe them when they say they won't hassle you for no license/DWI when they just booked your friend for it.

My rule of thumb is to err on the side of being uncooperative with law enforcement, especially if I'm already getting the ticket/whatever or have nothing to get in trouble for. That means minimal talking/question answering, not consenting to searches, etc. I'm not going to help them do their job if it's not in my best interest.

Technically it is illegal to drive with a BAC over 0.05 (I guess like it's illegal to roll through a stop sign), but it's not criminal if it's still under 0.08. The law apparently says that you can't even appeal it if you're charged with it.

For some traffic violations if you are instructed by a police officer to perform them then they are not only legal, but required. If a cop tells you to cross the intersection when the light is red you have to cross it. That makes me think that such a trick wouldn't stick here.

Yeah, but they told him to go ahead and park his brother's car in their drive. Soon as he did though the cops that told him to go ahead and park it arrested him for driving without a license and a DUI. His family attempted to sue the police, but I don't know what ever came of it.

Problem is that we are told, if you are at a light or on the road and a cop is there, you obey the cop and not the light or traffic signs. You are screwed either way as their are laws actually in place where you get in trouble if you disobey an officer. It is no wonder some get power hungry.

They already caught him. The trick was just to get him to drive back home (all 10 feet). Here, you can be charged with intent to drive drunk even if you're just sitting in your car, on your own driveway, with the ignition off. Or so I've been told.

In NY state, DWI only requires intent to drive. Simply being in the car (in any seat) with the keys in your possession counts as intent. You can be sitting in your car listening to the radio, waiting for a ride (doing the responsible thing) and still get a DWI.

The law says that a person directing traffic (DOT, police, firefighter, etc) supersedes any existing traffic control devices. The law doesn't say a cop can force you to break the law. A police officer has no right to break the law or order anyone else to do so. IANAL, but I would be fully confident in refusing to obey the cop in such a situation. If they're stupid enough to try and ticket and arrest you for refusing to break the law, then it will get laughed out of court. If they brutalize you, then you can cash in later.

On the contrary, if a officer tells you to do something and you refuse, they have a catch all they can arrest you for "Obstruction of a law enforcement officer". This is a catch that covers anything that the officer can claim you were interfering with any part of their job. This is one reason they added dash cams to cars, for the rights of the people being pulled over and for the safety of the police officers if any on tries to kill them while on the job. People don't like to admit it, but police abusing their power is more common than people want to think about.

_{Can't debate after this post (hit 5 limit post cap).}

That doesn't change the fact that they cannot legally force you to break the law. What do you suppose would happen in court when the police presented their case against an unlicensed person who refused to move a car, while drunk, under instruction of the police? Hint: it wouldn't make it anywhere near court before it was thrown out.

After you've done a day's training on a 125cc, this is the next exam in the uk and it's the equivalent of your 'parking lot' test. Do it on a 500cc and you can ride any bike on passing the next test, do it on a 125 and you have to stay on a 125 for 2 years.

IIRC, if a cop tells you to do something, you're required to do it even if it seems to break the law. For instance, if he's directing traffic at a stop light, you're supposed to do what he says no matter what the light shows. Of course there are limits to this, no B.J.s, no payments of cash, etc.

That's already been covered. It's because a traffic cop takes precedence over any lights or signs. Not because police can order you to do anything even if its illegal.

I'm 47 and still don't have a driver's license or a car.

After another week driving around the US, I'm now convinced that the reason why you guys are such bad drivers compared to UK drivers is because of your road systems. Roundabouts are just so far superior to stop-signs. Though you do need to be taught to use roundabouts properly. In the UK, learning to use roundabouts properly is at least 50% of learning to drive - I would imagine that building roundabouts in the US would cause mayhem because US citizens would have no clue of how to use them properly.

I have driven on roundabouts here in the USA without experiencing this mayhem that you speak of.

Those things have been popping up around here, and I haven't had any issues with them, though they are in isolated areas.

Is it really that hard to use your roundabouts? We have plenty of them around me. No mayhem, and no special training required.

Are they simple ones like this:

{"name":"au_Orange%20RAbout%205.JPG","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/c\/eccd84c97bfdfea6a98d7eeb44aca8d2.jpg","w":640,"h":480,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/c\/eccd84c97bfdfea6a98d7eeb44aca8d2"}

Or more complicated ones like this:

{"name":"rndabout.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/7\/8\/78d5d025cce1d446fed125298a87070a.jpg","w":434,"h":296,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/7\/8\/78d5d025cce1d446fed125298a87070a"}

Back in Christchurch, we had a three-lane, six entry/exit point roundabout that confused quite a few people.

More confusing roads are definitely safer because it forces people to slow down. It doesn't mean that people are better drivers... it just means the people designing the roads never learned how to draw a straight line.

The main problem with stop/start intersections is that women putting on their make-up and texting their bff run red lights at a high rate of speed.

According to Wikipedia, fatalities per billion km driven:

• United Kingdom: 5.7

• Australia: 5.8

• Canada: 8.2

• United States: 8.5

• New Zealand: 9.1

Everybody in the UK lives in London and walks or takes a bus around the roundabouts, so I'm not sure why their fatality rate is so high.

Here in the USA we drive drunk with loaded shotguns at high rates of speed through dangerous intersections in blinding snow storms, and we still are safer than the people down in New Zealand who mostly ride sheep to work.

And look at Canada. So cute trying to be just like the USA. Not quite there yet.

No wonder the fatality rate is so high in NZ. That roundabout is the work of the devil. WTF

The roundabouts here are of the simple type as they're replacing old four way intersections. Haven't drove through one where there was alot of cars. (I did drive through one that should of have a lot of cars, but there wasn't... I'm guessing people are scared of those things)

I believe I remember reading somewhere that Kansas has the most roundabouts than any other US city.

<edit>
I want to retract my response to not sound like a dumbass. I still think I read it somewhere but now cannot find any evidence to back that up
</edit>

The one in the picture is actually in England.

Kansas is a state.

That's a fractal roundabout!

Learning to use roundabouts was easy for me. Someone told me "give way to the right" and the rest just fell into place. (That's for countries driving on the left. If you drive on the right, it's "give way to the left".)

Don't get modern roundabouts where you give way to traffic already on the roundabout with the old style ones that had the opposite rule which is mayhem.

I think safety is better here due to the level of enforced safety and where it's targetted. For example on pedestrian (zebra) crossings, pedestrians always have the right of way so cars/bikes have to stop, seat belts aren't secondary and usage is almost 100%, distractions such as mobile phones are illegal, etc.

Funny you should ask. That is in fact the exact roundabout I learned to drive on. It's called the "Magic Roundabout", located in Swindon about 20 minutes drive from my parents' place.

I remember that b@stard like the back of my hand.

Well, if you look at the majority of your 'larger' roundabouts they are all now traffic light controlled. So you could argue that roundabouts are only of use for low-volume traffic and therefore intersections are just as good...

I assume he means Kansas City, Kansas.

And because I haven't said Kansas enough,
Kansas Kansas. Kansas Kansas Kansas, Kansas Kansas.

According to the news they reckon 80% of all major road accidents are caused on country roads (think, single lane windy roads in the cough idyllic english countryside.) This is due to farmers doing stupid things in the road with their tractors and lunatic drivers who can't drive and go too fast round bends).

So the solution they are thinking of is reducing the speed limit from 60mph to 40mph.

The solution is to stop selling fast cars.

Think of the children.

They do (think of the children), there's a big move here to changing residential roads from 30mph to 20mph (where instead of probably killing to maybe just crippling a child), but of course nobody actually goes this speed

I think the best way to improve drivers is to force them to re-test every 10 years and make them under go motorbike training