Slashdot Mirror
Road Rage Linked To Automobile Bumper Stickers
Ponca City, We Love You sends news of a study by Colorado State University psychologist William Szlemko that recorded whether people had added seat covers, bumper stickers, special paint jobs, stereos, or plastic dashboard toys to their cars. Szlemko found a link between road rage and the number of personalized items on or in people's vehicles. "The number of territory markers predicted road rage better than vehicle value, condition, or any of the things that we normally associate with aggressive driving,' says Szlemko. What's more, only the number of bumper stickers, and not their content, predicted road rage... Szlemko suggests that this territoriality may encourage road rage because drivers are simultaneously in a private space (their car) and a public one (the road). 'We think they are forgetting that the public road is not theirs, and are exhibiting territorial behavior that normally would only be acceptable in personal space,' the researcher says.
Apparently 'not exactly rare' is an understatement. According to the beeb almost 90% of UK drivers have reported incidents of road rage (I don't drive and rarely travel by car so have no idea what the mean streets of Britain are really like). I'm not sure what that really covers though, being run off the road? Sworn at? And is that ever? Across the entire span of someone's life? Is road rage in the UK really *that* bad?
--
Free Playstation 3, XBox 360 and Nintendo Wii
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
You do realise that what you're doing is qualified as "road rage", don't you? At least a light form. You're trying to teach them a lesson, by annoying them even more.
The hint? do they mod you 'troll' or 'flamebait'?
Either your cruising speed is faster than theirs in which case you won't have the tailgating problem, or their speed is faster than yours in which case you should just let them past instead of being a prick about it. Maybe you haven't been driving long enough or maybe you're just a slow learner, but tailgaters simply don't 'get it', and you can't teach 'it' to them. The best you can do is make sure that you're not the one they run up the rear of when you have to brake for a hazard. And one day, when you pull over to let them past, you'll pass them again when they are at the side of the road explaining to a police officer why they were in such a hurry, and nothing will get the smile off your face for the rest of the day!
You could become a fan of the band This Bike is a Pipe Bomb, wrap one of their stickers around your bike, and have it destroyed by the authorities.
I assumed it was cause most often, by idiots going too slow in the left lane...the passing lane.
I've never understood that mentality really, heck, while I drive pretty fast, if I see someone wanting to pass me...more power to them!! I happily pull to the right (if in the left lane) and let them pass. It only means they will run across the speed trap cops before I do. I love to have someone run 'blocker' for me...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Actually, if someone is over taking you, your supposed to maintain your speed and not alter your driving so the person making the affirmative move can gage a course of action. By slowing down, you could be closing their escape route if something is coming and putting yourself at a greater risk of an accident.
In Ohio, it is actually part of the law that the vehicle being overtaken is to maintain a constant speed (PDF warning, see the page marked as 36 if you had the book, it should be somewhere on page 42 according to the PDF). It is possible for you to be cited if you don't as well as become partially at fault if an accident occurs. Missouri and TX have the same laws. or at least they did when I was there.
But this is all pointless in this particular situation because the guy was behind me, then I saw his hood out of me left eye, he seemed to be going about 15 mph faster then me, and he came into my lane at that time. If I hadn't reacted, we should have hit somewhere with his front door at my my front tire. I moved over and saw him continuing into my lane and passing then I saw the other car and hit the brakes. By the time he was clear of me enough that I could come back into my lane, the oncoming car had already passed. It all happened faster then it would take you to read this, literally a matter of seconds. I'm serious, it was so close that a half second off for either of us could have resulted in either him hitting me or the oncoming car. It was that close.
I hate to say it, but in this circumstance the correct thing to do was probably to hit the guy, if you can do it in a controlled manner. It's hard to tell if that would've been possible, from your description of the road, so it might not have been. But if you had hit him, he would've been 100% at fault for driving that way in the first place. And if you were driving any kind of modern car, you and your nephew would've walked away with nothing more than a few bumps and bruises.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Yeah, and I don't know if I've ever seen a car driver who obeys all the traffic laws. Most commonly, it's speeding, failing to stop at a stop sign, or changing lanes without checking a blind spot. What's your point?
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
Hawking was fine until ~college, so unless we're allowing post 4th trimester abortions he would still be here...
You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
Window smashing is the providence of thugs, period. I'd like you to actually back up your assertion that the same people who are for peace and harmony are the ones who are smashing windows
Doesn't matter. The people who do that crap, and those that chain themselves across public roads to deny their use to as many people as possible and busy up as many police and rescue people as possible are all of a stripe... because if there were indeed massive numbers of non-thug, thug-disliking throngs at such protests, then they'd go to enormous lengths to not have their events become hosts to such BS. But through the "enemy of my enemy is my friend, or least someone we should tolerate" line of thinking, the groups that organize specifically to disrupt streets and cause some mayhem - who announce themselves in advance, and crow about it on a thousand blogs after the fact! - show up like clockwork and do exactly what's expected. It's not exactly mysterious.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
WTF?
Why would you let someone get away with menacing you?
Call the police
Tell them the mile marker + color/make/model/license plate number and that he flashed a gun at you.
He will get pulled over, his car will get searched, and you won't be involved.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
I don't think you know much about firearms. There are reasons cops and soldiers don't carry revolvers any more. Semi autos have been conclusively shown to be more reliable, and the additional firepower is nice. BTW, it's a Taurus.
I started carrying after a lunatic in a semi chased me through downtown Seattle. He was following people on the freeway 4 feet behind their rear bumper, leaning on the jake brake (illegal in Seattle) to get them to move. I didn't move, and he chased me for 5 miles, running streetlights through downtown. I was surprised to find that an Explorer can not outrun an unloaded semi. I ultimately had to jump a median to escape. The police were no help, nor was his employer, as I got the name of the company who owned the truck.
I had another fellow chase me after I elected to not let him join the exiting line of cars in front of me. He followed me for a couple of miles, trying to force me off the road to fight. He elected to cease when he saw my little friend. No shots fired, and the look on his face was priceless.
I don't expect to have to use it, but I prefer to have it. I am a polite and courteous driver, but I don't feel the need to yield to assholes. You can merge behind me, I was here first. The assholes would do well to think that little old psychos like me exist. If you ram me, I'll sue you, and if you assault me, you'll pay. I'm 60+ years old with grey hair, and the courts generally look kindly towards geezers that have had to defend themselves against thugs.
I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
Maybe in the land of swine, that is true. In California (you know, the most populous state with the most cars... not that either is a badge of honor really) the slowpoke most certainly does have a legal obligation to let you ahead of him. It's in the California Vehicle Code in the 20,000s someplace. Five people behind you? You are legally obligated to pull the fuck over at the earliest safe opportunity. I HAVE seen someone pulled over for this, dunno if they actually got written.
Also, it's specifically illegal to drive in the passing lane on the freeway when not passing if there is someone behind you. It doesn't matter if you're going five under the limit, or fifty over; the law does not specify such a thing. You must get the fuck out of the way.
Also, by any fucking civilized standard, they have an obligation to treat you as they would have you treat them.
I am pretty much always the fastest thing going around where I live. (Not a record-setter or anything, I like to stay in my lane... But when I've been driving alone (e.g. not with my girlfriend who dislikes "spirited" driving) I've only had to pull over for one person in the last three years or so, and he wasn't staying in the lane. Stupid fucker. I'm all too happy to let those people go because I don't want them driving up my asshole.
Put simply, if you are holding people up when it is safe to pull over and let them pass, you are the asshole. Even if you were right about the law (which you might be in whatever sheepfucking state you live in) not being considerate enough to let people pass is rude.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yelling (if the other driver can hear you) and swerving are actions. That's road rage. You can be cited for driving in an unsafe manner. If you mark the road or even make any substantial tire noise you can be considered to have lost control of the vehicle in court. No shit.
Other than that, though... you're spot on
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you read the actual procedure, what they did was drive up to a red light in the turning lane and then when the light turned green just sat there and timed how long it took the person behind them to honk. They then just attributed any difference in time to the driver being more aggresive and hence more prone to road rage. I find it hard to categorize honking at someone while stopped at a light as 'agressive driving', particularly when compared to someone who thinks they're entitled to deliberately block traffic for an experiment. Perhaps someone should study the 'territorialty mindset' of the scientists in the study.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
I am already a personal subscriber
Personal subscribes to Nature News can view this article. To do this, you need to associate your subscription with your registration via the My Account page.
If you already have an active online subscription, login below to access your account. Enter your e-mail address and password to login to your nature.com account
whatever.