Slashdot Mirror
MIT Algorithm Predicts Red Light Runners
adeelarshad82 writes "Researchers at MIT have developed an algorithm that determines which drivers will run a red light, within one to two seconds before a potential collision. The research, based on 15,000 cars at a busy intersection, monitored various factors to determine which cars were were likely to run a red light. They found that their predictions were correct about 85 percent of the time, which is about 15-20 percent better than existing traffic prediction algorithms."
Traffic court division!
I got here through a series of tubes
If the car isn't slowing down, it's more likely to run the light.
Deep.
Have you read my blog lately?
One would think that they simply will wait all of the 2 seconds to check that the driver actually runs the red light.
It's not like you can deploy a SWAT team in front of the driver in time to stop him from running the light and never know if he would actually have done it.
I assume it simply selects BMWs?
AI at the Crossroads - predicting who is going to run a red light
I usually look when the light turns green to make sure no one is about to run it. I have a similar accuracy in determining when I shouldn't cross because someone is going a little too fast. I don't think it's the speed, because some people like locking up their brakes at the last second. I think even those people have their foot on the break and are ready to stop. Whereas runners won't be decelerating much or if at all, and may not even be looking at the red light. Just imagine you're driving on a straight flat piece of land through a green light. That's what those drivers will do. That kind of behavior. Only the light is red. If you watch for it, you'll see it every time.
My issue with this technology is that the dumber types will pick it up and think that the same idea can also be used to catch speeders, drunk drivers, etc, etc. So they'll demand those systems be built and offer stupid amounts of money for it to happen. When it does happen, and it just might, the accuracy will be low, but you'll still have to go to court to fight your way out of a DUI because the computer said you swerved more than a few inches once. They already managed to get the field sobriety test approved, which most people fail SOBER, especially beside a busy interstate in the cold at night with all those bright lights buzzing past at 70mph. You fail a field sobriety test, you're drunk. Period.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
Is driver on mobile phone? Add 1
Is driver drinking coffee? Add 1
Is driver putting on makeup/shaving/combing hair? Add 1
Is driver having animated (you can see heads turning and arms waving about) discussion with passenger/children? Add 1
Is driver speeding? Add 1
If your score is 3 or higher then expect them to run the light, hope you are not in a crossing lane.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Predict that every car will not run the light. My prediction is correct much more than 85% of the time. Why aren't I in the news?
On the other hand, if everyone is being told to not enter the intersection because someone might run the red light, then you can more safely run red lights.
That's got to count for something....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Hope the folks at Google adapt this to their self-driving car. Seems like a no-brainer.
Come to think of it, the whole interaction would be a no-brainer. Car detects red-light runner, car avoids red-light runner.
We slide further down the slope that Huxley warned us about....
Sure, let's stop any applied sociological and psychological research whatsoever because OMG 1984 STALIN HITLER!!!
Not all slopes are slippery.
Does the red get held on the cross street longer ?
That just makes the red-runners life a lot more safer and encourages the behavior.
Does it trigger the 5ton metal barrier at the stop line ?
That make sit safer for the cross street and discourages the behavior. But we don't have the 5ton barriers.
We can't wait that long, city revenues are down again!
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
It's not like you can deploy a SWAT team in front of the driver in time to stop him from running the light and never know if he would actually have done it.
Can delay the green on the crossing street, or even put up an alarm with flashing blinkers so no one enters the intersection. The flashers can be implemented with the existing traffic lights, so not that expensive. What is expensive is setting up the cameras linked to a central computer on every intersection. They kind of doing it already with the red light cameras though.
MIT? The M in that TLA stands for Massachusetts. I've visited the state and seen the drivers, and I'm pretty sure that red light running there is mandatory. As near as I could figure, the law there is if you ever see the green or yellow as you approach the intersection, then the light is still considered green for you. I'll wait for research from somewhere else.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Hey, that's stupid. It's literally seconds before the crime is committed. Wait 6 seconds and you can ticket them for actually breaking the law. The applicable field for this information is self driving cars. If a car can know when a red light running is going to occur, it can not drive out in front of it.
It's amazing how paranoid you can be.
Using this technique plus normal(?) traffic cameras, police could pretty quickly build up a list of habitual red light runners. (Even if they didnt actually "run" the light, they would be put under suspicion). They could be put on a list for "random" pull overs. (This presumes that video cameras with auto license plate reading are present and functioning on police car dashboards. I'm not sure this is the case nationally, but when I was in Denver recently a police car pulled over my friend because the computer had her license plate on a list. Call it the "Do Not Drive List").
This is nothing compared to when face recognition systems become widely prevalent. That'll blow away the "big-brother" predictions made by science fiction films like minority report (which used retina scans). Of course, WE'VE been supplying the government with tons and tons of this pre-edited, organized data tagged data. Thanks Facebook! (which is another reason why I don't use it). Call it the "Do Not Walk List".
That coupled with national biometrics programs (India, Afghanistan) and GPS tracking in every smartphone (Carrier IQ) and warrantless tapping/tracking of American citizens (war on terror) means we are rapidly heading towards a world where your government CAN know where you are at every moment. Whether or not they WILL know where you are is up to the battles over privacy information.
Ah, so that's why my June ski trip to Whistler ended badly.
I think deploying a bollard in the path of the potential light runner will get the message across.... CRUNCH!
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Delaying the light because somebody's likely to run it has it's own problems. Every day around here I'd be surprised if there weren't hundreds or even thousands of cases where people ran red lights and nobody was hurt or killed.
I do personally support efforts to keep people from running red lights, it is important to keep things in perspective. Is further gridlock across the city and an incentive to run red lights more or less harmful than the status quo? Personally, I suspect that it isn't, at least around here.
But, if they use the information to more accurately crack down on people that are running red lights and stick them with a penalty that's painful enough to act as a deterrent, that might be worthwhile.
For anyone confused; a bollard is a retractable concrete or metal post that comes out the ground to block traffic. They seem to be popular in Europe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIqlkPhDfwM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZdLjKl0lHc
Karma: Can only be portioned out by the Cosmos.
Haven't you ever heard of the Slippery Slope Conspiracy? It involves a bunch of government agents who scream "Slippery Slope" at the most absurd things so that people will be desensitized to Slippery Slope claims because they will think that the people who make those claims are a bunch of nut-bars! And in another month's time the Slippery Slope Conspirators will have achieved a perfectly zero coefficient of social friction and make the rest of us their true slaves! Not only will we be digging canals with spoons and carrying spoons full of dirt 20 miles up hill both ways and with a 50 lb. steel ball tied to our ankle, but we will be happy for it!
Note to conspiracy-conspiracy theorists: I'm not being serious. Just to be clear, this conspiracy is a figment of my sarcastic imagination and not real.
Congradulations, you just invented the "delayed green". You should patent it, before the guy who has been setting intersections around here up like that for years does. We have them all over the place. Also.... I really wish that articles like this would get beyond things like "see we can do it". I would love to see what it is that predicts these actions, and see if it says anything about whats going on.
Cuz in the end, its not about catching people who run lights. Enforcing the law is not an end in and of itself, its supposed to be a means to an end. Who cares if we can "catch" more people? It may feel good and let someone justify their job with some metrics but, it doesn't solve the original problem of risks and dangers....not in anything even approaching a realistic way.
Like the delayed green... I would think that a very slight delay would cause any such accidents to drop off. In fact, as I said, we have lights timed like this all over the place, and while I have seen a few accidents, the only "red light running" one I know of involved a drunk guy blowing through a light that was just plain red, not even green and turning.... I don't think anything is going to solve that one, there will always be a few true idiots.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
The easiest way to reduce red light running is to make yellows longer.
It's more effective than a red light camera, but not nearly as profitable.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Who cares if we can "catch" more people?
The people who add the fines to their revenue.
As far as I'm aware, the only thing that's been proven to reduce the number of accidents at stop lights is to make the orange phase longer. This is why cities that want to increase revenue have often been found to have made the orange phase shorter.
Years ago I was sitting at light. The light turns green and the driver in front of me starts going oblivious to the car that's sailing down the road and clearly not intending on stopping for the red. So this guy slams right into the guy in front of me.
This was back when a light would turn green almost immediately after the intersecting street's light would go red. Drivers in my city are notorious for flaunting the rules and generally driving like jerks, but it was rare to have someone go through a red because people were aware of the risk involved.
Then at some point in the past 10-15 years traffic engineers got the idea to delay the interval between one light turning red and the next going green. So now there's a good 2+ second delay where all lights are red.
What has been the side-effect of this change? Now people brazenly blow through red lights. And the thing is that I've seen it happen everywhere, upscale and low-income areas alike. I've seen lines of 3-5 cars keep on going through when the light had clearly gone red. It's so bad sometimes that there are still cars in the intersection after the other light has already turned green, and this is with the aforementioned delay.
But yeah, it's pretty easy to spot the ones who aren't going to stop. They're the ones still moving at a good clip and making no attempt to slow down and stop.
This is why I'm somewhat supportive of stop light cameras. It's not like speed cameras which don't really target the real problem, aggressive or careless driving. Going through a red light poses real danger and is a clear example of reckless driving. Of course, I realize that stop light cameras are abused as well; one popular tactic being to shorten the yellow in order to boost the number of offenders. Otherwise running red lights is a persistent problem I don't really see anyone addressing. Probably because it involves more effort and brings in less revenue than going after speeders.
This is actually an interesting question.
In some ideal fantasy world focused purely on safety and low of traffic, the ideal action would be that when the system detects detects someone is about to run a light, it keeps the light yellow for longer and/or delays turning the cross traffic light from red to green.. Allowing the driver to pass safely and keeping cross traffic stopped.
Of course it could just be used punitively to gain more money :P
And of course if people ever got wind that this was implemented, they might casually run more red lights.
But I especially like the idea of delaying the cross traffic light turning green to prevent collision... regardless of wheather you ticking the red light runner.
SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY DETECTED.
The only slippery slope fallacy is the claim that when you give government new powers they won't abuse them and extend them to the ultimate limit. Occasionally that's true, but usually only because the powers become obsolete due to technological change, or because voters prevent them from doing so.
And I'm rather amused to see someone with 'Hail Eris' in their sig ranting about EVIL LIBERTARIANS.
Nah. That'd cause a car to stop dead in the middle of the intersection and make a bloody mess of traffic.
Instead, you want a smart deployment of spikes which puncture only a single tire. More than enough to seriously piss off a guy running the light, while still letting him limp out of the way to the shoulder.
...As for the 15% error, did anyone consider cargo?...
THANK YOU!!! As an economic refugee of the "Great Recession", I ended up driving a tractor-trailer for a living - and wound up learning a few things along the way. One interesting fact I've learned is that a fully loaded (80,000 lbs) semi moving at 55 mph can take up to 300 ft to come to a complete stop (think about that next time you want to "brake-check" a truck...). I have, unfortunately, run across traffic lights in which the yellow phase was, for some strange reason, really short- even if the the semi is traveling the legal speed limit. This is not a situation you want to be in: your choices often boil down to:
(1) Stand on the brake in order to not run the impending red light (remember that 300-foot stopping distance? By the time you get stopped, your trailer in squarely in the middle of the intersection. And that's if you don't jackknife and end up wiping out 5 or 6 cars along the way).
(2) Run the light (Yes, it's going to be red by the time you hit it, meaning you will almost certainly incur the wrath of any red-light camera or nearby cop - but see option 1 for the alternative scenario)
This is probably the number two reason I try to avoid surface streets when possible (reason number one being the preponderance of infrastructure not exactly designed with a 75-ft long, nearly 14-ft high vehicle in mind). I figure any traffic engineer worth his salt is going to take these factors into consideration; a failure to do so is going to inevitably invite the occurance of an 18-wheeled clusterfuck and all that comes with it (major property damage, potential loss of life, etc).
This space for rent!
Shit, if you want to fix this problem it's simple. Stop with the cameras and other bullshit.
Have a mechanism that can quickly raise a physical barrier (nice thick steel plate or something) in front of where you're supposed to stop at the red. The barrier lowers when it's green.
Or have a hole that would stop a car just like a ditch, that gets bridged when the light turns green. Now yellow means "prepare to stop" not "punch the gas and hope you don't hit somebody". Problem solved. With that covered, you can then design the lights and the timings between lights to minimize stopping both for travel efficiency and fuel economy.
I also wish they'd put concrete posts every so often wherever there is a double-yellow line. So you bought an SUV and refuse to learn how to handle a vehicle that size? Okay. You get to pay for repairs when you cross the median and strike the concrete posts. Fucking tired of putting my tires in grass because some idiot who hopped on the "must have an SUV" bandwagon decided that being halfway in my lane on a blind curve was his best move. You want to eliminate this kind of idiocy, make it more painful and make the consequences more confined to the person who is the idiot. You think that's harsh? Ever been hit by one of these morons? Getting hit by an SUV is pretty harsh too. Seems proportional to me.
Oh and if you want to fix tailgating, put a spike or a spear on the back of each vehicle pointed downwards from the roof towards the driver's side, right at the height where the windshield of the vehicle behind would be. Suddenly everyone will be more courteous and use a good following distance. Not because they really have any respect for the law or the safety of other drivers, but because being impaled is likely to be a slow lingering death and they will fear it.
If there are going to be so many childish, impatient, stupid people and for some reason we're giving them licenses, might as well recognize what you're dealing with. They don't care that their stupidity might kill someone. They don't care about the measly little fine they might get since for some reason failure to yield (you know that thing that actually causes accidents) is a minor violation like speeding (which doesn't). They don't care that having a cellphone in one hand and a cheeseburger in the other to satiate their fatass appetite is dangerous. So let's quit coddling them since it doesn't work and move on to something they do care about. They do care when there is a certain, immediate, severe consequence. That gets the attention of even the most selfish bastards.
Well, yea. It would be messy and annoying the first few times it happened... but I strongly suspect it would stop happening...
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
I assume their plan is that 2 seconds is plenty of time to avert an accident by hitting the guy who was going to run the red light with some sort of rocket? This is MIT we're talking about, so I'm going to assume some sort of rocket is involved somehow.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
There will always be people who will push the limits. When the US speed limit was 55mph, people drove 65. Speed limits have been raised to 60 in some places, people drive 70 there. Where the limit is 65, people drive 75.
If you make the yellow longer, people will get used to it and run yellow lights that they would have stopped for before. If you make the yellow last 60 seconds, you'll have a lot of people waiting 50 seconds longer than safety requires and some people will still run through it after 59.99999 seconds.
Dammit, who invited Heisenberg to the dinner party?
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
> Have a mechanism that can quickly raise a physical barrier (nice thick steel plate or something) in front of where you're supposed to stop at the red. The barrier lowers when it's green.
From what I've seen where I llive, you don't need anything anywhere near that drastic. People here will slow down to 2 mph and carefully and gingerly make their way over three-inch speed bumps.
So, have *five*-inch mechanical speed bumps at the stop lines, synchronized with the lights. The drivers' brains will explode as they struggle to decide which animal urge to follow, to display their status by blasting through the light, or protect their property by stopping.
2*3*3*3*3*11*251
Cities that implement red-light cameras think it's cute to actually REDUCE THE LENGTH OF THE YELLOW to increase revenue. This is often illegal, because most places have a legal minimum yellow time of 3-4 seconds.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
That's a pretty big assumption. The advantage this thing has is that you can outfit the traffic lights to delay the green light while the runner crosses and prevent the problem without instrumenting every car on the road.
And ticket the jackass who might have killed someone.
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin
Unfortunately, while sane, thoughtful people would come to this conclusion, someone, somewhere would rather make a profit off of it. This isn't theoretical, it's already happened, as some cities would rather profit at the expense and injury of motorists. What this does to insurance and medical rates I hate to think.
This sort of thing would be great for "dynamic yellow lights," as you implied. A sane, rational person would use this to make a yellow light last a little longer to prevent an accident. People like the above could widen the range a little and make it shorten the yellow light to catch a few extra bucks. It's not the technology; this algorithm is cool and great. It's the few abusers.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Of course, you are making an error of assumption in assuming that people who run lights generally do it willfully by thought, and not negligently by distraction, or though misjudgment.
Actually, thats one of the few things that I remember from taking the one social psych course that I took.... they called it the "fundamental error of assumption". That is, that people tend to ascribe internal motivations to other people's actions, and external ones to our own. So, you ran the red light because you are impatient and try to cut it as close as you can. I ran the red light because the yellow was excessively short, and you were sitting in the passenger seat talking to me and distracting me.
Sounds ridiculous when you say it like that but, its actually pretty common.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
two and three are all you need.
You can claim you thought you saw a cat/dog/child/buffalo/griffin/whatever.
My solution to tailgating when I was on my way home from a paintball match was to toss a handful of balls out the sunroof.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Old joke:
I was recently riding with a friend of mine.
We were coming to a red light, and he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" He tells me this is how his brother drives.
We come to another red light, and again, he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" Again, he tells me this is how his brother drives.
We come to a green light, and he slams on the brakes. My heart nearly goes into my throat. I shouted at him, "Why do you do that?!"
He replied, "You never know, my brother could be coming the other way."
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
You missed an option.
Delay the cross-green briefly to prevent a collision... and tell the next stoplight that the red light runner is going toward that it should give that car a red light well before he gets there. You run a red light here, and you're likely to be fourth in line waiting for the red at the next light. It is easier to do that where lights are mostly sensor-driven than where strict grid timing needs to be followed.
Heck, wouldn't it be even easier to reduce it if they put a countdown with the yellow light so people actually knew when it would change?
There is no "problem" to fix here. It's been shown that there are no safety benefits to RLCs... so why bother at all? If the cities simply followed the rules of the MUTCD to setup proper timing, we wouldn't have any problems (except for those who are inattentive or simply jerks)... and tickets won't solve the problem from those idiots anyway.
The person tailgating you is likely going faster than you. So why do you feel it's your right/duty to block them? You are not the enforcer of laws. Get out of the way, let them go by, or whatever. It's not your job to police people. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
I would love to see what it is that predicts these actions, and see if it says anything about whats going on.
I was hoping for the same info. I am left to figure that it is the obvious items, like approaching the intersection above the speed limit, accelerating at the yellow, perhaps a recent lane change.
Interesting to me is when I am in traffic and I think "That guy wants to cut me off" or "This guy wants to get the jump on me when the light turns green". Sometimes I can point to a behavior and say 'there's the tip-off', but often as not I just get a feel that they're driving aggressively. The automotive body language is (perhaps) emitted and read unconsciously.
Some info about that would have been interesting.
-- "Oh. This guy again."
You are clearly not a driver.
The reason tickets aren't given out at 1km over the limit is because various factors (tyre pressure, weight of occupants, etc) can affect the accuracy of the speedometer. Also, in the US at least, speedometers can legally register high (tell you you're going 45 when you're only doing 40) but never low (tell you you're doing 35 when in fact you're going 40). This means a cop matching your speed can assume you are actually going less than the displayed speed, but not more. Thus, there is some flexibility above the speed limit.
Why is it that many people who claim to support standards have such atrocious spelling and grammar?
In the UK, the green light blinks before it turns yellow. I've always wondered why we don't do that here.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Uh huh, and which world would that be?
Why is it that many people who claim to support standards have such atrocious spelling and grammar?
The easiest way to reduce red light running is to make yellows longer.
And when people discover yellow lights are longer? They know they have more time to catch the yellow light before it changes to red.
The paper is here, and it gives ROC curves. They used two approaches, a hidden Markov model and a support vector machine Bayesian filter.
"they called it the "fundamental error of assumption""...
I think you mean the fundamental attribution error?
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
The person tailgating you is likely going faster than you. So why do you feel it's your right/duty to block them? You are not the enforcer of laws. Get out of the way, let them go by, or whatever. It's not your job to police people. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Why do you feel they have a higher-priority right to go faster than I do to go the speed I'm going? If they don't like the speed I'm driving, they can pass me. It's not like I'm driving under the speed limit - I'm generally a few MPH above it. Also you apparently think tailgating only happens on freeways, since "getting out of the way" isn't practical on a two lane road.
My solution to tailgating is to slow down. As soon as they back off - or as soon as they're not behind me (passing or whatever) - I immediately return to normal speed. But, frankly, if they're going to drive in a way that increases the chances of an accident involving me, I'm going to make sure any accident happens at a lower speed.
#DeleteChrome
Not really linked to the story, but it gives me a chance to relate this tale of idiocy.
A friend was pulled over by police for running through an intersection just as it turned from amber to red instead of stopping. She said that because the car behind was tailgating (business as usual), to have stopped would have caused an accident, so in her judgement it was safer to continue. That cut no ice and she was booked. Eventually they let her go and then pulled out behind her and followed. At the next intersection, the lights were on amber so this time she stopped. The police patrol car ploughed straight into her rear. They booked her again (she was naturally livid) but elected to take the matter to court. She was cleared of all charges including the original offence and the police had to pay all costs. Justice.
Sometimes the right thing to do is to press on on amber - I usually stop but only if there's time to do it without the half-asleep moron behind rearranging the back of your car.
Most speed limits are BS and/or illegally set in the first place, so that's a pointless reference to go by.
Awesome, so you're offering to pay for everyone's speeding tickets? And the spike in insurance rates when we accrue "points" on our licenses?
What you think about speed limits is totally irrelevant. For that matter, what I think of them -- and I do agree that they're often BS -- is totally irrelevant too. As long as they exist, people have the right to follow them and not take crap for it, because you're not the one paying for it if a cop pulls them over for doing 50 MPH in a 35 MPH zone.
In my experience, most tailgaters seem to want to go 15+ MPH over the speed limit, whereas I prefer to go no more than 10 MPH over the speed limit so that I don't get pulled over (and aren't completely fucked if I am pulled over). That's their prerogative, but especially on a two-lane road, the rest of us aren't obligated to pull off to the side of the road en masse so they can drive the way they want to.
The rules of the road don't say "the people who drive the fastest have the most rights, and everyone else should accommodate them".
You are clearly a driver in an area with very nice mild winters and clear roads all the time. I'd love to see the look on your own face when you step on the brakes to avoid one of the ditches or walls or whatever, only to realize the roads are way too icy to stop in time.
How about a ramp that pops up, so the red light runner will just end up flying over the intersection, Dukes of Hazzard style? Even better if the intersection had a PA system to play Dixie when it happens.
It might not be pretty when they land, that's their problem for running the light...
The reason that trunk front brakes in the USA have been historically weak is that the drivers disable them to save money on brake and tire wear. The new rules will simply require them to discontinue this dangerous practice.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
Posts like yours are why I still come to Slashdot. HAH.
Of course, coming from Tennessee, I see a potential issue with rednecks intentionally hitting these at high speed while a buddy gets video.
The person tailgating you is likely going faster than you. So why do you feel it's your right/duty to block them? You are not the enforcer of laws. Get out of the way, let them go by, or whatever. It's not your job to police people. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Why do you feel they have a higher-priority right to go faster than I do to go the speed I'm going? If they don't like the speed I'm driving, they can pass me. It's not like I'm driving under the speed limit - I'm generally a few MPH above it. Also you apparently think tailgating only happens on freeways, since "getting out of the way" isn't practical on a two lane road.
My solution to tailgating is to slow down. As soon as they back off - or as soon as they're not behind me (passing or whatever) - I immediately return to normal speed. But, frankly, if they're going to drive in a way that increases the chances of an accident involving me, I'm going to make sure any accident happens at a lower speed.
As a motorcyclist, I take this same approach. Fuck you tailgaters, I don't want to die, because you want to following me so close. If you're going to decrease your reaction time to me stopping, then I'm going to reduce the chance that I'm going to have to stop. And don't flip me the bird when you drive by... it's my fucking LIFE on the line... worst you have to deal with is the insurance totalling your car...
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Your sarcasm is not required.