Intimidating Drivers

[daveshoot]

On the original topic... if you find yourself being tailgated and passed a lot, is it possible you are driving too slowly in the fast lane?

IMO there is no excuse for tailgating someone in the right lanes. There is no excuse for BEING tailgated in the left lane.

The Germans have it right: if you aren't passing someone, you shouldn't be in the left lane, except in extreme congestion. It is the "fast" lane and you are expected to yield it to someone who wants to go faster. The same general rules exist in most US states, but aren't enforced, or apparently even taught.

If the same things keep happening, you have to wonder if it's really the brand of car that's the cause. We seem to have extrapolated much about others from their choice of vehicle and tires. Just in case it is your speed and location that are the issue, rather than your smugmobile, note that the Tacoma behind you with standard tires is probably me, and I don't care what you are driving, I just want you to let me play through.

 

[houstonscott]

Can you be an atheist AND an environmentalist? So this helps explain why there is (or should be) internal tension for the atheist environmentalist. This does not mean an atheist cannot, in practical terms, be moral and/or an environmentalist; of course a person may be both. But it leads us to question where the grounding for such a combination could possibly come from. On one hand they (or you?) believe that the wanton destruction of our natural environment is wrong. And it is wrong. Not just wrong in the sense of “I don’t personally like it” but in the sense of being objectively wrong. But on the other hand, there’s no grounding for such a belief in objective right and wrong apart from belief in God. Greg Koukl continues: If I stood at an intersection and put my hand up, cars might stop voluntarily, but they’d have no duty to respond. They could ignore me with no fear of punishment because I have no authority to direct traffic. If, on the other hand, a policeman replaced me, traffic would come to a halt. What is the difference between the policeman and me? My authority is not grounded. It doesn’t rest on anything solid. The policeman, however, represents the government, so his authority is justified. Standing firmly in mid-air Without God claiming an objective moral rule loses its grounding because there is nothing (no one) to give it legitimate authority. You lose your grounding: It’s like trying to stand firmly in mid-air: A moral atheist is like a man sitting down to dinner who doesn’t believe in farmers, ranchers, fishermen, or cooks. He believes the food just appears, with no explanation and no sufficient cause. This is silly. Either his meal is an illusion, or someone provided it. In the same way, if morals really exist, as I have argued, then some cause adequate to explain the effect must account for them. God is the most reasonable solution. [3] Something to think about If you believe that destroying our Earth is wrong, really wrong, this necessitates belief in objective moral values, which in turn necessitates the existence of a God to provide the grounding for moral laws.

HS

 

[DS43812]

I driver both a large truck and a smaller car and definitely notice a difference in the way other drivers act towards each type of vehicle. When I'm in the smaller car they tend to be much more aggressive but they generally keep their distance when I'm driving the truck. They probably know the truck could easily squash them like a bug, which happens to be one of my own concerns when I'm driving the truck because it outweighs most vehicles I encounter by several times and I don't want anyone's death on my hands.

 

[CobyRupert]

There's seems to be a rivalry. In my town there's a big pick-up, with dual smoke stacks poking up through the bed behind the cab with a "Prius Repellant" label pointing at them like this: (what's the point? To make less cargo space or set things in the bed on fire?) Then there's the cars with this bumper sticker:

:laughing:

 

[troutsqueezer]

I driver both a large truck and a smaller car and definitely notice a difference in the way other drivers act towards each type of vehicle. When I'm in the smaller car they tend to be much more aggressive but they generally keep their distance when I'm driving the truck. They probably know the truck could easily squash them like a bug, which happens to be one of my own concerns when I'm driving the truck because it outweighs most vehicles I encounter by several times and I don't want anyone's death on my hands.

This was my original point, exactly. I did mention that I drive a truck plus I have several other cars as well. I'm seeing now that I should not have mentioned the brand/model of the small car nor my lack of religious beliefs in order to steer the thread. Just like politics, talk about Prius' and God bring out the crazy in people. Good thing I didn't bring up guns. :confused2:

 

[TripleR]

This was my original point, exactly. I did mention that I drive a truck plus I have several other cars as well. I'm seeing now that I should not have mentioned the brand/model of the small car nor my lack of religious beliefs in order to steer the thread. Just like politics, talk about Prius' and God bring out the crazy in people. Good thing I didn't bring up guns. :confused2:

I didn't even think you were allowed to own guns if you drove a Prius...:laughing:

Joking, I really don't care what a person drives or believes.

 

[troutsqueezer]

Can you be an atheist AND an environmentalist? So this helps explain why there is (or should be) internal tension for the atheist environmentalist. This does not mean an atheist cannot, in practical terms, be moral and/or an environmentalist; of course a person may be both. But it leads us to question where the grounding for such a combination could possibly come from. On one hand they (or you?) believe that the wanton destruction of our natural environment is wrong. And it is wrong. Not just wrong in the sense of 的 don稚 personally like it but in the sense of being objectively wrong. But on the other hand, there痴 no grounding for such a belief in objective right and wrong apart from belief in God. Greg Koukl continues: If I stood at an intersection and put my hand up, cars might stop voluntarily, but they壇 have no duty to respond. They could ignore me with no fear of punishment because I have no authority to direct traffic. If, on the other hand, a policeman replaced me, traffic would come to a halt. What is the difference between the policeman and me? My authority is not grounded. It doesn稚 rest on anything solid. The policeman, however, represents the government, so his authority is justified. Standing firmly in mid-air Without God claiming an objective moral rule loses its grounding because there is nothing (no one) to give it legitimate authority. You lose your grounding: It痴 like trying to stand firmly in mid-air: A moral atheist is like a man sitting down to dinner who doesn稚 believe in farmers, ranchers, fishermen, or cooks. He believes the food just appears, with no explanation and no sufficient cause. This is silly. Either his meal is an illusion, or someone provided it. In the same way, if morals really exist, as I have argued, then some cause adequate to explain the effect must account for them. God is the most reasonable solution. [3] Something to think about If you believe that destroying our Earth is wrong, really wrong, this necessitates belief in objective moral values, which in turn necessitates the existence of a God to provide the grounding for moral laws.

HS

It's far too easy to shoot down this type of rhetoric with simple logic and deduction but I'm not going to go into that in this thread. Plus, it's hard to read because of the punctuation, probably caused by copying and pasting from another app. If you like to discuss this type of thinking, submit your ideas to a forum like Straight Dope where folks will be glad to take you on. Straight Dope Message Board - Powered by vBulletin

 

[Gator6x4]

It's interesting, when I drive the wife's Prius, I noticed that some folks who are driving in much larger vehicles, usually with over-sized tires, tend to tailgate me, pass unsafely and generally try to intimidate, using the size of their vehicle as a weapon. I don't get this behavior much when I drive my truck. Now, I'm going to generalize here, I'm aware: Sometimes, after something like this happens, the other driver and I will happen be headed to the same destination and when we each get out of our vehicles I can't help but notice that the other driver tends to be on the small side, physically. Rarely does this happen with big people in big trucks. I think perhaps they don't have self-image problems nearly as much, or at least don't use their vehicles to make up for their small size. I'm guessing they buy those big trucks to actually haul something big. I'm 6'2" at 220 lbs. and I sense that the other driver is sometimes a little surprised that the person they just tried to intimidate is not the person they envisioned driving a smaller car so they avoid eye contact at all costs. I'm not the type of person who intimidates others, the opposite in fact, but sometimes I would like to pick them up by the collar and say, "Hey, do you feel like intimidating me now, Punk?" :laughing:

Given the number of road rage incidents recently involving serious injury or death, I just don't think I would be engaging in intimidation on the highways.

That said I agree, I have them riding my bumper at seventy plus miles per hour and I don't drive a Prius. I really love it when I am speeding, look in the rear view mirror and see some female right on my bumper with a cell phone stuck in her ear.

 

[Gator6x4]

Matthew 7:6 might read it and save a lot of your effort.

Matthew 7.6-16 Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you.

 

[hawkeye08]

Interesting how the discussion wanders around.. We drove our pickup on a recent trip rather than the car since it is more comfortable on long trips. It was interesting how the Prius seemed to be the car (actually driver not car) that constantly cut back in way too soon (dangerously soon) and my wife and I discussed it. This was on the freeway and regardless of whether traffic was heavy or light. Sometimes someone has to cut in close or miss their exit, no problem, it happens, but when there are no cars or exits and they cut back in too close, that is just plain wrong. It also seemed to be the car that was going 2-3mph under speed limit in the left lane at times holding up many cars. Don't get me wrong, it was not exclusive to the Prius, but the vast majority on this last trip (over 800 miles). BTW, I noticed they get irate when someone cuts in close in front of them. Hand gestures and sign language abound....