[Rant] Every Day...

BadGirl

I am so very blessed
Ahem...

You had plenty of time to merge over beforehand.

Photo: Massive Douchebags

Stop endangering everyone around you, every day, so you can get home 3 minutes sooner.

That is all.

Do you think it is a good idea to have your child's photo available to view on your photo link? We now know what you look like, what your kid looks like, how many dogs you have, the breed of dogs, and where you work, etc, etc.
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
There are three through lanes there. The intersection was designed to use those three lanes. The merge isn't until well after the light. What they are doing is legal and appropriate.

Tell me, if that lane is not meant to be used why is it there? Why this thought that everyone should merge well before the merge point? There is no sign requiring it. There is no law requiring it. There is no suggestion in the MD drivers manual.

With all the blatant and dangerous illegal driving I see every day, this is an example of WGAF?
 
Last edited:

GopherM

Darwin was right
The trouble with your photo is that the "Slow Douche bags" are the ones that rush through the light in the left-hand lane so they can get the jum in cutting off the people in the normal speed lane when they have to merge back in. That forces the normal drivers into cutting off the fast drivers' lane...that and the douche bags that stay in the far right lane until they have to make the cut over to get into those condos in Wildwood just before the light.
 

Chestr

Member
Do you think it is a good idea to have your child's photo available to view on your photo link? We now know what you look like, what your kid looks like, how many dogs you have, the breed of dogs, and where you work, etc, etc.

Yea. Did that. Thanks for the advice. I'm usually really good about those kinds of things.
 

Chestr

Member
There are three through lanes there. The intersection was designed to use those three lanes. The merge isn't until well after the light. What they are doing is legal and appropriate.

Tell me, if that lane is not meant to be used why is it there? Why this thought that everyone should merge well before the merge point? There is no sign requiring it. There is no law requiring it. There is no suggestion in the MD drivers manual.

With all the blatant and dangerous illegal driving I see every day, this is an example of WGAF?

Legal doesn't mean considerate. Legal doesn't mean respectful. Legal DEFINITELY doesn't even mean SAFE.

"Appropriate" doesn't mean racing ahead through the right lane at 2x the speed of the other drivers, until the last possible minute, and since your car is 15 feet long, you can go ahead and FORCE yourself over (because you have to, now that you're going 60mph and the lane ends in 20 more feet) into a gap that is 16 feet long.

I'm sorry.

"Appropriate" is coming in off the bridge, westbound, turning right, and using the damn lane for what it should be used for, but those people can't, because the speed racers coming northbound are using it for their cut-off game.

Again, everybody knows why they do it. Everybody knows they could alternately be good drivers and merge sooner. Everybody knows the behavior SO much, as a matter of fact, that everybody is already on the lookout beforehand, because they know the #######s will be trying to pull their #### every day.
 

sm8

Active Member
I have yet to see a car actually merge from that lane, it is as though they think that lane just continues and the center lane is the one that should do the merging. I use the far left lane coming through that intersection because every time I am in the center lane I was almost in an accident. Either from someone "merging" into the side of my car or the people behind me almost rear ending me because I hit the brakes to keep from hitting the "merging" car.
 

SEABREEZE 1957

My 401K is now a 201K
There are three through lanes there. The intersection was designed to use those three lanes. The merge isn't until well after the light. What they are doing is legal and appropriate.

Tell me, if that lane is not meant to be used why is it there? Why this thought that everyone should merge well before the merge point? There is no sign requiring it. There is no law requiring it. There is no suggestion in the MD drivers manual.

With all the blatant and dangerous illegal driving I see every day, this is an example of WGAF?

Tell me why is that lane there? What is the purpose for those travelling North on Rt. 235?

I believe the intent is for people coming off 4 to have space to merge into traffic. IMHO that lane is dangerous for people who use it to speed ahead through the intersection knowing damn well it is going to end & they will have to merge. Why not get over beforehand & avoid the forced merge? The far right lane should be required to merge before the intersection NOT at the intersection. Or how about just making another lane after the intersection all the way up to next intersection? Then everyone can try to shove 3 lanes into 2 lanes without the worry of people coming off of Rt. 4. :killingme

Whatever the original design intent was, it doesn't work.
 
Last edited:

ladyhawk

Active Member
There are three through lanes there. The intersection was designed to use those three lanes. The merge isn't until well after the light. What they are doing is legal and appropriate.

Tell me, if that lane is not meant to be used why is it there? Why this thought that everyone should merge well before the merge point? There is no sign requiring it. There is no law requiring it. There is no suggestion in the MD drivers manual.

With all the blatant and dangerous illegal driving I see every day, this is an example of WGAF?

I've seen the races off the light to see who can get there first... I've also seen those in the far right cut people off before the merge. This is the fault of Saint Mary's county.. They put it up but have no enforcement in how its used..

What they should so is about once or twice a month randomly sit off the side and start handing out "agressive driving" tickets.. maybe that would calm the situation or at least prevent someone from getting hurt....

If they can't do that, then they should shut that lane down altogether.. Turning right off the bridge can be a hazard as well.. Some have come close to getting run into by those racing off the light... Its not just those traveling in the same direction either, but those coming off the bridge as well!

June
 

glhs837

Power with Control
I agree that for most folks, using that lane during rush hour is douchebaggery. Me, I will no go near that lane from say 3pm to after 6pm. Only exception to that rule is that rare moment when I can be first in line.

If I can be first, I will take that lane, since the odds of the next lane over having anyone who goes 0-60 faster than I do is pretty low. And if there is someone who does, I have no problem letting them get ahead of me. We will still be ahead of most other folks.


MMDad, as pointed out, legal isnt always right.
 
I agree that for most folks, using that lane during rush hour is douchebaggery. Me, I will no go near that lane from say 3pm to after 6pm. Only exception to that rule is that rare moment when I can be first in line.

If I can be first, I will take that lane, since the odds of the next lane over having anyone who goes 0-60 faster than I do is pretty low. And if there is someone who does, I have no problem letting them get ahead of me. We will still be ahead of most other folks.


MMDad, as pointed out, legal isnt always right.

Same here, pretty much, other than that I usually use the left most lane to avoid the squeeze put on the center by people having to slow for the ones getting in front of them. Even if they aren't really cutting them off most drivers will back off a bit when someone gets in front of them and they want a bit more distance.
 

MMM_donuts

New Member
I drive through that intersection every day so I am going to say this with a fair amount of confidence. Most often, I don't see the far right lane drivers have a problem merging because there's always a slow enough driver in the middle lane that leaves plenty of room on their own, without prompting from someone trying to merge. I like to stay in the far left lane because I turn at the Wildewood light and I have a much bigger problem with the people in the middle lane that squeeze into the teeniest of spaces to get into the left lane as soon as they get an opportunity - regardless of whether or not there's anyone in the far right lane that will need to merge. Why do they do this? Because the line in the left lane is about twice as long as the other lanes since it also contains drivers waiting to get into the left turning lane that's often full. Between that sudden braking in the left lane to allow for the mergers and the people that, and god only knows why they feel the need to do this, have to start braking before they even get into the turn lane to the apartments, the left lane is very unpleasant to drive in.
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
I believe the intent is for people coming off 4 to have space to merge into traffic.

Then why does the lane exist south of the light? If it was for those turning off of 4, it would only exist north of the light.

Yes, people are a-holes about merging, but using the lane as designed and intended is not an a-hole move.
 

SEABREEZE 1957

My 401K is now a 201K
Then why does the lane exist south of the light? If it was for those turning off of 4, it would only exist north of the light.

Yes, people are a-holes about merging, but using the lane as designed and intended is not an a-hole move.

That's the part that makes no sense. It shouldn't.

It encourages a-hole moves.
 

RoseRed

American Beauty
PREMO Member
:howdy:

I'm one of those jerks that uses lane 3 to go through the intersection. Why stack up 20+ deep in lane 2 when I can use that lane as it is intended?
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
I believe the intent is for people coming off 4 to have space to merge into traffic.

The people coming off 4 do not have the right of way. They have a merge lane of their own. The right of way belongs to those already on 235, and the Rt. 4 traffic has to yield.

As I said before, there is nothing wrong with using that lane. The problem is aggressive drivers who make unsafe merges, combined with those in the middle lane who refuse to allow others to merge safely.

It's really weird how poorly Southern Maryland drivers merge. It's like people think that you are supposed to get in your lane five miles before your turn and stay there. If people used all of the lanes available, then merged politely at the merge point, traffic could flow so much better. Instead we have the two left lanes of 235 backed up for a mile with angry drivers resenting those who go by in the right lane.
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
:howdy:

I'm one of those jerks that uses lane 3 to go through the intersection. Why stack up 20+ deep in lane 2 when I can use that lane as it is intended?

But you learned to drive in a place where people know how to merge.
 
Top