|
People who drive slow in the fast lane | by SnArL | 2004-10-22 08:55:58 |
|
120 mph?!?! | by schwing1 | 2004-10-22 09:06:11 |
|
Dallas | by SnArL | 2004-10-22 09:09:03 |
|
So you're offended that the driver | by Kickstart | 2004-10-22 09:11:59 |
|
The left lane is supposed to be used for passing | by SnArL | 2004-10-22 09:29:56 |
|
Agreed. Regardless of the | by phezult | 2004-10-22 09:35:33 |
| Disagree. |
by Naruki |
2004-10-22 09:38:34 |
You condone his insanely stupid behavior by putting all the blame on the other driver.
Like I said, I'd smack the snot out of both drivers, but with him I would go for a few more bodily fluids. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Yes 120 wrong | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 09:44:09 |
|
That's quite wrong. | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 09:57:05 |
|
Actually not true. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:02:53 |
|
That's not true either. | by wheresthefish | 2004-10-22 10:05:15 |
|
That's an odd, ineffective law. | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 10:05:32 |
|
Not allowed to brake for animals in the UK | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:27:40 |
|
You can't? | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 10:30:03 |
|
It's also a law I'm completely unaware of. | by wheresthefish | 2004-10-22 10:32:34 |
|
But the same here in Germany. | by aix tom | 2004-10-22 10:38:04 |
|
That still doesn't make sense. | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 10:53:57 |
|
Laws have to make sense ? ;-) | by aix tom | 2004-10-22 11:09:08 |
|
It's still backward. | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 11:12:36 |
|
There isn't a law, my mistake. (n/t) | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:16:22 |
|
Thank God... | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 11:18:36 |
|
Heck no. we can start on property rights if you | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:21:29 |
|
Following not so closely .... | by aix tom | 2004-10-22 11:19:06 |
|
Indeed. | by LionsPhil | 2004-10-22 11:25:46 |
|
Yep. Following at a safe distance... | by rorajoey | 2004-10-22 12:45:49 |
|
small animals would make more sence. heh. (n/t) | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:00:21 |
|
Quick! Call PETA! (n/t) | by Myke | 2004-10-22 12:42:26 |
|
People Eating Tasty Animals ? ;-) (n/t) | by aix tom | 2004-10-22 14:18:11 |
|
Ignore him. | by LionsPhil | 2004-10-22 10:59:58 |
|
Woudn't be admissable in the US | by tigermouse | 2004-10-22 10:32:32 |
|
Presumably the other guy would have one too. (n/t) | by BloodyViking | 2004-10-22 10:47:14 |
|
Which, if he's tailgating | by tigermouse | 2004-10-22 10:59:24 |
|
And, of course, He wouldn't want allowed | by BloodyViking | 2004-10-22 12:22:32 |
|
from what I remember... | by scragman | 2004-10-22 10:34:14 |
|
Tailgaters are idiots. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:37:56 |
|
I think you're getting it backwards. | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 10:56:27 |
|
I think it is a matter of scale. | by BloodyViking | 2004-10-22 11:03:51 |
|
Again, impractical. | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 11:10:17 |
|
Agreed. (n/t) | by BloodyViking | 2004-10-22 11:13:03 |
|
dear will total a car | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 12:59:29 |
|
I thought UK law was similar to Norwegian law; | by krikkert | 2004-10-22 10:15:35 |
|
Usually you do. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:22:08 |
|
Nope. I work for a motor claims company in the UK. | by Voltigeur | 2004-10-22 10:40:55 |
|
I consider myself | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:14:41 |
|
Thats absolutely correct. | by neksys | 2004-10-22 10:16:47 |
|
You did WHAT? | by Martyny | 2004-10-22 10:19:04 |
|
Your book is pretty twisted. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:22:47 |
|
I'm sorry, but he deliberatly causes an accident | by Martyny | 2004-10-22 10:28:46 |
|
After Neskys explanation I withdraw my comments on | by Martyny | 2004-10-22 10:34:24 |
|
Accidentaly killed him | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 13:01:06 |
|
If it was just the lights coming on | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:33:37 |
|
Please think a bit before responding. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:39:56 |
|
I am responding to exactly that situation. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:48:05 |
|
Cabbage. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:53:06 |
|
The fact of the matter... | by neksys | 2004-10-22 10:29:43 |
|
I wasn't trying to defend tailgaters | by Martyny | 2004-10-22 10:33:08 |
|
In this situation, I put on my hazard lights. | by jedidiahstott | 2004-10-22 15:48:15 |
|
120 is absolutely stupid in such traffic. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:00:29 |
|
Yes indeed | by tigermouse | 2004-10-22 10:10:52 |
|
I disagree | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:03:30 |
|
The only people authorized to go that fast | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:08:15 |
|
We don't actually know the state of the roads at | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:10:32 |
|
It might be dumb... | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 10:11:32 |
|
I know the law is on her side. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:03:55 |
|
Nope. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:13:01 |
|
Not at all. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:19:33 |
|
But you don't know why she braked | by tigermouse | 2004-10-22 10:24:29 |
|
Which is precisely why you shouldn't | by wheresthefish | 2004-10-22 10:25:46 |
|
Then don't drive, because you are also dangerous. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:26:24 |
|
I don't ride at those speeds! | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:43:17 |
|
Perhaps I altered my statement... | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:50:07 |
|
I didn't mean to make that personal. Sorry. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:55:42 |
|
I didn't say new facts. | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 11:03:18 |
|
I dropped that assumption a while back. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:05:28 |
|
Yes, it was dumb. | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:17:48 |
|
Why would you brake? | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:26:08 |
|
Clearly... | by Illiad | 2004-10-22 10:27:46 |
|
Why do you think reactions are well-thought out? | by Naruki | 2004-10-22 10:28:16 |
|
For the last time. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:40:50 |
|
What if... | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:45:50 |
|
Furthermore... | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:48:10 |
|
Doing nothing would have made a difference. (n/t) | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:49:13 |
|
So she's going faster after the collision? (n/t) | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:51:02 |
|
Come on lets not go to extremes. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:50:51 |
|
How many 120mph cars have you seen? (n/t) | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:51:48 |
|
I've seen enough exceeding 100mph | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 11:06:11 |
|
8 in convoy last time someone in my family had a | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 14:31:45 |
|
Lucky you | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 15:44:44 |
|
they have to take my battle wagon on | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 18:40:41 |
|
There you go. | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 15:37:02 |
|
Got hit once, by a bird, when I was on a bike. | by jedidiahstott | 2004-10-22 15:57:49 |
|
How big? | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 16:06:17 |
|
Nowhere as big as a pheasant. Maybe a blackbird | by jedidiahstott | 2004-10-22 16:44:44 |
|
farking OWWch that had to hurt (n/t) | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 18:41:46 |
|
120mph in a car isn't all that fast. On a bike | by jedidiahstott | 2004-10-22 15:39:48 |
|
Why do people panic? | by wheresthefish | 2004-10-22 10:29:13 |
|
Because that's what you do. | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:30:36 |
|
But they are a requirement. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:37:22 |
|
In that situation I would brake. | by TheGM | 2004-10-22 10:38:27 |
|
Ever blown a tire like that? | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 14:33:52 |
|
That is because you are a motorcyclist | by jedidiahstott | 2004-10-22 15:35:02 |
|
Here's another situation: | by neksys | 2004-10-22 10:23:44 |
|
Thats the problem. | by McGowan | 2004-10-22 10:29:41 |
|
Okay, here's another situation.. | by neksys | 2004-10-22 10:37:12 |
|
I do know the highways around dallas | by joecrouse | 2004-10-22 13:02:49 |
|
No, there is No legitimate reason for doing | by BloodyViking | 2004-10-22 10:09:33 |