The Daily Static
  The Daily Static
UF Archives
Register
UF Membership
Ad Free Site
Postcards
Community
Geekfinder
UFie Gear
Advertise on UF
Forum Rules
& FAQ

Username

Password


Create a New Account

  
 

Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
People who drive slow in the fast lane by SnArL2004-10-22 08:55:58
  120 mph?!?! by schwing12004-10-22 09:06:11
    Dallas by SnArL2004-10-22 09:09:03
      So you're offended that the driver by Kickstart2004-10-22 09:11:59
        The left lane is supposed to be used for passing by SnArL2004-10-22 09:29:56
          Agreed. Regardless of the by phezult2004-10-22 09:35:33
            Disagree. by Naruki2004-10-22 09:38:34
              Yes 120 wrong by McGowan2004-10-22 09:44:09
                That's quite wrong. by Illiad 2004-10-22 09:57:05
People braking for no aparent reason is a major cause of accidents.

The law says otherwise. If you rear-end someone, it's YOUR fault, regardless of what the person in front of you braked for. Most of the time you can't see what they see; what if they were braking for an animal you couldn't spot?

I'd replace your sentence above with: People following too closely is a major cause of accidents. This is why you're told to leave enough room in front of you for your circumstances to come to a stop in time.

[ Reply ]
                  Actually not true. by McGowan2004-10-22 10:02:53
                    That's not true either. by wheresthefish2004-10-22 10:05:15
                    That's an odd, ineffective law. by Illiad2004-10-22 10:05:32
                      Not allowed to brake for animals in the UK by McGowan2004-10-22 10:27:40
                        You can't? by Illiad2004-10-22 10:30:03
                          It's also a law I'm completely unaware of. by wheresthefish2004-10-22 10:32:34
                          But the same here in Germany. by aix tom2004-10-22 10:38:04
                            That still doesn't make sense. by Illiad2004-10-22 10:53:57
                              Laws have to make sense ? ;-) by aix tom2004-10-22 11:09:08
                                It's still backward. by Illiad2004-10-22 11:12:36
                                There isn't a law, my mistake. (n/t) by McGowan2004-10-22 11:16:22
                                Thank God... by Illiad2004-10-22 11:18:36
                                Heck no. we can start on property rights if you by McGowan2004-10-22 11:21:29
                                Following not so closely .... by aix tom2004-10-22 11:19:06
                                Indeed. by LionsPhil2004-10-22 11:25:46
                                Yep. Following at a safe distance... by rorajoey2004-10-22 12:45:49
                            small animals would make more sence. heh. (n/t) by McGowan2004-10-22 11:00:21
                            Quick! Call PETA! (n/t) by Myke2004-10-22 12:42:26
                              People Eating Tasty Animals ? ;-) (n/t) by aix tom2004-10-22 14:18:11
                          Ignore him. by LionsPhil2004-10-22 10:59:58
                        Woudn't be admissable in the US by tigermouse2004-10-22 10:32:32
                          Presumably the other guy would have one too. (n/t) by BloodyViking2004-10-22 10:47:14
                            Which, if he's tailgating by tigermouse2004-10-22 10:59:24
                              And, of course, He wouldn't want allowed by BloodyViking2004-10-22 12:22:32
                      from what I remember... by scragman2004-10-22 10:34:14
                        Tailgaters are idiots. by Naruki2004-10-22 10:37:56
                        I think you're getting it backwards. by Illiad2004-10-22 10:56:27
                          I think it is a matter of scale. by BloodyViking2004-10-22 11:03:51
                            Again, impractical. by Illiad2004-10-22 11:10:17
                              Agreed. (n/t) by BloodyViking2004-10-22 11:13:03
                        dear will total a car by joecrouse2004-10-22 12:59:29
                    I thought UK law was similar to Norwegian law; by krikkert2004-10-22 10:15:35
                      Usually you do. by McGowan2004-10-22 10:22:08
                    Nope. I work for a motor claims company in the UK. by Voltigeur2004-10-22 10:40:55
                      I consider myself by McGowan2004-10-22 11:14:41
                  Thats absolutely correct. by neksys2004-10-22 10:16:47
                    You did WHAT? by Martyny2004-10-22 10:19:04
                      Your book is pretty twisted. by Naruki2004-10-22 10:22:47
                        I'm sorry, but he deliberatly causes an accident by Martyny2004-10-22 10:28:46
                          After Neskys explanation I withdraw my comments on by Martyny2004-10-22 10:34:24
                          Accidentaly killed him by joecrouse2004-10-22 13:01:06
                        If it was just the lights coming on by McGowan2004-10-22 10:33:37
                          Please think a bit before responding. by Naruki2004-10-22 10:39:56
                            I am responding to exactly that situation. by McGowan2004-10-22 10:48:05
                              Cabbage. by Naruki2004-10-22 10:53:06
                      The fact of the matter... by neksys2004-10-22 10:29:43
                        I wasn't trying to defend tailgaters by Martyny2004-10-22 10:33:08
                        In this situation, I put on my hazard lights. by jedidiahstott2004-10-22 15:48:15

 

[Todays Cartoon Discussion] [News Index]

Come get yer ARS (Account Registration System) Source Code here!
All images, characters, content and text are copyrighted and trademarks of J.D. Frazer except where other ownership applies. Don't do bad things, we have lawyers.
UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)