Slower traffic stays in right lane. That is all!
OT: It's state law.
- Thread starter GloryDawg
- Start date
- Status
My radical authoritarian idea is to force people to renew license with a test every 3 years and make it stricter - encourage on ramp acceleration, better reflexes, proper passing etiquette.
Would create more jobs.
Barrier would be getting public transportation up to snuff to handle the influx of idiots we take off the road. (Hey this also creates more jobs)
Would save countless lives and probably better for the environment too.
It's a win in every way except the liberal way. Limits your liberty to do what you want. So the libs would hate it. But we're approaching a point where society needs it.
Would create more jobs.
Barrier would be getting public transportation up to snuff to handle the influx of idiots we take off the road. (Hey this also creates more jobs)
Would save countless lives and probably better for the environment too.
It's a win in every way except the liberal way. Limits your liberty to do what you want. So the libs would hate it. But we're approaching a point where society needs it.
I would think cites police who can write tickets on the interstate could bring in a lot of money writing tickets for that.
Last edited:
I saw an unmarked TN trooper blue light a guy in the left lane last week. I wish he would have written him a ticket.
Related:
When turning left in a median crossover, move your asss as far forward and right inside that crossover as you can get.
When you dumb MFs turn immediately into the left (inside) position, if anyone else in opposing traffic also needs that crossover, you force them to mirror YOUR inside position, therefore blinding you both to oncoming traffic.
When turning left in a median crossover, move your asss as far forward and right inside that crossover as you can get.
When you dumb MFs turn immediately into the left (inside) position, if anyone else in opposing traffic also needs that crossover, you force them to mirror YOUR inside position, therefore blinding you both to oncoming traffic.
Not sure what country you're in, but in modern USA nomenclature, the libs will love it because it restricts you ability to do what you want and adds regulation. Confusing, but "liberal" in the US means "illiberal, with certain exceptions if it involves sex or drugs". Confusing, but sometimes you'll see "classical liberal" as a phrase to mean liberal in the literal sense.
1) I know what you are talking about, but it seems confusing as hell the way you wrote it. Not sure if I'm dumb at the end of the day or if that's on you.
2) I have found myself in a situation where I and people driving the opposite direction your rule, but a couple of dubmasses on the otherside lined up with no gap for me to drive through. All we needed was a dubmass or two behind me to do the same thing and somebody would have had to reverse in order for anybody to move.
It's not exactly the law, but if you follow that you will also basically follow the law, at least in Mississippi:
- (a)A vehicle shall not be driven in the outermost left lane of any roadway with two (2) or more lanes allowing for movement of traffic in the same direction except when:
- (i) Overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction under the rules governing such movement;
- (ii) The right lane(s) of a roadway is closed to traffic while under construction or repair;
- (iii) The right lane(s) of the roadway is in disrepair or in an otherwise impassable or unsafe condition; or
- (iv) A vehicle is preparing to exit the roadway on the left.
- (b) A vehicle shall not be driven continuously in the outermost left lane of a multi-lane roadway whenever it impedes the flow of other traffic.
Broad strokes are often inaccurate. While socially liberal fiscal authoritarians exist and socially conservative fiscal libertarians exist - they are not some broad vast majority. Actually most people don't fit the boogeyman that one side paints for the other.
Take Trump for example. That man hates anyone having the option to leave their job and do what they want (Biden's noncompete wasn't held up by him). Goes against what you just defined as liberal unless somehow you're saying Trump is the liberal?
How about we go back to letting words mean what they mean. Liberal means ya want liberty. Authoritarian means ya want to be told what to do. And having the list on your desk means you have the list on your desk Pam.
The right lane is rough as hell because of the log trucks. I’m riding in the left lane in my motorhome and driving 62 because I get 7.1 mpg rather than 7.3 mpg at 70. Go around if you don’t like it.
That is a freedom of contract issue. It is more liberal in the literal sense to let people generally have the autonomy to enter into contracts they deem in their best interests. Despite being much more liberal (in the literal sense) than most, I think non-competes are abused so badly that I would actually prefer employers be limited to using non-solicitation and trade secrets to protect their interests, except in very limited circumstances. But that is an example of me being less liberal and in favor of restricting freedom. That ignores the question of whether the FTC has the authority to just broadly outlaw contracts in common usage across the country outside of California.
Trump is not ideological. As far as I can tell, he doesn't have any overarching ideological principles that can be used to predict his positions. He's very transactional. There are good and bad things about that.
That would be great, but if you go around using the literal definitions in American politics you are going to have very frustrating conversations. People are going to be wondering why the hell you are using conservative to describe big government politicians that want to preserve the status quo and liberal to describe a portion of politicians on the right. I guess while you're at it you can spend your time correcting people that use the word "literally" to mean "figuratively". I hope you are successful but I'm not optimistic to say the least.
- Status