Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 7/7/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!oz
From: oz@rlgvax.UUCP (THE GREAT AND POWERFUL OZ)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: 55mph & common courtesy
Message-ID: <951@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 4-Aug-83 00:22:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.951
Posted: Thu Aug  4 00:22:53 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Aug-83 22:33:10 EDT
References: <534@grkermit.UUCP>
Organization: CCI, Capitol Region
Lines: 21

I suppose the real point here is the word "reasonable" (which was followed by
"to pull over").  If it IS reasonable to pull over, then, yes I think a person
should.  As Guy pointed out in his article this includes:  IF the shoulder
is properly paved, IF you won't cut anyone else off by pulling over, IF there
presently isn't another car/truck in the lane you want to move into and so on.
I DISAGREE that the majority of the people who tailgate really DO all the
nice signals you mentioned before they resort to tailgating.  If they did I
assure you the I would not have flamed about this topic.  Usually they come up
like a bat out of hell and try to seduce your back fender.

It is interesting to note the way the "original flame" is now mentioned.
It seems to me we had been hearing things like "the fastest car in the left
lane has the right of way" or "if you are doing ONLY 55 you have no right to
be in the left lane."  This "pull over if it is reasonable" flame is one that
I agree with and DO support  But it seems to me the first two statments I
quoted in this paragraph (which came from earlier discussions) do not exactly
(read: "AT ALL") match this "new" version of the "original flame"  Thanks for
making your intentions clear.

				OZ
				seimso!rlgvax!oz