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