Road Rage

[1995hoo]

What good would it have done to get his license plate number?

Probably nothing, except to report him, but there wouldn't have been much of a case for anything since he didn't technically do anything harmful (except for "intent to cause a rear-end collision", but it wasn't that bad).

More than anything I would have just loved the opportunity to calmly explain "you do realize I passed you in a legal passing zone because you pulled out right in front of me and I had to slam on the brakes, right?" just to see how he would respond. But following him would have been a huge time waste while potentially putting myself in danger, so I just came here to vent instead. 

Or you could always do what someone else would do in the same circumstance you had:
1. Keep going full speed until you're right on the bumper.
2. Slam on the brakes while loudly blaring the horn.
3. Rant.
4. Take the footage from your dashcam and compile it with other incidents into a video.
5. Upload the video to YouTube.
6. Post the link here and on Facebook.

You forgot about blasting the person with your high-beams (which is one fad I don't understand—blinding someone doesn't seem like it's going to help anything).

[vdeane]

You forgot about blasting the person with your high-beams (which is one fad I don't understand—blinding someone doesn't seem like it's going to help anything).

Did Carhorn do that?  I don't recall it, but I wasn't looking for high beam reflection either.

[webny99]

Reminds me of the time someone flipped me off for following "keep right except to pass" and using my cruise control when they got off I-490 at exit 28.  I guess as much as those of us who use cruise control hate those who refuse to do so, the reverse is true as well.

Missed this yesterday, but that stretch of I-490 in particular seems to be one where KRETP adherence is completely out the window. I think it's because the added lane from Exit 27 comes in on the right, so keeping to the right lane requires three lane changes (one to the right, then two to the left) for those accessing the Thruway EB. As such, drivers that would normally KRETP end up middle lane camping, while those that normally middle lane camp end up left lane camping. Yet another reason why 25-27 should be six lanes and the ramp to the Thruway EB should be two lanes: it would take the number of lane changes required to KRETP from three down to just one.

I don't mind whether or not anyone uses cruise control, but I do prefer that those that do use it have some flexibility. In cases where you're passing with a very small speed differential, It's a reasonable ask that you either bump your cruise up by a mph or two to get past someone, or down by a mph or two to move right and let others pass. In most vehicles, speeding up doesn't even require adjusting the cruise settings at all - you can just accelerate as needed and your cruise setting will resume once you take your foot back off the accelerator. This works well on the Thruway when attempting not to disrupt traffic flowing at 80+ mph on the left while also not wanting to have the cruise set that high.

[webny99]

You forgot about blasting the person with your high-beams (which is one fad I don't understand—blinding someone doesn't seem like it's going to help anything).

Considering this occurred in broad daylight, it's more likely I wouldn't have noticed at all. High beams and headlights in general tend to go unnoticed by me except between dusk and dawn.

[jeffandnicole]

You forgot about blasting the person with your high-beams (which is one fad I don't understand—blinding someone doesn't seem like it's going to help anything).

Did Carhorn do that?  I don't recall it, but I wasn't looking for high beam reflection either.

He'll flash his lights in his videos where the driver in front if him isn't going fast enough, taking too long at the McDonald's drive thru, or whatever Cra-Shit claims is incorrect at that particular point in time.

What good would it have done to get his license plate number?

Probably nothing, except to report him, but there wouldn't have been much of a case for anything since he didn't technically do anything harmful (except for "intent to cause a rear-end collision", but it wasn't that bad).

More than anything I would have just loved the opportunity to calmly explain "you do realize I passed you in a legal passing zone because you pulled out right in front of me and I had to slam on the brakes, right?" just to see how he would respond. But following him would have been a huge time waste while potentially putting myself in danger, so I just came here to vent instead. 

Reporting that someone honked and called you an asshole? What kind of glare from the cop are you thinking you're going to get when telling them that?

Frankly, I'm not even sure where road rage comes into play here.  You would need to site the state statutes that he violated.  I guess the excessive horn honking would qualify, although that's gonna be very subjective. He, or the cop, will ask after you've told them you passed the guy, did you reenter the lane too closely, causing him to honk his horn as an emergency measure?

[1995hoo]

You forgot about blasting the person with your high-beams (which is one fad I don't understand—blinding someone doesn't seem like it's going to help anything).

Did Carhorn do that?  I don't recall it, but I wasn't looking for high beam reflection either.

I wasn't referring to him, at least not intentionally. I was more referring to something I see all the time in the DC area where people who don't like what someone else does will high-beam the "offender" as though that's somehow going to help things. Sorry, I wasn't necessarily associating your comment with the former poster in question.

[webny99]

Reporting that someone honked and called you an asshole? What kind of glare from the cop are you thinking you're going to get when telling them that?

Frankly, I'm not even sure where road rage comes into play here.  You would need to site the state statutes that he violated.  I guess the excessive horn honking would qualify, although that's gonna be very subjective. He, or the cop, will ask after you're told them you passed the guy, did you reenter the lane too closely, causing him to honk his horn as an emergency measure?

I agree. It was just the heat of the moment that caused the thought to briefly cross my mind. I shouldn't have bothered to even go into that much detail about it here but just wanted to capture the whole scope of what happened in my retelling of it. Ultimately this particular incident was way more about personal conduct violation than it was about rules of the road. The reason I called it road rage is because honking without a very good reason and name calling another driver are two things that, IMO, only an enraged driver would do.

You could also argue my insistence on passing him for causing me to brake is also something an enraged driver would do, but I would disagree. It's something an efficient driver who wishes to make the other driver aware of their error in judgment would do, and I was not enraged in the least in doing so... at least not until he blatantly missed the point. If his reaction had been surprise rather than anger, that would have been exactly the intended result.

[triplemultiplex]

I've never encountered road rage before like three years ago.  Now I'm seeing it regularly.  Impatient, entitled, adult babies with zero self awareness and fragile egos.  (And no doubt, sexually impotent/incompetent.)

Some genetic dead-end didn't like that I wasn't speeding fast enough while passing a truck in the left lane over the fourth and starts flashing his widdle lights and swerving back and forth in the lane until I completed my pass.  Then he did that fake "I'm gonna side-swipe you" bullshit before speeding off at like 90.  Didn't even give the fucker the time of day.  If he had hit me with his temper tantrum, it would all have been on the trucker's dash cam.

Felt pretty smug about not taking little rage monkey's bait there.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

You forgot about blasting the person with your high-beams (which is one fad I don't understand—blinding someone doesn't seem like it's going to help anything).

Did Carhorn do that?  I don't recall it, but I wasn't looking for high beam reflection either.

I wasn't referring to him, at least not intentionally. I was more referring to something I see all the time in the DC area where people who don't like what someone else does will high-beam the "offender" as though that's somehow going to help things. Sorry, I wasn't necessarily associating your comment with the former poster in question.

I had a former friend who was annoyed someone didn't turn their brights off when passing in the left lane, then was dismayed when he saw that said vehicle had a trailer which blocked him from retaliatory rage-brighting the guy.

[jakeroot]

I think some user's heads would explode here in Japan. There is a full expectation that you will slow down as needed to accommodate someone entering traffic. Traffic forcing their way out is very common here.

One common move is when someone is crossing an arterial road, but one direction of the arterial is jammed up (and it's the side the driver is entering from). The drivers in the jammed side leave a gap, and the car enters into the roadway about halfway. Eventually, the driver noses so far into the opposing (free flow) direction that someone eventually stops to let them in, even though it's not their right-of-way. This should be common courtesy, but I don't recall seeing it often in the US.

Another is that driveways are normally too narrow to accommodate both entering and leaving traffic. So if you're entering a driveway where someone is leaving, you let them leave and then you enter the driveway. But this means the curb lane of a roadway often has cars coming to a complete stop for a couple seconds while both drivers complete the switcheroo.

Another is turning right (across traffic, left-hand traffic here), sometimes at double right turns, the visibility isn't so good, so both lanes will turn right at the same time, but sometimes drivers just follow the car in front of them even if there's an oncoming car. But oncoming traffic is very good about slowing down to accommodate turning traffic that maybe should have waited. Never any honking or gesturing, just gentle accommodation.

Things are slower here, but the more relaxed driving style, and total lack of road rage, is so much better than back in the US.

[Rothman]

One common move is when someone is crossing an arterial road, but one direction of the arterial is jammed up (and it's the side the driver is entering from). The drivers in the jammed side leave a gap, and the car enters into the roadway about halfway. Eventually, the driver noses so far into the opposing (free flow) direction that someone eventually stops to let them in, even though it's not their right-of-way. This should be common courtesy, but I don't recall seeing it often in the US.

My experience in the U.S. has been the complete opposite.  Yes, some drivers won't let anyone in, but eventually, absolutely.

[vdeane]

One common move is when someone is crossing an arterial road, but one direction of the arterial is jammed up (and it's the side the driver is entering from). The drivers in the jammed side leave a gap, and the car enters into the roadway about halfway. Eventually, the driver noses so far into the opposing (free flow) direction that someone eventually stops to let them in, even though it's not their right-of-way. This should be common courtesy, but I don't recall seeing it often in the US.

My experience in the U.S. has been the complete opposite.  Yes, some drivers won't let anyone in, but eventually, absolutely.

Sometimes even when there was a perfectly usable gap behind a platoon that the "nice" person was seemingly oblivious to.

[NWI_Irish96]

Got behind a guy on a two-lane highway once who was going exactly 55mph in a 55 zone. I prefer to go faster, but it never bothers me when someone wants to obey the law to the letter, so I settled in comfortably behind. When we got to one of those uphill passing lanes, he stayed in the left lane so I moved to the right to pass. He sped up, keeping ahead of me through the zone, but then slowing back down to exactly 55 as soon as the extra lane ended.

Needless to say I didn't appreciate that. The next time we got to a passing lane, I put it to the floor and cleared him. Didn't look at him, didn't gesture at him or anything. He immediately started tailgating me and shaking his fist at me. Tailgated me up to speeds as high as 70, which is as fast as I was willing to go on this road.

I found a spot with a gas station on the left, just as a line of oncoming traffic was approaching. Made him sit at a dead stop for 15 seconds or so before he decided to pass me on the gravel shoulder. Really thought he was going to stop and get out of his car.

[webny99]

I found a spot with a gas station on the left, just as a line of oncoming traffic was approaching. Made him sit at a dead stop for 15 seconds or so before he decided to pass me on the gravel shoulder. Really thought he was going to stop and get out of his car.

Wow. I respect this but don't think I would have had the guts or the composure to pull into somewhere where there was potential for him to follow me and/or get out of the car to pursue things further. In that situation, distance is your friend. I wouldn't have been comfortable with him knowing exactly where I was even if he didn't follow me. I would have probably thrown him off by turning down a side street or something, even if it was just to let him go past and cool down for a minute before resuming the journey.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Last Labor Day weekend I was on my way to a work assignment in Alexandria, MN about 130 miles from MSP. After I passed St. Cloud I came to a work zone where I-94 narrowed to one lane with the left lane closing. There was a long but not outrageous backup in the right lane while the left lane mostly remained free, so I was driving significantly faster than the right lane up until I came upon a van in the left lane driving the speed of the stop and go traffic in the right lane. He would stop when the right lane stopped, then move as it moved, stop when it stopped again. I thought this was weird at first but became increasingly angered as it became clear this guy had zero intention of trying to get into the right lane. I had absolutely no idea what the fuck he was doing, and then we came to the top of a hill where I could see the lane closure was still a good mile-plus away and I was stuck behind this guy. I had never been so angered at another driver in my life.

[Max Rockatansky]

I immediately pulled out to pass, got back up to roughly my previous speed while completing the pass, at which point the pickup driver gave an extensive honk

Did webny99 just have a Lord Carhorn encounter?

Almost certainly if a library displaying Illinois style (meaning flat) architecture was around nearby.

[jakeroot]

One common move is when someone is crossing an arterial road, but one direction of the arterial is jammed up (and it's the side the driver is entering from). The drivers in the jammed side leave a gap, and the car enters into the roadway about halfway. Eventually, the driver noses so far into the opposing (free flow) direction that someone eventually stops to let them in, even though it's not their right-of-way. This should be common courtesy, but I don't recall seeing it often in the US.

My experience in the U.S. has been the complete opposite.  Yes, some drivers won't let anyone in, but eventually, absolutely.

Sometimes even when there was a perfectly usable gap behind a platoon that the "nice" person was seemingly oblivious to.

^^^^
Perhaps ironically, this is what I typically encountered in the US. Most drivers wouldn't stop, because there was [probably] a gap some number of cars behind them. That does not happen in Japan, 99% of drivers will stop to let you in regardless of what is happening behind them, and it happens almost immediately after nosing out from the side. No fuss, no honking, no raging.

[webny99]

Last Labor Day weekend I was on my way to a work assignment in Alexandria, MN about 130 miles from MSP. After I passed St. Cloud I came to a work zone where I-94 narrowed to one lane with the left lane closing. There was a long but not outrageous backup in the right lane while the left lane mostly remained free, so I was driving significantly faster than the right lane up until I came upon a van in the left lane driving the speed of the stop and go traffic in the right lane. He would stop when the right lane stopped, then move as it moved, stop when it stopped again. I thought this was weird at first but became increasingly angered as it became clear this guy had zero intention of trying to get into the right lane. I had absolutely no idea what the fuck he was doing, and then we came to the top of a hill where I could see the lane closure was still a good mile-plus away and I was stuck behind this guy. I had never been so angered at another driver in my life.

Actually... bear with me here, but I get what he was going for, especially considering this occurred in MN, where the DOT has been actively promoting zipper merging for construction-related lane closures. I also get why it was very frustrating - it is abrasive to do this when the lane is otherwise clear because it forces everyone behind them to slow way down when there's an open lane ahead. But when the alternative is to keep going and cut in to the right lane at an arbitrarily chosen spot (which is the primary cause of the backup to begin with), this does reduce overall delays. It's just unfair to try and force it upon other drivers since the whole idea is to improve efficiency and reduce delays, and that only works when everyone on the road does it. It clearly wasn't happening here when those behind him could have been much further down the road. I give an A for identifying the correct merging concept, but an F for being a control freak about it and forcing it upon everyone else when existing traffic patterns dictated otherwise.

[epzik8]

One common move is when someone is crossing an arterial road, but one direction of the arterial is jammed up (and it's the side the driver is entering from). The drivers in the jammed side leave a gap, and the car enters into the roadway about halfway. Eventually, the driver noses so far into the opposing (free flow) direction that someone eventually stops to let them in, even though it's not their right-of-way. This should be common courtesy, but I don't recall seeing it often in the US.

My experience in the U.S. has been the complete opposite.  Yes, some drivers won't let anyone in, but eventually, absolutely.

This is why I tend to choose what is essentially the exact opposite course of action, to leave a long enough gap in front of me for multiple cars to get over.

[Rothman]

Last Labor Day weekend I was on my way to a work assignment in Alexandria, MN about 130 miles from MSP. After I passed St. Cloud I came to a work zone where I-94 narrowed to one lane with the left lane closing. There was a long but not outrageous backup in the right lane while the left lane mostly remained free, so I was driving significantly faster than the right lane up until I came upon a van in the left lane driving the speed of the stop and go traffic in the right lane. He would stop when the right lane stopped, then move as it moved, stop when it stopped again. I thought this was weird at first but became increasingly angered as it became clear this guy had zero intention of trying to get into the right lane. I had absolutely no idea what the fuck he was doing, and then we came to the top of a hill where I could see the lane closure was still a good mile-plus away and I was stuck behind this guy. I had never been so angered at another driver in my life.

Actually... bear with me here, but I get what he was going for, especially considering this occurred in MN, where the DOT has been actively promoting zipper merging for construction-related lane closures. I also get why it was very frustrating - it is abrasive to do this when the lane is otherwise clear because it forces everyone behind them to slow way down when there's an open lane ahead. But when the alternative is to keep going and cut in to the right lane at an arbitrarily chosen spot (which is the primary cause of the backup to begin with), this does reduce overall delays. It's just unfair to try and force it upon other drivers since the whole idea is to improve efficiency and reduce delays, and that only works when everyone on the road does it. It clearly wasn't happening here when those behind him could have been much further down the road. I give an A for identifying the correct merging concept, but an F for being a control freak about it and forcing it upon everyone else when existing traffic patterns dictated otherwise.

I thought the merge point was much further up the road from the description in the OP.  If that's the case, the van was just being a pain.

[Rothman]

One common move is when someone is crossing an arterial road, but one direction of the arterial is jammed up (and it's the side the driver is entering from). The drivers in the jammed side leave a gap, and the car enters into the roadway about halfway. Eventually, the driver noses so far into the opposing (free flow) direction that someone eventually stops to let them in, even though it's not their right-of-way. This should be common courtesy, but I don't recall seeing it often in the US.

My experience in the U.S. has been the complete opposite.  Yes, some drivers won't let anyone in, but eventually, absolutely.

This is why I tend to choose what is essentially the exact opposite course of action, to leave a long enough gap in front of me for multiple cars to get over.

That's just another annoying extreme.  Zipper!

[vdeane]

Actually... bear with me here, but I get what he was going for, especially considering this occurred in MN, where the DOT has been actively promoting zipper merging for construction-related lane closures. I also get why it was very frustrating - it is abrasive to do this when the lane is otherwise clear because it forces everyone behind them to slow way down when there's an open lane ahead. But when the alternative is to keep going and cut in to the right lane at an arbitrarily chosen spot (which is the primary cause of the backup to begin with), this does reduce overall delays. It's just unfair to try and force it upon other drivers since the whole idea is to improve efficiency and reduce delays, and that only works when everyone on the road does it. It clearly wasn't happening here when those behind him could have been much further down the road. I give an A for identifying the correct merging concept, but an F for being a control freak about it and forcing it upon everyone else when existing traffic patterns dictated otherwise.

If he was promoting zipper merging, why slow down when the other lane was?  Why not just take it to the end?  Seems more like he's an early merger who got frustrated at "those people" and decided to "teach them a lesson" by blocking the ability of later mergers to pass traffic.

[webny99]

If he was promoting zipper merging, why slow down when the other lane was?  Why not just take it to the end?  Seems more like he's an early merger who got frustrated at "those people" and decided to "teach them a lesson" by blocking the ability of later mergers to pass traffic.

Because both lanes matching speed and merging 1:1 where the lanes merge is how zipper merging is supposed to work. MNDOT is basically the gold standard for promotion of zipper merging: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/zippermerge/

The problem is that it rarely works as intended in practice because early mergers create a pre-existing backup in the through lane, and then the late mergers feed the backup by merging in at random points, so there's nothing even close to resembling a consistent 1:1 ratio at the merge point. So in this case, while I'm not saying it was right to block traffic, it absolutely would have helped to create a proper zipper merge for everyone that had backed up behind him, while also theoretically improving the flow ahead of him by eliminating the intermittent slowdowns due to people cutting in.

I obviously can't rule out the possibility that it was angry early merger, but it seems more likely that he would have somehow reserved himself a spot in the thru lane if that was the case - perhaps by straddling the lanes as I've seen trucks do sometimes. I've also seen trucks do what this guy did and speed match until the end of the lane, but it somehow seems less egregious when it's two trucks doing it - probably because (a) no one can see directly in front of the truck, and (b) trucks usually work together/in groups to maintain a consistent crawl rather than stop/go cycles, which is much more bearable for those following them.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Maybe I didn't make some details clear enough.
-I first encountered the van around 1.5 to 2 miles from the merge point.
-He was neither making an active attempt to merge early, nor actively driving forward to the merge point like he was supposed to. He would simply accelerate to the speed of traffic while the right lane was moving, then return to a complete stop whenever the right lane stopped, and only move again when the right lane started moving again. There was very little traffic in the left lane at this point either in front of or behind the van and there were no cars in the left lane ahead of the van up until the merge point well over a mile away. I did see several chances for him to merge early and he declined to take them. The point isn't whether he should merge early or zipper as much as *please just do something to get the hell out of my way*.
-This continued up until he reached said zopper merge point.

[Rothman]

Thanks for confirming.