12 ms·

Yes, yes it is a low effort comment. And it is exactly what I was trying to preempt. It adds exactly zero to the conversation to say "but the law" or "but dri

Yes, yes it is a low effort comment. And it is exactly what I was trying to preempt. It adds exactly zero to the conversation to say "but the law" or "but drivers ed" or "but some proverbial rule of thumb". For better or worse neither your fantasy of how people ought to act nor the letter of the law is reflective of how the overwhelming majority of the human population operators motor vehicles or expects others to. Is it ideal? Probably not. But it's a decent balance between being somewhat prepared for the expected traffic oddities, leaving margin for some subset of the unexpected and efficient use of road space. I'm sure this will be an unpopular comment because there is no shortage of people here who think humans adhere to laws the way a network switch adheres to its configuration but the reality is that there is not perfect alignment between how reasonable traffic participants behave and the letter of the law.

Zanni 5y ago
You could have pre-empted it by not making such a claim in the first place, and I abhor your attempt to normalize this dangerous behavior. It is not a "delicate balance." Increase your follow distance. Driving closer to the car in front of you gains you nothing but sacrifices valuable reaction time in the event of an emergency.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Take your high horse and turn it into glue. I'm not attempting to normalize anything. Look outside, it's already normalized. It is the current status quo. I'm not endorsing it. I'm simply asking you to not to pretend otherwise so you can pretend to be outraged at someone who failed to avoid an accident because they were driving like typical people drive.
trav4225 5y ago
I think that some of us would argue that these are not "reasonable traffic participants". People who do not maintain sufficient stopping distance are one of the most frustrating parts of the American driving experience and are (IMO) extremely disruptive to safe travel, especially on highways.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >I think that some of us would argue that these are not "reasonable traffic participants" You're basically arguing that almost everyone else is unreasonable. That's going to be a very uphill argument. Also there's no reason to hide behind "I think that some of us would argue". You clearly hold this opinion. Ask yourself why you have reservations about owning it. >People who do not maintain sufficient stopping distance Who defines "sufficient" because the consensus based on the observed behavior of typical traffic seems to be that "sufficient" is a few seconds where possible but always less than whatever the comments section on the internet thinks it should be >American driving experience The American driving experience is not particularly remarkable compared (except maybe in its low cost) compared to other developed nations. All of which are pretty tame compared to developing nations I'm not asking you to like the way people drive. I'm just asking you to not assess traffic incidents based on the reality of how people drive and not the farcical assumption that most participants are following or can be expected to be following whatever rules are on paper.

Zanni 5y ago

You could have pre-empted it by not making such a claim in the first place, and I abhor your attempt to normalize this dangerous behavior. It is not a "delicate balance." Increase your follow distance. Driving closer to the car in front of you gains you nothing but sacrifices valuable reaction time in the event of an emergency.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Take your high horse and turn it into glue. I'm not attempting to normalize anything. Look outside, it's already normalized. It is the current status quo. I'm not endorsing it. I'm simply asking you to not to pretend otherwise so you can pretend to be outraged at someone who failed to avoid an accident because they were driving like typical people drive.

trav4225 5y ago

I think that some of us would argue that these are not "reasonable traffic participants". People who do not maintain sufficient stopping distance are one of the most frustrating parts of the American driving experience and are (IMO) extremely disruptive to safe travel, especially on highways.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>I think that some of us would argue that these are not "reasonable traffic participants" You're basically arguing that almost everyone else is unreasonable. That's going to be a very uphill argument. Also there's no reason to hide behind "I think that some of us would argue". You clearly hold this opinion. Ask yourself why you have reservations about owning it. >People who do not maintain sufficient stopping distance Who defines "sufficient" because the consensus based on the observed behavior of typical traffic seems to be that "sufficient" is a few seconds where possible but always less than whatever the comments section on the internet thinks it should be >American driving experience The American driving experience is not particularly remarkable compared (except maybe in its low cost) compared to other developed nations. All of which are pretty tame compared to developing nations I'm not asking you to like the way people drive. I'm just asking you to not assess traffic incidents based on the reality of how people drive and not the farcical assumption that most participants are following or can be expected to be following whatever rules are on paper.