Get out of the Left Lane! Nice stickers...
01-23-2009, 06:47 AM
#12
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't miss the point, your point is invalid
You need to get over. The left lane is for passing, not for you to make a statement to people that are driving faster than you that you feel it is unsafe for them to do so.
You staying in the left lane is what is more unsafe in that situation. With YOU staying in the left lane, you make a potentially unsafe situation MORE unsafe just to "prove your point."
Just get over.
You staying in the left lane is what is more unsafe in that situation. With YOU staying in the left lane, you make a potentially unsafe situation MORE unsafe just to "prove your point."
Just get over.
01-23-2009, 08:19 AM
#17
well I say that if people used they're rear view mirror and saw that someone is coming up on them,
they need to move over. To me it doesn't matter what speed this is all done at. Move over!
01-23-2009, 08:23 AM
#18
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see where you're coming from, but I don't know if it's that simple. If
we are going to follow that line of reasoning to it's logical conclusion, it is almost tantamount to saying "I have the right to break the law' or "I have the right to endanger others for the sake of my fun, and you have no right to stop or impede me."
Uh, no you don't. And the law says so.
And actually, the Accessory Clause in 48 of the 50 states actually says:
"You, having had knowledge of the offense, did not nothing to report it NOR AID IN IT'S PREVENTION, makes you as guilty as the party that committed the offense."
Now does that mean that it's somehow the implied dutry of everyone to stop or try to prevent every person around them from breaking the law? No--of course not.
But at the same time, don't ask me (much less expect me) to get out of this jerkoff's way so he can break the law even further.
Your argument has merit from a 'common sense' ethic, I'll grant. And it also does make sense to try and avoid a confrontation when possible. But that line of reasoning is absolutely devoid of merit from a legal standpoint. And I am a student of law; currently in a Masters in Criminolgy with an emphasis in Constitutional Law.
It is true that 'what the law says' and what actually plays out as far as 'human conduct' are concerned often do not match up, granted. But don't ask me to willingly be a party to or FACILITATE what I know to be patently illegal and even worse (from a 'common sense' ethic) also flagrantly dangerous to others.
That's my point.
Uh, no you don't. And the law says so.
And actually, the Accessory Clause in 48 of the 50 states actually says:
"You, having had knowledge of the offense, did not nothing to report it NOR AID IN IT'S PREVENTION, makes you as guilty as the party that committed the offense."
Now does that mean that it's somehow the implied dutry of everyone to stop or try to prevent every person around them from breaking the law? No--of course not.
But at the same time, don't ask me (much less expect me) to get out of this jerkoff's way so he can break the law even further.
Your argument has merit from a 'common sense' ethic, I'll grant. And it also does make sense to try and avoid a confrontation when possible. But that line of reasoning is absolutely devoid of merit from a legal standpoint. And I am a student of law; currently in a Masters in Criminolgy with an emphasis in Constitutional Law.
It is true that 'what the law says' and what actually plays out as far as 'human conduct' are concerned often do not match up, granted. But don't ask me to willingly be a party to or FACILITATE what I know to be patently illegal and even worse (from a 'common sense' ethic) also flagrantly dangerous to others.
That's my point.
