advertisement

advertisement

Bad driving impressions

Yes Winnipeg you have lots of terrible drivers. What I mean by that is not so much that they have poor driving skill but more that they are VERY AGGRESSIVE.

Today on my way home while trying to get onto the Perimiter Highway from Route 90 I was just about run off the road by some old guy in a company truck (half ton of course).

Now my little car may not be as fast as your truck but I'm still ahead of you and you are not supposed to cross solid white lines to pass while forcing me onto the shoulder!

Not the first time this has happened and like the Camaro and sadly the two dead cable workers this is another case of selfish/aggressive driving that could have ended in a tradgedy. What were you thinking!

I could go on with a litany of complaints but I feel better now, and yes I know this will have no impact on the driving habits of those who feel it is their right to force others off the road because their car is faster.

I mean, how old are you anyway? 12?

Comments

pablo sanchez » Sep 29th 2007, 21:13

Avatar

Whoa, who ever said anything about the camaro being responsible for that accident that took the lives of the cable workers. My understanding is the minivan turned into on-coming traffic causing the camaro to swerve and lose control. Has it been proven either way? I haven't heard.

Careful about generalizing like that unless that accident has been proven as you state, then I will stand corrected.

pablo sanchez » Sep 29th 2007, 21:20

Avatar

I do have to ask, where you accelerating onto the perimeter or slowly approaching the perimeter? The ramp you were turning from Route 90 onto the Perimeter is called an Acceleration Lane.

If you were accelerating in this lane, then the old guy in the truck is 100% at fault, a complete jerk. But if you were dilly-dallying along and taking your time getting up to any speed (like people do so often, especially in the acceleration lane from Pembina onto Bishop Grandin), you become a traffic hazard as the upcoming traffic on the perimeter would be expecting you to accelerate on.

Spend some time in any large city outside Winnipeg (Minneapolis, Calgary, Edmonton) and you'll see what I mean.

Karla Burr of Spacecadet Design » Sep 30th 2007, 00:28

Avatar

Ken, I completely agree with you — when people use the acceleration lane as a yeild it makes me crazy! I fell that overly cautious drivers can often cause dangerous situations because of their hesitation.

Julian Moffatt of Visual Lizard » Sep 30th 2007, 10:15

Avatar

Here is a link at CBC for the news story regarding the Camaro and workers:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/09/14/crash.html

Follow up piece:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/09/17/worker-killed.html

Author » holycrap therearebaddrivershere » Sep 30th 2007, 10:58

Avatar

Well grasshoppers I think you may want to slow down on the assumptions a bit. My point is that when two vehicles try to occupy the same space at one time the result is an accident. I was not laying blame on either car although I believe it is a fact that the camaro was the car that hit the men.

Next point. It doesn't matter how slow the car in front of you is, it has the right of way, look it up.

Axiom: Never try to out jerk a jerk.

Was that you whom ran me off the road?

pablo sanchez » Sep 30th 2007, 21:35

Avatar

Ha ha, I knew you would ask. No, that wasn't me. I have never made that kind of move on anybody on the road(nor would I ever), but i have never had anybody do anything like that to me either, and I've been driving in Winnipeg for over 20 years. Hmmm...

I also find it interesting you didn't answer my question about your approach to the perimeter on the accelartion lane. I took a very objective view of your incident that you felt so strongly to write an article about and post for the entire city to see. As a side not, and just as a previous poster commented above, the slow indecisive drivers on the road are the most dangerous. I don't know if your one of those drivers as you didn't state.

Regarding the Camaro, your article is talking about fast, impatient drivers, then you referred to the Camaro accident. You are right, the Camaro did hit the cable workers. But your wording is infering that speed and a camaro were to blame for the accident. Did you even know there was a mini-van involved in the accident with the Camaro driving the other direction, turning left in front of the camaro? If so, why not mention the mini-van in your article as well. I'm not making an assumption of what you said, but your story was very misleading if people didn't know about the entire story about this tragic accident. Now, we don't know whether the Camaro was speeding or not. If it was, shame on them and they should pay the price. That being said, a car is only to enter an intersection when deemed safe. If you see a speeding car approaching you, is it safe to make a turn in front of it anyways just to prove a point that the car shouldn't be speeding? If that mini-van did in fact cause the accident by turning in front of the camaro (speeding or not), should the blame lay, at least partially, on the mini-van driver for not paying attention to the road? If in fact it is proven the mini-van cut off the camaro, this would be a case of an indecisive driver creating a very dangerous situation, this time leading to death.

Let me ask you a question. Has a car ever turned in front of you (or cut you off) so badly that you had to slam your brakes and causing your car to slighly swerve or waver? If you hit a parked car or a car beside you during this braking, who is at fault? Well, unfortunetly, you would be to blame because you wouldn't be able to catch the jerk who cut you off. However, it sounds like you had a similar situation, and I do believe you've already answered the question in your article.

pablo sanchez » Sep 30th 2007, 21:57

Avatar

Yes Karla, I couldn't agree with you more. The people who are unsure and nervous on the road are the most dangerous.

I would love to see cellphone use banned while driving. I wish they would pass that law, it would make the roads a lot safer, and people would actually pay better attention to what they are doing on the road.

Thanks Jilian for the link. I wasn't sure if the minivan actually hit the camaro. Geez, thats too bad, the poor families of the cable workers will suffer forever, and the driver of the camaro has to live with that for the rest of his/her life and he/she were just driving to get coffee. We don't know all the facts, probably never will, but I think that we can assume the minivan hitting the camaro caused the deaths of the cable workers by sending the camaro into the workers. That's just not fair to anybody.

pablo sanchez » Sep 30th 2007, 22:40

Avatar

"Next point. It doesn't matter how slow the car in front of you is, it has the right of way, look it up."

I did look it up and here is what I found:

Slow vehicles to keep to right

109(2) The driver of a vehicle who is proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place, and under the conditions, then existing shall drive in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand kerb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left-hand turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.


Slow driver to proceed in right hand lane

112(4) Subject to subsection (5), where a driver of a vehicle is proceeding at a slower rate of speed than other traffic he shall

(a) drive in the extreme right hand lane where the roadway has 2 or more lanes; or
(b) drive as closely as is practicable to the right hand edge or curb of the roadway.


Source:

http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/h060_2e.php#109(2)


Not trying to be a jerk, as I asked you questions in my posts to determine the whole situation. You deemed your incident so horrible that you posted your story on a site for everybody in the city can read about it.

So, this happened to me the other day. I was at a 4-way stop and was about to precede as there were no other cars in the area, except for, coincedently, a minivan rocketing down the crossing street. I decided to wait, even though it was my turn to go, and sure enough, the driver went straight through the intersection without slowing down. This in a school zone I should add. I honked my horn at her, and she gave me a dirty look.

Now, this driver probably went home and complained about how rude drivers are for honking their horn at her. If you had children in this school zone, would you want this driver to get a little more then a honk? I should have got her license plate and reported her looking back at it. My point? Just trying to get the whole story, not just part of it.

Author » holycrap therearebaddrivershere » Oct 1st 2007, 13:03

Avatar

I was right, it was you whom ran me off the road!

Thanks for demonstrating my point.

Author » holycrap therearebaddrivershere » Oct 1st 2007, 13:09

Avatar

Ok, I appologize for that. ;-)

pablo sanchez » Oct 1st 2007, 18:58

Avatar

I was objective (by asking questions and taking both sides of the situation) and I wanted to hear your ideas and opinions, and all you had was sarcasm. I'm guessing you didn't even read what I wrote (the laws of the road where you challenged me to look it up?). Go and drive the way you do in Minneapolis, I wish you luck. I hope to not meet you on 494. :)

Sheri Monk » Oct 1st 2007, 19:22

Avatar


I would just like to point out that in a small town, the biggest traffic issue is waiting for two trucks who are talking to one another in the middle of the street to get a move on.
That and I can get leave work, get my son from daycare and be home at 5:05. 5:20 if I need to get something for supper. :D

Robert Komosky » Oct 10th 2007, 10:09

Avatar

Yes mentioned going slow in the acceleration lane. I would like to mention drivers who stop in a merge lane and wait for a break in traffic cause as many problems and are a cause of most rear end collisions but as they are rearended they are NOT at fault. A good location of this is heading west on Grant and turning North onto Kenaston. There is a huge merge lane there and drivers stop in the turn.

Author » holycrap therearebaddrivershere » Oct 10th 2007, 19:49

Avatar

Ok I sat back long enough.

To the latest blogger, you might want to consider that if the driver who stopped was to go, it may cause an accident. This would save you no time at all. You also may want to consider that the driver in front of you whom stopped has a much better view of what is comming and bases their decision on better information. If you are in a hurry that whould not be their first concern, their first concern should be "can I do this safely?" Can you see through the driver in front of you? Do you have a better vantage point being that you are at least one car lenght behind that person and that much futher away from the action? Of course you are at fault if you rear end someone, you are supposed to leave enough room to stop.

To my long winded buddy whose notes I read with care.

Yes you are supposed to pull over to the side and let faster traffic through. That is providing there are more then 1 lane as it says in your quote. In the case I describe there was not. Are we to share the lane?

Please understand that your comments on the accident I sited are way off base. I got my information form the full page colour illustration of the accident off the front page of the Winnipeg Free Press the day after the accident. This is a matter of record. My interpretation was that the minivan turned into the right hand lane at the same time that the camaro was passing it on the right. If I remember my driving school that act is a no no. I'll leave it up to the authorities to decide who was at fault. My point is that selfish actions can have serious if not deadly consequenses.

And yes I have driven safely in much larger cities then Winnipeg. If I am aware, I will make every effort not to be on the road at the same time as you so as not to inconvenience you.

To the rest of you, please don't assume that the person in front of you that is pissing you off is doing it on purpose, that's just silly and selfish. You need to chill or you will be the cause of your next accident.

I note that apart from myself all the bloggers who have commented are on the opposing side of the argument. How about some of you type B drivers chiming in or is driving in Winnipeg only for racers?

pablo sanchez » Oct 12th 2007, 13:21

Avatar

I could be just as wrong as your are, but from what I read and understand, the minivan made a left hand turn in front of the minivan, minivan north bound, and the camaro south bound. I can't back that up as I don't have the resource available. But I do believe we can both agree that people need to pay attention when they are driving. Passsed a driver today texting and looking down, instead of paying attention to the road, cars, and lights ahead.

The rules do also state to drive as close to the curb is a second lane doesn't exist:


Slow driver to proceed in right hand lane

112(4) Subject to subsection (5), where a driver of a vehicle is proceeding at a slower rate of speed than other traffic he shall

(a) drive in the extreme right hand lane where the roadway has 2 or more lanes; or
(b) drive as closely as is practicable to the right hand edge or curb of the roadway.

...so yes, you are to share the lane, as stated above, and previously stated. Have you ever driven through Alberta when slower traffic moves over to the shoulder to let the faster traffic pass? Exactly the same idea.

I respect your point of view as I suspect/hope you do as well. Hopefully we both learned something here. :)

Author » holycrap therearebaddrivershere » Oct 12th 2007, 20:55

Avatar

Ken,

I still have the Free Press edition where I got my info.

Do you suppose that they are talking about vehicles like front end loaders or other vehicles incapable of highway speeds? I get the impression that they mean markedly slower and it probably does not apply to entrance ramps or when other vehicles are going much faster then the regular flow of traffic. After all there are signs that say "Do not travel on paved shoulder".

I would however pull over if I was pulling a trailer and holding up a line of traffic.

I'm thinking that two lanes and 3 cars across is a pretty dangerous situation.

I assume that we are all respecting the solid white lines that one is not supposed to cross over.

enough already.....

pablo sanchez » Oct 13th 2007, 00:49

Avatar

Whoever you are,

Ya, I agree, I'm done with this as well. I also agree I'm a bit longwinded ;) but I've had fun with this thread, I don't think you did, that's too bad. Debating is supposed to be a fun,learning experience. I just want to finish with agreeing with/seeing your side on a couple of points (of couse with a twist lol):

Slow traffic referring to equipment: I agree, the law was probably in place for that reason (however it doesn't actually say so), but you stated that slow traffic has the right of way, "look it up". Well, in fact, and proven in the way the law is written, it doesn't state anywhere that slow traffic has the right of way.

The accident between the mini-van and camaro: Let's pretend for the sake of argument that your right, that they were travelling the same direction. You stated that its a no-no to pass a car to the right (I agree). Its not against the law however, but your right, its not a favorable pass as its quite dangerous, especially on the highway. Saying that, St. Mary's road is 60 KM where this accident happened. How do we know, maybe the mini-van was going 30-40 KM? Driving erratically? Wouldn't YOU pass a car going 30-40 KM in a 60 KM zone or driving erratically? Of course you would. Regardless, it is the responsibility of the driver changing lanes to ensure that the lane is clear before changing lanes regardless of speed, what lane they are in, and the situation.

Here is my source about the accident, the Winnipeg Free Press (the same source as yours) stating that the mini van turned left into the intersection hitting the camaro.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/story/4039094p-4648028c.html

Maybe your story was an updated story and my source has been proven wrong. If you have it, please post the link. I'd like to know where you got that information because I can't find it anywhere, nor did I ever hear that scenario from anybody else but you. Regardless of whose story is correct, 2 people died because somebody wasn't paying attention to the road. Thats the horrible truth, and could have easily been avoided with some proper attention to the rules of the road.

Anyways, I'm done. Catch up with you on the next article we can debate. :)


Leave a Comment

Interested in contributing to WinnipegFIRST? Registered users can not only leave comments on any posted article, but can even submit their own articles and news stories for publication! If you want to start participating, click here to Register.

Publish
a Story

author

Avatar

holycrap therearebaddrivershere

  • User since Sep 26th 2007, 17:36

advertisement