What causes road rage?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

It's felt like, since the 'end' of COVID, that the slogan is "20 Under is the New 10 Over". Drives me nuts.

From my anecdotal experience, it feels to me like it's (enraged) entitlement vs (righteous) indignation at a lack of 'following the rules like me' that fuels road rage.

Some "jerk" does something because "putz" isn't driving how Jerk likes, so Jerk does something, and Putz, who's just following the road rules gets upset because Jerk isn't following the road rules, and the next thing you know. rage is afoot.

Agreed and frustrating.

Just today I almost got hit by some idiot at a stop sign. Only looking 1 ways and starts turning right and almost hit me if I don’t honk. Could see him mouth oh ####. Yeah no kidding.

Went for a walk. Someone literally just parked in the middle of the road at a stop sign. No other cars in sight. Umm why are you stopped for so long.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

I feel like gotten worse now since Covid. Feels like we suddenly added 300k new drivers on the road.

Can’t stand people who treat the speed limit like a suggestion. Oh I’ll just for 30 under the limit no big deal

The speed limit is the Maximum permitted speed. Thats its definition. There are minimum speeds in some highways but those tend to be 60km/h.

So doing 30 under the limit is inline with current regulations.

(I agree with you it’s really annoying and less safe when in good conditions when people don’t travel the speed limit but they are technically correct)

[habernac]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I remember reading in Lonely Planet how the average Brazillian driver sees pedestrians on the sidewalk as points to score in a video game. It's not quite that bad...but there were times walking in dodgy area's where I was trying to figure out when snd where to jump at the last minute as passing cars were weaving at the sidewalk.

I really wanted to drive in Rio. Looked like fun.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GGG

The speed limit is the Maximum permitted speed. Thats its definition. There are minimum speeds in some highways but those tend to be 60km/h.

So doing 30 under the limit is inline with current regulations.

(I agree with you it’s really annoying and less safe when in good conditions when people don’t travel the speed limit but they are technically correct)

It’s illegal to impede traffic so, no, people can’t just drive as slow as they want.

Legally you can’t even drive in the left lane of a highway unless you’re at the maximum speed limit.

The expectation is that everyone goes the speed limit.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by GGG

The speed limit is the Maximum permitted speed. Thats its definition. There are minimum speeds in some highways but those tend to be 60km/h.

So doing 30 under the limit is inline with current regulations.

(I agree with you it’s really annoying and less safe when in good conditions when people don’t travel the speed limit but they are technically correct)

This is so false it's actually amazing you're so confident in saying this.

If people are going the speed limit and you're purposely going a lot slower for no reason then you're breaking the law. You can get a ticket for it.

[habernac]

Driving behind GGG might cause road rage.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I wonder if it was GGG that Locke had the dispute with on Deerfoot.

[Sylvanfan]

I'm thinking GGG is the guy in a the jacked up Yellow Ford Super duty who came from an off ramp and pulled in front of me in the left lane on Deerfoor when I was going 110 in a 100 zone and slowed to 80 and than went mid lane to prove how intent he was backing up like 50 cars to enforce "Reasoable driving behavior" back in August of 22. About 3 exits later cuts hard right to get off looks at me and fist pumps.

It was a Sunday night around 6:00 P.M and I had just moved over to get around someone moving slower in the middle lane. I wanted to move back to the middle because that's a a bit slow for that lane but at the time the next wave was well back. Otherwise I wouldn't dare go in the left lane at 110 and keep driving there.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Triple G speak up. Your shenanigans on Deerfoot have been exposed.

[PepsiFree]

There’s no way GGG drives a super duty. He’s got Nissan Sentra written all over him, maybe a van. Dodge Caravan.

[powderjunkie]

Did the yellow Ford have truck nuts? If not, I wouldn't buy that it was GGG.


But seriously you people are all stupid. If you get stuck behind someone doing 85 kph when you want to be going 110 kph, it will cost you 10 seconds for every km. But unless traffic is heavy (in which case you're going nowhere fast) it's highly unlikely you'll be "stuck" for more than a km or two. So just chill out and go #### yourselves.

On long haul driving it can be slightly more impactful, but we still perceive those few kms behind a slow RV to be a much bigger problem than it actually is.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

This is so false it's actually amazing you're so confident in saying this.

If people are going the speed limit and you're purposely going a lot slower for no reason then you're breaking the law. You can get a ticket for it.

Show me the section of the law you believe states this. Let’s also define “no reason”. I would argue that most people going slower than the speed limit have a reason.

If you read through the driver handbook there is one section on merging which says get up to traffic speed then merge. The remainder of the references to speed talk about slowing down to ensure you are driving and maintaining safe distances and to slow down around curves if you need to and all kinds of practices which appear to be rage inducing for people in this thread

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/387f...de-2023-04.pdf

I will add that you do need a slow moving vehicle sign to go less than 40 on a highway.

There is also this page

https://www.alberta.ca/slow-moving-vehicles#jumplinks-0

Which does not suggest it’s illegal.

I’m also assuming we aren’t talking about someone who is intentionally disrupting traffic and blocking people. We are talking about the idiot driving 80 on Stoney right? That idiot is perfectly legally entitled to drive 80.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

There’s no way GGG drives a super duty. He’s got Nissan Sentra written all over him, maybe a van. Dodge Caravan.

I was hoping for a fuel economy optimizing Prius driver. There the worst.

I agree with everyone about how people should drive if they are driving in an optimum fashion. What I am arguing is that people are driving legally and if they are driving legally everyone just needs to relax and go around them without believing that they are intentionally committing a mortal sin against them.

Two people are dead because a drunk guy thought some guy was playing road police. A lot of the posts in this thread share the same anger at slower inexperienced drivers.

[Paulie Walnuts]

You just brought up merging. I’ve given up on people knowing how to merge.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Just noticed GGG lives in California so no idea why he's arguing traffic laws on a calgary message board.

Your links are also all misleading. Your 2nd link says specifically if you "must". Meaning there is a reason. You stated someone doing less than the speed limit is technically correct.

That idiot on Stoney doing 80 is literally breaking the law if there is no traffic in front of him. It's a law in alberta. You must maintain same speed as traffic. If people are going around you while you're going 80 then you're impeding traffic.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by GGG

Two people are dead because a drunk guy thought some guy was playing road police. A lot of the posts in this thread share the same anger at slower inexperienced drivers.

That's a major stretch and you know it. You are comparing a guy clearly speeding to get by traffic moving at or near the speed limit while impaired to people driving well under the speed limit in places, and not just that but erratic speed variations. Not to mention passing on the shoulder which is clearly in the wrong and dangerous.

Plus you are the one who is assuming they are all inexperienced drivers.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Driving 30 below the limit is just as dangerous as ripping through 30 over the limit.

That’s why the highways have 100 and 110 limits, it’s not a suggestion. Either keep up with traffic or get off the road.

It’s not about saving 10 seconds. It’s following the rules.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Driving 30 below the limit is just as dangerous as ripping through 30 over the limit.

That’s why the highways have 100 and 110 limits, it’s not a suggestion. Either keep up with traffic or get off the road.

It’s not about saving 10 seconds. It’s following the rules.

Go read the driver handbook. It doesn’t refer to minimum speed anywhere. I agree with you it is dangerous to travel 30 under the limit.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

Just noticed GGG lives in California so no idea why he's arguing traffic laws on a calgary message board.

Your links are also all misleading. Your 2nd link says specifically if you "must". Meaning there is a reason. You stated someone doing less than the speed limit is technically correct.

That idiot on Stoney doing 80 is literally breaking the law if there is no traffic in front of him. It's a law in alberta. You must maintain same speed as traffic. If people are going around you while you're going 80 then you're impeding traffic.

I don’t live in California, quote the law you state exists. You often get lazy when asked for evidence. Your reading of the word must as being illegal if you don’t is a gross misinterpretation.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by GGG

Go read the driver handbook. It doesn’t refer to minimum speed anywhere. I agree with you it is dangerous to travel 30 under the limit.

If it doesn't mention the minimum speed then that means there isn't one. You can't impede traffic.

No idea what you're even arguing anymore you keep changing the arguing points. You went from the guy doing 30 under the limit is technically correct to talking about merging.