So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn ran intous. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is the quote,
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of the
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is the
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn ran
right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked."On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of the
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.I'll address this bullshit later.
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is the
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn ran
right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway. >>>
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of the
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is the
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn ran
the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who couldn't even be bothered to check.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is the
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn ran
the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, >> or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle. That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who couldn't even be bothered to check.This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
-hhThat is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife. Happens all the time in urban traffic. The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit. As we exited correctly to go
On 2023-01-10 13:48, -hh wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrongI guess little Tommie is so upset that I haven't addressed enough of his posts to fulfill his pity party quota...
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is the
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn ran
the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, >> or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle. That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
-hh
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who couldn't even be bothered to check.This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out of
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, >>>> or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >>>> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be >>> illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is >>> pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.
Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.
Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right. c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who couldn't even be bothered to check.This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right. c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
On 2023-01-10 16:40, -hh wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >>>> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going >>> slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.
Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.
Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'I called it, didn't it? 😎
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
Little Tommie has replied (checking)...
...pretty much every post in this thread...
...EXCEPT the one where I posted this:
"'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>"
He lacks the personal integrity to just say he was wrong.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out
unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly legal
You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >>>>> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going >>>> slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be >>>> illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is >>>> pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right. >> c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 3:20:31 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On 2023-01-10 16:40, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
I called it, didn't it? 😎'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >>>>>> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going >>>>> slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.
Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.
Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right. >>> c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
Little Tommie has replied (checking)...
...pretty much every post in this thread...
...EXCEPT the one where I posted this:
"'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, >> or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>"
He lacks the personal integrity to just say he was wrong.
Interesting. But you failed to quote the entire regulation pertaining lane use. There are exceptions. Typical of you to do this. Here it is:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit whoThis again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hhYou still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
We get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going >>>> slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
On 2023-01-13 19:54, Thomas E. wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 3:20:31 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 16:40, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
I called it, didn't it? 😎'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.
Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.
Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
Little Tommie has replied (checking)...
...pretty much every post in this thread...
...EXCEPT the one where I posted this:
"'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>"
He lacks the personal integrity to just say he was wrong.
Interesting. But you failed to quote the entire regulation pertaining lane use. There are exceptions. Typical of you to do this. Here it is:I quoted what utterly refuted your claim that streets aren't highways,
Lying Little Shit.
Can you admit that?
On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 10:44:10 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
left out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn
perfectly legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's
'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit whoThis again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
No, I totally get it: the PROCEDURAL controls for the crap road design is for drivers in the circle to-hhYou still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.
keep track of how many exits they pass and to not pass by 'too many' while in the right lane.
That's what it says on paper, but that's not necessarily what the ground truth reality is of how the
circles are navigated. This disconnect is most commonly seen when you have a primary thoroughfare
crossing a secondary (e.g., two lane road / single lane road) in that traffic volume on the two lane
wants to use both lanes going straight through the circle essentially unimpeded, even though that
pedantically violates the aforementioned procedural rule: its done anyway to maintain traffic volume.
That's why this architecture is flawed and an accident waiting to happen.
-hn
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual. Here is
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left turn
of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left out
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
We get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >>>>>>> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going >>>>>> slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic conditions, the other driver was not. What about that don't you get?
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:09:13 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On 2023-01-13 19:54, Thomas E. wrote:
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 3:20:31 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 16:40, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
I quoted what utterly refuted your claim that streets aren't highways,I called it, didn't it? 😎'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going >>>>>>> slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.
Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.
Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
Little Tommie has replied (checking)...
...pretty much every post in this thread...
...EXCEPT the one where I posted this:
"'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway, >>>> or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the >>>> public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>"
He lacks the personal integrity to just say he was wrong.
Interesting. But you failed to quote the entire regulation pertaining lane use. There are exceptions. Typical of you to do this. Here it is:
Lying Little Shit.
Can you admit that?
No I cannot. A street and a highway are very different. Different speeds, different locations.
Street: the roads or public areas of a city or town
Highway: a main road, especially one connecting major towns or cities
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>> On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
We get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago.
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic conditions, the other driver was not. What about that don't you get?The Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you to have been in
the right lane unless you were passing other vehicles.
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/ >>>>>>>>>>>>
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
The Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you to have been inWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago. >>>>>>>>
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic conditions, the other driver was not. What about that don't you get?
the right lane unless you were passing other vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better flow of traffic..."
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or above the posted limit.
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
The Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you to have been inWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago. >>>>>>>>
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic conditions, the other driver was not. What about that don't you get?
the right lane unless you were passing other vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or above the posted limit.An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes is
driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane and trying
to get around this driver, then the slower driver has a duty to move
over into the right lane unless one of the exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a left
out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn left
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
The Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you to have been inWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago. >>>>>>>>>>
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business >>>>>>>>>>> parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed >>>>>>>>>> by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic conditions, the other driver was not. What about that don't you get?
the right lane unless you were passing other vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes is
driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane and trying
to get around this driver, then the slower driver has a duty to move
over into the right lane unless one of the exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
[...]
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos
posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around
your wife, Lying Little Shit.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
[...]
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos
posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around
your wife, Lying Little Shit.
What do the archives say?
Because my recollection is that Tommy had previously admitted to there
also being someone passing on their right prior to the circle, which IIRC
was why this was summarized as a "left lane sitter" driver behavior.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
[...]
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos
posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around your wife, Lying Little Shit.What do the archives say?
Because my recollection is that Tommy had previously admitted to there
also being someone passing on their right prior to the circle, which IIRC was why this was summarized as a "left lane sitter" driver behavior.
-hh
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 4:56:51 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:What do the archives say?
[...] I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I
have cited or the videos posted was another driver trying to
get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get
around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
Because my recollection is that Tommy had previously admitted to
there also being someone passing on their right prior to the
circle, which IIRC was why this was summarized as a "left lane
sitter" driver behavior.
-hh
No, do your research.
I stated that I saw that other car behind us in my rear view mirror.
If she had obeyed the lane assignments and been in the left lane for
a left turn there would have been no accident.
She was not trying to pass us, she was just in the wrong place.
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:left turn ran into us. Baker insisted that we should have been in the right lane. His justification was "stay right except for passing". That is in fact an Indiana road rule, as it is in most states. In fact, it's mentioned in the Indiana Driver's manual.
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the discussion about a fender-bender accident I was involved in. It was at a 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout. We were in our left lane, going straight on and a driver in the right lane making a
left out of the right lane. This was mentioned in the police accident report, and the other driver's insurance paid for our repairs, no questions asked.
"On the highway, slower vehicles should use the right lane." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it is mandatory that you turn left out of the left lane. In the left lane, roundabout or not you, can go straight or turn left, but not right. That other driver violated the rules by trying to turn
perfectly legal unless you are speeding, weaving in and out, etc. What is important is that the lane you are in is correct for your intended travel direction, including anticipated turns.I'll address this bullshit later.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out any details that contradict his narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a highway "stay right" rule to city traffic where it simply cannot apply. Either you lied or are ignorant of basic driving rules. People pass on the right all the time in city traffic, and it's
The Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you to have been in >>>> the right lane unless you were passing other vehicles.We get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always should monitor your surroundings and especially'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles § 9-25-2-4This again? Thought this had gotten beaten to death years ago. >>>>>>>>>>
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana, including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who
couldn't even be bothered to check.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that they were being passed
by at least one car on the right before they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a multi-lane circle, but one needs to
realize that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on the problem, namely having a
traffic circle (not roundabout) with more than a single lane, especially those
which also have multi-lane exits. These are a known hazardous road design which
is why places like NJ have been systematically getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was passing on the right but not yet in view of my wife.
Happens all the time in urban traffic.
your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hit us.Which only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to two-lane exits is the root case design flaw
of that roadway design: that configuration relies heavily on completely error-free procedural
execution by all drivers, and when that fails, you have this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only two:
a) Despite its presence (and how you're "supposed to", do not use the left lane at all
b) If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in yielding to the right.
c) Move from left lane to right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is that if there's the risk of a 'surprise'
of a car to your right (including blind spot) which does (or *might*) obstruct your
lane-crossing to exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left lane and
miss the exit on your first try: just go around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic conditions, the other driver was not. What about that don't you get?
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate highways." >>
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes is
driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane and trying >> to get around this driver, then the slower driver has a duty to move
over into the right lane unless one of the exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
So let's see:
Your argument the the road wasn't a highway:
Wrong.
Your argument that the keep right law only applied on the interstates:
Wrong.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5,
Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5,
-hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the
discussion about a fender-bender
accident I was involved in. It was at a
4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout.
We were in our left lane, going
straight on and a driver in the right
lane making a left turn ran into us.
Baker insisted that we should have been
in the right lane. His justification
was "stay right except for passing".
That is in fact an Indiana road rule,
as it is in most states. In fact, it's
mentioned in the Indiana Driver's
manual. Here is the quote, page 37:
"On the highway, slower vehicles should
use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles §In any event, on 4-lane city streets itI'll address this bullshit later.
is mandatory that you turn left out of
the left lane. In the left lane,
roundabout or not you, can go straight
or turn left, but not right. That other
driver violated the rules by trying to
turn left out of the right lane. This
was mentioned in the police accident
report, and the other driver's
insurance paid for our repairs, no
questions asked.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out
any details that contradict his
narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a
highway "stay right" rule to city traffic
where it simply cannot apply. Either you
lied or are ignorant of basic driving
rules. People pass on the right all the
time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in
and out, etc. What is important is that the
lane you are in is correct for your
intended travel direction, including
anticipated turns.
9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an
alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare
in Indiana, including a privately owned
business parking lot and drive, that is used
by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to getThe Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you toWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed intoIndeed it does, which is why one always shouldThis again? Thought this had gotten beaten to
death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that
they were being passed by at least one car on
the right before they slowed (further) for the
circle. That statement made the scenario pretty
clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the
speed limit or typical flow of traffic such
that other drivers were getting frustrated and
passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the
bad luck of being in the wrong place when the
slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within*
the circle while they were preparing to exit.
You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a
multi-lane circle, but one needs to realize
that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on
the problem, namely having a traffic circle
(not roundabout) with more than a single lane,
especially those which also have multi-lane
exits. These are a known hazardous road design
which is why places like NJ have been
systematically getting rid of such traffic
circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was
passing on the right but not yet in view of my
wife. Happens all the time in urban traffic.
monitor your surroundings and especially your blind
spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending toDoesn't matter that she made a mistake.
make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hitWhich only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
us.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to
two-lane exits is the root case design flaw of that
roadway design: that configuration relies heavily
on completely error-free procedural execution by
all drivers, and when that fails, you have this
mode of collisions: its a failure waiting to
happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only
two: a) Despite its presence (and how you're
"supposed to", do not use the left lane at all b)
If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in
yielding to the right. c) Move from left lane to
right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is
that if there's the risk of a 'surprise' of a car
to your right (including blind spot) which does (or
*might*) obstruct your lane-crossing to exit, its a
bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left
lane and miss the exit on your first try: just go
around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic
conditions, the other driver was not. What about that
don't you get?
have been in the right lane unless you were passing other
vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established
maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better
flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate
highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or
above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes
is driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane
and trying to get around this driver, then the slower driver
has a duty to move over into the right lane unless one of the
exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited
or the videos posted was another driver trying to get around me.
Checkmate.
around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
So let's see:
Your argument the the road wasn't a highway:
Wrong.
Your argument that the keep right law only applied on the
interstates:
Wrong.
You are wrong. She disobeyed the lane assignments. She was there only
because she should have been behind us in the left lane, not the
right lane.
So let's talk about stories changing. You started off with the story
that you must always be in the right lane unless passing. That turns
out to be not true. In urban traffic you can travel in the left lane
if no one is trying to overtake you. A driver can pass on the right
if that lane is clear. In our case she was not entitled to use the
right lane, she was turning left from the right lane. Even on a
4-lane straight street that is not a legal turn.
As you read on you will discover that there are nuances that you are ignoring. Lying by omission yet again.
You were given links to stills and videos showing local and BC
drivers traveling in the left lane with a clear right lane and no one overtaking or to overtake. Is this legal? Yes. You were show urban
traffic in the left lane when the right lane was clear. Is this
legal? Yes.
Both here and in BC it is perfectly legal to drive in the left lane
if you are not impeding traffic or if traffic is congested.
This law
is intended to punish drivers who drive slower than the traffic flow
in such a way as to impede other drivers.
I'm not clear on BC
regulation but in Indiana it is legal to pass on the right if traffic
allows. Here this law applies only when a left-lane driver is beside
a right-lane vehicle and others are stacking up in the left or right
lane, wanting to pass. It applies regardless of the speed of the
blocking vehicles.
In our case we were moving at the same speed as the traffic.
If that
other driver had gone straight per her lane assignment she could have
passed us on the right if she wanted to.
We were not impeding her.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
[...]
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos
posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around your wife, Lying Little Shit.What do the archives say?
Because my recollection is that Tommy had previously admitted to there
also being someone passing on their right prior to the circle, which IIRC
was why this was summarized as a "left lane sitter" driver behavior.
-hh
On 2023-01-18 14:39, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5,
Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5,
-hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the
discussion about a fender-bender
accident I was involved in. It was at a
4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout.
We were in our left lane, going
straight on and a driver in the right
lane making a left turn ran into us.
Baker insisted that we should have been
in the right lane. His justification
was "stay right except for passing".
That is in fact an Indiana road rule,
as it is in most states. In fact, it's
mentioned in the Indiana Driver's
manual. Here is the quote, page 37:
"On the highway, slower vehicles should
use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles §In any event, on 4-lane city streets itI'll address this bullshit later.
is mandatory that you turn left out of
the left lane. In the left lane,
roundabout or not you, can go straight
or turn left, but not right. That other
driver violated the rules by trying to
turn left out of the right lane. This
was mentioned in the police accident
report, and the other driver's
insurance paid for our repairs, no
questions asked.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out
any details that contradict his
narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a
highway "stay right" rule to city traffic
where it simply cannot apply. Either you
lied or are ignorant of basic driving
rules. People pass on the right all the
time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in
and out, etc. What is important is that the
lane you are in is correct for your
intended travel direction, including
anticipated turns.
9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an
alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare
in Indiana, including a privately owned
business parking lot and drive, that is used
by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to getThe Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you toWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed intoIndeed it does, which is why one always shouldThis again? Thought this had gotten beaten to
death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that
they were being passed by at least one car on
the right before they slowed (further) for the
circle. That statement made the scenario pretty
clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the
speed limit or typical flow of traffic such
that other drivers were getting frustrated and
passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the
bad luck of being in the wrong place when the
slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within*
the circle while they were preparing to exit.
You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a
multi-lane circle, but one needs to realize
that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on
the problem, namely having a traffic circle
(not roundabout) with more than a single lane,
especially those which also have multi-lane
exits. These are a known hazardous road design
which is why places like NJ have been
systematically getting rid of such traffic
circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was
passing on the right but not yet in view of my
wife. Happens all the time in urban traffic.
monitor your surroundings and especially your blind
spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending toDoesn't matter that she made a mistake.
make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hitWhich only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
us.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to
two-lane exits is the root case design flaw of that
roadway design: that configuration relies heavily
on completely error-free procedural execution by
all drivers, and when that fails, you have this
mode of collisions: its a failure waiting to
happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only
two: a) Despite its presence (and how you're
"supposed to", do not use the left lane at all b)
If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in
yielding to the right. c) Move from left lane to
right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is
that if there's the risk of a 'surprise' of a car
to your right (including blind spot) which does (or
*might*) obstruct your lane-crossing to exit, its a
bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left
lane and miss the exit on your first try: just go
around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic
conditions, the other driver was not. What about that
don't you get?
have been in the right lane unless you were passing other
vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established
maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better
flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate
highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or
above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes
is driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane
and trying to get around this driver, then the slower driver
has a duty to move over into the right lane unless one of the
exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited
or the videos posted was another driver trying to get around me.
Checkmate.
around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
So let's see:
Your argument the the road wasn't a highway:
Wrong.
Your argument that the keep right law only applied on the
interstates:
Wrong.
You are wrong. She disobeyed the lane assignments. She was there only because she should have been behind us in the left lane, not theYou described her as "overtaking" you, and you've been shown the law
right lane.
that requires your wife to have been in the right lane if a car was overtaking he.
I never once claimed that the driver who hit you didn't disobey the
rules. She is still primarily at fault for the accident and I never once claimed otherwise.
So let's talk about stories changing. You started off with the storyBut you've already admitted the other driver was overtaking you.
that you must always be in the right lane unless passing. That turns
out to be not true. In urban traffic you can travel in the left lane
if no one is trying to overtake you. A driver can pass on the right
if that lane is clear. In our case she was not entitled to use the
right lane, she was turning left from the right lane. Even on a
4-lane straight street that is not a legal turn.
As you read on you will discover that there are nuances that you are ignoring. Lying by omission yet again.
You were given links to stills and videos showing local and BCIs it irrelevant? Yes.
drivers traveling in the left lane with a clear right lane and no one overtaking or to overtake. Is this legal? Yes. You were show urban
traffic in the left lane when the right lane was clear. Is this
legal? Yes.
Your earliest discussions of this incident describe the other driver as "overtaking" you.
Since it was only IN the roundabout that she actually got to alongside
your car, she was clearly closing on your car for some time BEFORE the roundabout.
If your wife had been in the right lane Indiana law required you to be
when another car is trying to overtake, then the accident would NEVER
HAVE HAPPENED.
Both here and in BC it is perfectly legal to drive in the left laneYour wife was impeding the car that hit you as you already admitted when
if you are not impeding traffic or if traffic is congested.
you described that car as "overtaking" yours.
This lawAs yours ws.
is intended to punish drivers who drive slower than the traffic flow
in such a way as to impede other drivers.
I'm not clear on BCYou made that last part up from wholly bullshit cloth.
regulation but in Indiana it is legal to pass on the right if traffic allows. Here this law applies only when a left-lane driver is beside
a right-lane vehicle and others are stacking up in the left or right
lane, wanting to pass. It applies regardless of the speed of the
blocking vehicles.
<all your irrelevant bullshit snipped>
In our case we were moving at the same speed as the traffic.Clearly not. There was another car overtaking you.
If thatAnd I've never denied that the primary cause of the accident was her
other driver had gone straight per her lane assignment she could have passed us on the right if she wanted to.
illegal maneuver.
We were not impeding her.Yes. You were.
She was travelling faster than you, overtaking you, and your wife failed
to get in the right lane to allow her to pass.
As a consequence of that, the other driver did something much more stupid...
...but that doesn't change the fact that you were in contravention of this:
'Except as provided in subsection (c), a person who knows, or should reasonably know, that another vehicle is overtaking from the rear the vehicle that the person is operating may not continue to operate the
vehicle in the left most lane.'
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 4:56:51 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
[...]
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos
posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
What do the archives say?
Because my recollection is that Tommy had previously admitted to there
also being someone passing on their right prior to the circle, which IIRC was why this was summarized as a "left lane sitter" driver behavior.
That driver turned right at the first roundabout, Springmill Road, before the
accident at Illinois Street. Anyway, passing on the right is perfectly legal here.
We did not impede that driver.
On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 7:53:25 AM UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 4:56:51 PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
[...]
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited or the videos
posted was another driver trying to get around me. Checkmate.
But this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to get around >>>> your wife, Lying Little Shit.
What do the archives say?
Because my recollection is that Tommy had previously admitted to there
also being someone passing on their right prior to the circle, which IIRC >>> was why this was summarized as a "left lane sitter" driver behavior.
That driver turned right at the first roundabout, Springmill Road, before the
accident at Illinois Street. Anyway, passing on the right is perfectly legal here.
We did not impede that driver.
Sounds like my recollection was correct: there were two other cars, both of which were passing you on the right.
On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 6:10:35 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-18 14:39, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5,
Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5,
-hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the
discussion about a fender-bender
accident I was involved in. It was at a
4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout.
We were in our left lane, going
straight on and a driver in the right
lane making a left turn ran into us.
Baker insisted that we should have been
in the right lane. His justification
was "stay right except for passing".
That is in fact an Indiana road rule,
as it is in most states. In fact, it's
mentioned in the Indiana Driver's
manual. Here is the quote, page 37:
"On the highway, slower vehicles should
use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles §In any event, on 4-lane city streets itI'll address this bullshit later.
is mandatory that you turn left out of
the left lane. In the left lane,
roundabout or not you, can go straight
or turn left, but not right. That other
driver violated the rules by trying to
turn left out of the right lane. This
was mentioned in the police accident
report, and the other driver's
insurance paid for our repairs, no
questions asked.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out
any details that contradict his
narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a
highway "stay right" rule to city traffic
where it simply cannot apply. Either you
lied or are ignorant of basic driving
rules. People pass on the right all the
time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in
and out, etc. What is important is that the
lane you are in is correct for your
intended travel direction, including
anticipated turns.
9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare
in Indiana, including a privately owned
business parking lot and drive, that is used
by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
You described her as "overtaking" you, and you've been shown the lawBut this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to getThe Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you toWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed intoIndeed it does, which is why one always shouldThis again? Thought this had gotten beaten to
death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that
they were being passed by at least one car on
the right before they slowed (further) for the
circle. That statement made the scenario pretty
clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the
speed limit or typical flow of traffic such
that other drivers were getting frustrated and
passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the
bad luck of being in the wrong place when the
slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within*
the circle while they were preparing to exit.
You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a
multi-lane circle, but one needs to realize
that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on
the problem, namely having a traffic circle
(not roundabout) with more than a single lane,
especially those which also have multi-lane
exits. These are a known hazardous road design
which is why places like NJ have been
systematically getting rid of such traffic
circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was
passing on the right but not yet in view of my
wife. Happens all the time in urban traffic.
monitor your surroundings and especially your blind
spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending toDoesn't matter that she made a mistake.
make a left turn at the NEXT exit.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hitWhich only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
us.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to
two-lane exits is the root case design flaw of that
roadway design: that configuration relies heavily
on completely error-free procedural execution by
all drivers, and when that fails, you have this
mode of collisions: its a failure waiting to
happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only
two: a) Despite its presence (and how you're
"supposed to", do not use the left lane at all b)
If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in
yielding to the right. c) Move from left lane to
right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is
that if there's the risk of a 'surprise' of a car
to your right (including blind spot) which does (or
*might*) obstruct your lane-crossing to exit, its a
bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left
lane and miss the exit on your first try: just go
around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic
conditions, the other driver was not. What about that
don't you get?
have been in the right lane unless you were passing other
vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established
maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better
flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate
highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or
above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes
is driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane
and trying to get around this driver, then the slower driver
has a duty to move over into the right lane unless one of the
exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited
or the videos posted was another driver trying to get around me.
Checkmate.
around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
So let's see:
Your argument the the road wasn't a highway:
Wrong.
Your argument that the keep right law only applied on the
interstates:
Wrong.
You are wrong. She disobeyed the lane assignments. She was there only
because she should have been behind us in the left lane, not the
right lane.
that requires your wife to have been in the right lane if a car was
overtaking he.
I never once claimed that the driver who hit you didn't disobey the
rules. She is still primarily at fault for the accident and I never once
claimed otherwise.
But you've already admitted the other driver was overtaking you.
So let's talk about stories changing. You started off with the story
that you must always be in the right lane unless passing. That turns
out to be not true. In urban traffic you can travel in the left lane
if no one is trying to overtake you. A driver can pass on the right
if that lane is clear. In our case she was not entitled to use the
right lane, she was turning left from the right lane. Even on a
4-lane straight street that is not a legal turn.
Is it irrelevant? Yes.
As you read on you will discover that there are nuances that you are
ignoring. Lying by omission yet again.
You were given links to stills and videos showing local and BC
drivers traveling in the left lane with a clear right lane and no one
overtaking or to overtake. Is this legal? Yes. You were show urban
traffic in the left lane when the right lane was clear. Is this
legal? Yes.
Your earliest discussions of this incident describe the other driver as
"overtaking" you.
Since it was only IN the roundabout that she actually got to alongside
your car, she was clearly closing on your car for some time BEFORE the
roundabout.
If your wife had been in the right lane Indiana law required you to be
when another car is trying to overtake, then the accident would NEVER
HAVE HAPPENED.
Your wife was impeding the car that hit you as you already admitted when
Both here and in BC it is perfectly legal to drive in the left lane
if you are not impeding traffic or if traffic is congested.
you described that car as "overtaking" yours.
This lawAs yours ws.
is intended to punish drivers who drive slower than the traffic flow
in such a way as to impede other drivers.
I'm not clear on BCYou made that last part up from wholly bullshit cloth.
regulation but in Indiana it is legal to pass on the right if traffic
allows. Here this law applies only when a left-lane driver is beside
a right-lane vehicle and others are stacking up in the left or right
lane, wanting to pass. It applies regardless of the speed of the
blocking vehicles.
<all your irrelevant bullshit snipped>
In our case we were moving at the same speed as the traffic.Clearly not. There was another car overtaking you.
If thatAnd I've never denied that the primary cause of the accident was her
other driver had gone straight per her lane assignment she could have
passed us on the right if she wanted to.
illegal maneuver.
We were not impeding her.Yes. You were.
She was travelling faster than you, overtaking you, and your wife failed
to get in the right lane to allow her to pass.
As a consequence of that, the other driver did something much more stupid... >>
...but that doesn't change the fact that you were in contravention of this: >>
'Except as provided in subsection (c), a person who knows, or should
reasonably know, that another vehicle is overtaking from the rear the
vehicle that the person is operating may not continue to operate the
vehicle in the left most lane.'
As has been stated several times, I caught a glimpse of the other driver just before she hit us. The wife never saw her.
On 2023-01-19 04:55, Thomas E. wrote:Alan, you were not there. You have no evidence that she knew a car was behind us and overtaking. I caught a glimpse in my side mirror JUST before she hit us, not the wife. Even if she had seen the other car it was too late to move to the right lane. That
On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 6:10:35 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-18 14:39, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway.
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM UTC-5, -hh >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM UTC-5,
Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30 PM UTC-5, >>>>>>>>>>>>> -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:13:01 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 4:12:03 PM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E. wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had quite the
discussion about a fender-bender
accident I was involved in. It was at a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4 lane (2 lanes each way) roundabout.
We were in our left lane, going
straight on and a driver in the right
lane making a left turn ran into us.
Baker insisted that we should have been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the right lane. His justification
was "stay right except for passing".
That is in fact an Indiana road rule,
as it is in most states. In fact, it's
mentioned in the Indiana Driver's
manual. Here is the quote, page 37:
"On the highway, slower vehicles should >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use the right lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles §I'll address this bullshit later.
In any event, on 4-lane city streets it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is mandatory that you turn left out of
the left lane. In the left lane,
roundabout or not you, can go straight
or turn left, but not right. That other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver violated the rules by trying to
turn left out of the right lane. This
was mentioned in the police accident
report, and the other driver's
insurance paid for our repairs, no
questions asked.
This is how Baker lies. He leaves out
any details that contradict his
narrative.
Riiiight. You know you tried to apply a
highway "stay right" rule to city traffic
where it simply cannot apply. Either you
lied or are ignorant of basic driving
rules. People pass on the right all the
time in city traffic, and it's perfectly
legal unless you are speeding, weaving in
and out, etc. What is important is that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lane you are in is correct for your
intended travel direction, including
anticipated turns.
9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a street, an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alley, a road, a highway, or a thoroughfare
in Indiana, including a privately owned
business parking lot and drive, that is used
by the public or open to use by the public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
You described her as "overtaking" you, and you've been shown the lawBut this was about the fact that another driver WAS trying to getThe Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requires you toWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driver crossed into >>>>>>>>>>> our lane and hit us. That was in the police report.Indeed it does, which is why one always shouldThis again? Thought this had gotten beaten to
death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had admitted that
they were being passed by at least one car on
the right before they slowed (further) for the
circle. That statement made the scenario pretty >>>>>>>>>>>>>> clear: a left lane sitter going slower than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> speed limit or typical flow of traffic such
that other drivers were getting frustrated and
passing on the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know about IN. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One of these "get around the slowpoke" had the
bad luck of being in the wrong place when the
slow left lane sitter changed lanes *within*
the circle while they were preparing to exit.
You can say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate within a
multi-lane circle, but one needs to realize
that that a procedural rule is a band-aid on
the problem, namely having a traffic circle
(not roundabout) with more than a single lane,
especially those which also have multi-lane
exits. These are a known hazardous road design
which is why places like NJ have been
systematically getting rid of such traffic
circles.
That is correct in that the other driver was
passing on the right but not yet in view of my
wife. Happens all the time in urban traffic.
monitor your surroundings and especially your blind >>>>>>>>>>>> spots.
The problem was the other driver was intending to >>>>>>>>>>>>> make a left turn at the NEXT exit.Doesn't matter that she made a mistake.
As we exited correctly to go straight she hitWhich only happened because *you* crossed a lane.
us.
She was in the right turn or go straight lane.Doesn't matter, because the two-lane circle to
two-lane exits is the root case design flaw of that >>>>>>>>>>>> roadway design: that configuration relies heavily
on completely error-free procedural execution by
all drivers, and when that fails, you have this
mode of collisions: its a failure waiting to
happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically only
two: a) Despite its presence (and how you're
"supposed to", do not use the left lane at all b)
If one is in the left lane, be more aggressive in
yielding to the right. c) Move from left lane to
right prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) & (c) is
that if there's the risk of a 'surprise' of a car
to your right (including blind spot) which does (or >>>>>>>>>>>> *might*) obstruct your lane-crossing to exit, its a >>>>>>>>>>>> bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just keep to your left
lane and miss the exit on your first try: just go
around 360 and make another attempt.
-hh
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the traffic
conditions, the other driver was not. What about that
don't you get?
have been in the right lane unless you were passing other
vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the established
maximum shall travel in the right lanes to provide for better >>>>>>> flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the interstate
highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are at or
above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than two lanes
is driving in the left lane and another car is in the left lane >>>>>> and trying to get around this driver, then the slower driver
has a duty to move over into the right lane unless one of the
exceptions applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'Law Office of Christopher J. Martindale
Legal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN 46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I have cited >>>>> or the videos posted was another driver trying to get around me.
Checkmate.
around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
So let's see:
Your argument the the road wasn't a highway:
Wrong.
Your argument that the keep right law only applied on the
interstates:
Wrong.
You are wrong. She disobeyed the lane assignments. She was there only >>> because she should have been behind us in the left lane, not the
right lane.
that requires your wife to have been in the right lane if a car was
overtaking he.
I never once claimed that the driver who hit you didn't disobey the
rules. She is still primarily at fault for the accident and I never once >> claimed otherwise.
But you've already admitted the other driver was overtaking you.
So let's talk about stories changing. You started off with the story
that you must always be in the right lane unless passing. That turns
out to be not true. In urban traffic you can travel in the left lane
if no one is trying to overtake you. A driver can pass on the right
if that lane is clear. In our case she was not entitled to use the
right lane, she was turning left from the right lane. Even on a
4-lane straight street that is not a legal turn.
Is it irrelevant? Yes.
As you read on you will discover that there are nuances that you are
ignoring. Lying by omission yet again.
You were given links to stills and videos showing local and BC
drivers traveling in the left lane with a clear right lane and no one >>> overtaking or to overtake. Is this legal? Yes. You were show urban
traffic in the left lane when the right lane was clear. Is this
legal? Yes.
Your earliest discussions of this incident describe the other driver as >> "overtaking" you.
Since it was only IN the roundabout that she actually got to alongside
your car, she was clearly closing on your car for some time BEFORE the
roundabout.
If your wife had been in the right lane Indiana law required you to be
when another car is trying to overtake, then the accident would NEVER
HAVE HAPPENED.
Your wife was impeding the car that hit you as you already admitted when >> you described that car as "overtaking" yours.
Both here and in BC it is perfectly legal to drive in the left lane
if you are not impeding traffic or if traffic is congested.
This lawAs yours ws.
is intended to punish drivers who drive slower than the traffic flow
in such a way as to impede other drivers.
I'm not clear on BCYou made that last part up from wholly bullshit cloth.
regulation but in Indiana it is legal to pass on the right if traffic >>> allows. Here this law applies only when a left-lane driver is beside
a right-lane vehicle and others are stacking up in the left or right
lane, wanting to pass. It applies regardless of the speed of the
blocking vehicles.
<all your irrelevant bullshit snipped>
In our case we were moving at the same speed as the traffic.Clearly not. There was another car overtaking you.
If thatAnd I've never denied that the primary cause of the accident was her
other driver had gone straight per her lane assignment she could have >>> passed us on the right if she wanted to.
illegal maneuver.
We were not impeding her.Yes. You were.
She was travelling faster than you, overtaking you, and your wife failed >> to get in the right lane to allow her to pass.
As a consequence of that, the other driver did something much more stupid...
...but that doesn't change the fact that you were in contravention of this:
'Except as provided in subsection (c), a person who knows, or should
reasonably know, that another vehicle is overtaking from the rear the
vehicle that the person is operating may not continue to operate the
vehicle in the left most lane.'
As has been stated several times, I caught a glimpse of the other driver just before she hit us. The wife never saw her.'a person who knows, or SHOULD reasonably know, that another vehicle is overtaking from the rear the vehicle that the person is operating may
not continue to operate the vehicle in the left most lane.'
Your wife should reasonably have known. The fact that you could see her coming proves that.
On Thursday, January 19, 2023 at 6:13:35 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:116th Street in the Carmel Indiana city limits is a street, not a highway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2023-01-19 04:55, Thomas E. wrote:
On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 6:10:35 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-18 14:39, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 12:09:51 PM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-17 07:29, Thomas E. wrote:
On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 11:35:41 AM UTC-5, Alan
wrote:
On 2023-01-16 06:58, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 5:45:26 PM UTC-5,
Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-14 13:13, Thomas E. wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 2:08:18 AM
UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-13 19:44, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 7:40:40 PM
UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 5:18:55 PM
UTC-5, Thomas E. wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 4:48:30
PM UTC-5, -hh wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at
12:13:01 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-10 08:02, Thomas E.
wrote:
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at
4:12:03 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
On 2023-01-09 12:19, Thomas E.
wrote:
So years ago Baker and I had
quite the discussion about a
fender-bender accident I was
involved in. It was at a 4 lane
(2 lanes each way) roundabout.
We were in our left lane,
going straight on and a driver
in the right lane making a left
turn ran into us. Baker
insisted that we should have
been in the right lane. His
justification was "stay right
except for passing". That is in
fact an Indiana road rule, as
it is in most states. In fact,
it's mentioned in the Indiana
Driver's manual. Here is the
quote, page 37:
"On the highway, slower
vehicles should use the right
lane."
https://driving-tests.org/indiana/in-bmv-drivers-handbook-manual/
So not only are you a lying little shit, you're a lazy little shit who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't even be bothered to check.'Indiana Code Title 9. Motor VehiclesIn any event, on 4-lane cityI'll address this bullshit
streets it is mandatory that
you turn left out of the left
lane. In the left lane,
roundabout or not you, can go
straight or turn left, but not
right. That other driver
violated the rules by trying
to turn left out of the right
lane. This was mentioned in the
police accident report, and the
other driver's insurance paid
for our repairs, no questions
asked.
This is how Baker lies. He
leaves out any details that
contradict his narrative.
later.
Riiiight. You know you tried to
apply a highway "stay right" rule
to city traffic where it simply
cannot apply. Either you lied or
are ignorant of basic driving
rules. People pass on the right all
the time in city traffic, and it's
perfectly legal unless you are
speeding, weaving in and out, etc.
What is important is that the lane
you are in is correct for your
intended travel direction,
including anticipated turns.
§ 9-25-2-4
...
Sec. 4 . “Public highway” means a
street, an alley, a road, a highway,
or a thoroughfare in Indiana,
including a privately owned business
parking lot and drive, that is used
by the public or open to use by the
public.'
<https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-9-motor-vehicles/in-code-sect-9-25-2-4.html>
'Law Office of Christopher J. MartindaleThe Indiana Code Title 9. Motor Vehicles requiresWe get it fine.You still don't get it. The other driverIndeed it does, which is why one alwaysThis again? Thought this had gotten
beaten to death years ago.
My recollection is that Tom had
admitted that they were being passed by
at least one car on the right before
they slowed (further) for the circle.
That statement made the scenario
pretty clear: a left lane sitter going
slower than the speed limit or typical
flow of traffic such that other drivers
were getting frustrated and passing on
the right…even though that can be
illegal* when on a non-divided
highway/road.
* - it is illegal in NJ; don’t know
about IN.
One of these "get around the slowpoke"
had the bad luck of being in the wrong
place when the slow left lane sitter
changed lanes *within* the circle while
they were preparing to exit. You can
say all you want regarding how one is
pedantically supposed to navigate
within a multi-lane circle, but one
needs to realize that that a procedural
rule is a band-aid on the problem,
namely having a traffic circle (not
roundabout) with more than a single
lane, especially those which also have
multi-lane exits. These are a known
hazardous road design which is why
places like NJ have been systematically
getting rid of such traffic circles.
That is correct in that the other driver
was passing on the right but not yet in
view of my wife. Happens all the time in
urban traffic.
should monitor your surroundings and
especially your blind spots.
The problem was the other driver wasDoesn't matter that she made a mistake.
intending to make a left turn at the NEXT
exit.
As we exited correctly to go straight sheWhich only happened because *you* crossed a
hit us.
lane.
She was in the right turn or go straightDoesn't matter, because the two-lane circle
lane.
to two-lane exits is the root case design
flaw of that roadway design: that
configuration relies heavily on completely
error-free procedural execution by all
drivers, and when that fails, you have
this mode of collisions: its a failure
waiting to happen, again & again & again.
The sole recourse for drivers are basically
only two: a) Despite its presence (and how
you're "supposed to", do not use the left
lane at all b) If one is in the left lane,
be more aggressive in yielding to the
right. c) Move from left lane to right
prior to your exit.
Something else to keep in mind with (b) &
(c) is that if there's the risk of a
'surprise' of a car to your right
(including blind spot) which does (or
*might*) obstruct your lane-crossing to
exit, its a bloody --> CIRCLE <-- so just
keep to your left lane and miss the exit on
your first try: just go around 360 and make
another attempt.
-hh
crossed into our lane and hit us. That was in
the police report.
She was definitely more in the wrong.
But you were in the wrong, too; well, your wife
was.
WHAT? We were in the correct lane for the
traffic conditions, the other driver was not.
What about that don't you get?
you to have been in the right lane unless you were
passing other vehicles.
That is a flat out lie. Here is the law:
"A vehicle that travels at a speed less than the
established maximum shall travel in the right lanes
to provide for better flow of traffic..."
"... to provide for better flow of traffic on the
interstate highways."
Now who is leaving out words, Lying Little Shit?
That is section (a) of "I.C. § 9-21-5-9"
An actual Indiana LAWYER disagrees:
You are NOT required to move to the right if you are
at or above the posted limit.
'In a nutshell, if a driver on a road with more than
two lanes is driving in the left lane and another car
is in the left lane and trying to get around this
driver, then the slower driver has a duty to move over
into the right lane unless one of the exceptions
applies. '
<https://chrismartindalelaw.com/2021/09/08/the-left-lane-law-and-who-needs-to-get-out-of-it/>
'a person who knows, or SHOULD reasonably know, that anotherYou described her as "overtaking" you, and you've been shownBut this was about the fact that another driver WAS tryingLegal Service for Hoosiers'
'Locations:
333 N Alabama St., Ste. 350, Indianapolis, IN 46204
8888 Keystone Crossing, Ste. 1300, Indianapolis, IN
46240'
I agree with this. However, in none of the instances I
have cited or the videos posted was another driver trying
to get around me. Checkmate.
to get around your wife, Lying Little Shit.
So let's see:
Your argument the the road wasn't a highway:
Wrong.
Your argument that the keep right law only applied on the
interstates:
Wrong.
You are wrong. She disobeyed the lane assignments. She was
there only because she should have been behind us in the left
lane, not the right lane.
the law that requires your wife to have been in the right lane
if a car was overtaking he.
I never once claimed that the driver who hit you didn't disobey
the rules. She is still primarily at fault for the accident and
I never once claimed otherwise.
But you've already admitted the other driver was overtaking
So let's talk about stories changing. You started off with
the story that you must always be in the right lane unless
passing. That turns out to be not true. In urban traffic you
can travel in the left lane if no one is trying to overtake
you. A driver can pass on the right if that lane is clear. In
our case she was not entitled to use the right lane, she was
turning left from the right lane. Even on a 4-lane straight
street that is not a legal turn.
you.
Is it irrelevant? Yes.
As you read on you will discover that there are nuances that
you are ignoring. Lying by omission yet again.
You were given links to stills and videos showing local and
BC drivers traveling in the left lane with a clear right lane
and no one overtaking or to overtake. Is this legal? Yes. You
were show urban traffic in the left lane when the right lane
was clear. Is this legal? Yes.
Your earliest discussions of this incident describe the other
driver as "overtaking" you.
Since it was only IN the roundabout that she actually got to
alongside your car, she was clearly closing on your car for
some time BEFORE the roundabout.
If your wife had been in the right lane Indiana law required
you to be when another car is trying to overtake, then the
accident would NEVER HAVE HAPPENED.
Your wife was impeding the car that hit you as you already
Both here and in BC it is perfectly legal to drive in the
left lane if you are not impeding traffic or if traffic is
congested.
admitted when you described that car as "overtaking" yours.
This law is intended to punish drivers who drive slower thanAs yours ws.
the traffic flow in such a way as to impede other drivers.
I'm not clear on BC regulation but in Indiana it is legal toYou made that last part up from wholly bullshit cloth.
pass on the right if traffic allows. Here this law applies
only when a left-lane driver is beside a right-lane vehicle
and others are stacking up in the left or right lane, wanting
to pass. It applies regardless of the speed of the blocking
vehicles.
<all your irrelevant bullshit snipped>
In our case we were moving at the same speed as the traffic.Clearly not. There was another car overtaking you.
If that other driver had gone straight per her laneAnd I've never denied that the primary cause of the accident
assignment she could have passed us on the right if she
wanted to.
was her illegal maneuver.
We were not impeding her.Yes. You were.
She was travelling faster than you, overtaking you, and your
wife failed to get in the right lane to allow her to pass.
As a consequence of that, the other driver did something much
more stupid...
...but that doesn't change the fact that you were in
contravention of this:
'Except as provided in subsection (c), a person who knows, or
should reasonably know, that another vehicle is overtaking from
the rear the vehicle that the person is operating may not
continue to operate the vehicle in the left most lane.'
As has been stated several times, I caught a glimpse of the other
driver just before she hit us. The wife never saw her.
vehicle is overtaking from the rear the vehicle that the person is
operating may not continue to operate the vehicle in the left most
lane.' Your wife should reasonably have known. The fact that you
could see her coming proves that.
Alan, you were not there. You have no evidence that she knew a car
was behind us and overtaking. I caught a glimpse in my side mirror
JUST before she hit us, not the wife. Even if she had seen the other
car it was too late to move to the right lane. That would have caused
us to hit the other car.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 66:35:15 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,244 |
| Messages: | 5,356,315 |