100 percent Had a bloke going mental at me yesterday (I was merging) I rolled the window down and all he said was don't gob off? The way he was waving is arms was if there was something drastically wrong. I let everyone out, everyone in (when appropriate) try to be patient but there are just some absolute turds to be had
@@daveowen7372some drivers lose it completely in the safety of their vehicle but bottle it if confronted face to face. Had one last year, nearly hit the back of me on the M1, flies round me, cuts me up and comes off at an exit. I was going the same way anyway and managed get next to him and gestured for him to put his window down. Totally ignored me then eventually, window went down and he came out with some totally made up rant frothing at the mouth, I just looked at him blankly said I was recording it on my dash cam. I think he did that because he was actually scared, using the anger to mask his insecurity. I just shook my head and carried on.
Let someone merge, merge yourself. Let someone merge, merge yourself. Or as the Americans might say "like a zip". Or in the uk, (sometimes) a picture of cars and arrows denoting how to "merge in turn", for people who can't do "words". Not really too difficult.
@@ChrisCaaa I wouldnt doubt that in the slightest, plus continuos line 8 foot in front of give way line would mean half the van is out in fresh air. If it as appears to be single line why are they so far out against central markings and not in the middle is asking for this to happen. Other guess it was a dual carriageway well before and lane hogging as have to get over in a mile and still holding same line.
This is just normal behaviour on Indian roads, where drivers find anybody trying to merge ahead of them an affront to their manliness. Especially well-endowed gentlemen also use the dedicated and barricaded BRTS lanes to get ahead of traffic without any care.
The psychology behind this is interesting. Id like to know an experts opinion on this behaviour and why they think this happens. We know it doesn’t shorten journey time by not letting someone in, so it’s not that. Sometimes maybe if they are jealous of a car thats better than theirs they hate them getting in front, same goes the other way, BMW driver not letting a Ford in as they see it as a lesser brand. No, theres more to it than that. An aggressive personality, someone with a very big ego, a winner, hates losing in life because they actually feel superior even though they don’t know the person in the other car. The sort of person that never backs down in business, in their mind a high achiever. Totally obnoxious really and this transfers to their behaviour behind the wheel.
Selfish driver in the red car. There were parked cars, where else could the van go ? They also indicated well in advance. Would the driver of the red car been late ?
There should not be two lines of traffic at the pedestrian crossing in any event. If there were to be any merging it should have been before the start of the video. This is clear because of the zigzag lines which indicates that only one lane exists. The concept of merge in turn does not exist when there is only be one lane anyway.
That isn't what those lines indicate at all. Those lines mean that cars are not allowed to wait or park in those areas, they have nothing to do with the number of lanes
@@TheonSeverasse You misunderstand. The number of lanes is not determined by the number of zig zag lines, it is the number of zigzag lines that is determined by the number of lanes. The zig zag lines have to be painted in a way so that there is one set for each designated lane. In this case it is clear that there is only one set of zig zags. If there were two lanes at that point then another set of parallel zig zags would have been needed, I am sure you must have seen this all over the place. All this means that this location is not a 'merge' of lanes situation at all, but just people deciding to drive in two queues. No local authority in the land would design a merge situation that straddled a pedestrian crossing. You have also forgotten one of the most important rules of zig zags, i.e. not to overtake the leading vehicle.
@@donvanvliet9477 the zig zags is a rule for cars not to park on it at anytime that way pedestrians have clear site of the road to cross safely it has nothing to do with the lanes 😂
Weather. I used to cycle everywhere, but Glasgow's weather has beaten me. Cycling here is really doable only about 8 months per year. Still, the cycling infrastructure in Scotland is appaling.
If your lane is obstructed, you do not have the right to force another motorist out of your way. The van driver was 100% in the wrong and if there was a collision, the van driver should be charged with due care and attention
That is absolutely false. The van driver was 100% correct. The sedan was not driving with due care or attention or anything other than a bad attitude. If there was a collision the van driver was ahead on the road and the sedan who would collide with the van would be 100% at fault. Your analysis is completely misguided totally selfish and it is attitudes like yours that make road safety worse. Shame.
@@NebraskaGonvilleJones actually no, he indicated and the sedan car response was to not let him in, he should have aborted the manoeuvre and slowed to a stop until he had a safe gap to move lanes.
@@balf1111117373 yes its to indicate where you wish to go, but it doesnt mean you have the right of way or right to move lanes, if it was the motorway then you indicate and see what the other cars response is, if they refuse to hold back ABORT the manoeuvre
