Jump to content


How do you stop the queue jumping motorists ?

Recommended Posts

That find if there are already two queues, but if there is only one queue pushing in holds it up.

There are 2 lanes on the road, therefore there are 2 queues. Why anyone would join the shorter one I don't know.

 

You are number 10 in a queue at a checkout, I come in behind you but realise that I am blocking the isle, so instead of standing behind you I start a new queue next to number 1 in the queue, 8 more people come in behind me, so we have successfully avoided blocking the isle.

Are you in a supermarket that has lanes marked up to some sort of obstruction just before a till? Because if not your comparison is nonsense just like it has been all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 2 lanes on the road, therefore there are 2 queues. Why anyone would join the shorter one I don't know.

Are you in a supermarket that has lanes marked up to some sort of obstruction just before a till? Because if not your comparison is nonsense just like it has been all along.

 

When one lane is closed there is very often only one queue and it would move much faster past the obstruction if late comers joined the back of it instead of pushing in.

 

You wanted to form two queue to get through the door despite there being no lanes markings.

 

I love the way you know that queue jumping is immoral but still manage to justify doing it in the misguided belief that you are doing everyone in the queue a favour.

Edited by Petminder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 2 queues, it's just that 1 of them is much shorter than the other due to the very silly behaviour of joining the longest queue.

 

I didn't want to form anything, I was just responding to your increasingly desperate 'examples'.

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2016 at 13:09 ----------

 

When one lane is closed there is very often only one queue and it would move much faster past the obstruction if late comers joined the back of it instead of pushing in.

 

You've consistently failed to prove this by the way. You saying it is so, doesn't make it so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 2 queues, it's just that 1 of them is much shorter than the other due to the very silly behaviour of joining the longest queue.

 

I didn't want to form anything, I was just responding to your increasingly desperate 'examples'.

 

There were two queue in the supermarket after I made one but you din't like the idea of everyone joining my queue jumping in front of you, seams to me you have some double standards. You make up excuses to justify queue jumping when you benefit from it or aren't adversely affected by it, but when you are adversely affected by queue jumping you think up excuses to justify saying it is wrong.

 

 

 

How would you feel if you was driving behind me in the right lane when we come across a 1 mile queue in the left lane and a sign telling us the right lane was closed 1 mile ahead, despite the right lane being clear I slow down to match the speed of the drivers in the left lane but stay in the right lane right up to the cones.

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2016 at 13:15 ----------

 

You've consistently failed to prove this by the way. You saying it is so, doesn't make it so.

 

If you believe that pushing in doesn't adversely affect the people you push in front of why are you opposed to people pushing in front of you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, it definitely slows down the people who are pointlessly queueing. What it doesn't do (which you keep claiming it does) is slow down the overall rate of progress through the obstruction.

 

What I do object to is people using a lane incorrectly and then pushing in, for example when the lane is signed to go in a different direction.

 

How would I feel, annoyed, because you'd be causing an obstruction on the highway and driving badly. How would you expect someone to feel when you are deliberately causing an obstruction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, it definitely slows down the people who are pointlessly queueing. What it doesn't do (which you keep claiming it does) is slow down the overall rate of progress through the obstruction.

 

What I do object to is people using a lane incorrectly and then pushing in, for example when the lane is signed to go in a different direction.

 

How would I feel, annoyed, because you'd be causing an obstruction on the highway and driving badly. How would you expect someone to feel when you are deliberately causing an obstruction?

 

It does slow down the overall rate because the queue stops so that you can push in. It takes longer for the queue to stop whilst you push in and for the queue start moving again, than if you didn't push in and the queue just kept moving.

 

No I wouldn't I would be legally using the lane I was already in when I came across the traffic jam, the law says I should only move over when it's safe to do so and its not safe to move over if there is a car to my left. You won't find a rule that says I must continue doing 70 mph in the right lane if the left lane is only doing 10 mph. My actions would also create the very conditions that you aspire to create.

 

Getting annoyed is the cause of accidents and road rage and you appear to get annoyed if someone overtakes you and if you are unable to overtake others.

Edited by Petminder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you're still wrong, and that's on pretty much every point you just made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't get much fairer than queuing in both lanes, when two lanes merge.

 

Correct, if you come across a road condition where the two queues are more or less the same length. So under those conditions either queue will do. If not, well.......

What is it they say, drive to the conditions.

 

As for people who are willing to faff about taking side roads and detours to get a bit further ahead, i'd say that's fair enough if they're willing to make that effort and take that gamble (not always successfully) to get a little further ahead.

 

Assuming we`re not suffering from a breakdown in communication here, and we`re quite specifically talking about getting a bit further ahead in the same queue, I`m very surprised you should say that. To me it`s an irrational thing to say

 

1 : say you were in a queue, you saw the car behind pull into a side road then 50 yards further you see the same car wanting you to let him out (in front of you), you`d be quite happy to do so ? If so why ? Furthermore, why not just skip all the farting about, if the driver behind you pulled onto the other side of the road, drove just in front of you then wanted you to let him in, would you be happy to let him do that ? Of course you wouldn`t, you`d think he was a total ****head.

What`s the difference ? ! ? Apart from the fact the other driver is trying to get past you "on the sly", i.e. assuming you don`t realise he`s just got past you then you`ve let him in !

 

2 : surely we should be discouraging people from using narrow residential rat runs ?

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2016 at 14:06 ----------

 

It does slow down the overall rate because the queue stops so that you can push in. It takes longer for the queue to stop whilst you push in and for the queue start moving again, than if you didn't push in and the queue just kept moving.

 

No I wouldn't I would be legally using the lane I was already in when I came across the traffic jam, the law says I should only move over when it's safe to do so and its not safe to move over if there is a car to my left. You won't find a rule that says I must continue doing 70 mph in the right lane if the left lane is only doing 10 mph. My actions would also create the very conditions that you aspire to create.

 

Getting annoyed is the cause of accidents and road rage and you appear to get annoyed if someone overtakes you and if you are unable to overtake others.

 

To be frank PM, I think you`re wasting your time arguing with Cyclone.

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2016 at 14:08 ----------

 

Oh I'm sorry Justin, I had assumed because your question is so utterly stupid that it was rhetorical.

 

Sorry, asking "should we not strive to make life fair", is stupid ? ! ? That says it all. Are you being serious or trolling ?

Personally I can`t think of a more important question, it just shows how different we all are........ To me trying to be fair is an essential component of any decision I make in life. I feel life would be far far better if everyone adopted a similar attitude.

A "stupid question", I can`t believe it......

Edited by Justin Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be frank PM, I think you`re wasting your time arguing with Cyclone.

 

Instructing someone on the correct and safe way to drive is never a waste of time, whilst I agree that cyclone will never accept that he is wrong, there is a chance that someone else will read this and learn something they didn't know, just 1 extra safe driver on the roads is worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Instructing someone on the correct and safe way to drive is never a waste of time, whilst I agree that cyclone will never accept that he is wrong, there is a chance that someone else will read this and learn something they didn't know, just 1 extra safe driver on the roads is worth the effort.

 

To a great extent I agree with you, but I`m sure you`ve noticed, on this and other threads, the motoring mafia (as I call them) really will argue that black is white at the drop of a hat. Even when the subject is more clear cut than this one. Classic example, the driver speeding [= breaking the law] is in the right, whereas a driver (as they see it) spending too long in the middle lane [purely advisory wording in the highway code] is totally wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are absolutely wasting your time since all you keep doing is repeating your assertions.

Should you actually provide something resembling evidence then you will have stopped wasting your time.

 

Funny isn't it, a group of people disagree with you, you have to give them a silly name, with a reference to Italian criminal families.

If it weren't so childish we could make up a name for you two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and I'd ask the pair of you self appointed experts what additional driving experience and qualifications you have....

 

 

 

tumbleweed.....

 

yes... as expected. Walter Mitty's the pair of you.

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2016 at 14:30 ----------

 

If it weren't so childish we could make up a name for you two.

 

La Cosa Nostra..? It's very fitting if you decompose to the original meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.