Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tom Elam <thomas.e.elam@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dear Alan,
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 14:50:07 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 254
Message-ID: <v69f91$3danr$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v5et5s$1krq8$1@dont-email.me> <v5hh26$27h9t$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5hluc$28lm1$1@dont-email.me> <v5hmvh$2961d$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5mvo1$3f417$1@dont-email.me> <v5nf0j$3i4ah$4@dont-email.me>
 <v5um5j$15cvg$1@dont-email.me> <v5urt3$16f7h$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 20:50:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0552be38cf1eeac3d811067c8fda5d88";
	logging-data="3582715"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Hbnux547AXRX6ZW+PE0nECKnOscxIO70="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rI3yPY0RyGLW3fwjt1whgO3GDIY=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v5urt3$16f7h$1@dont-email.me>

On 7/1/2024 2:18 PM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-07-01 09:40, Tom Elam wrote:
>> On 6/28/2024 6:55 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-06-28 11:34, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>> On 6/26/2024 2:34 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-06-26 11:16, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/26/2024 12:53 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-06-25 10:01, Tom Elam wrote:
>>>>>>>> Please open the link below. It's the Indiana Driver's Manual. 
>>>>>>>> It's what new drivers are expected to know when taking their 
>>>>>>>> written test.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.in.gov/bmv/licenses-permits-ids/learners-permits-and-drivers-licenses-overview/learners-permit/drivers-manual/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You have insisted that the "stay right except to pass" law is a 
>>>>>>>> critical and must always be obeyed. Read the entire manual. Now 
>>>>>>>> please cite mention of this specific law in the manual.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With respect to roundabouts, on page 40:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "For multi-lane roundabouts where the circular
>>>>>>>> roadway has more than one lane, drivers should
>>>>>>>> know which lane they need to be in prior to
>>>>>>>> entering the roundabout. Drivers should not
>>>>>>>> change lanes in the circulatory roadway."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Signs, pavement markings, or both are
>>>>>>>> provided to guide drivers to the proper lane
>>>>>>>> in advance of the circulatory roadway."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where does this or any other manual language indicate that 
>>>>>>>> regardless of traffic conditions the left lane of a 4-lane 
>>>>>>>> roundabout cannot be used to continue straight if that lane is 
>>>>>>>> signposted for straight-through use?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BC has a stray right law too. Please open Google Earth and go to 
>>>>>>>> 49 15 14.9 N 123 14 28.3 W. This is the intersection of 16th Ave 
>>>>>>>> and East Mall on the UBC campus. Explain why 16th Ave is 
>>>>>>>> signposted for straight through traffic in both lanes and both 
>>>>>>>> directions. If you must stay in the right lane should the 16th 
>>>>>>>> Ave left lane be posted for left turns only???
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I await your response.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know whether this is your inherent dishonesty, or whether 
>>>>>>> you're just getting senile.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We discussed this previously, Liarboy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The issue is that she was in the left lane of two before she 
>>>>>>> ENTERED the roundabout.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And Indiana law is utterly clear that she wasn't supposed to be 
>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know whether this is your inherent dishonesty, or whether 
>>>>>> you're
>>>>>> just getting senile.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We discussed this previously, Liarboy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have failed to cite the law correctly yet again. The law 
>>>>>> states "Indiana Code 9-21-5-9. (a) 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 on the interstate 
>>>>>> highways."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://iga.in.gov/laws/2022/ic/titles/9#9-21-5-9
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Terms Used In Indiana Code 9-21-5-9
>>>>>> Highway: includes county bridges and state and county roads, 
>>>>>> unless otherwise expressly provided. See Indiana Code 1-1-4-5"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 106th Street is a city street. The law does not even apply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, in absence of an applicable regulation the roundabout signage 
>>>>>> clearly indicates either lane can be used for going straight 
>>>>>> through. If it was otherwise it would need to be posted for right 
>>>>>> lane straight or turn right only and left lane for left turn only. 
>>>>>> You do not need to be in the right lane if the signage indicates 
>>>>>> you have a choice and prevailing traffic is not trying to pass you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We were moving at the traffic's prevailing speed. This has all 
>>>>>> been explained to you, Liarboy. The other driver was exceeding the 
>>>>>> prevailing speed, illegally trying to pass us in the right lane to 
>>>>>> make a left turn at the next exit. For this she was cited for 
>>>>>> illegal lane use. The wife was in the correct lane and was not 
>>>>>> cited by an investigating city officer. Even if you apply the law 
>>>>>> intended for multi-lane interstates and rural highways we were in 
>>>>>> the correct lane.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You continue to attempt to ex post facto impose a rule that did 
>>>>>> not apply to the situation at the time of the accident. Of course 
>>>>>> you need to do this. You MUST be right.
>>>>>
>>>>> '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.'
>>>>>
>>>>> None of the conditions of subsection (c) applied to your wife that 
>>>>> day, and...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...you don't know that she wasn't travelling at less than 
>>>>> "established maximum" (unless you could magically have been 
>>>>> watching both the car behind AND have be keep an eye on the 
>>>>> speedometer at the same time) , and...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...I already cited an Indiana lawyer on this issue:
>>>>>
>>>>> 'In other words, drivers should stay to the right and only use the 
>>>>> left lane when passing. The driver who remains in the left lane and 
>>>>> prevents other drivers from lawfully passing them on the left is 
>>>>> the one who is breaking the law.'
>>>>>
>>>>> Your wife knew or should have known that a car behind her was 
>>>>> travelling faster than she was and so should have moved to the 
>>>>> right lane.
>>>>>
>>>>> At which point, the other car moves to the left lane and at the 
>>>>> roundabout there is no conflict.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your wife's violation of Indiana Code 9-21-5-9 was a direct factor 
>>>>> in there being a collision at all.
>>>>
>>>> And you know that there was someone behind us wanting to pass when 
>>>> we entered the roundabout? How do you know that? We were in the 
>>>> second of 2 closely spaced roundabouts. Could the driver who hit us 
>>>> could have caught up while we in the roundabout circulars? Yes, 
>>>> easily. The suggested speed for this street section is 20 mph. We 
>>>> were probably going faster than that. The other driver was going 
>>>> faster too. And, shifting lanes in the circular is not permitted.
>>>
>>> You told us there was someone behind you, Liarboy.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You continue to ignore the fact that the wife was not cited by the 
>>>> investigating officer for improper lane use. In the eyes of the law 
>>>> she is innocent. Please explain why you are ignoring this fact in 
>>>> evidence.
>>>
>>> And the other driver wasn't cited for speeding.
>>>
>>> So in the eyes of the law, the other driver is innocent of speeding 
>>> despite your claims.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are guilty of assuming facts not in evidence in order to 
>>>> manufacture   your version of what happened. In other words, you are 
>>>> lying.
>>>
>>> Your wife was driving in the left lane. This has been established.
>>>
>>> You TOLD us that someone over took you as you entered the roundabout.
>>>
>>> Ergo, that person was travelling FASTER than you were BEFORE the 
>>> roundabout.
>>>
>>> Ergo, your wife should have been in the RIGHT lane.
>>>
>>> You blamed the accident on the other driver's greater speed, and it's 
>>> true that her speed brought you into proximity, but it could have 
>>> easily been your wife driving a few mph slower than the speed limit 
>>> that did it.
>>>
>>> What is undeniable is that had your wife been in the correct lane 
>>> before entering the roundabout--
>>>
>>> ...the right lane of two...
>>>
>>> --then no difference in speed would have mattered.
> 
> Let's break this down.
> 
> And try to remember that I'm not saying your wife was to blame for the 
> accident. I'm saying that the accident wasn't the result of the other 
> driver speeding.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========