On 2023-02-07 14:16, Thomas E. wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 3:28:43 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
>> On 2023-02-07 11:25, Thomas E. wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 2:07:17 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2023-02-07 10:59, Thomas E. wrote:
>>>>> From a Windsor Ontario site:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hKXirnvf_I
>>>>>
>>>>> Since Alan has few or no multi-lane roundabouts like this in
>>>>> Vancouver he needs a lesson.
>>>> Despite having been told that I have to use multi-lane
>>>> roundabouts all the time...
>> Look!
>>
>> Unanswered by the Lying Little Shit!
>>
>> :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> At 2:00 in the video we are told that to make a left turn
>>>>> you MUST move to the left lane before entering the
>>>>> roundabout. Then you must wait for a gap in the traffic and
>>>>> enter in the left lane and stay there until you exit. Watch
>>>>> the blue car.
>>>> Look, you Lying Little Shit:
>>>>
>>>> I have never suggested that your wife should have changed lanes
>>>> IN THE ROUNDABOUT.
>>>>
>>>> That is a lie.
>> Look!
>>
>> Unanswered by the Lying Little Shit!
>>
>> :-)
>>>>> At 3:00 in the video we are told that to make a right turn
>>>>> you MUST move to the right lane before entering the
>>>>> roundabout. Then you must wait for a gap in the traffic and
>>>>> enter in the right lane and stay there until you exit.
>>>>>
>>>>> At 3:47 in the video we are told that to go straight you can
>>>>> use EITHER the right or left lane. Watch the yellow and light
>>>>> green cars as they go straight. Note that the 2 yellow cars
>>>>> transit together, side-by-side, straight on. The green car
>>>>> goes through straight on by itself in the left lane the
>>>>> entire time.
>>>>>
>>>>> The rest of the video covers encounters with trucks and
>>>>> emergency vehicles.
>>>>>
>>>>> These lane use rules and the road markings are exactly those
>>>>> in Carmel IN. One difference is that we do not require
>>>>> signaling exits. Our reasoning is that transit is so quick
>>>>> that it's too easy to make an error, confusing other
>>>>> drivers.
>>>>>
>>>>> What should have happened is shown by the 2 yellow cars
>>>>> going straight on at 3:50 in the video. The stay-right rule
>>>>> you assume must apply in this situation is contradicted by
>>>>> the path of the green car at 3:55.
>>>>>
>>>>> With regard to the accident, the other driver broke these
>>>>> rules. She was intending to make a left turn from the right
>>>>> lane. My wife did not break any rules. The other car was not
>>>>> in sight to my wife, and even if it was she would have
>>>>> expected it stay in its lane, go straight on, and not cross
>>>>> into our lane. The other driver had no reason to assume that
>>>>> we might not be turning left. Our lane was marked for
>>>>> straight on or a left turn. She crossed the lane line and hit
>>>>> our car.
>>>>>
>>>> Your wife broke the rules about which lane she should have been
>>>> in BEFORE you reached the roundabout.
>>>>> This was the conclusion of the investigating police officer
>>>>> and the other driver's insurance company. We had no liability
>>>>> for this accident.
>>>>>
>>>>> End of argument.
>>>> And he didn't mention speeding or aggressive driving....
>>>>
>>>> ...which is what made you bring up the whole thing in the
>>>> first place.
>>>
>>> The officer was not there when the accident happened. He cannot
>>> write up what he did not see.
>> So according to you, then, he couldn't write anything!
>>
>> The accident report REQUIRES the officer to make a determination
>> of agressive driving, you Lying Little Shit. It was literally
>> written on the form.
>>>
>>> Wrong again Alan, look at the green car in the video as it goes
>>> through by itself in the left lane. The strict stay right rule
>>> does not always apply in this situation.
>> It doesn't apply...
>>
>> ...IN THEN ROUNDABOUT, YOU LYING LITTLE SHIT!
>>>
>>> You were not there, you do not know if it was even advisable to
>>> move to the right lane in the traffic as it existed at the time.
>> I know that when you initially told the story, you had a car going
>> faster than you were that you saw coming and it was in the right
>> lane and you were in the left lane.
>>
>> It was only later on that a magical third car appeared and blocked
>> your view.
>>
>> A car was approaching from behind with the obvious intention to
>> overtake yours.
>>
>> Your wife should have seen it coming and moved over. In fact, she
>> should have (as a matter of proper driving ettiquette if not law)
>> been in the right lane to begin with. For your intended travel
>> direction there was no need to be in the left lane in the
>> roundabout.
>>>
>>> You are the one that is lying here.
>> Really?
>>
>> What do you claim I'm lying about? Would it be akin to you lying
>> when you said:
>>
>> "Since Alan has few or no multi-lane roundabouts like this in
>> Vancouver he needs a lesson." That's a lie by mistating the issue.
>> The number of roundabouts is not germane to the question of whether
>> or not I have lots of experience with driving in roundabouts.
>>
>> There could only be a single multi-lane roundabout in all of the
>> Lower Mainland, but I could still be very experienced with their
>> use.
>>
>> As a matter of fact, there are a few multi-lane roundabouts with
>> which I am VERY familiar.
>>
>> The multi-lane roundabouts on 16th avenue which I used regularly
>> while traveling out to UBC to play hockey:
>>
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2550803,-123.2389851,374m/data=!3m1!1e3>
>>
>>
>>
>> The DOUBLE multi-lane roundabout at the exit of Highway 1 onto >>
McCallum Road:
>>
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0341631,-122.2931191,303a,35y,84.88h,2.22t/data=!3m1!1e3!5m2!1e4!1e1>
>
>>
> Unlike you I actually have a life outside of newsgroups. So I don't
> sit around waiting for your lame replies. Does your employer know
> that you monitor this group constantly looking for an excuse to
> post?

Do you worry your lying little head about what my employer knows, Lying
Little Shit.

>
> Well, I did find two 4 lane roundabouts on W 16th Ave. Like I said,
> few of these in your area. We will have 150 total in this city by the
> end of the year. You still need a lesson.

You think the overall number is what is important, Lying Little Shit?

Fascinating.

>
> As has been explained many times we were in the roundabout when the
> other car was seen by me for the first time just before the
> collision. You are NOT supposed to change lanes in the circular. We
> had no reason to think that driver was going to ignore the signage or
> think we were intending to turn left. We do know that she was heading
> east before entering the intersection and in the wrong lane to turn
> left. There was other traffic in the right lane going straight on.

And I never said she wasn't in the wrong lane IN THE ROUNDABOUT for a
left turn, Lying Little Shit.

But you were supposed to be in the right lane BEFORE the circular...

....as Indiana law required.

>
> I never said a third car blocked our view. I did say there was heavy
> morning traffic that made it advisable to stay in the left lane.

You did later claim that a third car blocked the view of the oncoming
car that eventually hit you, Lying Little Shit.

Shall I produce the quotes?

:-)

>
> That green car in the video was in the left lane, all by itself,
> approaching, going through and exiting the intersection. It's done
> all the time. I have shown numerous videos and pictures of cars in
> the left lane all by themseves. It's not a hard and fast rule that
> everybody follows. I cited a quote from an official BC driver where a
> BC driver asked if that was the case. He was told no, if traffic is
> not trying to pass it's OK to be in the left lane.

BC is not Indiana, Lying Little Shit.

I quoted the law that required you to be in the right lane.

Must I quote it again?

:-)

>
> Stop lying and admit the truth.

What lie have I told, Lying Little Shit?