Ah so you're the asshole that's always honking at me

when you're driving a car, job one is driving the car. how is he the asshole for reminding you that the light is green?

Horns are safety features. They are meant for avoiding an accident, not for venting frustration. Here in California at least, using your horn because you’re feeling impatient at a green light is illegal. (Granted, so is using your phone while stopped in traffic, but that doesn’t make you in the right for honking.)

Horns are a general purpose signaling device. I am aware of no us laws prohibiting its general use ouside city noise ordanances and near hospitals.

Honking at a distracted driver is both legal and appropriate.

When safety is involved, yes. Laws vary by state, and of course enforcement varies even more, but the law in California is quite clear; horns are explicitly not a general purpose signaling device.

not a californian, so I can't speak to the laws there, but I don't see anything wrong with a quick tap on the horn to let the person know they missed the light change. in my view, this is communication, not mere venting. I would never give someone the full blast unless they were actively doing something unsafe.

that said, people expect to go when the light turns green. violating people's expectations as always at least a little dangerous on the road. they should know better, but they don't.

I live in California now. From my experience people are quicker with the horn in bigger metro areas. There's always the one guy who has no patience - although I try to keep in mind that person might be justified in trying to get to a hospital or some other emergency.

But generally there is a progression to events which follows what one would expect when walking:

1- Polite "excuse me mis/sir/mam" - tap on the honk 2- Louder "EXCuse ME mis/sir/mam" - double tap/one a little louder 3- Very loud "EXCUSE ME PLEASE?" - loud honk

Inevitably, a significant percentage of the time I see this, the person that is being inconsiderate and blocking traffic/a doorway will be annoyed at the person trying to move around. I wonder if there is a study as to the percentage of the population that has this type of reaction.

Horn honking is like a language. I doubt very many people are leaning on their horn when the person ahead of them is taking too long to take off from a light. Usually this is communicated through short, almost staccato honks from the horn. To communicate "shit you're about to crash" people lay on the horn. I don't think the honks used to wake up people dozing off at a green like are being mistaken for safety honks.

I never get honked at... might want to look into why you are getting honked at often.

try "pay attention to the road and press the skinny pedal when its time to go"

Several minutes? If you wait 3 seconds then you would have to have more than a hundred people stopped directly behind you to get that far!

And that's assuming the entire pack of cars doesn't just catch back up to the one in front of you, where you had to wait anyway, dropping the actual time loss back to about zero.

If it prevents two or three cars from making the light you were both in together, you’ve needlessly made those specific cars wait for an entire additional cycle...in heavy traffic, it’s bad for everyone when as many vehicles as possible don’t make it through the pipe, as it slows down the entire congested apparatus further.

You do realize even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right?

Minutes? 3 seconds? Whatever. No one has a right to other people's time. I can't help but feel that anything else is a sense of entitlement over other peoples time.

That's not to say someone should blare their horn after 3 seconds, but definitively a tap or two... and if that doesn't work, then get progressively louder.

Nobody can drive perfectly with .01 second precision at all times. It's not entitlement to aim for "good driver" without being a neurotic mess about every time you slow down or don't take the first gap. And I think the logical conclusion of having absolutely no right to anyone else's time is to not take up space on the road at all.

And when I say "about zero" I mean that it can in fact be exactly zero.

You are right.

That is why there is an expectation of you paying attention. Including during a red light. That means not using your phone.

I can assure you, if you are using your phone at a red light, it takes more than 0.01 seconds to notice the change in light, put the phone down, look at the street in front of you to make sure there isn't anything new since the last time you looked and go. In fact, if it took you the 0.01 seconds you say, it would literally be impossible for someone to honk you in time before you take off. The amount of time quoted is mind mindbogglingly small.

I don't get honked at. When I'm at a red light, I'm paying attention. If I need to use my phone, I pull over. Therefore, when a light changes I generally move along as quick as possible. If for some reason something falls in my car, I'm having a conversation with someone next to me or I get distracted (happens once or twice a year) and someone honks, I defer to them, since I know I'm in the wrong by not being on the ball.

I defer because I have no entitlement over the time of the person behind me. I'm not making up excuses saying how little time it is. I understand it's wrong of me to impose on them unnecessarily. Using your phone while driving is not necessary. It's all very logical. Basically:

My pleasure < Their Right to not have people impose on their time.

I always find it strange when an issue isn't addressed but instead denied by making it seem small (generally with gross underestimations). I remember a coworker once got fired for stealing a box of pens. When caught he claimed "I didn't steal, it was just a box of pens! It's basically worth nothing." - I think the boss actually fired him for giving that argument instead of owning the issue.

* Exceptions could be made for checking the traffic in GPS or some other activity that aids driving (knowing you need to change lanes with advance notice is important). Checking messages emails isn't one such activity, though I've seen a lot of friends and colleges do it much to my chagrin.

> I was calling your standard impossibly high

Except... you are arguing against a cartoon of what I said. You even intentionally edited it out to make it seem like I am being unreasonable. I'll post your quote with the missing part included: "amount of time needlessly"

Needlessly. An important part of what I said. If you aren't wasting peoples time needlessly, you are within my standard. Therefore, my standard isn't unrealist.

Let's be clear about the chain of events:

mikepurvis complains about cell phone use during red lights. tasty_freeze posts saying: why is this an issue

rconti tries to take a middle ground by saying 'he does the phone checking at a red light to, but he is highly consious of other people and he notices that many who check it during a red light aren't as concious and implores other people to be so. He explains the chain effect of how a few seconds of your delay can cause several minutes of delay to other people.

Dylan16807, you, post how this knock on effect would only happen if there were 'more than a hundred people stopped directly behind' (as if that is impossible) Furthermore you state: "And that's assuming the entire pack of cars doesn't just catch back up to the one in front of you, where you had to wait anyway, dropping the actual time loss back to about zero"

Which sounds a hell of a lot like denial through minimizing. So I post saying: "even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right?"

It seems like a statement you seem to agree to but haven't stated as much.

Instead, you edited my words to try and prove the point that I have 'unrealistic expectations'.

To me, it sounds like you feel like arguing. Though I might be missing your point, so feel free to clarify what that point is and how it is relevant to the chain of communication as originally posted and recaped on this post.

> Which sounds a hell of a lot like denial through minimizing.

At that point I was just calling out an exaggeration, which is not the same thing as denial. It might be possible in a very niche case, but "if you ever" portrays it as a typical result.

> So I post saying: "even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right?"

You interpreted "about zero" in a different way than I meant it. You seemed to take it as a small amount in every case, when I meant that it could often actually be zero.

The difference is important, because you can make an argument that a small delay harms someone, but you can't make an argument that zero delay harms anyone.

> It seems like a statement you seem to agree to but haven't stated as much.

I agree that small delays can be harmful, but there's a threshold before I think we can assign blame.

> Instead, you edited my words to try and prove the point that I have 'unrealistic expectations'.

I'm sorry I omitted words. The omitted words don't change my argument. If you think they do, I think you're misunderstanding the argument.

"You do realize even if it is 'about zero'... any amount of time needlessly taken from other humans against their consent isn't cool right?"

Every time someone drives they waste some amount of others' time needlessly. Everyone, always.

When you said "any", were you using it in a non-literal sense? Or do you think other wastes of time are not "needless"?

If you answer "no" to both of those, then I think your standard is impossible, and you're holding phone-users to a higher standard than everyone else.

I'm really not trying to distort your view. If I'm still not understanding something, it's not on purpose, and I really welcome correction.

Please believe me. I did not have any intent to distort your statement when I removed those words. I did it to make it clearer what words I was focusing on. To me, "waste" implies "needlessly" in this context.

-

And then entirely separate from that, I assert that it's possible to use a phone while stopped without causing any delay, if done right.

Needlessly, definition: in a way that is unnecessary because it is avoidable.

Therefore this statement:

> every time someone drives they waste some amount of others' time needlessly

Is absolutely incorrect. Following good driving techniques means no needless wasted time happens when driving. By the very definition of the word needless. Anything that is within good driving techniques is needed. By the very definition of good driving techniques.

Since cell phone use to check messages (the point which you are answering to) is not needed to operate a motor vehicle, IF time is wasted on this (again, the point you are literally hitting reply to), any amount, it is a needless imposition on other people. As someone who can communicate effectively pointed out, this has a knock on effect. (again, the point you are replying to)

Using words by their actual meaning helps communication. Playing games and saying 'driving is not needed' is a silly ego defense that doesn't further the understanding of reality and the finding of truth. Especially because there are people who clearly need to drive. And the who point that was being made was 'when driving', not if driving is needed.

This is all very basic.

BTW, in the middle of the hair splitting defensive posting, you forgot to clarify what the point you were making when replying to rconti - because that is the topic we are supposed to be on.

I am not getting any deeper into a semantics argument.

> you forgot to clarify what the point you were making when replying to rconti - because that is the topic we are supposed to be on

"At that point I was just calling out an exaggeration, which is not the same thing as denial. It might be possible in a very niche case, but "if you ever" portrays it as a typical result."

I think that's about all I have to say so uh good luck in life!