daddyo

  What you're describing is your personal preference. How did you arrive at 5 mph difference? Why not 4? Driving one mile at 70 or 75 takes about 50 seconds. Is your time so important that one minute or less is going to make such a huge difference?   If I'm passing someone at a reasonable speed, and I have three or four cars behind me playing Death Race 2000, they're the ones who are doing it wrong.   I really don't understand the attitude that if you don't get out of my way when I want you to, just because I want to drive as fast as I want, you're being a jerk.  :squint:

  I'd like to see those tests. Can you provide a source?

  They don't. But if they don't, neither do I. It's a tough world.

  I don't tap my brakes, nor anything else to intentionally aggravate the driver eating my bumper.   If he's that impatient, tough toenails. It's not my fault his parents didn't teach him courtesy or patience.

  Why should I worry about hindering someone else's progress? That's what I stated earlier - I'm not on the road for someone else's convenience.   The same logic would dictate that I let someone cut in front of me when standing in a line, just because they think their time is more important than mine. But if they're courteous about it, and have a legitimate reason for needing to go ahead of me, then I have no problem letting them ahead of me. Likewise, someone who is traveling faster than I am, but maintains a safe distance behind me while I'm passing someone else and doesn't try to run over me is much more likely to get consideration and courtesy. I'll get around faster and get over more quickly if the person behind me is courteous and doesn't have the attitude that he owns the road and that I have no right to be there.   And no, someone passing me, then pulling in front of me and slowing down is not the same thing at all as someone passing at a safe speed with someone trying to drive up his tailpipe.

So, how quickly should I pass a semi on the interstate without breaking the speed laws?

  Define "modest effort". Subjectivity is our enemy here. I'm trying to ascertain as to whether or not passing someone at 75 when they're doing 70 and someone comes up behind me doing 80 is illegal or not.

  Maybe you can direct me to the appropriate section of the TCA. I've looked in Section 55 and cannot find anything about this being illegal.

    It isn't about being in the right. I refuse to let other drivers dictate how I drive. I drive no more than 5 miles over the limit. If someone wants to drive like a maniac, that's his problem.   I've been driving legally now for 44 years. Took defensive driving; I understand the concept. Never had a wreck due to someone else's arrogance or insanity. I constantly monitor rear and side views, so I know what's coming up behind me and what's beside me. But when I'm going around someone, I'm not going to alter my speed because someone thinks they have more right to the road than I do. They can wait till I'm done passing, then I'll get over.

  Define "lollygagging". Are you saying I should drive around someone just as fast as possible? if not, then at what speed? Sounds pretty subjective to me.    I'm not going to constantly change my speed to accommodate someone else. I'm not on the road for anyone else's convenience.

  So, if I'm passing someone at, say 72, and some asshat comes racing up on my butt at 85, I should increase my speed to 85 to accommodate him?

I like me some Benchmade. Their Axis lock is the shizznit.   I'm waiting for the right deal on a Sequel myself.

Federal HST in 147 gr. flavor.

Pretty much proves that gun free zones don't work.

Let's see if I have this straight:   Cop pulls her over, she tells him she has a loaded weapon in the car (clue #1 for Mr. LEO: she's an honest, law-abiding citizen, so there's nothing to fear here)   He isn't comfortable with someone other than him having a loaded firearm, so he instructs her to unload it. (clue #2 for Mr. LEO: You're afraid she might draw on you, so you want her to FILL HER HAND WITH HER LOADED FIREARM. Now she has tactical advantage as your weapon is still in your holster. Good thing for you she is an honest, law-abiding citizen.)   Conclusion: Clueless LEO.

I have a close friend who used to compete locally. He's very good at it and it makes me wish sometimes that I could do it, but I have two left feet.

 How about charging him with assault with a deadly weapon (fire)? Or attempted murder?

This is where decades of putting "self-esteem" above everything else have gotten us.

Funny. But I just wish 'em all Merry Christmas. If they don't like it, they can lump it!  :usa:

I was in fourth grade at Ducktown Elementary School in Ducktown, TN. The principal announced over the loudspeaker that President Kennedy had been shot. The teacher, Mrs. Stella Chancey, was so upset she had to leave the room.

  I really don't know if it would or not. It completely depends on the person and the situation. I've had martial arts training myself and I'm not foolish enough to think I'm safe simply because of that.   If I'm going up against multiple attackers, then I'll take a firearm over martial arts any day of the week.

  Maybe that's exactly what should happen.

It would be nice if anyone who's going in the morning would take some photos and post them.

 Sorry, Barry. You own it. It will forever be known as Obamacare, whether you like it or not.

    I'm not understanding how martial arts training would be any more beneficial in this particular situation.