Occasionally when you’re driving, you’ll make a mistake and perhaps need to adjust and it can create some awkward situations. Like today, my dad ended up in the wrong lane to go straight instead of turn at a light. He had to cut in line to make sure we could go the right way. It’d be nice if we could communicate “sorry, I screwed up. Excuse me. I just need to slip in there.”
Right now all we have for inter car communication is the horn, which has kind of an aggressive implication to it. This is for trying to de-escalate potential road rage.
Or your dad could accept that he’s going to travel a tiny bit further than he originally intended, and reroute with a u-turn, or a block circle, or a parking lot turn, or something similar. No invasive lane change. No need to apologise for an invasive lane change. No need for a special horn to communicate an apology for an invasive lane change. You don’t need to apologise for something you don’t make into someone else’s problem.
deleted by creator
I think it’s healthier for everybody to accept that mistakes happen, and tolerate the correction, knowing that one day you might make the mistake too.
An invasive lane change costs a few seconds to the other person, while rerouting will usually cost at least a minute. In other words, if we imagine everybody in the world makes that mistake once a month, then forcing everybody to reroute rather than do an invasive lane change, costs the world thousands of more hours.
No lol, it is the driver that makes the mistake that needs to accept the mistake, not the other way around.
“Sorry I endangered your life, but I cannot be bothered to reroute for a minute.”
Yes mistakes happen, but the healthier solution is for people to accept the consequences of their actions. Your view is a manifest to the egocentric society we decry every so often.
If someone crashs into you doing an invasive lane change (or any other mistake correction) I hope you’re thankful for them not adding to the world’s wasted hours.
What the fuck man.
Endangered life? Where did OP say they endangered someone’s life? It could have been a lane change in stopped traffic. Which is 100% safe, albeit a bit annoying to the person you cut off. I assume OP knows the difference between annoying and unsafe.
You used the word invasive lane change.
If the lane next to you has stopped traffic, but you cut into a gap between cars and edge in as the traffic begins to move again, that is an “invasive” but also 100% safe move.
It sounds like you’ve never driven before.
What is invasive about that, and why would you have to say sorry? It doesn’t sound dangerous is everyone is stopped at the same light.
It is not a “sorry” horn, but flashing your hazards once or twice is how to say “thank you” to the car behind you that lets you in.
Well ideally you would change lanes where you have ample space to just fit in without impacting the traffic. Cutting in stopped traffic is more chaotic. But I agree that I don’t think it’s a big deal
Use “safe lane change” then, maybe? Instead of making up scenarios afterwards, where invasive equals safe.
But I feel you have a problem admitting mistakes in general, not just when it comes to traffic.
If you think I don’t drive, I think you shouldn’t drive.
The word “invasive” doesn’t even matter here. That was a word you introduced and I was just using it too. But if you want, we can use OP’s terminology. OP said cut in line, you responded saying not to do that, and I’m saying that it’s fine and can be totally safe.
Please read the comment chain again if you think I used the term first, lol. u/sunsofold used it, you used it, and only then I entered the discussion.
if it’s 100% safe there’s no need to apologize!
This is not a blind choice between adding a minute to one person’s commute or adding ten seconds to five people’s commutes. This is a man who failed to do the most basic, bare minimum cost of driving around in a machine that can and does kill people on a regular basis: paying attention. Others shouldn’t be endangered to save someone from an inconvenience. A sudden, illegal maneuver, even at low speed, introduces more danger and unpredictability where we want less. Why give MORE trust to someone who is actively engaged in demonstrating they should not be trusted?
Because everybody makes mistakes, and based on what OP said this does not sound like the “endangering life” sort of situation. They’re just cutting in line. More unpredictable, sure, but not dangerous.
If you came a minute late to your doctors appointment, should all doctors refuse to see you and force you to re-schedule? Or is the world a better place because there’s a bit of lenience?
Really important for you to understand: Not likely to kill you is not the same as not dangerous. So many people end up in low speed collisions which, while having an infinitesimal chance of death, cause them non-lethal pain, stress, financial harm, legal trouble. These are dangers. The existence of death does not negate the suffering which does not cause death.
And that is absolutely not analogous. The inattentive driver isn’t analogous to someone coming in one minute late, and the other driver is not analogous to the doctor. He’s doing an analog of coming in half an hour late, when the doctor has already made the reasonable assumption he is not coming, (He’s already at the intersection by the time he’s trying to make the lane change.) and started seeing the next patient. (The other patient is the other driver, following the expected rules of courtesy and appointment keeping.) He is then making an invasive entry into the doctor’s exam room (analog to the space they each want to use, the turn lane) and expecting to be seen ahead of the person who was on time for their appointment. (cutting in on the mutually desired space without regard to anyone else) He was inattentive and failed to arrive on time. (He failed to get into the correct lane at an appropriate time) The only reason a person would let him barge in is out of fear he might be even more dumb, aggressive, and inconsiderate than he already appears and hurt them, whether through selfish ignorance or active malice.
I really don’t think cutting in line is as big a deal as you make it sound. Inconvenient, and causing a non-zero amount of “suffering”? Sure. But only a few seconds of inconvenience at most. Literally just a few seconds. And maybe an infinitesimally increased risk of injury.