Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1
- Thread starter Snake-Eyes
- Start date
-
- Tags
- motivational pictures
If she can swallow both inches I’ll happily buy her a baby goat, it’s 2” but it damn sure smells like a foot.
In Mass., the "traffic circle" is called a "Rotary." There are four along the way to Woods Hole Mass (to get to the ferry). The most famous one is just after you cross the Bourne Bridge and land on Cape Cod (you see the big bush there with that name) You have to stay on the outside lane to continue down on to Rt. 28 South to get to Woods Hole. The problem being, some cars might not recognize you trying to turn right and want you to continue around the Rotary. One must "assert" one's self.
The "Cape Cod" bush is on the opposite side of that clump of shrubs you see there.
The proper way to use a roundabout in the US is, look to the left (AKA yield), fuck the people on the right.
In England and other bass ackwards countries, it's the opposite.
Call them traffic circles or rotaries all you want. They are, and will always be roundabouts. The Brits will tell you that.
I think, percentage-wise, the volume of idiots is exponentially worse the closer you are to the city limits.
That's an easy one, but I bet it fucks a lot of people up.
Miss your turn? Have another go round.
Good Luck with that. If your mindset causes an accident up there (particularly the Rotary I mention), you will be dealing with two forces:
1) The Mass. State Police that patrols that area and:
2) Extremely pi$$ed off drivers that may very well miss their ferry because of the traffic tie up! Which will cause the Mass State Police to be ever more pi$$ed!
Probably looks like a foot too. How many toes it got ?If she can swallow both inches I’ll happily buy her a baby goat, it’s 2” but it damn sure smells like a foot.
You know I wasn’t the only one.I guess monkeys can use emojis
So to correct you, a gang of monkeys!
The chance of me being in ANY North East state is nil to nil.
I have zero reason to be in any of those commie states (shitholes).
My mindset of roundabout use is simply yield to the oncoming traffic and not yielding to asshats that don't wait their turn.
There's zero traffic infraction on my part if an accident happens.
If you can’t make her gag from the size, do it with the smellIf she can swallow both inches I’ll happily buy her a baby goat, it’s 2” but it damn sure smells like a foot.
Fair enough. Someone with *that* mindset, then.
On this particular Rotary, there are "dual right turn lanes. Both are also "continue the circle" lanes as far as traffic goes. See the pic above that shows the Cape cod bush. The conflict occurs when a driver on the "left" right turn lane wants to turn right, but the driver on the "right" right turn lane wants to "continue the circle." That "continue the circle" driver may ignore the others' right turn signal and then honk and be pi$$ed at him when he thinks the driver in the left right turn lane is trying to cut him off. Some of those drivers may try to force the "left" right turn lane driver to "continue the circle" anyway, not giving way so he can turn right.
Not a pretty sight if an accident ensues.
My county fell in love with the things. Wife told me, she saw where someone had done that the other day.
Don't know how many times I've hit the brakes, wondering if that car was going to yield to me, when I'm in the round about or hit me.
Sounds like a case of piss poor engineering.
There's this thing with driving called right of way.
A driver is not required to yield to someone cutting across their path if they have right of way.
Too many drivers think their path is the only path and anyone else in the road has to yield to them.
It doesn't work that way.
Piss poor engineering by people that don't actually drive is a huge part of every day accidents and confusion on the road. Add in cell phone use, inattentiveness and just poor driving skills, all play a part in daily accidents.
All you have to do is look at these retarded criss cross intersections. It's clear that a non-driver designed them. People get used to them, but they suck for traffic control.
Then that’s just a piss poor design. The inside lane should never have a turn option.
That's what I said.
The DOT has a bunch of idiots working for them.
Look at any business that tears down and rebuilds.
It used to be the parking lots were always on the road side of the property.
Now, any time a business is rebuilt, the building goes up close to the road.
I see two very large issues with this.
1. If there's a road departure accident, the building stands a near 100% chance of being hit.
2. If the DOT decides to widen the road, which is a very likely occurrence, the building has to come down to allow that to happen.
The old way allowed the parking lot to just get a little smaller. Now it costs millions to tear down and rebuild. Again...
Oh sure Mr Sugar Tits, act like you don’t know.Probably looks like a foot too. How many toes it got ?
Now I know how my wife feels when her time of the month is over!
Agreed. But I think those designers had different objectives.
Their problem was "traffic flow" and keeping it flowing all the way down to Woods Hole (and, maybe, also to (then) Otis AFB. now "Joint base Cape Cod" I think), which is just North of Falmouth/Woods Hole. Hence, two lanes turning right. I guess they figured that's the way 90+% of the traffic was going to go, anyway. It's weird because just South of Otis, at "Brick Kiln Rd" it drops to one lane each way. And, as you enter the CDP of Woods Hole, it's one lane with maybe a 25mph limit that might go up to 35 in lightly populated areas. Imagine all the 18-wheelers and busses that have to travel that road to get to the ferries.
Last edited:
It really doesn't matter what objective the designer/engineer had.
The design and its execution was still piss poor. And very dangerous.
If an objective appears solid on the outset, but the only way to execute it is flawed, then the objective itself is flawed, and must change along with the design.
The design and its execution was still piss poor. And very dangerous.
If an objective appears solid on the outset, but the only way to execute it is flawed, then the objective itself is flawed, and must change along with the design.
Envision this fucking abortion covered in snow…
