Not judging a situation... I'm judging the actions you say you took. For all I know the situation is imaginary.
If we must use Freud to understand your preocupation with the pencil size of other drivers, I'll do so...but I want it on record that it is only at your request. It is clear from your words that you have a preoccupation with your genitals and the genitals of others. This places you at the phalic stage of psychosexual development. Further, it is clear from your observation about females that you have noticed that females lack penises. This sets the stage for the classical manifestation of the opedial complex, where your natural love for your mother, when combined with your burgeoning realization that she lacks a pencil, transforms into castration anxeity centered on your father, and transforms into a desire to supplant your father. Given the intensity of emotion it is clear that you were caught masturbating and disciplined for these autoerotic explorations, further exacerbating your castration anxiety. I just can't see how saying all of that will make you a better driver though. Besides, Freud was a fraud.
And you know the really cool thing? I don't have to look up latin phrases! Do I rock or what?
As for the driving part...the reason for this little tete-a-tete sans privacy....
I am curious tho why you think I & the other driver were impeding traffic ? Didn't I already say both of us were already exceeding the speed limit ?
I have no clue why you would think you should yield to a driver like that.
Exceeding the speed limit is irrelevant. If it bothered you, you should have dropped to a lower speed. If it didn't, you should have kept speeding. Either way, you should have sought to diffuse any potentially dangerous situation that arose while taking the minimum risk possible in doing so.
How could you have diffused this situation? Well, you could've whipped out a gun and shot out her tires. She woudl've stopped trying to pass, stopped speeding, and you could've gone along your merry way. Is that a good solution? No. Why not? Because it is MORE RISKY. That's what we are trying to avoid. Avoid the risk. Get it? What are some other ways to diffuse this situation? How about waiting until she is right behind you and slamming on the brakes? Again, not good. Why not? Still too risky -- she might not respond in time, her kids may be injured, you may be injured, and so on. Remember, the goal is to reduce the danger of the situation. Other ways? How about easing off the gas until you are 25' behind the car in the other lane, opening a passage so the high-risk driver can pass? Does this increase your risk? No, because you are actually going to be closer to the speed limit and it gets the high risk driver away from you. Does it increase her risk? No, because she can pass you and is no longer feeling compelled (for whatever reason) to tailgate. Does it increase the other driver's risk? no, because it increases their seperation with the hazard as well. What are some other ways? You could have sped up. You could have merged into the other lane, opening up a passing lane. The list goes on.
That's the point. I did not say you should yield, I said you should diffuse the situation. How? The easiest and safest way available to you. Why? That should be self evident. EVERYONE would have been safer. You, her, her kids, the other driver... EVERYONE.
This should be common sense.
It seems like you want to justify allowing a high risk situation to develop. What is your motiovation? Punishing her for being more willing to break the law than you?
The traffic light ahead is irrelevant. It is not your "job" to keep her from running that light, or to slow her before she reaches it. The light may have changed, she may have been making a right turn, etc... none of which matters.
Ride it like you think owning it matters.
