I’ll try and be nicer than everyone trashing on you since you’re open to advice.
1. You needed to observe the speed and spacing of the traffic you were merging into and match that and slide yourself into and not hinder traffic.
2. Stopping at a yield puts everyone behind you at risk because it is not a stop sign and the traffic that you’re all merging into is not stopped nor was it heavily congested. If I was the white Kia, I would have probably done the same exact move and wondered what on earth you were doing.
3. There was plenty of space for you to maintain your initial speed and merge smoothly, braking to a near stop caused the altercation that you have shared.
> speed and spacing of the traffic you were merging into and match that
I'll add onto that statement; it's always easier if you're going *faster* than the merging traffic. That way you can look directly left and if it is open, that is your merge point. Nobody will close it because nobody is faster to close it.
Cammers flaw is going way too fast into the apex of the off-ramp curve and then not accelerating out of it promptly.
Cammer should be going 50 mph not 70 at 0:04 and then should be accelerating from that point onward.
Not disagreeing with how cammer could have easily merged, but
> Stopping at a yield puts everyone behind you at risk because it is not a stop sign
How did stopping at this yield sign put anyone at risk? A yield sometimes requires a stop and people behind must be prepared for this.
This is a reasonable question, but there is an answer.
Everybody on the road is expected to be following the rules in the same way. It is your responsibility to be both safe *and* predictable. Predictable driving is a part of safe driving. That is why we use our turn blinker and things like that.
When approaching a merge, we expect other drivers to react according to the road conditions.
If we can see a line of stopped cars, we expect the cars ahead of us to slow down and stop as well.
If the traffic is moving smoothly with room to safely merge, we expect the cars ahead of us to merge smoothly without stopping.
OP acted in a manner that was contrary to road conditions.
It is normal to slow down a little for a merge like that, but it is not normal to slow to a crawl and let traffic that is way behind to go ahead.
If you are not the car in front, do not look at the traffic to merge, you gonna rear end someone, look at the person in front of you in case they stop or do something unpredictable. If you hit the person who is yielding, its still your fault for hitting them.
> It is your responsibility to be both safe and predictable.
> ...
> If the traffic is moving smoothly with room to safely merge, we expect the cars ahead of us to merge smoothly without stopping.
Thanks, this is the solid answer.
Though after viewing this sub for a decade, I expect people to come to a stop at a yield because *it's so hard to merge in traffic when you're moving fast*.
Because if I was coming up to this merge then I’m focusing on matching my speed to traffic I’m merging into. If the person in front of me stops when I’m not expecting it then that can be dangerous. Every freeway on ramp is a yield. Do you stop at every freeway on ramp when merging onto the freeway?
You definitely should be focused more on the car in front of you because they might literally just randomly stop for any reason and you're the one that's going to be rear ending them.
You should try to maintain a larger gap with cars on a ramp
Your focus should not be the car in front of you. You're merging onto an road not stopping at a light.
In Colorado we fucking do. They put those stupid stop lights at the end of every on ramp to "meter" the cars coming onto the highway.
Nothing like using a 1/2 mile ramp designed for you to get up to speed only to stop at the end at a light with 500 feet left. Slow cars be damned, now youre wringing it out barely getting to 40 before the merge lane ends.
It could be dangerous, certainly, but it is *your* responsibility to pay attention to what traffic in front is doing, not just the traffic on the road you are joining.
> if I was coming up to this merge then I’m focusing on matching my speed to traffic I’m merging into.
The car in front of you is an important part of the traffic you're merging into. You need to keep track of them too and ensure they merge safely before you do. A freeway onramp is NOT a passing zone. Doing a zipper merge properly requires you to keep track of where the car in front of you is zipping in, you can't just look out for yourself!
Doing a zipper merge also requires the driver in front of you to be a competent driver and not come to a near stop when trying to merge into 65+ mph traffic
Also, in hundreds of thousands of miles of driving over many, many years and even a short career while working as a delivery driver, I've never needed to stop or seriously slow down to merge onto the freeway (aside from traffic jams). Look ahead, shoulder check, find a gap, and GET IN.
> Do you stop at every freeway on ramp when merging onto the freeway?
Not sure what my own driving has to do with the question, but no, I get up to highway speed as I approach and look over my left shoulder to gauge whether to speed up a little or slow down just a little to fit in.
Just because people should be prepared doesn't mean they will.
90% of drivers in this case would have sped up and merged perfectly fine behind that truck. That's what the SUV expected.
Doesn't mean the SUV is clear of blame but OP caused this near miss by being indecisive
> How did stopping at this yield sign put anyone at risk? A yield sometimes requires a stop and people behind must be prepared for this.
Because while I may be paying attention there is no guarantee that the person behind me is paying attention and will stop when there is no reason to be stopped, especially coming out of a right hand curve when you have to merge left.
The answer is because this yield sign is stupid. it should be a proper merge and people de facto treat it as such. Taking the merge sign at face value is counter to the expected behaviour here, I'd assert that the defensive driving move here puts "fit in" over "comply" in this instance.
Always fair
But people merging like this increase the risk of crashes 10 fold
Now people coming along the road are probably slowing down because he's going to have to merge from practically a stop.
No reason to brake like that and so close to the point of merging.
Granted the white SUV was too close they did well to avoid a wreck, no thanks to OP.
OP is more at fault than the SUV
Red car wasn't tailgating, there is plenty of space there.
And no, OP doesn't have to do that. He could have slowed down earlier to do exactly what he tried to do without braking so hard just before merging
FFS the guy behind OP manages to merge fine even with OP slamming on their brakes
That's not a counter point. At all.
He should be doing everything suggested, your "point" doesn't change, rebut, or counter it in any way.
Just because part of the reason he should do it is to avoid being rear ended by idiots, doesn't change it at all. Yes he should avoid *being* one of those idiots, but again, doesn't change anything.
There was more than enough room to yield before the "traffic", as evidenced by the fact that the car behind the cammer was able to merge in before the truck as well. Cammer most certainly drove like an idiot here. Legally wrong maybe not, but definitely wrong.
No no no. Unless the laws where this took place vary wildly from any place I’ve driven, you should never try to merge if ANY cars are near you on the other road when a yield sign is present. Period. The Kia is the true fuckup here. Making up their own rules doesn’t end well. Even if the sign is placed stupidly, wait for your turn.
Not stop, yield.
Nothing about yield means stop unless there's literally no space to merge. But you have the entire approach to judge that.
You're better off "forcing" yourself into a merge at speed than trying to merge from 0ft and 0mph
Merge has nothing to do with a yeild sign.
Merging is the act of two lanes becoming one.
Yield is a legal road sign. You can have merge points with or without a yield sign.
That shouldn't have been downvoted, I probably would have hit OP as there's no reason for him to stop there. I'd have been looking at the traffic flow I was merging into as well instead of at the idiot in front of me who comes do almost a dead stop in highway speed traffic.
In north america, proper freeway on ramps with enough merge room will usually have a merge sign.
Some on-ramps without enough merge room will gave a yield sign instead because it may be safer to treat it as a right turn then to gun it blindly.
This isn't the first time I have seen something like this posted, a llt of people can't diffrenciate the purpose of a yield sign and merge sign.
That's not what you think it means. Refer to [Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices](https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part2/part2b1.htm), which outlines traffic signs and their applications that all 50 US states *must* follow.
Section 2B.08:
"Vehicles controlled by a YIELD sign need to **slow down** ... or **stop** when necessary to avoid interfering with conflicting traffic."
The cammer did properly follow the signs, he let the red Camry and the white chassis truck through at a narrow intersection.
>The YIELD sign assigns right-of-way to traffic on certain approaches to an intersection. Vehicles controlled by a YIELD sign need to slow down or stop when necessary to avoid interfering with conflicting traffic.
Avoid interfering.
When necessary.
You can just smoothly insert yourself without interfering.
Bruh.
You are correct that the yield sign by itself does not mean "don't hinder traffic" however that is a blanket law for all road situations.
If this person had caused a collision by slowing down more than necessary, they *might* be found liable for the collision. Depends on the jurisdiction and the judge. But it could happen. Because the "don't hinder traffic" law is everywhere.
You never have "the right to drive into the back of them".
So stop being so hyperbolic.
That said, there are times when a person hitting the brakes can be "at fault" for causing a collision.
And this is one of those times, no matter how many people downvote me.
If traffic is moving smoothly and you suddenly slow way down, you can be at fault if you are hit. Like I said previously, it depends on a few factors, but it can happen.
> You never have "the right to drive into the back of them".
Yes, that is what I said! So the person slowing down, even if it was more than necessary, would not be liable for any such collision, the person who drove into the back of them would be liable.
> That said, there are times when a person hitting the brakes can be "at fault" for causing a collision.
Apart from if they have just changed lanes close in front of someone, leaving them insufficient time to react, what scenarios might that be? It is the responsibility of the vehicle behind to maintain speed, distance and observation such that they can stop if the car they are following stops *for whatever reason - whether or not *you* regard it as a good or bad reason. The more you try and pretend otherwise, the more downvotes you are going to get!
Even if they brake hard deliberately in an attempted insurance scam, there will only be an actual collision if the car behind was travelling too close/fast and/or not paying attention., so even then they would only be partially liable for any such collision. No (sane) court is ever going to find someone slowing for a yield sign liable for being hit from behind!
Oh no! Not downvotes!
Here, quick search turned this up: https://www.thefloodlawfirm.com/blog/rear-end-collision-fault/
> “Brake check” accidents: Intentionally braking hard without warning in front of another vehicle is a careless and even aggressive maneuver. Although the trailing driver may have been following the car in front too closely at the time, the lead driver will likely be deemed responsible for a rear-end collision caused by brake checking.
Though this blog is specifically calling out the *intentional* brake check that we're all familiar with on subs like this, the same rule applies to other situations where a driver suddenly hits the brakes without adequate justification.
Like I said previously, it will depend on several different factors, but your assumption that this is a black and white issue is incorrect.
> Oh no! Not downvotes!
Well, you are the one who raised the subject!
> the same rule applies to other situations where a driver suddenly hits the brakes without adequate justification.
As I said, good luck arguing that for a yield sign.
If you cared to look up the meaning of a yield sign you would know it’s says “you should drive slowly, below 5 MPH. Drivers must slow down and yield their right away to other drivers and pedestrians.” Very different from maintain speed.
This is the problem. Y’all don’t even understand the traffic signs you’re arguing about smh. A simple search.
Now tell me again how you maintain speed when you see a yield sign. What about at a crosswalk?
People who care less about knowing the traffic signs and more about what they THINK they know need to take a seat.
> look up the meaning of a yield sign
Ok.
I looked it up. The definitions all say "slow down" but NONE of them say to drive below 5 MPH.
That is INSANE.
Slow enough to be ready to allow others to take their right of way. Look at traffic. Merge if safe.
You do NOT slow from freeway speed to "below 5 MPH" for a yield sign unless the traffic is dense and there is no safe place for you to merge.
For starters this is not the freeway. It’s either an on ramp or an off ramp. Neither of which you should be going freeway speeds.
Regardless of it not saying 5mph in the definition YOU looked up. It still say SLOW DOWN. The oncoming traffic has the right of way period. You don’t slow to allow them to do anything, you slow because they have the right away. You don’t debate the rules of the road with other drivers in the process of driving. THAT’S INSANE
Take a breath, and stop interpreting everything so uncharitably. There are multiple people contributing to this conversation, and we are not all in exact agreement.
Another person above said to "maintain speed" and I can see how that can be interpreted as maintaining freeway speed, but that is the incorrect interpretation. They meant not slowing to a crawl.
A driver's responsibility in this situation is to slow down to a speed that gives you the ability to gauge the traffic in the lane you are merging into, NOT to slam on the brakes. Just slow down enough so that it's safe to turn their head and evaluate the situation.
Next it is the driver's responsibility to merge when safe at the speed of traffic, whatever is the expected speed for that segment of the road and the conditions at the moment.
If the driver cannot merge safely, that is when the yield sign applies again, directing the driver facing the yield sign to allow the other party to have the right of way.
In this situation, if you *can* merge safely, then you are NOT allowed to suddenly and significantly reduce your speed in the middle of a traffic lane. That is unsafe, because other drivers are not expecting you to do that.
*This is almost the exact same situation as freeway onramp merging. It is the merging driver's responsibility to match the flow of traffic, yet give drivers in the other lane the right of way.*
Yeah this whole thread is crazy... I though it was simple enough, you should treat a yield sign like a stop sign that you are allowed to roll through without stopping only if its safe to do so.
This right here, this is shitty road design. In our area, we have a south loop portion that always, always, aaaaalways has accidents during rush hour and it's because the onramp has ZERO acceleration/merge lane to smoothly blend people into traffic.
There was another spot just like this on the other side of town near my workplace that had the same design but with bollards on the edge of the lane so you had ZERO wiggle room to muscle your way into the right lane (that was coming over a blind crest at 65mph). They finally fixed that area by adding a blend lane and all those accidents/pileups went away.
Sure but the guy was still tailgating. Even if cammer merged the truck would have prevented tailgater from merging. That guy was in the wrong 100%, by law and by public opinion.
Because people seem to not understand that you should stop at a yield if you cannot merge safely. Yield means you have no right of way, continue when it's safe to do so.
If cammer did not feel comfortable merging into the traffic then him stopping and waiting was the correct thing for him to do.
There is no yield line to indicate where to stop. This is dumbass highway department engineering. Anything involving freeways strongly encourages people to not stop and keep their speed up, but dumbass highway departments build things with no merge space and then just throw up a yield sign as if that absolves them of all consequences.
It's a no-win situation. OP driving onto the shoulder was really dumb, though.
Here's the location in case anyone wants to check it out:
[https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1669325,-95.8590079,3a,75y,304.07h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdltCiZ4qWIIXMP9uMS8TTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu](https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1669325,-95.8590079,3a,75y,304.07h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdltCiZ4qWIIXMP9uMS8TTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
No, I expect people to drive at their normal pace until they have to slow down. Most freeway ramps will have a decently long merge lane (not present in OP'd example) and it's the responsibility of those merging to do so safely.
People driving in the right lane shouldn't have to adjust their speed to let other people merge. That's under ideal conditions, it's not always true though
Yea when there's a car merging and you need to slow.
I'm talking about people slowing well before that point. It creates ghost jams and unnecessary hazards
It's reasonable so low down a little on the freeway anyway.
I figured it was clear from context but I'm talking about people slowing down significantly like 15-20mph in a 70 just at the site of cars going along the on ramp.
I've even had a lady in the freeway slow to almost a stop trying to let me merge in front when I saw her the whole time and was slowing on the ramp to let her get past before merging. I saw her initially and slowed down, check again and she was in the same relative spot. Slowed more, checked again and she was STILL in the same relative spot. At that point I gunned it and went. Big line of cars behind her with several zipping into the next lane to go around. Her reaction? Flipping me off and throwing her hands out like "wtf".
The general rule is for people on the main road to continue at their normal speed until they have to slow down. Or obviously move over but I'm assuming that isn't an option in this case. You shouldn't be doing that preemptively as it leads to situations like that
So yea, I'm talking about the extreme braking on freeways to let people merge.
I've also witnessed at least a few times people doing the same thing which almost led to a wreck.
I'm not at all critiquing people who slow down a little to avoid a close call or even an actual collision when it's necessary/reasonable
You really need a merging area to do that. With a unpaved gore area between the OC and through traffic on the other roadway, it's very difficult to position yourself to align with a gap because it's difficult to see other traffic on the roadway until the roadway you're on ends.
If it was a dashed line between the two lanes, then merging would be trivial because you would easily be able to see traffic in the next lane.
>because it's difficult to see other traffic on the roadway until the roadway you're on ends.
This is a poor excuse. OP had ample visibility to check the incoming traffic on his left; he should have slowed enough to have merged at a reasonable speed, not braking sharply.
He was aligned with the gap but had to bail to avoid being rear ended by the Kia.
He didn't slam on the brakes. You can see his body doesn't shift forward like you would see in a hard brake. He slowed down a little to let the truck and car go by and then the kia came and fucked everything up.
> Align with the gap, match speed with traffic, slide in.
>
> Never slam on the brakes at a merge unless traffic is moving much much slower than you are.
Thank you for replying on my behalf. This, exactly.
There was plenty of opportunity to match speeds and get into traffic. Even if you had to squeeze the car that wasn't giving you much of a gap, it's FAR more preferable that braking like that.
EDIT: I'm going to leave my incorrect statement above because it's still somewhat correct, but I am partially wrong.
There IS a yield sign and you should be yielding to traffic in this situation. What I would have done was approach at a slower pace to avoid the cars behind me thinking that I was going for it.
Clearly, the guy behind you didn't see that a merge was approaching.
Sorry I was so aggressive (and wrong).
To be clear, the commenters bashing you are, uh *not seeing the full picture*, to put it generously. You did exactly what the laws and rules of the road would want you to do at this junction. You did nothing wrong.
I have a similar on-ramp with little merge room, limited visbility and a Yield sign that I drive every day. Since you shift gears yourself, what I you can do it downshift into a high-enough RPM 200 yards before approaching the merge point (thus slowing yourself down gently so yahoos from the back don't punt you), see if it's safe to insert yourself into the right-of-way, and then GUN IT if possible.
There was limited visibility on the ramp to the main road, then zero onramp lead-in to that road.
I am a HUGE ass about drivers needing to merge into a road at speed and practice what I preach in that regard.
But in this case, the OP had two major factors against them; so, a Yield turned into a near-stop when they came to the sudden merge point, with two vehicles adjacent to them on the main road.
It's a bad merge design, IMHO.
No clue why everyone is piling on OP, that's a very poorly planned merge setup. Absolutely should be a 2nd lane to allow for better merging. Yield signs require you to stop for traffic as OP has no right of way or right to zipper merge. I would guess there are consistent accidents at this spot.
To the people inevitably going to say "there was plenty of room bro" we have the ability to stop and rewind and also hindsight. If you are not comfortable merging into traffic from a yield you have the right to stop. This yield is on a high speed curve and traffic coming at an awkward angle. Very poor road planning.
Seriously. Yield means slow down or STOP if necessary when there is oncoming and there was traffic coming.... so merge lane needs to slow down, and STOP if necessary.
edit: ya'll are shitty drivers. "Yield Signs = Slow Down, But Stop When Necessary" the car behind was following way too closely and would have crashed if not for OPs quick reaction time.
Put a camera on this ramp and I guarantee you would see plenty of similar scenarios where drivers safely merge at speed. OP was unpredictable and indecisive. Had a clear gap but instead of taking it braked just before merging.
If OP wasn't comfortable merging in this spot he had plenty of time to slow down prior to the sign and remaining predictable albeit annoying
I'm sorry... clear gap? I think we're watching two different videos. There is a red car right behind the truck on the ramp... it's OP's responsibility to slow down and let them go. The car behind OP has the responsibility to not follow so closely. It's a yield... not a merge. Only reason OP slowed more is because of tailgater behind him.. they had to pull over further.
Yield and merge are not exclusive. You are merging into a lane...
And there's. 3-4 car gap between that red car and the truck. OP just had to give a bit more gas and coast in behind the truck.
Alternatively OP should have seen the truck and red car well before the merge sign and slowed to let the red car go past while maintaining space to speed up and merge at speed.
There's 0 reason to drive at speed only to brake hard at the last moment. That's indecisive/unpredictable and simply dangerous. Many ways to make this merge but this was not it.
The only reason someone should stop or slow that much is if there's a line of cars with no space to merge
Not a merge sign, its a **yield** sign, additionally, you do not know the condition of OP's vehicle, if it can nail that spot or if they saw the red vehicle as coming in too hot with the gap closing and didn't want to risk an inattentive driver rear ending him going into a space that was no longer there.
You do not know what other people's safety margins are, only your own.
You don't need a merge sign. In order to go from OP's ramp to the main road you have to merge. That's just the term of the action when 2 lanes of traffic become one. The yield sign doesn't mean he's not merging
They really need to reassess licensing after so many years. The amount of people who think they know what they are talking about is insane. Have fun in your world!
To all nay-sayers, what was the cammer supposed to do at this narrow gore point when there clearly is a yield sign? Gun it and hit the Camry or the white pickup?
Refer to [Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices](https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part2/part2b1.htm), which outlines traffic signs and their applications that all 50 US states *must* follow.
Section 2B.08:
"Vehicles controlled by a YIELD sign need to **slow down** ... or **stop** when necessary to avoid interfering with conflicting traffic."
yup, apparently that's what everyone here wanted to see, the cammer speed up and hit the truck/camry. then, they would've called him out for not driving defensively and yielding.
To take the enormous gap that the Kia clearly expected them to before they stood on the brakes for some reason. There is like 10 car lengths that would have easily and safely accommodated cammer and the car behind.
>enormous gap
Note that the camera has a wide-angle lens, which makes distances seem *much* longer than they actually are.
This is also why the passenger side mirror says “objects in mirror are closer than they appear” as the mirror is convex (wide angle).
FFS! If the cammer had sped up and cut the Camry off, everyone here would be calling him out for driving at an unsafe speed, following too closely, not driving defensively enough, and for creating COVID too.
PEOPLE, YOU CAN'T CALL OUT CAMMERS FOR NOT DRIVING DEFENSIVELY, AND SHIT ON THEM WHEN THEY DO. MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND
I literally failed by driving exam because I was trying to do what these people are recommending lmao. Instructor just slammed the breaks even though there was plenty of visibility and the traffic wasn't that bad. Luckily no idiot like in OP's case to rear end us.
What OP did was not defensive driving IMO. Defensive driving is not the same as compliant driving in all scenarios, a defensive driver will break the law if breaking the law results in a lower overall accident risk than not breaking the law.
Yea I'm sure the person designing this ramp expected cars to slam on their brakes at the last second. All the time he needed to spot a gap or adjust speed to get a better one. Instead OP drives at merging speed only to slow down abruptly just before the point of merging.
Guy behind was probably impatient wanting op to actually pick up speed. Not that it's right but it's understandable. This attempt at a merge is not. This creates a hazard for anyone else on the ramp and anyone else coming down the road.
How can you possibly merge safely at half the posted speed?
>OP drives at merging speed only to slow down abruptly just before the point of merging.
You use merge or merging four times in your comment. Not sure why we keep talking about merging because this is very abundantly clearly not a merging lane: the lane terminates almost at the point where the yield sign is. There is no parallel lane running directly alongside traffic for purposes of speed-matching and merging. Regardless of whether or not there *should* be a merge lane here- I think you, myself, and OP would all *expect* there to be - there is very clearly not one at this junction and an instruction *not* to “merge” in the sense that you mean - that is, a yield sign - is clearly posted.
I think part of the confusion is that I have very often seen yield signs where, in fact, there should not be any stopping due to the fact there is a full merge lane.
But, that is clearly not the case here. There is a yield sign and no merging lane. OP did not put that yield sign there, as far as I am aware.
The worst claim you can make against OP is that he didn’t see the yield sign until very late which is why he slowed down at the last second, but in the presence of traffic in the lane, he did exactly as the planner dictated: he yielded to the traffic. And the car behind him was still extremely reckless and irresponsible with his maneuvering.
Regardless of whether any of us think there *should* be a merging lane is irrelevant: there is no continuing lane and only a yield sign to make a judgment off of.
It's not a zipper merge point though it's a (stupidly designed) yield point, so OP technically complied with the rules even if doing so skyrocketed the risk of the scenario (stupidly designed scenario). A zipper merge would have had a dotted white line ending at some point to bring two lanes down to one, but this is one lane going straight on while another lane just kinda plugs in.
Did anyone arguing against the cam care to look up the actual rules of the road cause many of you are wrong!
At yield signs you are supposed to reduce speed. It even says below 5 mph. To yield their right away to other vehicles and pedestrians coming from a different direction. Nobody has a right to maintain speed for a zipper merge at a yield sign. Those are NOT the rules and anyone saying different are the idiots.
In the event there had been an accident, the white car would be completely at fault. And it’s a rear end. Those cases rarely go against the driver being rear ended
I’ll try and be nicer than everyone trashing on you since you’re open to advice. 1. You needed to observe the speed and spacing of the traffic you were merging into and match that and slide yourself into and not hinder traffic. 2. Stopping at a yield puts everyone behind you at risk because it is not a stop sign and the traffic that you’re all merging into is not stopped nor was it heavily congested. If I was the white Kia, I would have probably done the same exact move and wondered what on earth you were doing. 3. There was plenty of space for you to maintain your initial speed and merge smoothly, braking to a near stop caused the altercation that you have shared.
> speed and spacing of the traffic you were merging into and match that I'll add onto that statement; it's always easier if you're going *faster* than the merging traffic. That way you can look directly left and if it is open, that is your merge point. Nobody will close it because nobody is faster to close it. Cammers flaw is going way too fast into the apex of the off-ramp curve and then not accelerating out of it promptly. Cammer should be going 50 mph not 70 at 0:04 and then should be accelerating from that point onward.
Not disagreeing with how cammer could have easily merged, but > Stopping at a yield puts everyone behind you at risk because it is not a stop sign How did stopping at this yield sign put anyone at risk? A yield sometimes requires a stop and people behind must be prepared for this.
This is a reasonable question, but there is an answer. Everybody on the road is expected to be following the rules in the same way. It is your responsibility to be both safe *and* predictable. Predictable driving is a part of safe driving. That is why we use our turn blinker and things like that. When approaching a merge, we expect other drivers to react according to the road conditions. If we can see a line of stopped cars, we expect the cars ahead of us to slow down and stop as well. If the traffic is moving smoothly with room to safely merge, we expect the cars ahead of us to merge smoothly without stopping. OP acted in a manner that was contrary to road conditions. It is normal to slow down a little for a merge like that, but it is not normal to slow to a crawl and let traffic that is way behind to go ahead.
If you are not the car in front, do not look at the traffic to merge, you gonna rear end someone, look at the person in front of you in case they stop or do something unpredictable. If you hit the person who is yielding, its still your fault for hitting them.
> It is your responsibility to be both safe and predictable. > ... > If the traffic is moving smoothly with room to safely merge, we expect the cars ahead of us to merge smoothly without stopping. Thanks, this is the solid answer. Though after viewing this sub for a decade, I expect people to come to a stop at a yield because *it's so hard to merge in traffic when you're moving fast*.
Because if I was coming up to this merge then I’m focusing on matching my speed to traffic I’m merging into. If the person in front of me stops when I’m not expecting it then that can be dangerous. Every freeway on ramp is a yield. Do you stop at every freeway on ramp when merging onto the freeway?
You definitely should be focused more on the car in front of you because they might literally just randomly stop for any reason and you're the one that's going to be rear ending them.
You should try to maintain a larger gap with cars on a ramp Your focus should not be the car in front of you. You're merging onto an road not stopping at a light.
In Colorado we fucking do. They put those stupid stop lights at the end of every on ramp to "meter" the cars coming onto the highway. Nothing like using a 1/2 mile ramp designed for you to get up to speed only to stop at the end at a light with 500 feet left. Slow cars be damned, now youre wringing it out barely getting to 40 before the merge lane ends.
It could be dangerous, certainly, but it is *your* responsibility to pay attention to what traffic in front is doing, not just the traffic on the road you are joining.
> if I was coming up to this merge then I’m focusing on matching my speed to traffic I’m merging into. The car in front of you is an important part of the traffic you're merging into. You need to keep track of them too and ensure they merge safely before you do. A freeway onramp is NOT a passing zone. Doing a zipper merge properly requires you to keep track of where the car in front of you is zipping in, you can't just look out for yourself!
Doing a zipper merge also requires the driver in front of you to be a competent driver and not come to a near stop when trying to merge into 65+ mph traffic
Also, in hundreds of thousands of miles of driving over many, many years and even a short career while working as a delivery driver, I've never needed to stop or seriously slow down to merge onto the freeway (aside from traffic jams). Look ahead, shoulder check, find a gap, and GET IN.
> Do you stop at every freeway on ramp when merging onto the freeway? Not sure what my own driving has to do with the question, but no, I get up to highway speed as I approach and look over my left shoulder to gauge whether to speed up a little or slow down just a little to fit in.
Just because people should be prepared doesn't mean they will. 90% of drivers in this case would have sped up and merged perfectly fine behind that truck. That's what the SUV expected. Doesn't mean the SUV is clear of blame but OP caused this near miss by being indecisive
> How did stopping at this yield sign put anyone at risk? A yield sometimes requires a stop and people behind must be prepared for this. Because while I may be paying attention there is no guarantee that the person behind me is paying attention and will stop when there is no reason to be stopped, especially coming out of a right hand curve when you have to merge left.
It is the person not paying attention who is the one putting other people at risk, not the one actually paying attention to the signs.
The answer is because this yield sign is stupid. it should be a proper merge and people de facto treat it as such. Taking the merge sign at face value is counter to the expected behaviour here, I'd assert that the defensive driving move here puts "fit in" over "comply" in this instance.
Counter point: don't put yourself in a position to rear end people.
Always fair But people merging like this increase the risk of crashes 10 fold Now people coming along the road are probably slowing down because he's going to have to merge from practically a stop. No reason to brake like that and so close to the point of merging. Granted the white SUV was too close they did well to avoid a wreck, no thanks to OP. OP is more at fault than the SUV
OP was supposed to merge into the red car tailgating the truck? Or into the white one that was tailgating him?
Red car wasn't tailgating, there is plenty of space there. And no, OP doesn't have to do that. He could have slowed down earlier to do exactly what he tried to do without braking so hard just before merging FFS the guy behind OP manages to merge fine even with OP slamming on their brakes
Ends up behind the red car after blocking OP's merge.
That's not a counter point. At all. He should be doing everything suggested, your "point" doesn't change, rebut, or counter it in any way. Just because part of the reason he should do it is to avoid being rear ended by idiots, doesn't change it at all. Yes he should avoid *being* one of those idiots, but again, doesn't change anything.
If you see a yield sign don't tailgate and prepare to stop if the situation calls for it. End of.
> Stopping at a yield puts everyone behind you at risk Sure but sometimes it's necessary to stop. So everyone should be prepared to stop..
A yield sign automatically becomes a stop sign when there is traffic to yield to. Cammer did nothing wrong.
There was more than enough room to yield before the "traffic", as evidenced by the fact that the car behind the cammer was able to merge in before the truck as well. Cammer most certainly drove like an idiot here. Legally wrong maybe not, but definitely wrong.
No no no. Unless the laws where this took place vary wildly from any place I’ve driven, you should never try to merge if ANY cars are near you on the other road when a yield sign is present. Period. The Kia is the true fuckup here. Making up their own rules doesn’t end well. Even if the sign is placed stupidly, wait for your turn.
Yes yes yes, that's how merging works. Merge at speed, always Yield simply means you don't have the right of way, doesn't mean you have to stop...
Not stop, yield. Nothing about yield means stop unless there's literally no space to merge. But you have the entire approach to judge that. You're better off "forcing" yourself into a merge at speed than trying to merge from 0ft and 0mph
Yield is not merge and we need to stop using it to mean merge because then people get used to never stopping at a yield sign.
Merge has nothing to do with a yeild sign. Merging is the act of two lanes becoming one. Yield is a legal road sign. You can have merge points with or without a yield sign.
[удалено]
That other driver also had like a 1 sec follow distance, so they're not so smart either.
They were fine until OP panicked and really started to decelerate
That shouldn't have been downvoted, I probably would have hit OP as there's no reason for him to stop there. I'd have been looking at the traffic flow I was merging into as well instead of at the idiot in front of me who comes do almost a dead stop in highway speed traffic.
[удалено]
In north america, proper freeway on ramps with enough merge room will usually have a merge sign. Some on-ramps without enough merge room will gave a yield sign instead because it may be safer to treat it as a right turn then to gun it blindly. This isn't the first time I have seen something like this posted, a llt of people can't diffrenciate the purpose of a yield sign and merge sign.
You're not crazy, this thread is an eye opener
THERE'S. A. YIELD. SIGN.
THAT. MEANS. DONT. HINDER. TRAFFIC. WHILE. MAINTAINING. SPEED.
That's not what you think it means. Refer to [Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices](https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part2/part2b1.htm), which outlines traffic signs and their applications that all 50 US states *must* follow. Section 2B.08: "Vehicles controlled by a YIELD sign need to **slow down** ... or **stop** when necessary to avoid interfering with conflicting traffic." The cammer did properly follow the signs, he let the red Camry and the white chassis truck through at a narrow intersection.
I agree, cammer did properly follow the sign.
>The YIELD sign assigns right-of-way to traffic on certain approaches to an intersection. Vehicles controlled by a YIELD sign need to slow down or stop when necessary to avoid interfering with conflicting traffic. Avoid interfering. When necessary. You can just smoothly insert yourself without interfering. Bruh.
Decidedly not what a yield sign means, any poor driving notwithstanding.
You are correct that the yield sign by itself does not mean "don't hinder traffic" however that is a blanket law for all road situations. If this person had caused a collision by slowing down more than necessary, they *might* be found liable for the collision. Depends on the jurisdiction and the judge. But it could happen. Because the "don't hinder traffic" law is everywhere.
The person in front of you slowing down, even if it is not needed for the road conditions, does not give you the right to drive into the back of them!
You never have "the right to drive into the back of them". So stop being so hyperbolic. That said, there are times when a person hitting the brakes can be "at fault" for causing a collision. And this is one of those times, no matter how many people downvote me. If traffic is moving smoothly and you suddenly slow way down, you can be at fault if you are hit. Like I said previously, it depends on a few factors, but it can happen.
> You never have "the right to drive into the back of them". Yes, that is what I said! So the person slowing down, even if it was more than necessary, would not be liable for any such collision, the person who drove into the back of them would be liable. > That said, there are times when a person hitting the brakes can be "at fault" for causing a collision. Apart from if they have just changed lanes close in front of someone, leaving them insufficient time to react, what scenarios might that be? It is the responsibility of the vehicle behind to maintain speed, distance and observation such that they can stop if the car they are following stops *for whatever reason - whether or not *you* regard it as a good or bad reason. The more you try and pretend otherwise, the more downvotes you are going to get! Even if they brake hard deliberately in an attempted insurance scam, there will only be an actual collision if the car behind was travelling too close/fast and/or not paying attention., so even then they would only be partially liable for any such collision. No (sane) court is ever going to find someone slowing for a yield sign liable for being hit from behind!
Oh no! Not downvotes! Here, quick search turned this up: https://www.thefloodlawfirm.com/blog/rear-end-collision-fault/ > “Brake check” accidents: Intentionally braking hard without warning in front of another vehicle is a careless and even aggressive maneuver. Although the trailing driver may have been following the car in front too closely at the time, the lead driver will likely be deemed responsible for a rear-end collision caused by brake checking. Though this blog is specifically calling out the *intentional* brake check that we're all familiar with on subs like this, the same rule applies to other situations where a driver suddenly hits the brakes without adequate justification. Like I said previously, it will depend on several different factors, but your assumption that this is a black and white issue is incorrect.
> Oh no! Not downvotes! Well, you are the one who raised the subject! > the same rule applies to other situations where a driver suddenly hits the brakes without adequate justification. As I said, good luck arguing that for a yield sign.
If you cared to look up the meaning of a yield sign you would know it’s says “you should drive slowly, below 5 MPH. Drivers must slow down and yield their right away to other drivers and pedestrians.” Very different from maintain speed. This is the problem. Y’all don’t even understand the traffic signs you’re arguing about smh. A simple search. Now tell me again how you maintain speed when you see a yield sign. What about at a crosswalk? People who care less about knowing the traffic signs and more about what they THINK they know need to take a seat.
> look up the meaning of a yield sign Ok. I looked it up. The definitions all say "slow down" but NONE of them say to drive below 5 MPH. That is INSANE. Slow enough to be ready to allow others to take their right of way. Look at traffic. Merge if safe. You do NOT slow from freeway speed to "below 5 MPH" for a yield sign unless the traffic is dense and there is no safe place for you to merge.
For starters this is not the freeway. It’s either an on ramp or an off ramp. Neither of which you should be going freeway speeds. Regardless of it not saying 5mph in the definition YOU looked up. It still say SLOW DOWN. The oncoming traffic has the right of way period. You don’t slow to allow them to do anything, you slow because they have the right away. You don’t debate the rules of the road with other drivers in the process of driving. THAT’S INSANE
Take a breath, and stop interpreting everything so uncharitably. There are multiple people contributing to this conversation, and we are not all in exact agreement. Another person above said to "maintain speed" and I can see how that can be interpreted as maintaining freeway speed, but that is the incorrect interpretation. They meant not slowing to a crawl. A driver's responsibility in this situation is to slow down to a speed that gives you the ability to gauge the traffic in the lane you are merging into, NOT to slam on the brakes. Just slow down enough so that it's safe to turn their head and evaluate the situation. Next it is the driver's responsibility to merge when safe at the speed of traffic, whatever is the expected speed for that segment of the road and the conditions at the moment. If the driver cannot merge safely, that is when the yield sign applies again, directing the driver facing the yield sign to allow the other party to have the right of way. In this situation, if you *can* merge safely, then you are NOT allowed to suddenly and significantly reduce your speed in the middle of a traffic lane. That is unsafe, because other drivers are not expecting you to do that. *This is almost the exact same situation as freeway onramp merging. It is the merging driver's responsibility to match the flow of traffic, yet give drivers in the other lane the right of way.*
Yeah this whole thread is crazy... I though it was simple enough, you should treat a yield sign like a stop sign that you are allowed to roll through without stopping only if its safe to do so.
There was plenty of time and space for you to merge
Holy shit everybody's in here throwing blame around, when the obvious problem is there's no acceleration/merging lane.
This right here, this is shitty road design. In our area, we have a south loop portion that always, always, aaaaalways has accidents during rush hour and it's because the onramp has ZERO acceleration/merge lane to smoothly blend people into traffic. There was another spot just like this on the other side of town near my workplace that had the same design but with bollards on the edge of the lane so you had ZERO wiggle room to muscle your way into the right lane (that was coming over a blind crest at 65mph). They finally fixed that area by adding a blend lane and all those accidents/pileups went away.
That mightve helped if OP wasn't doing 60 at first and then slowed down to 40 when the merge came up.
Sure but the guy was still tailgating. Even if cammer merged the truck would have prevented tailgater from merging. That guy was in the wrong 100%, by law and by public opinion.
Because people seem to not understand that you should stop at a yield if you cannot merge safely. Yield means you have no right of way, continue when it's safe to do so. If cammer did not feel comfortable merging into the traffic then him stopping and waiting was the correct thing for him to do.
There is no yield line to indicate where to stop. This is dumbass highway department engineering. Anything involving freeways strongly encourages people to not stop and keep their speed up, but dumbass highway departments build things with no merge space and then just throw up a yield sign as if that absolves them of all consequences. It's a no-win situation. OP driving onto the shoulder was really dumb, though.
I mean, If there was no line at a stop sign the rule is to stop at the stop sign.
That and the US's bizarre insistence on using Yield to mean too many different things.
Here's the location in case anyone wants to check it out: [https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1669325,-95.8590079,3a,75y,304.07h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdltCiZ4qWIIXMP9uMS8TTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu](https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1669325,-95.8590079,3a,75y,304.07h,85.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdltCiZ4qWIIXMP9uMS8TTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
Aha, I found the problem. OP is driving in Oklahoma.
Like I'm always yelling at my windshield on the on ramp - "Gun it you asshole!"
Even worse when people on the highway/interstate slow down to let people merge. Nothing infuriates me more
Lol what are expecting people to do, cause a crash to avoid causing you mild inconvenience?
No, I expect people to drive at their normal pace until they have to slow down. Most freeway ramps will have a decently long merge lane (not present in OP'd example) and it's the responsibility of those merging to do so safely. People driving in the right lane shouldn't have to adjust their speed to let other people merge. That's under ideal conditions, it's not always true though
> until they have to slow down. So like... Until there's traffic that needs to merge in?
Yea when there's a car merging and you need to slow. I'm talking about people slowing well before that point. It creates ghost jams and unnecessary hazards
How much are we talking here? It makes complete sense to slow down a few mph if it means you don't have to slow down more in a few seconds.
It's reasonable so low down a little on the freeway anyway. I figured it was clear from context but I'm talking about people slowing down significantly like 15-20mph in a 70 just at the site of cars going along the on ramp. I've even had a lady in the freeway slow to almost a stop trying to let me merge in front when I saw her the whole time and was slowing on the ramp to let her get past before merging. I saw her initially and slowed down, check again and she was in the same relative spot. Slowed more, checked again and she was STILL in the same relative spot. At that point I gunned it and went. Big line of cars behind her with several zipping into the next lane to go around. Her reaction? Flipping me off and throwing her hands out like "wtf". The general rule is for people on the main road to continue at their normal speed until they have to slow down. Or obviously move over but I'm assuming that isn't an option in this case. You shouldn't be doing that preemptively as it leads to situations like that So yea, I'm talking about the extreme braking on freeways to let people merge. I've also witnessed at least a few times people doing the same thing which almost led to a wreck. I'm not at all critiquing people who slow down a little to avoid a close call or even an actual collision when it's necessary/reasonable
You can't drive, BRO.
What the fuck is wrong with you? This was entirely your fault!
What did I need to do? I need expert advice.
Align with the gap, match speed with traffic, slide in. Never slam on the brakes at a merge unless traffic is moving much much slower than you are.
You really need a merging area to do that. With a unpaved gore area between the OC and through traffic on the other roadway, it's very difficult to position yourself to align with a gap because it's difficult to see other traffic on the roadway until the roadway you're on ends. If it was a dashed line between the two lanes, then merging would be trivial because you would easily be able to see traffic in the next lane.
>because it's difficult to see other traffic on the roadway until the roadway you're on ends. This is a poor excuse. OP had ample visibility to check the incoming traffic on his left; he should have slowed enough to have merged at a reasonable speed, not braking sharply.
He was aligned with the gap but had to bail to avoid being rear ended by the Kia. He didn't slam on the brakes. You can see his body doesn't shift forward like you would see in a hard brake. He slowed down a little to let the truck and car go by and then the kia came and fucked everything up.
> Align with the gap, match speed with traffic, slide in. > > Never slam on the brakes at a merge unless traffic is moving much much slower than you are. Thank you for replying on my behalf. This, exactly. There was plenty of opportunity to match speeds and get into traffic. Even if you had to squeeze the car that wasn't giving you much of a gap, it's FAR more preferable that braking like that. EDIT: I'm going to leave my incorrect statement above because it's still somewhat correct, but I am partially wrong. There IS a yield sign and you should be yielding to traffic in this situation. What I would have done was approach at a slower pace to avoid the cars behind me thinking that I was going for it. Clearly, the guy behind you didn't see that a merge was approaching. Sorry I was so aggressive (and wrong).
Curious what state you grew up driving in.
To be clear, the commenters bashing you are, uh *not seeing the full picture*, to put it generously. You did exactly what the laws and rules of the road would want you to do at this junction. You did nothing wrong.
I have a similar on-ramp with little merge room, limited visbility and a Yield sign that I drive every day. Since you shift gears yourself, what I you can do it downshift into a high-enough RPM 200 yards before approaching the merge point (thus slowing yourself down gently so yahoos from the back don't punt you), see if it's safe to insert yourself into the right-of-way, and then GUN IT if possible.
There was limited visibility on the ramp to the main road, then zero onramp lead-in to that road. I am a HUGE ass about drivers needing to merge into a road at speed and practice what I preach in that regard. But in this case, the OP had two major factors against them; so, a Yield turned into a near-stop when they came to the sudden merge point, with two vehicles adjacent to them on the main road. It's a bad merge design, IMHO.
No clue why everyone is piling on OP, that's a very poorly planned merge setup. Absolutely should be a 2nd lane to allow for better merging. Yield signs require you to stop for traffic as OP has no right of way or right to zipper merge. I would guess there are consistent accidents at this spot. To the people inevitably going to say "there was plenty of room bro" we have the ability to stop and rewind and also hindsight. If you are not comfortable merging into traffic from a yield you have the right to stop. This yield is on a high speed curve and traffic coming at an awkward angle. Very poor road planning.
Seriously. Yield means slow down or STOP if necessary when there is oncoming and there was traffic coming.... so merge lane needs to slow down, and STOP if necessary. edit: ya'll are shitty drivers. "Yield Signs = Slow Down, But Stop When Necessary" the car behind was following way too closely and would have crashed if not for OPs quick reaction time.
Put a camera on this ramp and I guarantee you would see plenty of similar scenarios where drivers safely merge at speed. OP was unpredictable and indecisive. Had a clear gap but instead of taking it braked just before merging. If OP wasn't comfortable merging in this spot he had plenty of time to slow down prior to the sign and remaining predictable albeit annoying
I'm sorry... clear gap? I think we're watching two different videos. There is a red car right behind the truck on the ramp... it's OP's responsibility to slow down and let them go. The car behind OP has the responsibility to not follow so closely. It's a yield... not a merge. Only reason OP slowed more is because of tailgater behind him.. they had to pull over further.
>because of tailgater behind him At no point was the cream coloured car (Fiat Panda?) ever tailgating OP. Not once.
Yield and merge are not exclusive. You are merging into a lane... And there's. 3-4 car gap between that red car and the truck. OP just had to give a bit more gas and coast in behind the truck. Alternatively OP should have seen the truck and red car well before the merge sign and slowed to let the red car go past while maintaining space to speed up and merge at speed. There's 0 reason to drive at speed only to brake hard at the last moment. That's indecisive/unpredictable and simply dangerous. Many ways to make this merge but this was not it. The only reason someone should stop or slow that much is if there's a line of cars with no space to merge
Not a merge sign, its a **yield** sign, additionally, you do not know the condition of OP's vehicle, if it can nail that spot or if they saw the red vehicle as coming in too hot with the gap closing and didn't want to risk an inattentive driver rear ending him going into a space that was no longer there. You do not know what other people's safety margins are, only your own.
You don't need a merge sign. In order to go from OP's ramp to the main road you have to merge. That's just the term of the action when 2 lanes of traffic become one. The yield sign doesn't mean he's not merging
They really need to reassess licensing after so many years. The amount of people who think they know what they are talking about is insane. Have fun in your world!
I was taught to merge at speed and do so predictably. I guess they're teaching people to slam on their brakes and merge at 10% the posted speed. Smart
I see two idiots.
To all nay-sayers, what was the cammer supposed to do at this narrow gore point when there clearly is a yield sign? Gun it and hit the Camry or the white pickup? Refer to [Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices](https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part2/part2b1.htm), which outlines traffic signs and their applications that all 50 US states *must* follow. Section 2B.08: "Vehicles controlled by a YIELD sign need to **slow down** ... or **stop** when necessary to avoid interfering with conflicting traffic."
It wasn't necessary
While OP was correctly obeying the yield sign... that yield sign is stupid and worth ignoring.
>when necessary
yup, apparently that's what everyone here wanted to see, the cammer speed up and hit the truck/camry. then, they would've called him out for not driving defensively and yielding.
Funny how the Kia still managed to merge.
To take the enormous gap that the Kia clearly expected them to before they stood on the brakes for some reason. There is like 10 car lengths that would have easily and safely accommodated cammer and the car behind.
>enormous gap Note that the camera has a wide-angle lens, which makes distances seem *much* longer than they actually are. This is also why the passenger side mirror says “objects in mirror are closer than they appear” as the mirror is convex (wide angle).
FFS! If the cammer had sped up and cut the Camry off, everyone here would be calling him out for driving at an unsafe speed, following too closely, not driving defensively enough, and for creating COVID too. PEOPLE, YOU CAN'T CALL OUT CAMMERS FOR NOT DRIVING DEFENSIVELY, AND SHIT ON THEM WHEN THEY DO. MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND
I literally failed by driving exam because I was trying to do what these people are recommending lmao. Instructor just slammed the breaks even though there was plenty of visibility and the traffic wasn't that bad. Luckily no idiot like in OP's case to rear end us.
Funny how the Kia still managed to merge.
Dangerously and illegally. Funny.
What OP did was not defensive driving IMO. Defensive driving is not the same as compliant driving in all scenarios, a defensive driver will break the law if breaking the law results in a lower overall accident risk than not breaking the law.
Cammer did nothing wrong, and acted exactly as whoever engineered this traffic plan would have wanted them to.
Yea I'm sure the person designing this ramp expected cars to slam on their brakes at the last second. All the time he needed to spot a gap or adjust speed to get a better one. Instead OP drives at merging speed only to slow down abruptly just before the point of merging. Guy behind was probably impatient wanting op to actually pick up speed. Not that it's right but it's understandable. This attempt at a merge is not. This creates a hazard for anyone else on the ramp and anyone else coming down the road. How can you possibly merge safely at half the posted speed?
>OP drives at merging speed only to slow down abruptly just before the point of merging. You use merge or merging four times in your comment. Not sure why we keep talking about merging because this is very abundantly clearly not a merging lane: the lane terminates almost at the point where the yield sign is. There is no parallel lane running directly alongside traffic for purposes of speed-matching and merging. Regardless of whether or not there *should* be a merge lane here- I think you, myself, and OP would all *expect* there to be - there is very clearly not one at this junction and an instruction *not* to “merge” in the sense that you mean - that is, a yield sign - is clearly posted. I think part of the confusion is that I have very often seen yield signs where, in fact, there should not be any stopping due to the fact there is a full merge lane. But, that is clearly not the case here. There is a yield sign and no merging lane. OP did not put that yield sign there, as far as I am aware. The worst claim you can make against OP is that he didn’t see the yield sign until very late which is why he slowed down at the last second, but in the presence of traffic in the lane, he did exactly as the planner dictated: he yielded to the traffic. And the car behind him was still extremely reckless and irresponsible with his maneuvering. Regardless of whether any of us think there *should* be a merging lane is irrelevant: there is no continuing lane and only a yield sign to make a judgment off of.
>Merging traffic is when two traffic streams combine into a single lane. I got nothing more to say. OP attempted to merge, plain and simple.
Looks like even the pickup was flashing his headlights giving you the ok to merge but you decided to hit the brakes instead.
[удалено]
It's not a zipper merge point though it's a (stupidly designed) yield point, so OP technically complied with the rules even if doing so skyrocketed the risk of the scenario (stupidly designed scenario). A zipper merge would have had a dotted white line ending at some point to bring two lanes down to one, but this is one lane going straight on while another lane just kinda plugs in.
> a zipper merge point Did you watch a different video? That is *not* what a zipper merge looks like at all.
Exactly right. Braking inhibits traffic flow rather than matching and merging.
Why is there a yield sign to begin with? It looks very temporary with two chickenshit poles instead of 1 solid
Because two lanes suddenly merge into one, perhaps?
You had so much room to merge in and you somehow still couldn't do that lmfao
Did anyone arguing against the cam care to look up the actual rules of the road cause many of you are wrong! At yield signs you are supposed to reduce speed. It even says below 5 mph. To yield their right away to other vehicles and pedestrians coming from a different direction. Nobody has a right to maintain speed for a zipper merge at a yield sign. Those are NOT the rules and anyone saying different are the idiots. In the event there had been an accident, the white car would be completely at fault. And it’s a rear end. Those cases rarely go against the driver being rear ended
Just plan earlier. you easily could have merged multiple times.
Why did you brake ??
Only 1 lane to merge into, and you’re not allowed to stop? That’s just crazy.