Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Ba-Dump Tissssh - Memes


Pat Riot

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Alpo said:

meme merge.jpg

Almost hate to admit it, but I put a nice shiny Porsche into the jersey barriers once who thought he shouldn't have to merge being entitled! I waited til the last moment when he was still along side my already damaged Pontiac Executive, then pretended to cut the wheel towards him! His immediate reaction was to avoid me!! Ooopsy Daisy. Looked like his pretty car exploded! Amazing how many cars passed me later with a thumbs up! Ahole:angry:

Edited by Eyesa Horg
Fricken otto
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 28.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Buckshot Bob

    5668

  • Pat Riot

    2824

  • Alpo

    2780

  • Subdeacon Joe

    1959

There's a long discussion on the Smith & Wesson board about whether you should allow people in when they come charging up that empty lane.

 

Amazingly, to me, many people think you should. They say that the department of transportation says that the longer you stay in the lane that's going to close, the faster traffic moves.

 

Personally, I think that if dot wanted me to stay in that right hand lane, they wouldn't have put up a big sign that says merge left.

 

But my thoughts on that would be like - the new Harry Potter movie has just been released. And the line at the box office is a block and a half long. And this guy walks all the way up, ignoring the line, and when he gets to the box office he wants to cut in and buy a ticket. Because he doesn't want to wait in line for 45 minutes like everyone else.

 

And that's exactly what those merge-ignorers are doing. They're attempting to get cut in line. And you are taught in kindergarten that you do not cut in line.

 

Many people in the Smith & Wesson thread think that it has to do with the American driver's "I have to be in front" attitude. But I don't think so. I don't care about being in front of the group. If there are other cars in front of me, that's fine. But damn it, you are not going to break line if I have anything to do with it.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially the mammary heads that even come up the emergency lane to cut in, doesn't fly with me!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Texas Joker said:

Both vehicles approach the merge point and zipper merge: 1 left lane and 1 right lane.

 

You BOTH got the warning it needed to happen 2 miles ago. So in your scenario, there is now an accident at the merge point and traffic is going to be congested or stopped for miles. That's a much better outcome. Yea he's an entitled dbag but in that situation how are you any better?

Oh well,bet he merges next time. Be a dbag,get treated like a dbag. Entitled pieces of excrement and I'm probably paying his school loans to boot.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alpo said:

There's a long discussion on the Smith & Wesson board about whether you should allow people in when they come charging up that empty lane.

But damn it, you are not going to break line if I have anything to do with it.

I'm with Alpo on this one. I spent 30 years driving a truck and saw this behavior nearly every day. And it's usually some self important Jackwagon that thinks that since he has an expensive car that he's better than the rest of us. 

I made more than a few of them stop and wait in my day, and if I hadn't been driving a company truck, would have made a lot more of them.

I still do it in my Jeep when it seems to be needed to be done. 

As a side note, when I have the top off especially, I really like it when one of them make a Big Deal about passing me, just to have me catch up to him at the next red light. I'll pull up beside him, clap my hands, and in my best Marine Corps Drill Instructor voice, give him a,

"ALL RIGHT! CONGRATULATIONS! YOU BEAT ME TO THE RED LIGHT!" 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually wait next to an eighteen wheeler, blocking the closing lane until we get to the merge point. Lets the traffic ahead clear and prevents the left or right lane passers. Usually makes the transition faster.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: the "zipper merge."  The theory is great, but it assumes that everyone is doing the one car length per 10mph between cars.  Which I almost never see.  Say that there are 3 lanes plus the merge.  You're in the #3 lane, if you leave that much space people come zipping up in the #2 lane and the merge lane and fill it in so you have maybe half a length between you and the next car.  Someone else come zipping up in the merge lane and the choice is slow down or let them hit you.  So you slow down, then another tries to merge in, so you slow down more.  Zipper merge only works under ideal conditions, which only happen in the test track or on paper.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474 said:

I'm only a dumb Canadian, so maybe someone can riddle me this:

2 nd Amendment Question 81a31aa534270afb9a4db7c6059a7e4d2304b4ddcf9c109e200882d182232685_1.jpg

It's the same way that the second amendment's reference to militia only applies to the national guard even though the national guard did not appear until 1903, and the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791.

 

Boy, you are a dumb Canadian.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2024 at 12:15 PM, Alpo said:

meme merge.jpg

 

I get the meme, and I can sympathize with it, but food for thought:

 

The one time I zoomed past traffic, cut in when I had a chance and drove on the shoulder for a ways I had gotten a message at work that my barn was on fire.  I was unable to make phone contact with anyone at home and I had no idea where my kids were or if they were in the barn or not.  Luckily all I lost was a barn, a couple horses and a tractor.  That was the most scared I've ever been in my life, and I've had guns pointed at me.

 

I'm glad I didn't happen across any of you guys on my way.  When ever I get passed by such A--  jerks, I like to think they have a good reason to drive like a jerk, too.

 

I also try real hard not to complain about parking, but that's another story.

 

Angus

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474 said:

I'm only a dumb Canadian, so maybe someone can riddle me this:

2 nd Amendment Question 81a31aa534270afb9a4db7c6059a7e4d2304b4ddcf9c109e200882d182232685_1.jpg

The Bill of Rights does not apply to Canadians, you need to work this out for yourselves.

 

But you ask a good question to get your thinking in the right direction. The Bill of Rights is an assurance of freedoms on this side of the border, it has been working well for quite some time even if not perfectly. 

 

You are free to copy ours or come up with your own version. Then go through whatever processes you need to to make it stick. Hopefully, as Canadians, you can do it far less painfully than what the founders here went through.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

The Bill of Rights does not apply to Canadians, you need to work this out for yourselves.

 

But you ask a good question to get your thinking in the right direction. The Bill of Rights is an assurance of freedoms on this side of the border, it has been working well for quite some time even if not perfectly. 

 

You are free to copy ours or come up with your own version. Then go through whatever processes you need to to make it stick. Hopefully, as Canadians, you can do it far less painfully than what the founders here went through.

OH, I'm well aware the Bill of Rights is solely recognized and should apply in the United States.

I was just wondering why I, a Canadian, a foreigner if you will, can understand it's importance, significance and it's simplicity while a portion of your population does not. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

448694008_1713221479211600_1857094322496008184_n.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474 said:

OH, I'm well aware the Bill of Rights is solely recognized and should apply in the United States.

I was just wondering why I, a Canadian, a foreigner if you will, can understand it's importance, significance and it's simplicity while a portion of your population does not. 

Good point.

 

Difference in education systems?

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, John Kloehr said:

The Bill of Rights does not apply to Canadians, you need to work this out for yourselves.

 

But you ask a good question to get your thinking in the right direction. The Bill of Rights is an assurance of freedoms on this side of the border, it has been working well for quite some time even if not perfectly. 

 

You are free to copy ours or come up with your own version. Then go through whatever processes you need to to make it stick. Hopefully, as Canadians, you can do it far less painfully than what the founders here went through.

 

 

From an unattributed source:
 

The 2nd Amendment does not apply to semi-auto rifles, nor does it apply to bolt action rifles, pistols, or revolvers.  The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS THE GOVERNMENT. The technology of the firearm is irrelevant. The restrictions on the government remain the same, regardless of the firearm.  The 2nd Amendment was not written to grant permission for citizens to own and bear firearms.  It forbids government interference in the right to keep and bear arms, period.  The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

This also applies to the other rights.  They are not granted, they stipulate inherent rights that the government may not prohibit.

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

 

From an unattributed source:
 

The 2nd Amendment does not apply to semi-auto rifles, nor does it apply to bolt action rifles, pistols, or revolvers.  The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS THE GOVERNMENT. The technology of the firearm is irrelevant. The restrictions on the government remain the same, regardless of the firearm.  The 2nd Amendment was not written to grant permission for citizens to own and bear firearms.  It forbids government interference in the right to keep and bear arms, period.  The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

This also applies to the other rights.  They are not granted, they stipulate inherent rights that the government may not prohibit.

 


I agree.

 

But that can be tough to sell these days.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.