Re: merge in turn
- From: "JamesB" <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 14:50:38 -0000
"Brimstone" <brimstone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:do6a0l$efv$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> They would set it there if thats where they wanted you to merge!
>
> I've never seen any indication of where they wanted traffic to merge. The
> only reason it takes place at the obstruction is because most people are
> incapable of thinking ahead.
Err, apart from the fecking great big signs saying "merge in turn now"?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- References:
- merge in turn
- From: Tim S Kemp
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Knight Of The Road
- Re: merge in turn
- From: SteveH
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Knight Of The Road
- Re: merge in turn
- From: SteveH
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Tim S Kemp
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Tim S Kemp
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Alistair J Murray
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Cessna172
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- merge in turn
- Prev by Date: Re: merge in turn
- Next by Date: Re: This Morning
- Previous by thread: Re: merge in turn
- Next by thread: Re: merge in turn
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
