Safe Speed Forums

Nope, I got it right the first time, thanks. Perhaps by some bastardization of the word "unacceptable" you might be right, but I suggest we use the actual meanings of words in our discussions rather than the ones you decide to apply to them. To describe behaviour as "unacceptable" is to say it is behaviour which cannot or should not be accepted as valid. It doesn't mean you refuse to acknowledge that behaviour is happening regardless of physical evidence which suggests otherwise. The examples you gave actually prove the opposite point you were trying to make. If a criminal declares his sentence "unacceptable" then he is denying the validity (not the existence) of the sentence. If you're going to attempt to play the pedant role, at least get it right.



Cute. All the straw in the world couldn't make the little toe of this insane strawman. Fortunately, you seem to be less subtle about your fallacious tactics than many others of similar ilk are, so even the least discerning onlooker will be able to see that the point you're arguing against bears no resemblance to the point I made not only in my post, but in the part of my post you quoted. You also imply that I attempted to change this person's driving, despite me stating several times I observed this from a distance. It was immediately obvious that this woman's driving was eratic and unpredictable. It was also immediately obvious from my post, and once again the part of my post you've decided to quote above, that it is the woman who was driving the car who should modify her behaviour. This is why the driver is not like the weather. She can modify her behaviour, the weather is not a sentient being capable of altering its actions.



I think your responses imply otherwise. You seem to take issue with my criticism of this lady's driving and felt it necessary to leap to the defence of a stranger, regardless of how untenable her behaviour was. Your white-knighting is almost as embarrassing as your juvenile malfeasance on these boards, but not quite.



I don't remember making that claim or any similar claim. You've invented that stance and applied it to me. I cannot respond to loaded questions and intellectual dishonesty, you might as well ask me if I'm still beating my wife.

_________________
David

Surely only politicians speak like that? Look, it happened, you had to accept it, end of story.
Now please quit preaching about "shoulds" and "valids" etc. Unacceptable means "too bad to be accepted;
intolerable". You tolerated it, so it's acceptable.That's that.



It's a good idea to stick to the truth. That means that you should cease making bits up.



I didn't mention the lady.



So you don't think drivers should go at the speed limit where possible. And
you have nothing to grumble about if they go slower than you'd like, do you?
So what are you saying, again?

But I can assure you that (like the weather) she can't hear you, no matter how much bile you pour into the bulletin board! So keep raging about the little dear - fill yer boots - it makes no difference at all to her driving.

Slow up a bit more... stick hand out of window - wave at them to request they overtake you.


Pity we do not have some signal which prevails amongst the continentals - especially amongst teh French/Swiss/German/Austrian. They make a little signal with their hands in front of the rear view mirror - like a circle between finger and thumb followed by a wide back of hand. This seems to be some established polite signal to ask the person to back off a bit. I've seen this on very odd occasions. I asked one driver in a motorway cafe what it meant and he said it was their way of telling someone that they felt him to be too close for thir comfort. I asked if it worked - and he said it did most of the time in his experience :scratchchchin:


I do not know if he was being polite or not. I do not know if the gesture really means "Back off you wit.!"


The wild uses it when abroad though. The rest of them ruddy Swiss hooligans do it. As far as I have observed - these are placid .. calm and very precise drivers - trained to a high standard. I have to admit it... they are very safe and legal on aggregate. to them as credit has to be given when due.





Lack of COAST skills amongst the muppets who think they "know it all" :roll;


I know we are right to offer DIS/Speed Awares which assess by this criteria. Yep .. Co Durham has a "Speed Awareness Course" running parallel to its DIS course. Difference? If you get an invite to ours? Our RPU made a professional and objective assessment and decided it would be of greater benefit long term than fines and penalty points
We mark to COAST criteria // the same one as posted up by the Mad Cats with resepct to the Lancs course Despite the accusations of "money making" - I still hope that all had a benefit in kind all the same. I still despair of something worthwhile and a longe term benefit being undermined and sullied by pedantic stupidity on the part of some all the same You invite only those who need it. You deliver a polite, but still stinging rebuke to those whose driving standard warranted "just a word or warning shot"

But if we trained properly to COAST and encouraged further training and development better than we do at present - offering fair offset costs via running costs of a car - then by offering a few more carrots and less blows with a stick - we just might start to make that difference?


These are just occurrent thoughts to discuss.




But I think Squirrel was talking of a road where none of these apply? I still say that 28 mph in a 40 mph lolly zone is not an issue. I may think 25 mph may be just a bit too slow here - but not enough to claim proveable lack of consideration in a court of law. Had he been at 18 - 20 mph - we may have sufficient reason to question overall competence


There is hope for Squirrel. He's questioning things. We are all hopefully here to help folk .. not condemn them. In non judgemental fairness to Squirrel on my part - he seems to live in an area where twazaks "breed like rabbits"


I hope he continues to post here. His posts make for lively debate - and I think he perhaps exaggerates his experiences to get a serious discussion going?? Have I nailed and banged you to rights here .. my lad?

But what the heck... "Squirrel Nutterkins" opens up debate to make folk think a bit And no offence meant by calling you bantering name I do not do "offence" or if I am ever perceived to do so by poster or lurker .. it's completely without intent to do so.





Road rage. We have words if we see it.


One person made a serious mistake with me. They did just that to my wife and I was the passenger in this case.

50 mph limit. Urban dual. Alice was at 47 mph per the useful origin doo-dah and 50 mph per the dash. She ovetook someone at 30 mph in L1. Fool behind flashed lights.. then cut in on our overtakee . undertook us and then weaved in front and slammed on his brakes. I hit my mobile and alerted our RPU - who pulled him less than two miles ahead. He will not forget a hard lesson of being done for inconsiderate driving

So .. if you can . get the number and report it.

OH.. you will not hear much for a while. You may think we have taken zero notice. We have. We interview the driver and then dig for all evidence to support a case. Then we decide whether or not to prosecute or offer DIS. We would then write to you to advise as GMP did to Allan Roadpeace Ramsay.

Report the fools. We cannot do much if folk don't. Do not be disheartened if you hear nothing further fir a while. It does not mean you are forgotten. It means we are looking hard for hard proof We will always interview the driver fo his or her version. If we do not have the evidence - we will still advise the person that whatever they do out there can be perceived by another to be "menacing" and that they must think how someone else will be affected by whatever they decide to do on the roads out there. In this way - we hope to educate folk. You should never judge what we do by excited jourmaiists

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Just out of interest, why are you typing in this garbage?

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, what on earth are you trying to say? Did you read my post? What did you think of the bits you've chosen to ignore, particularly my question to you?

If it costs you nothing/zero/nada/zilch/zip, and benefits someone else, it should be done, always, in any situation. Especially on the roads.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

I suggest you ask yourself the same question every time you're about to hit the 'Submit' button.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Has this thread now run its useful course? All I see if I gaze into the crystal ball is more clever ways of BW/AC firing arrows and several others dodging them, grabbing them and firing them back with slightly more accurate aim.

Should I lock it?

The prevailing conditions, road layout, weather, visibility etc.

"Travel at a speed where you can stop within the distance you know to be clear on your side of the road." (Or "half the distance" on a single track lane.)

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Almost. These conditions are a strong guide for the drivers, who set the flow

To what end? I got caught in a non-contact incident with a minicab a couple of years back that frightened the then other half badly. When straight to nearest Cop Shop, only to be told 'It's your word against his. so there's nothing we can do'. So you're not prepared to do anything I asked? 'No' came the reply. Turns out that I should have complained to the taxi licensing authorities as they often do take notice of complaints.

Barkstar

_________________
The difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence has limits.

Yes please!

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Refreshing indeed. I think I probably would have fainted with surprise. IME horse trailer drivers are often amongst the worst for that sort of thing.


I couldn't agree more. I feel bad if I'm even holding up one car, and do everything I reasonably can to help them get past at the earliest practical opportunity. I usually get a wave of thanks as well. Everyone's happy...why can't it always be like that? I'm certainly not perfect, yet I can manage that, so why can't/won't others?

It's one of the constant irritations of driving on single carriageway rural roads: a small number of drivers manage to spoil it for everyone else by driving mile after mile at between 35 and 40mph with an ever-growing number of vehicles behind them, and refusing to pull over or in any way aid those trying to pass. Sadly, I get the feeling that many of them not only don't care about impeding others, but actually enjoy it. It's as if elsewhere they don't get the power and control over others that they so desperately crave, so when they get the opportunity to frustrate people and make them go at their speed, they just can't resist. How else does one explain how many of these drivers flash and hoot at those who do actually manage to get past them (not to mention the ones who speed up when anyone tries to overtake...something tells me "safety" isn't their concern)?

By all means go at the speed you want to (within reason), but as Steve says, have some consideration for others, pull over and let them past when you can, and don't make the oh-so-arrogant assumption that anyone who wants to go faster than you must be automatically going dangerously fast. (I'm not talking to anyone in particular there BTW!)

Of course, although the passive aggressive slowsters are the root cause of the "trains" of vehicles, those who will neither overtake nor let others "leapfrog" them are part of the problem as well. I must admit that I seldom leapfrog these days because there's just too high a chance of getting a negative reaction to my "queue jumping", and I'm fed up with having to endure people who I've leapfrogged tailgating, flashing and/or gesticulating behind me until I can overtake the next car (which of course just makes them even madder and "proves their point", whatever that was).

Yet these people are also stuck in the "train" of vehicles, so presumably wish to go faster than the front vehicle. So why do they not overtake themselves when it's clear (I always give them a good chance to before I overtake them)? Do they think it's illegal? Are they not confident or competent enough? And if they're not going to overtake themselves, what is the harm in letting someone else overtake them and then eventually the front vehicle? They go off into the distance and are never seen again; those who are overtaken are not affected in the slightest. Surely only a spiteful busybody would have a problem with that. So how do these "You're not leapfrogging me" types reach the logical conclusion that it's best for them and everyone else just to sit there obediently behind the obstructive driver and never overtake no matter how many opportunities there are? That it's best for all that unused space in front of the slowster to remain unused, even if it's completely safe and legal for someone to manoeuvre into it?

In fact, typing this has made me determined that I'm not going to be bullied into not doing perfectly reasonable things by people who are, quite objectively, in the wrong. Whenever I wish to overtake, and it's safe and legal to do so, I'm going to do it, and if those who are ignorant and self-righteous don't like it, then tough. I'm not going to be dictated to by those who don't know what they're talking about, however unpleasant they are about it (although obviously if someone's shown themselves to be a real nutter then I'm not going to provoke them). I don't normally pander to the whims of irrational members of the public, and I don't see why this should be an exception. If anyone else reading this has been browbeaten into never or seldom leapfrogging, please join me in resuming it, for your sake and for that of drivers behind (because of course there is an altruistic element to overtaking obstructions and thereby shortening lines of vehicles behind them).


Yep. I recently had a car which only had three cylinders working. Yet I don't think I ever had more than one car behind me on a rural road. If the will is there not to hold people up then it's perfectly achievable.

I for one find congestion caused by inconsiderate, obstructive drivers to be a lot more irritating than congestion which is for some other reason (e.g. sheer weight of traffic). Maybe that's a weakness of mine, but I can't help thinking that if just a few people would drive only a little more considerately, things would be far, far better for a large number of other road users. The amount of collective, completely unnecessary delay that certain people cause to other drivers per day must be shocking, and it's all completely avoidable. It would be nice if the authorities actually tried to do something about such drivers, instead of encouraging them with simplistic "fast = bad, slow = good" type rubbish.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

What makes me laugh are the people who, when you overtake on a long straight, that are coming towards you in the distance (usually doing 40MPH and with a long train behind them) and even though you have pulled back into your own lane for quite a few seconds, still have to flash at you as if to say "I had to slow down for you/you nearly killed me", when it is obvious that they would have had to be doing well over the ton to have been in that situation.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Well I live in rural Gloucestershire, where inbreeding is common (allegedly). Not far from the Forest of Dean, where men are men and sheep are nervous - and marrying your sister is considered normal!

(My family isn't originally from this area and my parents are definitely not brother and sister!)

(inappropriate comments removed by PeterE as moderator)

I've also got a friend who lives close by who thinks that:

The internet encourages paedophiles
No kid under 16 should ever be given a mobile phone
His step-son (coming up 15) isn't allowed to have a girlfriend

And on driving related matters he also thinks that:

There's never an excuse for breaking the speed limit
Overtaking on a single carriageway is "highly dangerous"
There's no point having a car with more than about 75bhp, FWD is better than RWD and people who buy German cars are paying for the badge (so of course he's got a great source of material for starting arguments as my A4 has 210bhp and AWD)

Unfortunately this attitude isn't unusual around these parts. I've suggested that he comes on here and tries to make these arguments with people here but as yet he hasn't.



Heh, maybe. Not sure about deliberate exaggeration although it may be that in the time frame between whatever incident happening and me actually writing it up on here it's got dramatised in my head. The human memory isn't like a VCR after all.



None taken! And debate is good, that's how things get changed and people get motivated.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Anyone (like me) who's inclined to skim over long posts, go back and read this one as it sums it all up very well.

Thanks bud.

(As ever, I did start out with the intention of keeping it short! )

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

1.There are, of course, other guides for drivers that have nothing to do with road and traffic conditions; agendas, beliefs, characterizations, dispositions ... I'm sure I could think up another 22, but I trust I've made my point.

(Oh, I forgot perhaps the most important one: driver education, training, and testing.)

When a driver makes any set of choices which directly limit the choices of other drivers against their will, that driver is either incompetent, or inconsiderate. If that driver's beliefs do not allow for the possibility that they are wrong, they are in dire need of better driver education, training, and testing.

2.Often, those who can't, will use a great deal of imagination - despite lacking proper education, training and testing - to excuse and justify passive aggressive efforts to encourage, enforce, and/or reward mediocre behavior of others - many while pretending that they are not being inconsiderate.
Those catalysts who not only will not overtake, but also prevent others from overtaking[/u], at the very least, make things more miserable for everyone else, including themselves. If they have deluded themselves into enjoying what they are doing, they highlight a need for better driver education, training, and testing, among other things.

Bombus, I usually agree with you, but given sufficient quality information, 'anti-leapfroggers' would not exist, therefore, they are illogical.
(A minor nitpicking of another of your thoughtful posts. I've learned quite a lot from you.)

I, too, have a dream ...
Ever read Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What it Says About Us) by Tom Vanderbilt?

3. Squirrel, while you should be careful, and strive to continue to learn, as a driver, the possible effects you may have on others, both in general and in particular, I for one am grateful for your existence.
Your driving actually causes people to question standards of etiquette and decorum, which also brings the "Road & Traffic Evangelists" out of the woodwork.
You're a good twazak , like I once was.
Now I'm a taxi driver. In other words, I simply decided to profit from my driving style while making it easier for people to expect that driving style.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Why thank you

I'll admit to generally being quite a fast driver when conditions permit, but only when it's safe to put my foot down! These occasions are getting rarer, it has to be said. Largely because of the people who insist on sitting at 37.5mph in an NSL - and then the numpty sat 3 feet off their bumper that refuses to overtake.

I can easily overtake 2 cars at once. Sometimes I can manage 3. But when you've got a string of 6-7 cars sat nose to tail with nobody leaving a gap big enough to leap-frog it gets frustrating. There are about 2-3 straights I can think of round here where you can actually overtake up to 5 cars at once that are in a procession like this.

_________________
Magistrates rule #1: "Never let justice get in the way of a conviction."

Now I can identify with that


I caught it off Wildy Or was it that the only way I could get a word in edgeways was to compete with her and play her at her own game


All the kids are sleeping - including Wildy And her mother and her father.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.