Safe Speed Forums

Folks,

If I am driving at 70mph in the middle lane of a motorway, why should I pull over for someone flashing their lights and gesticulating in my rear view mirror?

Wouldn't this be encouraging that driver to break the law?

C.

sounds like common courtesy to me.

if you're not overtaking and there's room in L1, why stay out in L2 ?

I would also have gone with self preservation, if they are the sort of idiot that hangs on your tail flashing at you, chances are that if you need to brake quickly they will be too close and will shunt you.

They sound like an accident waiting to happen. let them pass and at least the accident won't be with you.

If you feel that they are being dangerous / aggresive call the police, let them deal with numpty.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

On top of that your speedo might not be correct and you could in fact be doing just 63mph and they doing 70, so you'd be simply being a pain.

You are breaking the law if you stay in the middle lane when you don't need to.

It's non of your business what other drivers are doing. Also, its a TAD self-riteous to preach against someone else breaking the law when you are doing so yourself by not keeping left and causing an obstruction.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

The fact he is flashing his lights means in the highway code he is alerting you of his presence, the fact is he is obviously traveling much faster than you so move over let him past then pull back out if you so desire .....Job done stresless not rightious. Safe motoring drive.......

See my sig:

I haven't had cause to read the highway code for quite a while now, but I do believe that it has always been advised that you keep left unless overtaking.
Indeed some Trafpol might consider a "middle lane owners club" member to be guilty of careless driving if they intentionally impede another road users progress.


It is NONE of your business what anybody else is doing, in fact police advice states quite clearly that you do not take the law in to your own hands by attempting to enforce it.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

If I see someone walking down the street with a gun in their hand should I try to take it off them or let the police deal with it?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

You should go into John Mclain mode and save the world
"Police? I am the police!" should be the only thing running through your head

The bad guys have better tailors though.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

ed,

Well, the simple answer is that I don't like getting boxed in behind trucks on a busy motorway. On a long trip I can spend a long time waiting to get back out again, because of all the other cars hogging - wait for it - the middle lane.

C.

Magnum,

Yes, the flashing lights did gain my attention, and the arm waving (both arms) and fingers that followed hammered his message home.

But who was holding his steering wheel?

C.

Well in that case you're not really what I'd call a middle lane moron. While I deplore lane-hogging which is done with the express intention of impeding and "policing" others, or for no reason whatsoever, there are arguably reasons why some drivers would sometimes wish to remain in the middle lane on today's crowded motorways. It's not ideal but there's no reason why you should box yourself in and lengthen your journey time either.

As long as you observe, don't stay in the middle lane any longer than necessary (e.g. move over if there's a long gap in L1), and don't have an overly self-righteous attitude towards others, no-one's really got a right to get upset with you. This having to stay in the middle lane so as not to get boxed in is just one more symptom of the overcrowded motorways that we have in this country (and, as you say, the problem is exacerbated by other middle-lane dwellers, not all of whom are doing it for the right reasons).

See this page (written by our own PeterE) for a balanced and interesting discussion:

http://www.speedlimit.org.uk/hogging.html

I do see plenty of examples of ridiculous lane-hogging (try here), and I would say that lane-hogging causes somewhat more of a problem than Peter says there (and it doesn't take many "bad" lane-hoggers to hold up a lot of people when it's busy), but neither is it always inexcusable by any means. Those who do deliberately and unnecessarily impede the progress of others, however, should be dealt with very strictly IMHO. They don't deserve to share the roads with others if they're going to act like such petulant self-righteous little shits. People like this should be forcibly re-educated, and failing that, banned (and no, I wasn't surprised that it was a Rover either):



One of the cycling forum-connected troublemakers on this site (probably the worst that we currently have) is an example of such a moron. He freely admits to lane-hogging in order to impede others and for no other reason. What a twit. We shouldn't have to share the roads (or anything for that matter) with those who have a psychological need to feel good by making others feel bad. At best these "impedophiles" are extremely irritating and cause unnecessary delays; at worst, they cause safety problems, both by posing an additional hazard, and resulting in possible road rage. (Which gives the lie to any dishonest claims that they're "trying to make people safer by stopping them speeding", but we knew that anyway.)

_________________
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)

I was stuck behind an 'outside lane hogger' for several miles the other day, totally oblivious to the tailback behind her with nothing whatsoever in the other two lanes. And so, to my eternal shame I rolled on over to the nearside lane and cruised on by at 2MPH faster than her and continued on my way. Did she see me? Yes. Did she move over and allow the 20+ vehicles trundling along behind to get by? Did she hell.

One would hope that a safe undertake would shame such drivers into moving into the appropriate lane, but sadly there are all too often too obstinate/oblivious/petulent/etc. to change a thing.

I can see no good reason to be a middle lane hogger. If you dont like being blocked in by trucks in L1 then learn to be a more assertive driver, you should never get blocked in if you are looking and planning ahead, your other option is dont use motorways. Being a nervous driver is no excuse for irritating other people, and tut tuting when they are getting infuriated with you.

scrag,

"tut, tut"

C.

I don't remember ever getting "blocked" in L1, even back in the days when I drove a 1.1 litre Fiesta (just after passing my test).

It's not the size of the car, it's how you assert your presence on the road. You can be driving a Mini (a real one, not a pretend BMW) and still assert presence.

The funny thing is now I have a car with plenty of power (170bhp) I'm less aggressive than I was in the Fiesta (50bhp). Probably because I was "aggressively defensive" in the 50bhp car - I knew I'd need that 500 yard (and about 30 second) gap between me and the next lorry to accelerate up to the speed of the traffic in L2 before pulling out. Whereas now I can get from 56mph to 90mph in less than 3 seconds, pull out without cutting anyone up and tuck back in to L1 again.

A middle-laning friend of mine claims it takes him 20 seconds to make a lane change and won't use L1 unless the motorway is pretty much empty. He also claims that lane changes are "highly dangerous".

Now with that in mind, imagine this scenario. You're on a pretty much empty motorway in L1. You're approaching a car that's been sat in L2 for the last mile or so and shows no signs of pulling over. Do you:

1. Pull out to L2, then to L3, pass, pull back in to L2 then back to L1, therefore making 4 lane changes?

2. Stay where you are in L1?

3. Stay where you are in L1 but give a half-second flash on your headlights as you start to pass the middle-laner to alert them to your presence?

Not what you should do according to the letter of the law but what's the safest course of action?

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