Speeding

[MrFrost]

Lets have a speeding debate.

There was a story a few weeks ago about a car salesman caught doing in excess of 120mph on the M1 who was allowed to keep his license, as losing it would have cost him his job.

Now, anyone travelling in excess of 50mph of the speed limit dones't deserve to be driving IMO.

In fact, people who get caught speeding really only have themselves to blame. Most of the time, you will get away with 10% above the spped limit, so is there really any excuse for anyone to speed, other than to try and boost their own ego.

I got caught a few years back doing 95 on the M62. Since then, I think alot more about the speed I am travelling and the damage it could cause.

On another driving note, why is it every time I come up Wheatley Hall Road to St George's rounabout, the eprson in the left hand line ALWAYS cuts across another two lanes to go back up towards Wheatley Hall Road. Can people not understand lanes?

[5minstogo]

MrFrost wrote:

Lets have a speeding debate.

There was a story a few weeks ago about a car salesman caught doing in excess of 120mph on the M1 who was allowed to keep his license, as losing it would have cost him his job.

Now, anyone travelling in excess of 50mph of the speed limit dones't deserve to be driving IMO.

In fact, people who get caught speeding really only have themselves to blame. Most of the time, you will get away with 10% above the spped limit, so is there really any excuse for anyone to speed, other than to try and boost their own ego.

I got caught a few years back doing 95 on the M62. Since then, I think alot more about the speed I am travelling and the damage it could cause.

On another driving note, why is it every time I come up Wheatley Hall Road to St George's rounabout, the eprson in the left hand line ALWAYS cuts across another two lanes to go back up towards Wheatley Hall Road. Can people not understand lanes?

Don't get me started on lane discipline. I'll be on here all day!

[BLIR]

For me:

Increase speed limits on motorways to 80mph

Dish out fines for those hogging middle/outside lanes and increase fines for those dangerous driving/using mobiles etc

Jail anyone caught driving without insurance, what use is a fine that is less than the price of the insurance premium?

Cars are infinitely safer now than when the speed limit was introduced, and are capable of travelling safely at higher speeds. Technology has advanced so quickly, most cars have ABS these days.

Most motorway accidents are caused by people whilst changing lanes rather than the speed they are going (although the faster you go, the less reaction time you have to change direction)

[CusworthRovers]

BLIR wrote:

For me:

Dish out fines for those hogging middle/outside lanes and increase fines for those dangerous driving/using mobiles etc

Jail anyone caught driving without insurance, what use is a fine that is less than the price of the insurance premium?

I'd say hang em

[bobjimwilly]

The middle lane hoggers wind me up good 'n' proper!  :angry:
They are the ones who most of the time cause tailbacks, as people who may have been in the left lane and are travelling faster have to cross two lanes to overtake them. I try to restrain myself but mostly fine myself honking, flashing my lights and swearing at them (is that road rage?), but doesn't matter anyway coz most of the time they are totally oblivious to what is actually happening around them  :S

[Thinwhiteduke]

Speed limit on Motorways is outdated and ridiculous in the country. You can do 70 mph whether:

 - its Raining
 - its Foggy
 - its snowing
 - its Dry
 - Its quiet
 - its busy
 - its Day
 - its Night.

We need a variable based on conditions / vehicle volume. To be honest, given the right conditions, I can seem no problem with the speed limit being 90 or even 100mph.

[Thinwhiteduke]

bobjimwilly wrote:

The middle lane hoggers wind me up good 'n' proper!  :angry:
They are the ones who most of the time cause tailbacks, as people who may have been in the left lane and are travelling faster have to cross two lanes to overtake them. I try to restrain myself but mostly fine myself honking, flashing my lights and swearing at them (is that road rage?), but doesn't matter anyway coz most of the time they are totally oblivious to what is actually happening around them  :S

In a round a bout sort of way this issue could be eased a little if Drivers, by law, had to have some Motorway lessons.

As far as Im concerned there should be the standard driving test, and then a test for Motorway Driving as it is a different animal, and its totally ridiculous that someone can pass their test, jump in their car, and immediately tootle on down the nearest Motorway.

Our lass will simply not drive on Motorways as they terrify her...yet has 5 years experience, accident free, on all other road types.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

70MPH is fine IMO, if you want to be somewhere earlier set off blooming earlier.  Nothing worse than being stuck on the motorway, 3rd lane overtaking at speed those in the middle lane than some t**t in his BMW speeding up at 100MPH flashing his lights, note to said drivers, I will f**king slow down if you do that.  When I'm doing 80MPH in the 3rd lane and comfortably overtaking those in the middle I'm not doing anything wrong, that really riles me up.

Same goes for those t**ts (again usually driving 4x4, BMW, Audi etc) who stick right on your bumper ridiculously close, I will slow down and annoy you as it pisses me off (mainly because I got hit by one who couldn't break quick enough when I had to break on Ledger Way when a kid ran out in front of me).

[BLIR]

big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:

70MPH is fine IMO, if you want to be somewhere earlier set off blooming earlier.  Nothing worse than being stuck on the motorway, 3rd lane overtaking at speed those in the middle lane than some t**t in his BMW speeding up at 100MPH flashing his lights, note to said drivers, I will fcuking slow down if you do that.  When I'm doing 80MPH in the 3rd lane and comfortably overtaking those in the middle I'm not doing anything wrong, that really riles me up.

Same goes for those t**ts (again usually driving 4x4, BMW, Audi etc) who stick right on your bumper ridiculously close, I will slow down and annoy you as it pisses me off (mainly because I got hit by one who couldn't break quick enough when I had to break on Ledger Way when a kid ran out in front of me).

Not just me that does that then. w**kers really piss me off - as if flashing their lights is going to make me go any faster when there's a car in front?

I find a dab on the breaks usually shits them up enough to back off  

[Filo]

I must confess that anyone that gets close enough to have a look in my boot will be going gradually slower and slower until they get the message to back off

[pkt_drfc]

There is a speed limit on motorways i never knew that        

[Wellred]

The biggest problem in this country is the vast majority of drivers haven't a clue about the rules of the road.
You only have to drive along along Wheatley Hall Road and see all the pillocks driving along the outside lane when there is no traffic in front of them.
They probably think its ok when they get on the road at Sandall Park and stay in the outside lane cos they are turning right onto the North Bridge duh.
Also how many women and old buggers think that the first lane on the motorway is only for lorries?

[Filo]

Wellred wrote:

The biggest problem in this country is the vast majority of drivers haven't a clue about the rules of the road.
You only have to drive along along Wheatley Hall Road and see all the pillocks driving along the outside lane when there is no traffic in front of them.
They probably think its ok when they get on the road at Sandall Park and stay in the outside lane cos they are turning right onto the North Bridge duh.
Also how many women and old buggers think that the first lane on the motorway is only for lorries?

You see it all the time on Wheatley Hall Road, drivers in the right hand lane because they are turning right 2 miles down the road, they do my head in!

[5minstogo]

Filo wrote:

Wellred wrote:

The biggest problem in this country is the vast majority of drivers haven't a clue about the rules of the road.
You only have to drive along along Wheatley Hall Road and see all the pillocks driving along the outside lane when there is no traffic in front of them.
They probably think its ok when they get on the road at Sandall Park and stay in the outside lane cos they are turning right onto the North Bridge duh.
Also how many women and old buggers think that the first lane on the motorway is only for lorries?

You see it all the time on Wheatley Hall Road, drivers in the right hand lane because they are turning right 2 miles down the road, they do my head in!

You've been stuck behind my missus then!

[MrFrost]

5minstogo wrote:

Filo wrote:

Wellred wrote:

The biggest problem in this country is the vast majority of drivers haven't a clue about the rules of the road.
You only have to drive along along Wheatley Hall Road and see all the pillocks driving along the outside lane when there is no traffic in front of them.
They probably think its ok when they get on the road at Sandall Park and stay in the outside lane cos they are turning right onto the North Bridge duh.
Also how many women and old buggers think that the first lane on the motorway is only for lorries?

You see it all the time on Wheatley Hall Road, drivers in the right hand lane because they are turning right 2 miles down the road, they do my head in!

You've been stuck behind my missus then!

I had one yesterday down Wheatley Hall Road, guy doing 20mph in the outside lane, nothing else on the road. I had no choice but to try an undertake as he wasn't budging, minute I did it he speeds up to make sure I cant get by him. What a cnut. It's people like this who cause accidents.
I also reckon people driving UNDER the speed limit should suffer points aswell.
I've seen some pillocks on the motorway doing no more than 25/30mpg with lorries having to take drastic action to get by them.

And just what is it with St George's roundabout that makes people want to go from the left lane, cut everyone up trying to get onto the bridge and go back up Wheatley Hall Road?

[Thinwhiteduke]

big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:

some t**t in his BMW speeding up at 100MPH flashing his lights, note to said drivers, I will fcuking slow down if you do that.  

To be honest...when they tailgate me/ speed up behind me, I tend to just turn the rear foglights on and watch them vanish behind me in a cloud of brake dust - scares 'em shitless.

[Filo]

MrFrost wrote:

5minstogo wrote:

Filo wrote:

Wellred wrote:

The biggest problem in this country is the vast majority of drivers haven't a clue about the rules of the road.
You only have to drive along along Wheatley Hall Road and see all the pillocks driving along the outside lane when there is no traffic in front of them.
They probably think its ok when they get on the road at Sandall Park and stay in the outside lane cos they are turning right onto the North Bridge duh.
Also how many women and old buggers think that the first lane on the motorway is only for lorries?

You see it all the time on Wheatley Hall Road, drivers in the right hand lane because they are turning right 2 miles down the road, they do my head in!

You've been stuck behind my missus then!

I had one yesterday down Wheatley Hall Road, guy doing 20mph in the outside lane, nothing else on the road. I had no choice but to try an undertake as he wasn't budging, minute I did it he speeds up to make sure I cant get by him. What a cnut. It's people like this who cause accidents.
I also reckon people driving UNDER the speed limit should suffer points aswell.
I've seen some pillocks on the motorway doing no more than 25/30mpg with lorries having to take drastic action to get by them.

And just what is it with St George's roundabout that makes people want to go from the left lane, cut everyone up trying to get onto the bridge and go back up Wheatley Hall Road?

You did have a choice, the choice was, you stay behind him or you perform an illegal manoeuvre and undertake him, you chose to do the illegal manoeuvre, thus in the event of an accident and in a court of law the person performing the manoeuvre is the cause of the accident

[MrFrost]

Undertaking itself is not illegal. It is if it is performed in a wreckless or dangerous manor, as it can fall under wreckless or dangerous driving.
However, the fact there is a slow moving vehicle in the outside lane gives cause for undertaking.
If he had slowed down to 5mph, would you expect everyone to just queue behind him?
People who choose to drive under the speed limit should be given the same treatment as those speeding.

[Filo]

From the Highway Code:

only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so

Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

[MrFrost]

I didn't switch lanes, so maybe the term I used \"undertake\" is incorrect. I could see him chugging along and slowed down to his speed to see if would do the sensible thing and pull over into the correct lane. He didn't so I simply sped up to the correct speed and tried to pass him, until he decided to speed up, gesture at me and then fcucked off at probably about 60mph.
If I had technically undertook him, I would have come up behind him in the outside lane, gone into the inside then once past him, go back into the outside lane.
You can't expect the rest of road users to plod along at 20mph under the speed limit because some pillock can't drive properly.

[Filo]

MrFrost wrote:

I didn't switch lanes, so maybe the term I used \"undertake\" is incorrect. I could see him chugging along and slowed down to his speed to see if would do the sensible thing and pull over into the correct lane. He didn't so I simply sped up to the correct speed and tried to pass him, until he decided to speed up, gesture at me and then fcucked off at probably about 60mph.
If I had technically undertook him, I would have come up behind him in the outside lane, gone into the inside then once past him, go back into the outside lane.
You can't expect the rest of road users to plod along at 20mph under the speed limit because some pillock can't drive properly.

You talk utter b*llocks at times!

[MrFrost]

I'm sorry, did you witness the situation?
I take it you would have stuck behind the guy at 20mph all the way into town?

[Filo]

MrFrost wrote:

I'm sorry, did you witness the situation?
I take it you would have stuck behind the guy at 20mph all the way into town?

No I did n`t witness the situation, do you purposely go out of your way to be a bombastic t**t!




You stated that you undertook the car

I had no choice but to try an undertake as he wasn't budging

I pointed out that you did an illegal manouevre

You did have a choice, the choice was, you stay behind him or you perform an illegal manoeuvre and undertake him, you chose to do the illegal manoeuvre, thus in the event of an accident and in a court of law the person performing the manoeuvre is the cause of the accident

You tell me undertaking is not illegal (you maybe correct)

Undertaking itself is not illegal.

I quote the Highway code to you

only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so

Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.

After earlier saying you had no choice but to undertake him, you then back peddle like a clown on a unicycle and state that you did n`t undertake him because you did n`t switch lanes  

I didn't switch lanes, so maybe the term I used \"undertake\" is incorrect. I could see him chugging along and slowed down to his speed to see if would do the sensible thing and pull over into the correct lane. He didn't so I simply sped up to the correct speed and tried to pass him, until he decided to speed up, gesture at me and then fcucked off at probably about 60mph.
If I had technically undertook him, I would have come up behind him in the outside lane, gone into the inside then once past him, go back into the outside lane.
You can't expect the rest of road users to plod along at 20mph under the speed limit because some pillock can't drive properly.

So in essence get your story right before you tell it, you get a picture in your mind and take it from there, you should explain yourself better. As soon as folk start getting the better of you in a debate, you start getting bombastic, sometimes it`s not a bad thing to admit you`re wrong you know!  

[Filo]

MrFrost wrote:

I take it you would have stuck behind the guy at 20mph all the way into town?

Nope, I would have passed him without undertaking as I would not have switched lanes, at the same time I would be aware that this is the wrong thing to do  

[MrFrost]

Is staying in the same lane without breaking the speed limit passing slow moving traffic undertaking though?
I at first thought it was, however a quick look online found it might not be as clear cut.
Besides, my point was that people travelling under the speed limit to that excess should also be handed points and a fine.

[BLIR]

I take it the Frost/Filo love-in is officially over?

[Filo]

MrFrost wrote:

Is staying in the same lane without breaking the speed limit passing slow moving traffic undertaking though?
I at first thought it was, however a quick look online found it might not be as clear cut.
Besides, my point was that people travelling under the speed limit to that excess should also be handed points and a fine.

Jesus fcuking wept!

If you passed him on the inside, by definition you`ve undertook him!


Again look at the piece from the highway code

In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right

Was it congested?

[MrFrost]

No, but he was slow moving.
Like I said, if he was doing 5mph, would the correct thing to do be stay behind him?

[Filo]

MrFrost wrote:

No, but he was slow moving.
Like I said, if he was doing 5mph, would the correct thing to do be stay behind him?

According to the Highway code, yes as the road was n`t congested at the time!

But then again, I could n`t possibly form an opinion as I did n`t witness the situation

[jucyberry]

I am so, so  glad I can't drive.....