Bloody motorists

[Gary]

the only "fault" on petes part that i can see is that he should have checked his mirrors and his blind spot before pulling in - but if he knew he was passed the lorry and wasnt expecting anything to be inside of him its easy to see how he could miss checking the blind spot.

None of us were there, so we don't know the full facts. Pete doesn't even know if he's had a reportable collision. Let's hope he don't get a section 172 notice, it could prove expensive.

 

[andycktm]

If the blokes cut up a 50ton lorry then undertook he's obviously a retard!

 

[matt]

What's odd is that every driver I've ever met thinks they are a good driver and that it's always everyone else that is at fault. Statistically that cannot be true. Therein lies the real problem with driving... Very few people seem prepared to admit they make mistakes.

I can think of many occasions where drivers have either misjudged something or made a similar mistake. I don't have sufficient experience of those drivers to determine whether that makes them a wholly "bad" driver. Perhaps there are some mitigating circumstances around someone's "bad" driving? Anyone here ever had to get their kid to A&E in a hurry? For those that have, and given that we're clearly all "good" drivers around here, I'm guessing you're mighty pleased with all the "good" drivers that are observing the speed limit and staking their claim to remain in the outside lane because they are a good, law-abiding, driver.

The more someone tries to convince me they are a "good" driver through claims of driving "prowess" or exploits, the less I think of them as a driver.

Kinda a pointless thread, eh? Who knows why this driver was in a rush? We know very little about what makes people behave in a certain way, unless we take the trouble to find out. Not really possible in a car, so why not be a really good driver and not let these things get you bent out of shape and potentially start to demonstrate traits that we, the self-righteous, would perceive as "bad driver"?

And, for the record, I too am guilty (yes, guilty!) of becoming indignant at what I perceive to be bad driving. I think there's often instances where my perception rather than the other drivers ability that is potentially wrong.

 

[big soft moose]

Problem with folk undertaking is that the evidence only shows the outer car moved in and struck a car already there - it would be entirely the outer cars fault. Not right, but the way these things work.

Dibs

For some reason big soft moose thinks otherwise. :roll:

what i dont get is a guy posts on here whos obviously had a bad day, and your first reaction is to slag him down and tell him its his fault.

then , even tho your post displays a massive lack of understanding of the highway code (as described by chems who as a fireman should know) you then position yourself as an expert and make snidey jibes at anyone who disagrees with you.

For the record the reason I think otherwise is

a) as per my earlier post undertaking is contrary to the highway code so it is not petes fault that the other driver was driving like a silly billy

b) touching wing mirrors is hardly a reportable collision, as there is no damage to petes car he clearly didnt even trade paint with the guy.

c) had a reportable collision occured the other driver would also be guilty of failing to stop so highly unlikely to say owt to anyone in authority

d) as there were no witnesses (other than the lorry driver who will have seen the other driver driving like a twit and thus would probably take petes part if he could be traced, which he cant be) if anything did transpire pete could simply deny all knowledge of any collision - the other driver wouldnt be able to prove different,

and lastly as you yourself note none of us were there so we dont know the full facts, and yet your imediate reaction is to attack and deride another member even tho you admit to not being in full possesion of the facts - nice behaviour :roll:

 

[big soft moose]

I'm guessing you're mighty pleased with all the "good" drivers that are observing the speed limit and staking their claim to remain in the outside lane because they are a good, law-abiding, driver.

I'm not sure where the idea that pete was "remaining" in the outside lane comes from - hes said that he was overtaking a lorry and pulled in at a safe distance (ie didnt cut it up) - thats hardly the same thing as driving continualy in the outside lane.

On your other point, I understand the impulse to get to A&E as quickly as possible but in practice its not going to do the injured child any good if the parent crashes the car as a result of weaving all over the road, better to be a couple of minuites later and get there in one piece.

If its so critical that a couple of minuites is going to make a difference then they'd be better off staying put and waiting for the paramedics - who will both be able to render imediate treatment, and also be much more able to transport swiftly and safely to hospital with the blues and twos on.

While you are right that we dont know what mitigating circumstances there might be, we also dont know that there were any - its equally possible that the other driver was just the sort of tosspot who thinks the car is an extension of his masculinity

Dont know means dont know , but Pete is our fellow UKWer so in the absence of evidence perhaps we should take his part, or at the very least not jump up and down telling him its his fault.

 

[MIGNAL]

I haven't driven a car for over 7 years. I do remember that it was virtually impossible to drive at the edge of the speed limit without infuriating a good number of motorists. The only exception was when one came across the dreaded speed camera. I loved those cameras

 

[Dibs-h]

Saw one of those Police A Boards stating there was a collision on Sunday and asking for witnesses.

My friends pointed out the particulars - a car driving along with a chap, his wife and two teenage children as well as the drivers elderly father.

From behind comes a young driver (22yrs old) with his 18yr brother as passenger, decides he doesn't like the speed of traffic and decides to overtake 4-5 cars - the centre section is "chevroned" off, so shouldn't have overtaken, along with central reservations, so it really is stupid to overtake there.

Hammers along and must have cut up the car with the family in it. Clipped it apparently, sending it into the curb and going in another direction themselves.

Family car - elderly father dead on the scene, bloke & Mrs are critical in Leeds General, 2 sons crawled out of the wreckage, one missing one eye.

Other car - driver walked out, 18yr brother dead on impact.

Just makes you wonder why is it that 22 yr old's can buy 2L car's and when it all goes **** up - slap on the wrist whilst the lives of another family are devastated forever. Never understood this "death by reckless\ dangerous" driving sh1te. Why not just plain old manslaughter?

Dibs

 

[cutting42]

Never understood this "death by reckless\ dangerous" driving pineapple. Why not just plain old manslaughter?

Dibs

Death by dangerous driving has a max penalty of 14 years imprisonment. Whilst not quite as punitive as life imprisonment for involuntary manslaughter, is a fairly significant punishment.

Certainly it is treated very seriously by the police and court system. I have a friend who was accused of death by dangerous driving as when someone dies in an RTA arrest is mandatory. The charges were dropped later that night as upon a brief investigation he was exonerated of blame. However during the period of his arrest he was left in no doubt as to the feelings around him. He said many years later that he felt he was being treated as a murderer, they probably thought he was one at the time.

I agree with much of Matt's post as well, we do all have an over inflated opinion of our driving. I have certainly driven inappropriately on occasion. I have and do speed (and have been punished for it), not looking for praise or condemnation, just being honest. When I did my IAM test with a traffic officer his view was to affect other road users as little as possible. Leave space, anticipate, give way and assume incompetence on the other drivers part. This is how I try to drive.

 

[PeterBassett]

Sorry, your fault despite the other driver being aggressive.

If you are in the outside lane and there is no reason to be there then you should pull into the inside lane.

A lorry up ahead is not a valid reason unless you are currently overtaking it. You could easily have pulled in to let the traffic flow and then pulled out when you actually *needed to*.

You're not a middle lane warrior are you? :lol:

huh ?

try reading the post propperly - he overtook the lorry then pulled back in at a safe distance in front, only to find that the car behind had already overtaken the lorry, presumably cut it up, and was now undertaking him

so you are essentially saying that cam pete should have cut the lorry up so that the other driver wasn't obstructed in his pursuit of driving like a silly billy

the only "fault" on petes part that i can see is that he should have checked his mirrors and his blind spot before pulling in - but if he knew he was passed the lorry and wasnt expecting anything to be inside of him its easy to see how he could miss checking the blind spot.

to say its his fault that the other driver was driving like a knobend is hardly sympathetic , or for that matter accurate.

No, I'm saying he shouldn't have been in the outside lane in the first place as he wasn't in the process of overtaking the lorry. None of this would have occurred if he had allowed traffic to flow and only moved into the outside lane when it was needed.

>> try reading the post propperly

I have ready it perfectly well and I'll kindly ask you to keep your apparent anger in check.

>> We stayed in the outside lane for a little bit with the Picasso following us (a bit too closely) as there was a lorry a little way ahead in the inside lane.

Should have pulled in instead of holding up traffic. He caused another road user to have to "either change direction or speed".

The bottom line is, if there is room for your vehicle and your space forward and back in a lane to your left, you should move into it.

And as for the "he's a forum member and should be given the benefit of the doubt" argument. It's not like we've tarred and feathered him. He and everyone else concerned is ok and I'd far prefer to hear honest opinion than insincere approval.

 

[Dibs-h]

Death by dangerous driving has a max penalty of 14 years imprisonment. Whilst not quite as punitive as life imprisonment for involuntary manslaughter, is a fairly significant punishment.

So many cases that have either gone to press or are local and in most cases the sentences are around the 1yr mark - I've yet to hear about anyone getting even half the max term. I'm obviously excluding the nutters who lead Plod on for a several hr chase, etc.

Why is it that some who knowing full well they are executing a dangerous manoeuvre or are doing something where the road markings clearly indicate it shouldn't happen - i.e. overtaking where the centre line is solid and double - ends up costing some other innocent road user their life - gets 18 months and out in less than 12 months? And then back to driving a while later.

I understand that it isn't murder - i.e. no intent, but the driver clearly knows there is a possibility of killing someone - so why not manslaughter?

I agree with much of Matt's post as well, we do all have an over inflated opinion of our driving. I have certainly driven inappropriately on occasion. I have and do speed (and have been punished for it), not looking for praise or condemnation, just being honest. When I did my IAM test with a traffic officer his view was to affect other road users as little as possible. Leave space, anticipate, give way and assume incompetence on the other drivers part. This is how I try to drive.

I'm in the same boat myself - not the IAM test bit that is. I do work on the assumption that most other drivers are incompetent tho. :lol:

Dibs

 

[Blister]

Try driving a HGV for a living

I keep looking for a sign on the back of the lorry saying

" YOU MUST GET IN FRONT OF THE LORRY AT ALL COSTS "

but never find it :?

I see idiotic driving every day , guaranteed

 

[cambournepete]

We stayed in the outside lane for a little bit with the Picasso following us (a bit too closely) as there was a lorry a little way ahead in the inside lane.

Should have pulled in instead of holding up traffic. He caused another road user to have to "either change direction or speed".

Sometimes it's inevitable you will cause other road users to change speed (slow down) when overtaking simply because they want to go faster than you do and you don't think there's a safe space to move into to get out of the way. I really don't like the "must go faster because I'm getting pushed" idea.

The bottom line is, if there is [room] for your vehicle and your space forward and back in a lane to your left, you should move into it.

I quite agree, if there is sufficient space, but I didn't think there was. Clearly the Picasso driver thought differently. Had I been blocking the outside lane for ages I would have understood his frustration, but I hadn't been. Anyway, if I was blocking his way, why didn't he just flash me?

I'm just grateful we're all OK, unlike people in other incidents reported in this thread.

TBH, I almost wish I hadn't bothered starting this thread, kind of like the emails you type but never send.

Thanks to all for their opinions.

 

[cambournepete]

Try driving a HGV for a living

I keep looking for a sign on the back of the lorry saying

" YOU MUST GET IN FRONT OF THE LORRY AT ALL COSTS "

but never find it :?

I see idiotic driving every day , guaranteed

I try and be as helpful as I can to lorry drivers - I probably annoy other car drivers by letting lorries pull out or go through a space.
I know they're on a tight schedule and I can wait a bit.

I travel by bus quite a lot in Cambridge and it never fails to amaze me how unhelpful car drivers are to buses...
I was even in a 4x4 with a woman who said - I'm not letting him pull out as she started to overtake the bus trying to leave the stop... :roll:

 

[cutting42]

I understand that it isn't murder - i.e. no intent, but the driver clearly knows there is a possibility of killing someone - so why not manslaughter?

It is actually a good question. I have no legal training so don't know the official differentiation. However to speculate a little, manslaughter can be where someone is killed after a minor attack such as a single punch that would not normally end in death or a death following defending oneself from an assailant.

Driving per se regardless of the carelessness is not inherently an attack on a person despite the consequences possibly ending in death.

I am not trying to create a definative argument here (no time or ability) but my thoughts.

 

[miles_hot]

Try driving a HGV for a living

I keep looking for a sign on the back of the lorry saying

" YOU MUST GET IN FRONT OF THE LORRY AT ALL COSTS "

but never find it :?

I see idiotic driving every day , guaranteed

I try and be as helpful as I can to lorry drivers - I probably annoy other car drivers by letting lorries pull out or go through a space.
I know they're on a tight schedule and I can wait a bit.

I travel by bus quite a lot in Cambridge and it never fails to amaze me how unhelpful car drivers are to buses...
I was even in a 4x4 with a woman who said - I'm not letting him pull out as she started to overtake the bus trying to leave the stop... :roll:

In terms of busses I think that's a mixture of Karma and not wanting to be stuck when it stops again. I say Karma as the amount of seriously rubbish, rude and dangerous driving I've seen from buses (not just towards cars but bikes and walkers) beggers belief - far worse than lorries etc. As such I don't think that buses enjoy much good will, which I supose makes them more likely to drive like swine and so the circle goes on...

 

[Noel]

Ok, since Pete regrets starting this thread I'll put him out of his misery.
I'll shall leave the thread intact.

Have a nice day.