Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


T in the Park

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Two strikes and you're out threat for speeding drivers



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 21 November 2008
DRIVERS will be banned if they are caught twice speeding at 15mph over the limit, under proposed new laws.
Fines for not wearing seat belts will be doubled to £60, while there is a possibility of lowering the drink-drive limit.

A raft of proposals by ministers to tighten up motoring laws published yesterday also included new moves against drug driving
, while more average-speed cameras have been signalled.

The crackdown on speeders will focus on those breaking 20mph and 30mph limits, because they risk the most pedestrian casualties.

Drivers caught above a certain speed in a 20mph zone would have six penalty points added to their licence, compared with three at present. Drivers reaching 12 points lose their licence.

Six points would be imposed at either 35mph or 40mph, depending on the responses to the consultation. The threshold in 30mph zones would be 45mph or 50mph, and 90mph or 95mph on 70mph roads. It would be set at 20mph above the speed limit elsewhere.

Ministers said there was evidence that drivers slowed down after clocking up at least six points. They said higher fines were a less effective deterrent, so the standard £60 penalty would remain unchanged.

However, previous plans to cut penalties for motorists caught just over the speed limit have been abandoned, because ministers said this would send the wrong message to drivers.

The AA cautioned on the introduction of extra penalty points. Edmund King, its president, said: "More than two-thirds of drivers support the idea of higher penalties for those who break the speed limit by a considerable margin. However, our main concern is that large drops in the speed limit, for example 60mph to 30mph, are clearly signed."

Jim Fitzpatrick, the UK road safety minister, pledged a "very serious discussion" over the drink-drive limit but confirmed the government did not propose to cut the 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood level to the European level of 50mg.

He said there was no conclusive evidence that it would reduce drink-driving.

However, Stewart Stevenson, the Scottish transport minister, who is campaigning for the reduction, said it would make a "significant contribution to road safety." The British Medical Association said: "The science is clear – a 50mg limit would lower the number of road crashes, deaths and serious injuries on our roads."

Other proposals include a new offence of driving after taking a drug "which is both illegal and impairing".

The government also said average speed cameras had a "clear potential" to cut casualties, especially on rural roads.





The full article contains 432 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 20 November 2008 11:04 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Plodjfriss, Hammer of the Numpties,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 00:53:27
I'm sure all the readers will be absolutely delighted by these proposals. I could be wrong though.
2

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 21/11/2008 05:04:59
We are getting more and more of a police state every day. Motorists are simply easy targets.
We have one council who are removing speed cameras because they do not reduce accidents and yet this lot want to punish us even more.
I know of several places in the country where on dual carriageways the limit varies from 30 to 70 with speed cameras at every reduced speed change - all in the interests of safety off course !!
What they should be doing is cracking down on bad driving at whatever speed is involved.
Punishing the majority of motorists for a technical breach of the law istead of targetting the minority of bad drivers will not win any friends.
3

Snuffy Ivy,

Aberdeen. 21/11/2008 06:05:19
#2 ...."....a technical breach of the law"
Is this your paltry excuse for errant stupidity on the part of the errant minority?
Isn't breaking that what's referred to as a CRIME?

Next you'll be excusing all yobos/druggies and prostitutes who in your view are in "technical breach of the law?"
I always had the impression it was the 'minority' who breached the law judging from the number of cases reported daily, the masses are law-abiding responsible citizens are they not? "Technical breach of the law" indeed!
4

SouthernSkye,

21/11/2008 06:59:15
#3 We have MPs and MSPs and Euro MPs who get away with far worse "technical breaches of the law". Wendy Alexander springs to mind. Our old friend Mandy is another.
However, these proposals, for 20mph and 30mph zones I could accept. For motorways and dual carriage ways it seems a bit OTT unless the speed limits are increased. 80mph or 90mph would be a viable and safe speed. But we also need more traffic police out there to catch bad drivers, uninsured drivers, banned drivers who go back on the roads, drug/drunk drivers. To attend to all those dangerous cases that a camera cannot.
5

Dave,

Western Isles 21/11/2008 07:49:45
Buy a roll of catering size cling film. Proceed to nearest fixed speed camera and wrap film around the camera a few times.

Drive normally. You will not be caught.

Protest a lot too. These are roads that WE pay for, not the cops or the ministers. It has long been known that speed cameras are cash cows. Time to stop milking it then me thinks.......hit back at them.

6

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 08:27:50
3 Snuffy Ivy,

You've sucked in all the bilge propaganda about speeding.

I can categorically say that speed definately and irrefutably does not kill.

I can also confidentally assert that it is inappropriate speed leads to a higher probability of being out of control and causing injury or death.

The problem is that high quality analysis of the causes of crashes and accidents is not reflected in the measures taken to counter them. On the subject of speed alone I read that speed is a factor in as few as 8% of injuries. That leaves 92% of incidents being caused by factors other than speed. However, the spending and effort seems to be skewed to dealing with the 8%.

It was interesting watching the 'Top Gear' programme last week and noting the Driving test requirements in Finland which are far more demanding than here in the UK. Surely, improving driving standards will have more effect than retrospectively trying to sort a problem.

Only this morning I could have been knocked off my motorcycle under the wheels of a following artic, by a driver who neither indicated or had the faintest inkling of what lane discipline means on a roundabout. Fortunately my advanced riding training predicted the antics of this 'arbiter of death' and led me to take defensive action. It was interesting to reflect that the nearby speed camera completely missed this near fatal incident.
7

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 21/11/2008 08:28:50
Average speed cameras work. I have yet to see an instance of anyone speeding where these are installed.

But it's not the whole story! Cameras do not pick up on tailgating or erratic driving or drunks, but arguably these pose more of a threat than a driver who is exceeding the speed limit but tends to read the road ahead and behaves responsibly (apart from the speed limit thing).

Quite simply it needs more traffic police on the roads to take out the remaining risks to road safety.
8

57vintage,

Keith 21/11/2008 08:40:32
Hey Snuffy Ivy quine is your vilification of the oldest profession not a trifle ironic? ;-)

Do the crime, do the time.

Speed limits are in the Highway Code and the hard of thinking who "forget" them are constantly reminded of what applies by the series of signs consisting of red circles with numbers inside them. It's not so difficult, is it?

It concerns me that there are so many people who write to newspapers and populate websites complaining about the unfairness of it all or sharing urban myths on how to "get away with it". Despicable.

Anyone charged with knife crime would be laughed out of court if their defecne was "Ah but I only stuck the blade in by 20mm".

If you don't like the law, try finding a political party who's willing to stand on a manifesto which says it will raise speed limits and vote for them.
9

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 09:06:01
The Former Mr. Angry,

The constant checking of speedometers near and around speed cameras actually distracts motorists. They spend less time assessing road conditions and more time with their eyes off the road.

You are right - cameras cannot pick up dangerous driving. I recently spent 10 hours in a car with a friend who always adhered to speed limits but spent most of the journey 2 foot off the bumper of the vehicle in front! Like Ivy above, she honestly thought that 10mph above the limit on a motorway was more dangerous than tailgating!
10

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 09:10:42
57vintage,

Your 20mm knife analogy is rubbish!

Driving at 90mph down a deserted motorway is not as dangerous as driving past a school gate at 9.45am at 30mph. But you and your ilk would have the former banned and the latter let off scot free.
11

57vintage,

21/11/2008 09:13:14
#9

"constant checking of speedometers...actually distracts motorists".

Not in my view.

I consider it, and monitoring of the rev counter, temperature gauge, fuel gauge etc as an essential part of driving.

I'd be reluctant to go on a flight where the pilot/co-pilot only made cursory reference to their instrument read outs.
12

57vintage,

21/11/2008 09:14:42
#10

I don't disgaree with your view on the appropriacy of speed in the situations you describe, but stand by mine over the irrelevance of excuses of those who are caught breaching the law.
13

carrottop,

Dumfries 21/11/2008 09:29:04

Strange how the people caught breaking the law speeding think they are the victims, the victims are the dead or injured caused by their anarchist tendencies.

You are not heroes, the rest of the responsible road users regard you as scum so when will you all learn that people are not looking up to you.
14

fred bear,

21/11/2008 09:33:51
#11

For information, pilots have plenty of time to check thier instruments since a) the aircraft will be flying under autopilot most of the time and b) an abnormal condition will carry an alarm. Even on much older aircraft with analogue dials, these were generally arranged so that the needles point straight up in the normal condition, so an abnormal condition can be spotted by general scan, not detailed inspection.

Can I suggest this is the second rubbish analogy you have posted.
15

Guga II,

Rockall 21/11/2008 09:45:19
Obviously the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party want to raise more money, and the easiest way to do it is to penalise that easy target, the motorist.

It might be more to the point to go for the dangerous and incompetent drivers, as well as those driving under the influence of drugs. Drug drivers seem to be able to drive with impunity, despite there being, allegedly, 20% of drivers actually doing this.

Moreover, there are allegedly 1.4 million drivers who have no insurance which, despite all these ANPR cameras, they seem to do little about.

With regard to speed limits, I would go along with stiffer penalties for those exceeding 20mph in school zones, and also for speeding in 30mph zones. The motorway and similar speed limits are a joke though. There is no justification for a 70mph speed limit on motorways.
16

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 21/11/2008 09:50:14
I don't have an issue with speeding drivers I think trunk roads should have speed limits removed. I do however have a problem with the idiots who speed past me on the inside lane, Undertaking like this is dangerous and stupid, If there was to be a law then tailgaitaing and undertaking would be my target as opposed to speeders.
17

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 09:57:36
57vintage,

Big problem is that you seem base you opinions on daft analogies and jumping to conclusions.

A few facts:-

1. A whopping 93.5% of all road fatalities occur at speeds lower than 70mph.
2. 80% of all fatalities occur at speeds of 20-30mph and 50-60mph. (ie motorist below or at the most common speed limits)
3. Participants involved in accidents above 70mph are more likely to walk away without injury than at any other speed than sub 20mph.

These figures come from the 'Road safety report no. 80 - analysis of on the spot (OTS) road accident database.

I have no problem admitting that speed is a factor - but this emphasis on combatting speed is missing the point. I do not condone speeding but equally I do not condone poor quality decision making based on rubbish analysis. Money needs to be spent on training not enforcement.

18

King Richard IV,

Brisbane 21/11/2008 10:13:13
If your serious about drink driving ? Lock them up! If your over the limit you should be taken directly to a Police Station and held until your under the limit! If you were just over the limit then you will only have to wait 20 minutes, if your pi$$ed then most of the night.As well as all the usual fees and fines which are neither here nor there, you then have to make your own way back to your car.It is inconvenience and shame that stops these people not money and points!!!
19

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 10:16:48
A simple roadside drug-driving test will be introduced in Germany later this summer, leading to speculation that something similar could be on the horizon for motorists in this country.

Officers in Berlin are soon to start taking sweat samples from suspects' armpits. These can be analysed in seconds to check for traces of cannabis, heroin, cocaine or amphetamines.

British police have road-tested several swab-style devices in recent years, including ones using saliva, but found them fiddly to administer.

Most recently, they have resorted to US-style competency trials where drivers try to walk in a straight line, or lean back, close their eyes and touch their nose.

Unsurprisingly none of the above measures can be admistered by speed cameras - they need traffic police, on the spot, stopping people. The nuances of bad driving or under the influence driving can only be detected by experienced human beings - paradoxically one of the things police look for is excessively cautious or slow driving.
20

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 11:12:46
The sooner we get these stupid labour loonies out of power the better.

It is clear by reading these proposals that NONE of them understand what they are talking about. The speed of travel should be determined as a result of the consideration of many other factors. It should never be elevated to the most important consideration... Ever.

If these measures are implimented, look for a steady rise in road deaths and injuries as a result of drivers switching off as they pootle around, supposedly safe in the knowledge that they are perfectly safe because they are driving within the speed limit.

Speed limits were never intended to be rigidly enforced. They were introduced as a means of prosecuting drivers who drove at excessive speed without having the need to prove dangerous driving---and initially, they only existed in built-up areas.

There is absolutely no emphasis on driver skill nowadays, and that is the main reason why road safety statistics are worsening. Introducing brain-dead laws and enforcing them with a rod of iron will never work. What we need is driver education.

Make the test harder. Introduce tiered licences. Limit the number of times someone can take a driving test. Encourage skilful driving and car control.

We could learn a lot from the way that Finland approaches driving. The driving test (as hinted at on Top Gear) is far more comprehensive and challenging.

Regarding the alcohol and drugs side, we need to introduce a test which measures the actual fitness of a driver to drive and takes into account factors resulting from both drink and drugs. Simply lowering our drink-drive limt will have no effect on the real problems but will instead just criminalise millions of perfectly safe drivers.

As I say. We MUST get rid of stupid labour before they do any more damage to the country.
21

Gina Gibson,

Wales 21/11/2008 11:22:21
Speed cameras do NOT improve peoples driving!
In the vast majority of locations they are there purely to generate income.
The only way to improve peoples' driving is to make the driving test more difficult and have compulsory refresher courses every 5 years or less.

Having more traffic police in marked cars would also make people more cautious in their driving.

It would deter people who undertake and perhaps it just might deter those idiots who seem to be unable to move out of the middle lane on motorways!
22

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 11:40:31
Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

I'm with you 99% of he way - except the political bit. I think the politicos have to try to reduce death on the roads. The problem is they are listening to the wrong people and applying the wrong methods.
23

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 11:44:28
"perhaps it just might deter those idiots who seem to be unable to move out of the middle lane on motorways!"

Which is probably one of the main causes of undertaking. People don't do things without a reason, and whilst undertaking is illegal (under some circumstances) if it is going to be done, it is generally done because someone else is too pig-headed to move out of the way. Likewise, tailgating is generally done because someone is too pig-headed to make an effort to keep up with the traffic flow or lacks the skill (or can't be bothered) to drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions.

Untertaking and tailgating are symptoms. Remove the causes and the symptoms go away.
24

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 11:45:51
"The problem is they are listening to the wrong people and applying the wrong methods."

Yeah. Just as labour have always done and always will do...
25

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 11:49:43
Gine,

I'm not sure how dangerous undertaking is. It's legal in many countries.

I have to admit to a modicum of frustration in situations when I have followed someone for miles at 60mph down the outside lane of an otherwise deserted dual carriageway. I have to admit on such occasions that I have dropped a cog or two and executed a near side passing manouevre. How can these boneheads not see a flourescent clad motorcyclist with flashing double headlights?
26

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 11:50:45
Lane discipline in the UK is atrocious.
27

Upbeat,

21/11/2008 12:08:07
25 Vincent.

If you are not sure why undertaking is dangerous, and you admit that you do it on occasion you will not be around for too long. Sooner or later you will meet a grisly end.

This will not necessarily happen on a clear open dual carraigeway or motorway, but will happen because the vehicle that you have decided to cut through the inside of did not see you. Being crushed under the wheels of a large lorry, or side-swiped off the road just to save a few seconds does not seeem a very sensible way to 'live long and prosper', and it is not the way that others, going wisely about their daily lives expect you to drive.

When an HGV driver knows that vehicles will only attempt to pass them on one side - the offside - the full concentration of the driver can be given to what is moving ahead of them and not just to monitoring constantly for any vehicle that might slip into a nearside blindspot.
28

Artemis,

21/11/2008 12:09:07
If you don't want to pay a fine for speeding, stick to the speed limit. It's not rocket science.
29

G Man542,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 12:26:13
#23

"Likewise, tailgating is generally done because someone is too pig-headed to make an effort to keep up with the traffic flow or lacks the skill (or can't be bothered) to drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions."

Not all the time, last time i was tailgated was yesterday in a 30 zone doing 30, so if i was to "keep up with the traffic flow" then i would be speeding and i can assure you my driving skills are fine.
30

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 12:40:09
Upbeat,

What absolute generalising simplistic codswallop!

1. I said I'm not sure HOW dangerous - not WHY it is dangerous. The risks are bl**ding obvious, but can be mitigated.

2. I never ever 'cut through' this is an inaccurate description of the manouevre.

3. HGV drivers are on the whole brilliant. I have yet to come across one driving down the outside lane of a deserted dual carriageway. If only all road users were as good as HGV drivers!

4. In any case a trained rider/driver carries out a 'risk assessment' before any manouevre.

5. Number one rule of motorcycling self preservation is see and be seen. I would never get close to a vehicle, large or small, in a blind spot.

Sorry Upbeat - your post merely exhibits your lack of fitness to drive a vehicle.
31

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 12:42:52
G Man542,

If you are being tailgated and you are not blocking a lane, don't speed up. Gently decellerate until the following vehicle realises what they are doing, then pull over as soon as possible.

It's non agressive and actually reduces the likelihood of a collision.
32

Luke Skywalker,

21/11/2008 12:43:35
This is really good news.
33

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 12:46:48
Planet Earth calling Luke Skywalker,

It's ok for you - there's no speed limits in space!
34

SV650s,

21/11/2008 13:22:39
It's a simple rule - the faster you drive, the less time you have to deal with any "eventualities" on the road. Speed limits are there for a reason - those who don't understand that shouldn't be on the road. And those who don't check their left-hand mirror nor indicate before manouring left (whether this be changing lanes or turning left) shouldn't be driving - full stop. Sorry, but women and taxi drivers are the worst - indicators and mirrors are on your vehicle for a purpose.
35

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 13:34:02
SV650s,

Yep - and on an SV you'll have more time than most!

Seriously, if there are no 'eventualities' present then your rate of progress can be adjusted accordingly.
36

SV650s,

21/11/2008 13:37:30
#35 Cheeky....
37

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 21/11/2008 13:47:17
#2 nabodican in rural Scotland

Your posting has to be the most stupid and nonsensical I have read today.

Although there may not be much traffic in whatever backwater you live, on the major highways of Scotland and England the carnage is increasing and these new and drastic measures may just save some lives.
38

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 13:56:05
#29:

"...if i was to "keep up with the traffic flow" then i would be speeding..."

Which is one of the points I am trying to make. Speed limits are not intended to be enforced to the letter at all times. They only started being enforced like this when the government found out that they could make MASSIVE amounts of money by using speed cameras.

In the situation you mention, if you were to speed up a bit, say to 40mph, then the tailgating problem would probably dissappear. The likelihood is that you would still be driving safely and you would have removed the tailgating hazard, plus the additional hazards potentially created by the bloke behind you getting annoyed and possibly doing something stupid.

This is a perfect example of what I mean when I say that the speed of travel should be determined as a result of the consideration of other factors. This "obey the speed limit regardless" culture has been created under false pretences in order to justify automated revenue raising by speed cameras. It should not be applied as it creates a lot more problems than it solves.

At the end of the day, THINK! don't blindly obey propaganda.
39

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 14:02:45
"...on the major highways of Scotland and England the carnage is increasing..."

Agreed. Mainly because of the brain-dead approach to road safety in the last decade or so.

"...and these new and drastic measures may just save some lives."

No it won't. It's just more of the same brain-dead approach that has wasted thousands of lives over the last decade.
40

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 14:13:29
To add to your reasoning Vincent...

6. Always have a planned escape route. In that way, if something goes wrong, you can deal with it.

As an aside... If "undertaking" is such a heinous crime and creates such an unacceptable danger, how come the roads in most cities are infested with bus lanes, where large, heavy vehicles are encouraged to do just that? How come cyclists are encouraged to undertake on th eapproaches to traffic lights where a real hazard exists of traffic turning left?

Like I said earlier, if people were to wake up and think when they are driving and get out of the bl00dy way when they should, people wouldn't undertake.
41

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 14:30:21
TimW1234,

Why don't you ever check your facts before posting your rubbish?

Scotland - Road Accidents Scotland 2006 Govt stats.

The publication builds on the provisional figures released in June in the Key 2006 Road Accident Statistics bulletin, by providing more detailed analyses and new figures.


Road casualties

314 deaths on Scotland's roads in 2006 - 10 per cent more than in 2005, but still the fifth lowest figure for more than 50 years


It's similar in England
42

Shaken,

21/11/2008 14:34:26
Have to say cameras for the most part are there for money. Most of the current laws for our road safety are there to generate income and why?

Because people need to drive and people who can afford cars can afford to pay ridiculous fines for:

Parking - Has anyone been 3 minutes late and got a £25-30 fine?

Ridiculous 'zoning' - When the speed limit changes very quickly A77 coming into Prestiwck Airport is a prime example. Goes from a 60 to a 30 and the police wait at the airport roundabout to catch those who do not break sharply passing the sign. Also M80 is similiar.

Fuel duty around 2/3 of the cost of petrol

Road Tax - Anyone know wtf this is for?




43

Upbeat,

21/11/2008 14:40:18
30 Vincent.
Attack attack....

You are just dismissing the experience of driving HGVs over two million miles in over 35 countries around the world.

Of course because it suits you to attack without thought you consider that I know nothing ????

Dream on, and don't leap to judgements about the experience of those you " meet" on the Scotsman comment columns.

The difficulty ...if you are interested...in the attitude you display, is that the law proscribes the manoeuver that you seem to be willing to consider. This is precisely for the reason that has been set out for you above, and which you chose to ignore.

When -in a few other countries- undertaking is permitted this is because the relative speeds of traffic moving in adjacent lanes is small. For the UK the law insists that overtaking MUST be carried out on the offside of the overtaken vehicle. Consequently this is the area in which every driver will expect other traffic to restrict his options to change course. The nearside of every HGV has considerable blind spots. Even if you, on your motorcycle,consider this risk acceptable , as you apparently still do, moving through the blind spot you can have no idea what obstruction could be ahead of the vehicle you are undertaking.... obstructions that might necessitate evasive action. The one safe place for any vehicle when taking evasive action is to swerve to the nearside. Impatience of drivers when undertaking makes this option less viable for the driver being undertaken, and increases danger for all road users.

If you can't or won't see this that is up to you. But it is ironical that when attacking those who have spent large periods of time being what you describe as " 3> HGV drivers are on the whole brilliant. I have yet to come across one driving down the outside lane of a deserted dual carriageway. If only all road users were as good as HGV drivers!" this points up the worthlessness of your point of view.
44

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 21/11/2008 15:22:38
Upbeat,

I think that Vincent's example would be far more relevant to normal cars than to HGVs.

As an HGV driver you will be more than aware of the blind spots around the vehicle and the difficulty in judging distances due to the effects of curved mirrors. As a driver or motorcyclist (or even as a pedestrian) I am also aware of these difficulties because I have made it my business to find out.

As such, when I am near an HGV I position my vehicle so that I can not only see the mirrors, but can also see the driver's face reflected. I make it my business to determine whether the truck is left or right-hand drive as well. I never cruise along alongside an HGV unless the speed is really low, as in the case of a traffic jam. When I overtake, I do so briskly, having thoroughly assessed the road conditions and the presence of hazards. I will always have an exit route planned in the event of an emergency.

One other thought... Doesn't overtaking a left-hand drive truck involve much the same risk as undertaking a right-hand drive one? I think it does. And in light of soem of the crashes that have happened, I think you will agree with me.

At the end of the day, common sense should prevail. Unfortunately these days, common sense has been overshadowed by the perceived need to blindly obey rules. Maybe evryone will learn before it's too late.
45

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 16:05:13
Upbeat

Hold hard mate - you ain't listening and it's you that is making crass assumptions. In 35 years of motorcycling and currently doing 15k miles a year I have NEVER come across an HGV driver sitting in an outside lane on a deserted stretch of road. The reason is these guys are good drivers and would not sit in an outside lane without good reason. Next, as a motorcyclist with advanced training I would not undertake an HGV unless I was certain he knew I was there and had clear sight of the road ahead (which is unlikely as HGVs are generally big opaque things don't you know). Therefore:-

HGV + outside lane = EXTREME CAUTION (DO NOT PASS.)

However, Fiesta, 60 mph, outside lane, no other vehicle in view - I can see over, under and past him. I have been following him/her for 2 miles. I am dressed in flourescent kit, have twin halogen bulbs. I have moved my road position, flashed my lights, sounded my horn and accelerated, braked and done everything in my power to bring myself to his attention, but to no avail, he/she shows no sign of functioning sensory input.

At this point I select a piece of the road with an escape route (slipway, hard shoulder or layby), I drop two gears and accelerate promptly, moving to the extreme left of the inside lane and maintaining close observation of said motorist. I have my brakes covered and have already assessed the road condition as super safe and grippy. The risk to me in a situation like that is very low.

As I said HGV drivers are usually excellent - clearly I've not met you on the road yet!
46

Upbeat,

21/11/2008 16:23:41
44 AHOFH

Good points.

Having driven LHD and RHD vehicles, both on LH and RH traffic systems .for decades , there are two points that can be made about LHD trucks on British roads.
The first is the most important. The driver is "out of his usual comfort zone"......However familiar a foreign driver may be with the truck, when he is asked to drive it on the "wrongside of the road" his method of driving has to change also. No longer is is sufficient to glance at the right hand mirror set just to assess his distance from the kerb, and other objects ...it is now important for him to switch from mainly viewing to his rear in his door mirror, to making most use of the RH mirror set instead . This requires extra concentration. The second point is that when caught up in unfamiliar traffic flows in a strange land this extra need for concentration is why foreign registered HGV's appear to have greater risk of the side swipe type of collision.
47

Upbeat,

21/11/2008 16:36:17
45 Another assumption and another wrong one. I read everything you wrote, and I realised from what you said that you are prepared to break the law simply out of impatience. You can 'rattle on' all you like about risk assessments and "it'll never happen to me cos I'm a good guy " advanced training , but your " just drop a cog or two and race on by on the inside attitude is common today among motorcyclists. This is why there are fatalities among your fellow motorcyclists every week of the year on Scottish roads. Impatience , and a I'm in full control "you can't catch me" mentality.

Everytime that a motorcyclist is involved in a collision which has resulted in injury, the rest of the law abiding public has to tolerate hours of road closures while the NHS and ambulance service has to fund expensive remedial work on the damaged people.

It is perfectly possible to disobey every law that has ever been enacted for the safety of road users . For you to advocate choosing which laws you personally will obey, and which not, indicates to me that you are not a driver trained to any advanced driver standard at all...but simply an impatient,sometime reckless and on occasion a very selfish one.

48

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 16:36:55
46 upbeat,

Good points

I failed to mention that I would always apply even greater caution when riding near a non GB plate vehicle.
49

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 21/11/2008 18:13:56
41 Vincent

Yet another of your abusive and insulting remarks aimed at me.

You must be of a higher intellectual order OR just a self-satisfied blowhard with your vicious attacks on anybody who disagrees with you.

You must be an utter JOY at pubs during heated discussions and you have a few pints in you.

As for me, your comment about me is without merit and typical of your "type".
50

Vincent-W,

21/11/2008 18:31:58
TimW1234,Ottawa,

Totally merited, you frequently 'shoot from the hip' without checking facts.

Why not check your facts before posting things that are not accurate?


And before you accuse others of abuse, buddy, check out what you wrote to nabodican:-

"#2 nabodican in rural Scotland

Your posting has to be the most stupid and nonsensical I have read today.

Although there may not be much traffic in whatever backwater you live, on the major highways of Scotland and England the carnage is increasing and these new and drastic measures may just save some lives."


(a) nabodicans post was infinately less stupid and nonsensical than yours

(b) 'carnage' is at the lowest levels for 50 years and the trend is down.


PS:- Pub + me = hours of mirth
51

truthsleuth,

21/11/2008 23:56:24
Listen to the petrolheads and boy racers their attitude is clear they are self first self second and b####r those who want safe roads to drive on.

The quicker they get a brain the better but that is shear wishful thinking.

SPEED KILLS
BOY RACERS ARE MURDERERS IN MAKING
PETROLHEADS ARE FROM THE SAME MOULD.
52

Vincent-W,

22/11/2008 08:02:14
51 truthsleuth,

Entirely wrong - in fact insultingly so. I am absolutely determined that on every journey that I am coureous and considerate to every other road user. I mae it a matter of pride that I never cause another motorist to take any avoiding manouevre due to me. I get really cross with myself if I miss a single indication or mirror check.

The main difference is between me and you is that I use my brain to form my opinions based on fact and reasoned analysis.

There are times when conditions allow that I make good progress and other times when conditions dictate that I ride/drive well below any speed limits. I will virtually guarantee that if you followed me down the road, you would never have to brake suddenly so predictable is my driving.

Boy racer - ha ha ha - I'm 50 with four children and drive a slow diesel (and ride a dull as ditchwater Divvie)!!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.