Jump to content

Driving - we're all great at it


chrisp65

Recommended Posts

Over/undertaking is something of a free-for-all on the roads in Victoria, and indicators are for the most part unheard of. Survival of the fittest!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep to the left is a very simple rule. When the motor way is fairly clear of even a dual carriageway then keeping to the left is an easy and simple rule to follow if you believe in not going over the speed limit. If you want to go over the speed limit at your own risk then a simple move to the right then back to the left once the move has been completed. There are WAY too many people goggle the centre and right hand lane which clogs motor ways for the People who choose to go faster. I fear this is simply because stay to the left is not emphasised enough as I don't think my driving instructor ever made this as clear and important as it is. Too many people believe the middle Lane is the same option and cruise along like a zombie holding many people up which is frustrating and causes people to change Lane in haste and can cause incidents. My opinion anyway

Edited by Tezvilla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over/undertaking is something of a free-for-all on the roads in Victoria, and indicators are for the most part unheard of. Survival of the fittest!

 

Rush hour in Melbourne

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLCmcV4gC_0

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite legally got my car up to 140mph on the way home yesterday evening.

Conversely I drove at 100mph through central Wembley during the morning rush hour on Tuesday. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I drive in the Middle East - home of tailgaiting Land Cruisers, idiots that sweep across a 6 lane highway, idiotic taxi drivers, multiple crashes, rubber neckers, new levels of gormlessness and just general f*ckwittery of all kinds on the roads.

 

Everyone seems to drift in to the outer lanes, even when the road is empty, but also people don't think twice about flashing their lights at you to get out of their way - even when there's no where to pull over to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took the kids to the seaside today and the drive back was single lane for about 20 miles with nowhere to overtake

When it was 30 the car in front did 28 , when it was 40 they did 37 and when it was 50 they did 45

Yeah I should have more patience but **** me they pissed me off

If you can't drive a car safely at 50 through a 30 zone you shouldn't be allowed on the road ... Simples

   

if you do drive a car at 50 in a 30 zone you shouldn't be allowed on the road... Simples.  Its 30 for a reason, kids, people, schools nearby.

30 is the magic number where if you hit someone they have a greater chance of survival, 50 and its a death on your conscience.    

Edited by hycus-flange
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Driving back from London earlier, I felt like I had to either sound the horn or give an awkward flash of the full beams more than once. 

 

Why do peinarses feel the need to cut out in front of you (whilst you are going 70mph(ish) in the outside lane about to overtake them) without indicating when there is absolutely nothing in front of them. GGggrrr!

"Ooohhh he's going to overtake us, we can't let our manhood on the road be tarnished. Let's stop him". Absolute cretins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...

Arise, long forgotten thread.

So with the amendments to the Highway Code, something I’m unsure of -

The one about pedestrians now having the right of way when they are waiting to cross the road that you’re turning into. Before today, the rule was pedestrians only had right of way at a junction if they were already on the road.

What I’m wondering is, how far away from a junction can a pedestrian stand, waiting to cross, and still expect right of way?

I’m possibly overthinking this, but it’s something that seems like it might result in problems in interpreting the change(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said:

Arise, long forgotten thread.

So with the amendments to the Highway Code, something I’m unsure of -

The one about pedestrians now having the right of way when they are waiting to cross the road that you’re turning into. Before today, the rule was pedestrians only had right of way at a junction if they were already on the road.

What I’m wondering is, how far away from a junction can a pedestrian stand, waiting to cross, and still expect right of way?

I’m possibly overthinking this, but it’s something that seems like it might result in problems in interpreting the change(s).

I don't believe that the law has changed. The Highway Code is interpretation of existing law. Drivers have been getting this wrong for so long that they are having to spell it out. Pedestrians always have right of way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, limpid said:

I don't believe that the law has changed. The Highway Code is interpretation of existing law. Drivers have been getting this wrong for so long that they are having to spell it out. Pedestrians always have right of way.

Hmm, I think I owe an apology to quite a few pedestrians.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, limpid said:

I don't believe that the law has changed. The Highway Code is interpretation of existing law. Drivers have been getting this wrong for so long that they are having to spell it out. Pedestrians always have right of way.

In fairness, I can see why drivers have been getting this wrong.

This is an extract from one of the top results from a search on the subject I made -

Quote

From today, drivers and cyclists must give way if a pedestrian is waiting to cross a road they are turning into.

Under the old code, pedestrians only had right of way at a junction if they were already on the road.

The Press and Journal

Meanwhile, last year when discussing the proposed changes, the RAC said -

Quote

Currently, drivers are only required to give way when someone steps onto a crossing, while pedestrians are told they shouldn’t start to cross until vehicles on the road have stopped.

RAC link

Both of those suggest that unless the pedestrian is already on the road, the driver has the right of way (at a junction, anyway). The RAC seems wrong, and while I wouldn’t solely check with them, I’d expect them to know the laws and codes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said:

In fairness, I can see why drivers have been getting this wrong.

This is an extract from one of the top results from a search on the subject I made -

The Press and Journal

Meanwhile, last year when discussing the proposed changes, the RAC said -

RAC link

Both of those suggest that unless the pedestrian is already on the road, the driver has the right of way (at a junction, anyway). The RAC seems wrong, and while I wouldn’t solely check with them, I’d expect them to know the laws and codes.

So these two sources don't even agree. One says drivers have to give way if a pedestrian is waiting, the other says that drivers only have to give way when someone has stepped out and only applies to "crossings".

The law is more simple though, in essence you must always give way to more vulnerable road users. If you are a driver, that means (motor-)cyclists, horse riders and pedestrians. All the rest is interpretation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, limpid said:

So these two sources don't even agree. One says drivers have to give way if a pedestrian is waiting, the other says that drivers only have to give way when someone has stepped out and only applies to "crossings".

The law is more simple though, in essence you must always give way to more vulnerable road users. If you are a driver, that means (motor-)cyclists, horse riders and pedestrians. All the rest is interpretation.

Exactly, it’s why I thought the RAC seemed wrong. I don’t expect them to be the authority on the matter but I do kinda expect them to get something like that correct. So I can understand any confusion surrounding this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mark Albrighton said:

Exactly, it’s why I thought the RAC seemed wrong. I don’t expect them to be the authority on the matter but I do kinda expect them to get something like that correct. So I can understand any confusion surrounding this.

I've not got time to dig in at the moment, but I doubt that they are offering this as legal advice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, limpid said:

 

The law is more simple though, in essence you must always give way to more vulnerable road users. If you are a driver, that means (motor-)cyclists, horse riders and pedestrians. All the rest is interpretation.

But isn't the difference that before you only had to give way to those more vulnerable road users if they were already on the road. A pedestrian waiting on the side of the road (assuming there's no crossing) wouldn't expect cars to stop for them, but if they were already in the process of crossing the road then they would.

The changes now mean that drivers have to give way to the pedestrian even if they're not in the road

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we all know what happens in practice. You're indicating to turn left off a main road, and you see a pedestrian waiting to cross the minor road. If you stop to wait for them, the bloke behind you honks angrily (if you're lucky, and he doesn't drive into you). And the pedestrian doesn't cross anyway. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

But isn't the difference that before you only had to give way to those more vulnerable road users if they were already on the road. A pedestrian waiting on the side of the road (assuming there's no crossing) wouldn't expect cars to stop for them, but if they were already in the process of crossing the road then they would.

The changes now mean that drivers have to give way to the pedestrian even if they're not in the road

Previously people thought that if a pedestrian steps out 2 feet in front of you, you have to give way. In order to anticipate someone stepping out, you'd have to be moving so slowly that you might as well stop for them anyway. Which is what this change is clarifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â