Motorists

Whoever it was said "cyclists deserve all they get" - perhaps you were one of the arseholes in the BMW who tried to run me off the road last Sunday? Or perhaps you were the scumbag who gobbed at me out of the window of your Fiat Panda this afternoon? Prick.

Tim

The comment re cyclists is a pants one.

I have been involved with dealing with the aftermath of cyclists and pedestrians, as well as drivers/passengers being involved in collisions, and it's not pretty.

On a legal point there is no such thing as an 'accident'. There is always some degree of blameworthiness Legally. Whether someone is prosecuted is down to policy's that are in force at the time, and also other factors.

andy c!

quote:

---

If someone does attempt to overtake you when you are probably only doing 44 mph in reality, and as a direct result of you hogging the centre of the road, they collide head-on with a vehicle coming the other way I suppose your conscience will be clear.

---

As much as I disagree with Micks view of himself as a self appointed Traffic Officer, it is the responsibility of the person overtaking to ensure they can perform the manouvre safely, not the person they are overtaking.

Ade

Chaps

Just to answer a few points.

1. The road on which I drive (A420 Swindon to Oxford) is literally single lane all the way with a heavy flow of traffic both ways. Overtaking is impossible. You can only travel as fast as the car in front of you.

Therefore by restricting my speed to 49 mph, I am controlling everyone elses speed and they CANNOT overtake.

2. If an ambulance came along with its flashing lights etc, all motorist would pull over etc. So that is a non issue.

3 What I am doing is 100% legal as Toy well knows. Advice to Toy...stop being a barrack room lawyer, you are useless at it.

4. I do not use fog lights in the dark.

I control the speed of others and increase road safety. I have discussed this with Policemen, with whom I mix with socially, and they fully endorse my actions. That is good enough for me.

Regards

Mick

Given that the speed limit on the road is 60mph, it could be argued that Mick's decision to deliberately drive at 49mph could be interpreted as driving with "undue consideration to other road users" and that can constitute a traffic offence.

Saying that, I would much rather sit behind Mick at 49 mph on a busy road than sit at 60mph on the same road whilst some tosser passes me at 90 - 100mph just because there is a space.

I believe Mick said that the speed limit along that stretch of road is 50mph.

I admire your strict compliance with the speed limit Mick, but have difficulty in accepting 'road safety' as your primary reason for preventing anyone else exceeding the limit. More likely you enjoy the feeling of power over others.

Ade

I therefore withdraw my previous post......

I would also suggest that to maintain a speed of 'precisely 49mph' along the whole stretch of road would mean you were concentrating more on the speedomoter than on the road ahead, which would be more dangerous than a driver doing approx 55mph but concentrating fully.

Ade

A quick blow in the intoximeter may reveal something that could be confirmed by a blood test after consuming a few glasses of Highland Spring Water the night before. By doing 49 in the 50mph limit you are perhaps being careful because you don't want to get stopped...

Unless you make these trips along the A420 only in the evening rush hour or after.

Mick,

For you to be any use in limiting the speed of other drivers along this road you'd have to be up and down it all bloody day.

As it is clear that you don't have time to do this, and you are obviously the kind of gent who would never drive if you thought you may be over the drink-drive limit at the wheel, I suggest you simply drive as fast as you feel is safe for you, and let other drivers do the same without hindrance on your part.

That way you can never be made (at least) to feel responsible if something goes wrong in your midst.

Regards,

Steve.

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Sat 25 September 2004 at 6:44.]

Steven

I drive early in the morning and 6 pm in the evening. These are the normal commuter rush hours.

My actions, control speed, prevent people getting clocked by (I think) 11 speed cameras on the road and contribute to road safety.

I have the support of the police and that as far as I am concerned means that I shall continue to do it every day.

Regards

Mick

quote:

---

I have the support of the police and that as far as I am concerned means that I shall continue to do it every day.

---

As, I'm sure you'll also continue with your usual 'trolling'

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Steven

I drive early in the morning and 6 pm in the evening. These are the normal commuter rush hours.

My actions, control speed, prevent people getting clocked by (I think) 11 speed cameras on the road and contribute to road safety.

I have the support of the police and that as far as I am concerned means that I shall continue to do it every day.

Regards

Mick

---

Where do you stick ýer Dorsal Fin ?

Mick,

Do you ever drive early in the morning after a late night tipple?



Regards,

Steve.

quote:

---

Do you ever drive early in the morning after a late night tipple?

---

He'll never cough that!

andy c!

Hi,
The argument about 49 in a 50 is not really any good. This is because the limit is 50mph. It is just that, the speed limit. if you go above that it may aid you in mitigation if you say 'I was keeping up with traffic flow', but it won't help you in an insurance claim.

It seems to have become an acceptance that you can exceed the limit because you are keeping up with traffic flow. That however does not make it legal. As mentioned before you are either speeding or not.

andy c!

ps that is not to say I do or don't,

I'm more concerned with Mick's assertion that he enforces the law by driving to the centre of the road to prevent other motorists from overtaking him.

As I understand it it's the police's task to enforce the law. It's the task of us ordinary punters to abide by it.

If I'm driving at the speed limit for a particular road, and a motorist behind me wants to overtake, then it's no business of mine to stop that motorist from doing so. OK so they will then risk being caught for speeding; if so that's their look-out, and no business of mine.

Just my take.

Regards,

JonR

quote:

---

Just my take

---

And an eminently reasonable one, which is why you won't find Mr Parry espousing it. He enjoys control too much and now he's no longer able to exert it in the workplace, he has to find another outlet, hence he's become a self-appointed driving monitor. Simple really

quote:

---

If I'm driving at the speed limit for a particular road, and a motorist behind me wants to overtake, then it's no business of mine to stop that motorist from doing so. OK so they will then risk being caught for speeding; if so that's their look-out, and no business of mine.

---

I agree with ya... and when they do crash you should stand up as a witness for their daft overtake also tho (If you saw it of course..)

andy c!

quote:

---

He enjoys control too much and now he's no longer able to exert it in the workplace, he has to find another outlet,

---

or he's having a wind up.....

andy c!

I think a career move into air traffic control would be spot on. I'd certainly sleep safer nights.



Harry

Why do we keep talking about these things? I mean it - and I am as bad as anyone.
Do we need help?

I put it to Mick that the main reason why he does 49 in a 50 and hogs the middle of the road is because he may have had two or three glasses of Malt the night before.

So, three glasses poured by himself or Mrs Mick (I guess a home pouring is probably the equivalent of about 4 pub measures) into a nice large Tutbury Crystal tumbler. Three of those and we are talking, say, 12 units.

So lets say, hypothetically, he downs the last one at about 11.30 pm before retiring to his bed. His alcohol/blood levels continue to rise for another hour or so and he's on the road by 6.30 am.

So that is a total of about 6 units of alcohol eliminated from his system by the time he gets behind the wheel, leaving 6 units still to be processed. The average bloke is pushing his luck with just 4 units in his system if he expects to pass the breath test.

Thus I think it is highly probable that on some mornings Mick may well have be over the alcohol limit to drive. Driving steadily at 49 in a 50 mph limit would thus be a sensible precaution to avoid being stopped by the police and possibly breathalised.

I await Mick's own comments on the above hypothetical scenario.

On this score I symapthise with anyone who enjoys a drink or two and has to be on the road in the early morning. Although still under the influence, I believe a few hours' sleep does wonders to restoring your judgement and reflexes to some degree in comparison with the guy who drives straight home from the pub or dinner party.

However, in my job I can't afford to take such chances, and I'm glad I only work in the evenings.



Regards,

Steve.

Steven

I have won my argument (even Tom reluctantly accepts it) but now you are playing amatuer diversionary tatics over alcohol.

You said

"So, three glasses poured by himself or Mrs Mick (I guess a home pouring is probably the equivalent of about 4 pub measures) into a nice large Tutbury Crystal tumbler. Three of those and we are talking, say, 12 units."

I usually pour myself a malt (in a Gleneagle tumbler..they are the best) at around 8.00 pm and finish it at around 9.30. I usually retire at 11.30 pm.

I get in my car at 8.00 am to arrive at the office at 9.00am. I always have a good solid breakfast of poridge and my head is crystal clear. I have been 11 hours after the last sip of whisky has passed my lips.

Regards

Mick

Why are you smiling all the time ?

Fair enough Mick

You'd certainly be under the limit then.

The porridge wouldn't make any difference though. The only thing that elimintates alcohol is time. If anything, eating may slow down your metabolism.



Regards,

Steve.