speed limits

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

Sorry, but anyone who does not check a lane before moving into it, is a terrible driver in my book.

Unless what you actually mean is you'd do it deliberately. In which case you're just filth.

If your driving depends on me checking, I reckon you're worse.

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

I find that quite ironic.

Do you also believe you should pull out in front of other cars, as they should see you and stop?

Shame your irony sensor didn't kick in right there.

Pulling out in front of people is something done by ignorant barstools who don't look before they change lanes.

Remind me who was tacitly endorsing such actions again?

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

If your driving depends on me checking, I reckon you're worse.

At no point have I *ever* said I pass on the left of anyone.

I simply have an, erm, different picture of the scale of driving errors to you it would seem.

But for the record, let it be cast in stone that mikey72 thinks there are worse things to do on the road than to deliberately drive into other road users.

I would also point out that any overtaking maneouvre relies to a large extent on the overtakee looking before he moves to the right in front of the overtaker. On the left or right really makes little difference.

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

Shame your irony sensor didn't kick in right there.

Pulling out in front of people is something done by ignorant barstools who don't look before they change lanes.

Remind me who was tacitly endorsing such actions again?

Is it? I assumed it was done by undertakers, who expect others to make allowances for them.

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

At no point have I *ever* said I pass on the left of anyone.

I simply have an, erm, different picture of the scale of driving errors to you it would seem.

But for the record, let it be cast in stone that mikey72 thinks there are worse things to do on the road than to deliberately drive into other road users.

There are. I had more abuse when I said I'd hit cyclists in black at night with no lights in my blind spot undertaking me.

Again, the rest of the skilled motorists would see them.

Lum

mikey72 wrote: »

I find that quite ironic.

You all profess to be skilled drivers, capable of ignoring the highway code, and being able to drive safely at all times, speed, undertake, criticise middle lane hoggers, have outstanding observational skills, but ultimately confess that your skills actually come down to relying on all the "poor" drivers ensuring they see you, and they have to keep you safe?
Doesn’t that suggest your skills may really be lower than theirs?

If you'd actually read my posts in this thread, you would see that I advocate getting past the other car as quickly as possible to minimise the risk of getting sideswiped and to be alert to the possibility of the person you are passing deciding to change lane at the worst possible moment.

Ultimately any overtake carries a risk, with the biggest risk being from the time your front bumper passes their rear until the time that your rear bumper passes their front. It's simply a case of minimising that risk by increased speed differential and careful observation.

I've had plenty of people attempt to change lanes into the side of me while I am passing them on the right, not one of them has managed to hit me thanks to my spotting them and using either the brake or accelerator to remove myself from the impact zone depending on how far past them I was.

I've never had anyone attempt to change lanes into the side of me while I am passing them on the left, but that's most likely due to the fact that I don't do it very often, or possibly due to the fact that the conditions for a suitable pass on the left only really arise when you're dealing with a fully paid up member of the middle lane owners club.

Edit: I'm reluctant to get into the personal attacks here, but for the record I don't believe it is ever acceptable to deliberately hit somebody because they did something you didn't like. In the case of the unlit cyclist in black example above it is likely an acceptable reason for accidentally hitting them, but if you have seen them and choose to hit them anyway you should be put away for attempted murder in my opinion.

Edit2: Also, "other road users" includes cyclists and pedestrians, so that cyclist example comes under "deliberately driv[ing] into other road users" in Jase's post.

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

There are. I had more abuse when I said I'd hit cyclists in black at night with no lights in my blind spot undertaking me.

Again, the rest of the skilled motorists would see them.

Deliberately? Wow. I think we need fewer psychopaths on the oad, frankly.

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

Deliberately? Wow. I think we need fewer psychopaths on the oad, frankly.

It's a skill. I use the force.



(Do you know what a "blindspot" is?)

jase1

Lum wrote: »

Edit: I'm reluctant to get into the personal attacks here, but for the record I don't believe it is ever acceptable to deliberately hit somebody because they did something you didn't like. In the case of the unlit cyclist in black example above it is likely an acceptable reason for accidentally hitting them, but if you have seen them and choose to hit them anyway you should be put away for attempted murder in my opinion.

What personal attacks? IMO *anyone* who would be prepared to use deadly force to make a point is beneath contempt. Nothing personal there.

Lum

mikey72 wrote: »

It's a skill. I use the force.
(Do you know what a "blindspot" is?)

Your post implied that you would do it on purpose, which means you knew they were there, perhaps by doing a proper blindspot check before moving to the left.