Speed traps and warnings.

Stephen_Leak

Lone_Ranger wrote: »

I think you missed the point, which was: FLASHING HEADLIGHTS CAUSES LOTS OF ACCIDENTS. And that's not bollox.

If so, then that function on most lighting stalk switches should be done away with.

In my driving career (since 1 November 1976), I've flashed my lights quite a few times and never caused any accidents and also had lights flashed at me quite a few times and never had any accidents.

I always wonder how many accidents have happened when at least one of the drivers involved has had their car radio/cassette/CD on. I suspect that this would be a significantly high percentage. So, therefore, logically, should the use of ICE be banned?

LincolnshireYokel

Lone_Ranger wrote: »

I think you missed the point, which was: FLASHING HEADLIGHTS CAUSES LOTS OF ACCIDENTS. And that's not bollox.

do you have some sort of statistical proof of this, or is it guesswork ?

According to the insurance industry the main causes are:

• reckless drivers – these include vehicle operators that swerve between lanes, tailgate, and fail to come to complete stops at red lights and stop signs
• drunk drivers and other drivers under the influence of alcohol or even drugs
• road hazards, including potholes, lack of signage, uneven lanes, and missing guardrails
• inattentive drivers – these are vehicle operators who allow themselves to get distracted, whether by eating while driving, talking on their mobile phones, or singing along to the radio
• bad weather – when a sudden downpour significantly decreases the ability of drivers to see what is ahead it is possible for dangerous situations to easily arise
• vehicle error – from tyre blowouts to a suddenly stalled engine, when mechanical problems occur on the road it is possible that all those near the troubled vehicle will suffer

In fact if you google "main causes of road accidents" you will get variations on the categorisations, but 'he flashed his headlights at me' doesnt enter into any of the list.


Exactly where did you get your information, can you provide a link please.

mikey72

I'm curious on the staement on the police, do you have a link to that? Any info there on pulling motorists over insurance there?

Stephen_Leak

LincolnshireYokel wrote: »

No. Read the original post. Glendinning vs DPP ruled it was NOT 'obstructing an officer' and therefore by extension, it cant be 'perverting', by virtue of the fact at the point you flash the other car there is no evidence an offence is being committed.

And yes, charging them with 'misuse of headlamps' is both an attempt to circumvent the High Court Ruling and a feeble attempt to intimidate drivers not to interfere with the Cash
Cow.

Noted with thanks. I was not aware of this case. But they tried. OK, the courts (and well above the usual anti-motorist magistrates court) disagreed. But they tried. What are they going to come up with next? After all, speed kills.

Actually, it's slowing down very, very, very quickly that usually does it.

marleyboy

Does this mean I can issue tickets to those drivers who go around flashing their blue lights in an attempt to get me to slow down or stop, that distract my driving and could potentially cause an accident??. :D

dacouch

LincolnshireYokel wrote: »

do you have some sort of statistical proof of this, or is it guesswork ?

According to the insurance industry the main causes are:

• reckless drivers – these include vehicle operators that swerve between lanes, tailgate, and fail to come to complete stops at red lights and stop signs
• drunk drivers and other drivers under the influence of alcohol or even drugs
• road hazards, including potholes, lack of signage, uneven lanes, and missing guardrails
• inattentive drivers – these are vehicle operators who allow themselves to get distracted, whether by eating while driving, talking on their mobile phones, or singing along to the radio
• bad weather – when a sudden downpour significantly decreases the ability of drivers to see what is ahead it is possible for dangerous situations to easily arise
• vehicle error – from tyre blowouts to a suddenly stalled engine, when mechanical problems occur on the road it is possible that all those near the troubled vehicle will suffer

In fact if you google "main causes of road accidents" you will get variations on the categorisations, but 'he flashed his headlights at me' doesnt enter into any of the list.


Exactly where did you get your information, can you provide a link please.

Shouldn't that read "According to a personal injury solicitors website"

LincolnshireYokel

Stephen_Leak wrote: »

Noted with thanks. I was not aware of this case. But they tried. OK, the courts (and well above the usual anti-motorist magistrates court) disagreed. But they tried. What are they going to come up with next? After all, speed kills.

Actually, it's slowing down very, very, very quickly that usually does it.

In 2007 official government figures revealed only 3% of RTA's were caused primarily by speed

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1061808/Speeding-drivers-cause-3-car-accidents-figures-reveal.html

and i saw another study a few years ago , which i havent a link for, that showed only 30% of RTA's had speed as a factor.

LincolnshireYokel

dacouch wrote: »

Shouldn't that read "According to a personal injury solicitors website"

There still unbiassed statistics drawn from insurance claims, its about the only objective way to measure it. The sample size is colossal, something like 700,000 accidents. even the police cant massage it to make it look like speed is the main cause, as much as they woudl like to, to justify the speed camera driven witch hunt.

Lone_Ranger_2

Sorry you are absolutly right, flashing headlights doesn't cause accidents, it's others drivers reactions to the flashing of headlights that do. Ask the young girl who pulled out from a junction having been "flashed" out and killed my mate on his motorbike. . Now I didn't make my first statement to cause any argument on here about what the cause of most accident are, who's been driving the longest time, etc,etc, but simply to add an opinion which I thought maybe helpful. Maybe I shouldn't have bothered.

mikey72

Stephen_Leak wrote: »

Noted with thanks. I was not aware of this case. But they tried. OK, the courts (and well above the usual anti-motorist magistrates court) disagreed. But they tried. What are they going to come up with next? After all, speed kills.

Actually, it's slowing down very, very, very quickly that usually does it.

Michael Thompson in Grimsby, wasn't so lucky in last year. Found guilty, cost him £440. "wilfully obstructing a policewoman in the execution of her duty "