Driver in overtaking lane at 65mph

SHIPSHAPE

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

Taking that statement to the extreme, there should also be no need for the police to ever carry out breathalyser checks as the law demands that drivers shouldn't be over the limit when driving.

You are confusing yourself.

It is the job of the police to carry out these checks, not the ordinary motorist.

Just as it is not the job of the ordinary motorist to flash their headlights at others, which is not instructed in any road traffic regulation whatsoever.

SHIPSHAPE

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Are you being serious
Do you really think that a driver has no right to "prompt" someone not to drink and drive?

Not worth a response.

BobQ

SHIPSHAPE wrote: »

Why don't you put your specs on and see what I was responding to?

No IAM instructor will advise use of headlight flashing in any circumstance. It means different things to different drivers, thus, it isn't used as a method whilst driving.

Beeping your horn is more effective.

In any case, the law demands drivers should be alert and aware at all times so there should be no need whatsoever for 'unofficial' prompts to other drivers.

I know what I am on about, trust me.

I could never trust anyone with your level of arrogance, particularly when use phrases like "Why don't you put your specs on and see what I was responding to?" without explaining what you mean.

SHIPSHAPE

BobQ wrote: »

I could never trust anyone with your level of arrogance, particularly when use phrases like "Why don't you put your specs on and see what I was responding to?" without explaining what you mean.

You know what I mean.

Flashing of headlights is not taught by any instructor who knows what they are doing for the simple reason it has no defined meaning whatsoever.

And doing it behind a vehicle driving at 65mph on a motorway is just an aggressive act.

shaun_from_Africa

SHIPSHAPE wrote: »

Not worth a response.

Yet you still responded.

Anyway, why do you not consider it worth a response?
Is it because it what I posted shows just how ridiculous your comment is

It would not be for you, as another driver, to prompt others not to do what you describe above.

when what I "described above" were various acts of dangerous and stupid driving and you clearly stated that any other driver should not prompt others not to do these things.

You may well be happy to ignore a drunk if you see them getting into a car, but I certainly wouldn't.

Marvel1

k12479 wrote: »

On my daily commute I frequently pass upto 10 cars or so in a row by driving in the first lane while they all sit in the middle lane.

I did that before and I was only doing 55-60mph, no cars in front of me lane 1!

almillar

SHIPSHAPE - I disagree - trust me - you don't know what you're on about.
Flashing your headlights is done to indicate your presence to someone. Like this example, when they haven't noticed you're behind them. The Highway Code AND the IAM both advocate using headlights for this purpose. Not all rules of the road have to be LAW! Any IAM instructor WILL tell you this.
People CAN take a flash of headlights to mean different things, but the use above is the only one you should do - ie you shouldn't flash to allow someone out of a junction, as you're not permitted to direct traffic.
I'd love to hear your reasoning behind why the horn is better. Is it THE LAW?! Before posting, I suggest you pick up your up to date copy (you do have one of course) of the Highway Code, which does indeed tell you when to, and when not to, use your headlights or horn.
Flashing your headlights is NOT an agressive act, but aggressive people (and that sounds like you) may interpret it as such. We've been over this already in this thread, I think Strider was posting about it.

Lum

And that is the issue, there are so many interpretations of what a headlight flash could mean, and the official interpretation is unlikely to be the one chosen by the recipient of the flash.

Which then leads on to the thought: Why even bother flashing if the most likely response will be to wind the person up and maybe cause them to do something stupid.

I don't think there is any good solution to this one.

C_Mababejive

I'm all for undertaking as it is lawful. I am sick of the centre lane owners club and now the outer lane owners club. Potentially what i do with the centre lane owners club is to stay behind them in the nearside thus creating a roadblock. Eventually someone will come along and bully them out of the way.

Lum

Great, so you create an even bigger obstruction that can only be fixed when someone who prefers to be actively aggressive comes along and figuratively pushes them out of the way.

Either pass them, or if you do not wish to pass them then leave room for others to pass, otherwise even more unnecessary congestion will be created.

Also if you drive too close in the inside lane then when the MLM eventually wakes up and realises they need to move over they will see you too close and possible become flustered or otherwise unwilling to cut in front of you, so they will stay out for longer.