Tailgating should be made a criminal offence

Crabman

pinkteapot wrote: »

What is the point in slowing down and winding the tailgater up even more?

Slowing down isn't to wind the tailgater up (at least, not for me).

Whether or not I slow down depends on the conditions, e.g. on a single-carriageway A-road, a car once came out of a side junction. I had to brake very hard but managed to stop.

Had there been a tailgater behind me, there is little chance he would have had time to react before smashing into the back of my vehicle.

So, a solution is to slow down, so that if there is a sudden hazard ahead, instead of braking as hard as possible, you can do so in a more controlled manner so as to minimise the risk of the tailgating idiot landing his headlights in your back seats and leaving you with potentially serious injuries.

That said, if there is a lay-by I'll often pull over so they can continue to break the law and then moan on online forums when they're inevitably caught & prosecuted by police :rotfl:

Joe_Horner

Crabman wrote: »

....when they're inevitably caught & prosecuted by police :rotfl:

Ahhh, if only 'twas inevitable

almillar

Anyone who says 'tailgaters' can just wait behind me and I'm not changing my speed (Gordon Hose) - read NBLondon's excellent post #120. You're car A. Make sure you're not pulling out in front of someone who's going far faster than you (maybe perfectly legally, but that's none of your business). It doesn't matter how far back they are coming from - one of the main 'rules of the road' (again DON'T ask me to quote a law) is that you should not cause another driver to change his speed or course. By STARTING your manoeuvre in front of this person and NOT FINISHING before he catches you, you are breaking that rule. Just because it's a dual carriageway, doesn't mean you can just change lanes any time you like, just like a single carriageway, you need to be sure you can complete your manoeuvre in time. Yes, stay in lane, yes you're stuck, yes you may have to slow down. You chose that lane and speed. You always have the option to speed up if you want to overtake. Lorry drivers going at 57mph seem to be immune to this rule...

Crazy_Jamie

martinthebandit wrote:

So you are quite happy to move into the third lane to overtake at 60 65 mph to prevent yourself having to slow down and are not concerned at all that you will be causing anyone that is travelling at the speed limit to have to slow down?

Surely the responsible, courteous thing would be to accelerate up to the speed limit for your overtake?

I hope you realise that intentionally or otherwise you have decided to use a speed guaranteed to cause most inconvenience to other drivers?

This general attitude, including the apparent labelling of anyone who wishes to travel at 60 to 65 mph, as an 'inconvenience' or 'considerate', is concerning.

martinthebandit wrote:

Plus, you know those occasions when traffic comes to a complete standstill for no apparent reason? If the conditions are right and you insist on going no faster than 60 65 in the outside lane then your inconsiderate driving is one of the causes.

You're going to have to explain that one to me.

stugib

Crazy_Jamie wrote: »

This general attitude, including the apparent labelling of anyone who wishes to travel at 60 to 65 mph, as an 'inconvenience' or 'considerate', is concerning.

Keeping up with the speed of traffic is good driving, which generally should mean at the speed limit. If you want to go slower in a multi-lane carriageway, fine. If you want to hold everyone else up because of personal benefits (fuel) to you, that's inconsiderate.

Crazy_Jamie wrote: »

You're going to have to explain that one to me.

Look into traffic queuing theory. You pull out at a slower speed, forces someone to brake. Causes a chain effect of braking which concertinas into a jam.

Joe_Horner

stugib wrote: »

Look into traffic queuing theory. You pull out at a slower speed, forces someone to brake. Causes a chain effect of braking which concertinas into a jam.

Only if the cars "forced to brake" are driving too close to each other or not reading the road far enough ahead. Oh, there's those tailgaters again....

sunshinetours

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Only if the cars "forced to brake" are driving too close to each other. Oh, there's those tailgaters again....

Drive the M25 each day rather than rural Wales and you may see how this works in real life

Yes tailgaiting can be vey dangerous - most people will agree that.....

Joe_Horner

I've done (and still do) plenty of motorway driving, although the last time I was on the M25 was in a 750cc daf with a trailer attached. Saying "that's how real life is" doesn't make it right (or necessary).

Once upon a time, drink driving and no national speed limits was "how it was". It took a LOT of work to change public opinion but most people would agree now that it was worth it and few would condone doing the ton down the M1 after 4 or 5 pints!

Driving too close is probably THE number one cause of accidents - certainly on motorways - because, by definition, if you've left enough room to avoid a problem, you're not going to hit it.

The trouble is, unlike drink driving or driving faster than you're competent to, the people who tailgate always find reasons to blame the other driver. Most of them have been aired repeatedly on this thread. Until that becomes as socially unacceptable as driving tanked up people will continue to drive too close and continue to not stop in time.


eta: curiously, everyone backing off a little tends to make traffic flow better and actually increases average speeds. So shoving up someone's arrse because they're slowing you down can actually make your journey take longer than showing a bit of patience would because it prevents what martinthebandit describes below from happening!

martinthebandit

Crazy_Jamie wrote: »

You're going to have to explain that one to me.

Its quite simple really, in heavy but free flowing traffic if someone pulls out into the third lane at, for example, 65 mph the first oncoming car in that lane will brake down to a slightly slower speed, say 64 mph, the car behind him down to 63 mph, unless there are sufficient gaps in the traffic in that lane 60 or 70 cars later the traffic is at a standstill.

That's the simplistic version.

martinthebandit

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The trouble is, unlike drink driving or driving faster than you're competent to, the people who tailgate always find reasons to blame the other driver. Most of them have been aired repeatedly on this thread. Until that becomes as socially unacceptable as driving tanked up peole will continue to drive too close and continue to not stop in time.

I don't think anyone on here has tried to put the blame for tailgating on the driver being tailgated, if that's how you have interpreted my posts then either you have misread them or I haven't explained myself very well.

If you are being tailgated then you already know that the driver behind you is an idiot and a bad driver (no ifs or buts)

However, you as the driver being tailgated now have a choice, are you also going to demonstrate your an idiot and a bad driver by allowing the situation to continue longer than is absolutely necessary or are you going to be the responsible adult driver and pull out of the way briefly to enable the ejit behind you to continue on?

I know it may, to some, feel like they are giving in to bullying or whatever, but safe responsible driving is never about showing how macho you are.

And to the posters who suggest screen wash, wiring switches to brake lights etc, you really should have a long hard look at how you drive. Making a bad situation worse because you are annoyed is never a sensible way to drive.