slow drivers

Norman_Castle

..... Its interesting though that the ones on here who seem to have got most worked up about it are the ones who seem to be defending, or admitting to be, slow drivers.

I disagree. The most "worked up" people on here are the one insisting slower drivers are wrong for choosing to drive at a lower speed claiming they are incompetent* and demanding they pull over to let them pass. You won't agree with this as its not what you want to hear.

* As judged by self appointed better drivers based on them choosing to drive faster and apparently driving how they drove to pass their driving test.

Dave_C_2

Since retiring I no longer do the daily commute and have noticed that my driving style is much more relaxed - I'm no longer in a hurry to get anywhere.

So saying I am not one of the "slow drivers" and I usually accelerate gently to the speed limit - saving fuel in the process. If a pedal to the metal tailgater is behind me when I do this then tough - and I'm saving him fuel!

I happily sit a comfortable distance behind a slow driver if it isn't safe to overtake and yes I do accelerate hard to overtake.

This makes interesting reading and applies to some posters on this thread

Dave

martinthebandit

Norman_Castle wrote: »

I disagree. The most "worked up" people on here are the one insisting slower drivers are wrong for choosing to drive at a lower speed claiming they are incompetent* and demanding they pull over to let them pass. You won't agree with this as its not what you want to hear.

* As judged by self appointed better drivers based on them choosing to drive faster and apparently driving how they drove to pass their driving test.

Or

*As judged by drivers who are trying to drive in accordance with the basic skills they achieved in order to pass the driving test.

Oh and I think the tone of your post, and earlier ones, tends to prove my point.

Joe_Horner

Dave_C wrote: »

This makes interesting reading and applies to some posters on this thread

Interesting, as you say.

Of course, the concept does suffer one fundamental flaw in that it doesn't allow for those of us who are genuinely superior and simply aware of their outstanding abilities :money::p

Gilbert2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Absolutely right on all counts.

Which strongly suggests that driving at the sort of speeds, and in the circumstances, being discussed here does NOT amount to inconsiderate driving and, no matter how badly you want it to, is NOT an offence.

Oh yes it is!

If it did there would be lots and lots of prosecutions for it because the law is unforgiving and doesn't discriminate. I challenge you to find one.

Sure, here's one I posted earlier-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3694201.stm

Gilbert2

Norman_Castle wrote: »

* As judged by self appointed better drivers based on them choosing to drive faster and apparently driving how they drove to pass their driving test.

I just fail to see how anybody at all would even question why some of us continue to drive as we were taught to do so in the first place.

Essentially, we were all considered competent to at least a minimum level.

Why on earth would anybody have a problem with that?

I am absolutely baffled by some forum members.

Joe_Horner

Gilbert2 wrote: »

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Absolutely right on all counts.

Which strongly suggests that driving at the sort of speeds, and in the circumstances, being discussed here does NOT amount to inconsiderate driving and, no matter how badly you want it to, is NOT an offence.

If it did there would be lots and lots of prosecutions for it because the law is unforgiving and doesn't discriminate. I challenge you to find one.

Sure, here's one I posted earlier-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3694201.stm

Did you actually read the story you linked to? No-one here has suggested that driving at 5mph wouldn't become an offence.

BBC_News wrote: »

A 75-year-old widow has been fined £200 for driving too slowly.

Mary Lamond was doing just five miles an hour as she approached every bend on a twisting road in Stirlingshire.

Now go find one that relates to driving at the sort of speeds, and in the circumstances, being discussed here

Gilbert2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Did you actually read the story you linked to? No-one here has suggested that driving at 5mph wouldn't become an offence.

Now go find one that relates to driving at the sort of speeds, and in the circumstances, being discussed here

Ahhh, got you! At least member brat didn't fall for it like you did!

The lady was not charged for driving slow at 5mph, she was charged with going slow in the range of 5mph to 35mph!

The retired teacher, from Bearsden, pleaded guilty to driving carelessly and without due consideration for other road users by braking at each corner "in a manner so as to cause the vehicle to slow down almost to a halt" and by driving erratically at five to 35mph, causing other drivers to take evasive action to avoid a collision.

The offence took place on the A81 with varying speed limits, 60, 50, 40 & 30 zones.

There is no way possible you can say that her top speed of 35 was not judged too slow in the 60 or 50 zone.

But I can catagorically say she was done for driving too slow in the range 5mph to 35 mph on that road! Because it is fact.


Nice try!;):T

Joe_Horner

Err, still considerabloy below the 40 - 45mph being discussed. There's also the matter of the extreme variability - unlikely that she would have been charged if she'd stuck at a steady 35.

So I ask again:

go find one that relates to the sort of driving being discussed please.


eta: In case (as it's starting to look like) English isn't your first language, "the sort of driving being discussed" means pootling along at a fairly steady 40 - 45mph in an NSL.

Gilbert2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Err, still considerabloy below the 40 - 45mph being discussed. There's also the matter of the extreme variability - unlikely that she would have been charged if she'd stuck at a steady 35.

Oh come off it! She should have had you to defend her then???

So I ask again:

go find one that relates to the sort of driving being discussed please.

You will find this debate has become a lot more broad with subsequent posts.

In particular, you and member brat have consistently said slow driving is not an offence. (regardless of what that slow speed is)

Many of us have informed you it can be.

We have given you a link to the CPS who specifically describe the offence.

I have even given you a link to a conviction.

Yet you will still argue the toss.

I can only now put you on ignore because I'm as damn sure as mustard that you would argue that grass is pink.


eta: In case (as it's starting to look like) English isn't your first language,

A pretty damn rasict comment is it not?

No, English is not my first language, so what if it isn't?

How very dare you!




"the sort of driving being discussed" means pootling along at a fairly steady 40 - 45mph in an NSL.

As mentioned, the topic has broadened.

In any case, the proof I posted cannot be argued by you that the 35mph in that case didn't relate to the 50mph zones, which would be an equivalent of a 40-45 in an NSL.

35mph must be relevant because it wouldn't have been mentioned in the charge.

Now be gracious and admit defeat!;)