"Hogging the middle lane"

Wig

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The problem with that definition is that you can hardly say that making someone move into the third lane on a quiet motorway is "inconveniencing" them..

Hmmm but on a "quiet motorway" the one from behind will be in lane 1
might move to lane 2 then to lane 3 then back to 2 and back to 1 because of the idiot.

I don't know why they don't just make a law that says the following are unlawful:

• flashing of lights to force other drivers in front to give way;
• misuse of any lane (including cycling lanes) to avoid queuing or gain some other advantage over other drivers;
• unnecessarily remaining in an overtaking lane;
• unnecessarily slow driving or braking without good cause;
• driving with un-dipped headlights which dazzle oncoming drivers, cyclists or pedestrians;
• driving through a puddle causing pedestrians to be splashed;
• driving a bus in such a way as to alarm passengers.

JustinR1979

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

You can laugh, I confirm that definitely was not me. I know where my hole is.

Where your brain should be?

Wig

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

All this section quoting, anybody would think this was a solicitors forum sometimes.

And yet you come here asking about laws.

dacouch

I don't agree with much of what Disabled Rights For Me posts, but they're a wonderful poster.

The forum needs people with differing views to the majority, it makes for entertaining threads

Joe_Horner

Wig wrote: »

Hmmm but on a "quiet motorway" the one from behind will be in lane 1
might move to lane 2 then to lane 3 then back to 2 and back to 1 because of the idiot.

I don't know why they don't just make a law that says the following are unlawful:

• flashing of lights to force other drivers in front to give way;
• misuse of any lane (including cycling lanes) to avoid queuing or gain some other advantage over other drivers;
• unnecessarily remaining in an overtaking lane;
• unnecessarily slow driving or braking without good cause;
• driving with un-dipped headlights which dazzle oncoming drivers, cyclists or pedestrians;
• driving through a puddle causing pedestrians to be splashed;
• driving a bus in such a way as to alarm passengers.

I think they may have beaten you to that one

The point I was trying to make was that an awful lot of what happens on the road has to be dealt with subjectively.

For example, there's no hard and fast rule about when it's appropriate for someone doing (say) 65 past a queue of 60mph lorries to pull in and let the person wishing to do 90 pass. Often, however, the person wishing to do 80 will have a considerably smaller idea of what an appropriate gap is than the one doing 65.

They then have a choice of respecting the driver in front's judgement and hanging back, using the 3rd lane if available, or getting close behind with lights flashing trying to intimidate driver 1 into a gap that they've obviously judged to be inappropriate. One of those three choices is unacceptable, and would undoubtedly count as inconsiderate driving, yet it's the one that seems to be taken most often!

As for the empty motorway scenario (which is admittedly unlikely nowadays), it's really no inconvenience at all for the car coming up behind because they'll have seen the MLM from at least half a mile away so have plenty of time to move out across the two empty lanes with barely any steering input whatsoever.

It only becomes a problem if they take their "keep left" mantra too far and wait until they've almost caught the MLM before moving over, but that's down to their own failure to observe and anticipate rather than the MLM per se.

Disabled_Rights_For_Me

I do have a mobile phone and if any of you who have been nasty to me were to try and rear end me, I would be straight on to the police quicker than you could say your own name.

For anyone who is waiting, Eastenders has been moved from 7.30 to 8.30 to to a film, so we have to wait even longer to find out who killed Lucy. I think it was Jay or Ben.

sinizterguy

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

I do have a mobile phone and if any of you who have been nasty to me were to try and rear end me, I would be straight on to the police quicker than you could say your own name.

Do you know what would happen when you make that call ?

The square root of !!!! all.

Without multiple reports of dangerous behaviour pertaining to the same vehicle, nothing would happen.

Disabled_Rights_For_Me

sinizterguy wrote: »

Do you know what would happen when you make that call ?

The square root of !!!! all.

Without multiple reports of dangerous behaviour pertaining to the same vehicle, nothing would happen.

I can be persistant, and if I have someone bullying me, whether I am a bad driver or not, I WILL NOT tolerate. I have worked my socks off all my life and the police WILL NOT ignore me because I just won't get off the phone.

bod1467

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

I do have a mobile phone and if any of you who have been nasty to me were to try and rear end me, I would be straight on to the police quicker than you could say your own name.

Hopefully hands-free, otherwise the police may well be interested ... in arresting YOU.

Disabled_Rights_For_Me

I do not "flash" my blue badge while I am driving but I have shown it while I am still. Because of the car I drive, some people do not think I am disabled as it is not a standard mobility car. I have my mobility car as well as my second car which I keep somewhere else in a garage and use for longer journeys and weekends away and such.


If I don't show my badge, then because they don't know, they will not know that they need to back off. I really don't flash anything, that makes me sound a little bit perverse or an exhibitionist.