Lawful driving so rare it's treated as deviant (Irish Times)

blorg

I don't think this was posted already, I think you will like it...

.Longshanks.

The bit about slowing down to discourage tailgaters....i see where they are coming from but the journalist needs to learn that its not their job to enforce the speed limit, but the gardai

stealthyspeeder

blorg wrote: »

I don't think this was posted already, I think you will like it...

Ha Ha, I meet driver's like that regularly, they are infuriating but they get a surprise when 300 bhp shoots past them in a blur at the first safe oppertunitiy!

I cant even make a serious comment on her and her stupid, petty and dangerous outlook on motoring!

I loved this response at the bottom though! Taking it right to her petty level while ignoring the poor content of her article!

The old N4 between Enfield and Kilcock was desperate for tailgaters" writes Sarah Carey.
I note the use of the past tense here. It would appear, therefore, that the old N4 is not longer desperate for tailgaters.
Either the N4 now has enough tailgaters to satisfy its desperation or Sarah is desperate for an editor with good English.

voxpop

she probably speeds up when other drivers try to overtake her - that'll teach those selfish ppl who want to get somewhere quicker than her

Cookie_Monster

Women :rolleyes:

alias no.9

In the situation where someone is tailgating you where there is no opportunity to move over and let them by or for them to pass due to oncoming traffic, I find the windscreen washers invaluable. Usually by the third time the run-off from my windscreen has landed on theirs, they realise that keeping a safe distance back will prevent it from happening again. For the record, if I feel I'm impinging on anybodies progress and there's room to let them by, I'll let them by.

galwaytt

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

.. or Sarah is desperate for an editor with good English. !

+1, quite apart from operating a mobile hazard, as she seems to, and inviting an accident - hopefully also attractinga Dangerous Driving charge - she would do well to read the ROR alright.

Hash Browns, I understand -but 'hashed lines'........??

Anyone for a Chevron ?

Dark-Mavis

voxpop wrote: »

she probably speeds up when other drivers try to overtake her - that'll teach those selfish ppl who want to get somewhere quicker than her

Was thinking the same thing!

She must drive around with her full beams on during the day too!

Why can't she just pull into the hard shoulder:(

Cookie_Monster

Dark-Mavis wrote: »

Why can't she just pull into the hard shoulder:(

or get someone to drive for her...

Thinkingaboutit

There are a lot of aggressive drivers in this country. Going at the speed limit enrages some people, well it makes them drive too close. I was amused some time ago by an incident where a silver Focus diesel was tailgating me and then the tard tries to overtake on a hill and barely gets past. All that time I had not changed my speed or course, I was not going to accommodate an idiot. Fail like that is going get him a nice funeral.

Brake testing is stupid, though. If a person wants to break the law and overtake illegally, I let them, provided I am are not endangered. My responsibility is my own safety, not to teach other people manners. Still I will not make concessions to idiots.

Berty

The power of the written word as opposed to the forum.

She gets to write what she wants without fear of contradiction. If the same was posted here she would be challenged about her opinions.

Driving slowly with a purpose to enrage other drivers is considered wreckless driving or dangerous driving. You decide. :cool:

Should she stick to the speed limits? Yes

Should drivers tailgate? No

Should she have a god given right to police the roads all by herself? NO!

corcaigh07

really wish the gardai could do her for dangerous driving based on her confessions in the article.

JHMEG

I empathise with the author.

Last time I drove that stretch, at 80kp/h, I was overtaken by a very long articulated lorry, and going on how long it took to overtake it was probably laden.

Berty

JHMEG wrote: »

I empathise with the author.

Last time I drove that stretch, at 80kp/h, I was overtaken by a very long articulated lorry, and going on how long it took to overtake it was probably laden.

You drove at 80kph and were overtaken by an articulated lorry which has a speed limited to 80kph.

JHMEG

Berty wrote: »

You drove at 80kph and were overtaken by an articulated lorry which has a speed limited to 80kph.

I've been driving at 120km/h and been overtaken by articulated lorries that were 'limited' to 80km/h.

jdivision

Berty wrote: »

The power of the written word as opposed to the forum.

She gets to write what she wants without fear of contradiction. If the same was posted here she would be challenged about her opinions.

Or rather than moaning about not being able to contradict her opinions, you could write to the paper about it or leave a comment on the website.

andy3695

Berty wrote: »

You drove at 80kph and were overtaken by an articulated lorry which has a speed limited to 80kph.

hate to correct you there, but a hgv is limited at 90km/h.

Berty

jdivision wrote: »

Or rather than moaning about not being able to contradict her opinions, you could write to the paper about it or leave a comment on the website.

Who was moaning? If you will read it again you will see that I was simply pointing out the power of the WRITTEN(Typed if you will) word.

I do not care for contradicting her opinions because I have learned from experience that her opinions will never be changed and she will continue to drive with that "Irish attitude".

Sleipnir

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Ha Ha, I meet driver's like that regularly, they are infuriating but they get a surprise when 300 bhp shoots past them in a blur at the first safe oppertunitiy!

I cant even make a serious comment on her and her stupid, petty and dangerous outlook on motoring!

I loved this response at the bottom though! Taking it right to her petty level while ignoring the poor content of her article!

So you ignore speed limits, continuous white lines and "do not pass" signs and you think you're the good driver?

Cuddlesworth

Berty wrote: »

You drove at 80kph and were overtaken by an articulated lorry which has a speed limited to 80kph.

I clocked one doing 110 last night. By GPS not speedo. So it would appear that its very possible.

As for Sarah, she drives a small car, is afraid of any sort of speed and is unaware of how to drive in a safe and appropriate manner. She could only be a coffin dodger or women.

Cuddlesworth

Sleipnir wrote: »

So you ignore speed limits, continuous white lines and "do not pass" signs and you think you're the good driver?

Choose to ignore the safe opportunity part of his post?

Heroditas

JHMEG wrote: »

I've been driving at 120km/h and been overtaken by articulated lorries that were 'limited' to 80km/h.

I don't believe you've been overtaken when driving at 120kmph by an articulated lorry in this country.

Sleipnir

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Choose to ignore the safe opportunity part of his post?

No I didn't at all.

The journalist said that she drives at the speed limit on a road with "do not pass" signs and the poster said
" I meet driver's like that regularly, they are infuriating but they get a surprise when 300 bhp shoots past them in a blur"

Writer says "I drive at the speed limit", poster says "I meet people like that"
and poster says "I shoot past them"

JHMEG

Heroditas wrote: »

I don't believe you've been overtaken when driving at 120kmph by an articulated lorry in this country.

That's ok, but it has happened maybe 3 times.

Thoie

Berty wrote: »

You drove at 80kph and were overtaken by an articulated lorry which has a speed limited to 80kph.

andy3695 wrote: »

hate to correct you there, but a hgv is limited at 90km/h.

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I clocked one doing 110 last night. By GPS not speedo. So it would appear that its very possible.

Heroditas wrote: »

I don't believe you've been overtaken when driving at 120kmph by an articulated lorry in this country.

If it helps, I was doing 100kph about half an hour ago, and was overtaken by a lorry with a container on the back. The Gardai have his reg now. Perhaps my speedo is wildly inaccurate, but it tallies well enough with my GPS. I'm sure the Gardai can check it out if they want to.

Cuddlesworth

Sleipnir wrote: »

No I didn't at all.

The journalist said that she drives at the speed limit on a road with "do not pass" signs and the poster said
" I meet driver's like that regularly, they are infuriating but they get a surprise when 300 bhp shoots past them in a blur"

Writer says "I drive at the speed limit", poster says "I meet people like that"
and poster says "I shoot past them"

Sorry, I obviously missed the part of his post where he said he passes people out on the very same road, rather then the implication that he passes out that type of driver on similar roads.

Edit: And for the speed part, 80kph on a speedo is not guaranteed to be 80kph.

Sleipnir

Sleipnir wrote: »

Edit: And for the speed part, 80kph on a speedo is not guaranteed to be 80kph.

G'way, really?
Well sure make it up as you go along then. Let's all just make it up as we go along.

Cuddlesworth

Sleipnir wrote: »

G'way, really?
Well sure make it up as you go along then. Let's all just make it up as we go along.

Its a well known fact that speedos can be way off the mark. My bikes is 15%off.

Dark-Mavis

Sleipnir wrote: »

G'way, really?
Well sure make it up as you go along then. Let's all just make it up as we go along.

Most speedos will over and under read at different speed ranges.

cabrwab

Sleipnir wrote: »

G'way, really?
Well sure make it up as you go along then. Let's all just make it up as we go along.

Unless you've changed your wheels lower profile etc, your speedo will under read.
Look at the speed indication signs that flash you speed up then look at you speedo.
You'll notice a difference of 5-10KMph depending car and speed your doing.

And as for "limited" trucks, if you know the fuse it can easily fall out. And sure problems with the techograph recording the speed that day jesus sorry.

Not saying i've being passed by a truck at 120, but i have around 90.

But to the article its stupid driving by the writer, after a couple of recent close calls by these people who decide to show there annoyance with other road users by slamming on there brakes nearly causing a pile up on the M50.

I've tried on the M50 to stick to the posted speed limit its not safe or possible to do. 80Kmph is safer for sure.

At stealthyspeeder some sundays on the N9 with 300bhp and id be happier.

I don't like making people pulling into the hard shoulder but i despise people who speed up when you go to over take.

Cookie_Monster

JHMEG wrote: »

I've been driving at 120km/h and been overtaken by articulated lorries that were 'limited' to 80km/h.

+1

andy3695 wrote: »

hate to correct you there, but a hgv is limited at 90km/h.

Yeah but not really. I used to work for Tesco and they officially limited their trucks to 95 kph, but I've still been passed by them at over 100.

Sleipnir

Sleipnir wrote: »

G'way, really?
Well sure make it up as you go along then. Let's all just make it up as we go along.

Did anyone who posted saying "it's a well known fact that speedometers are not accurate" read the bit where I said;
"G'way really?" in response to same statement?

I know, everybody knows. Everyone saw or heard about Top Gear when they proved it.
So what should everybody on the road do?
Add 15%? 20%? My car's 40 years old so maybe I could add 50%?
Basically you're saying that people can guess how much their speedometer is off and add whatever they think is appropriate. That's good driving practice is it?
Let's just cover them with tape and use The Force eh?

The speed limit is the speed limit and let's not forget that it is the maximum permitted speed.
If it's raining or there's poor visibility or you're tired or whatever, you can and should travel at a speed you are comfortable with regardless of what the people behind you may think.

Sleipnir

cabrwab wrote: »

Look at the speed indication signs that flash you speed up then look at you speedo.
You'll notice a difference of 5-10KMph depending car and speed your doing.

You're absolutely right. One of those on the m50 told me I was doing 3kph last month.

Busta Hyman

Sleipnir wrote: »

You're absolutely right. One of those on the m50 told me I was doing 3kph last month.

ye the traffic can be brutal



i think the jounalist is a bit of a road king i.e. "sure im travling at the speed limit so i can stay in whatever lane i please" but in saying that comeing back from cork years ago i had a tw@ in a rolls pull up behind me in less than ideal weather conditions and i was just over the speed limit and that was as fast as i was prepared to go. he was slow close that from my rear veiw mirror his headlights dissapeared from veiw! my wife was pregnant with our first so i took the "if he is going to remove any chance of stopping if i have to brake then i have to travel at a speed that allows me to cope with the impact" stand and slowed down gradually while blinking hazards flashing my brake lights and rear fogs to signal my discontent he didnt get the picture till we got to 20 mph!!!! when he backed off i sped up again

stealthyspeeder

Sleipnir wrote: »

So you ignore speed limits, continuous white lines and "do not pass" signs and you think you're the good driver?

I dont travel on that road at all, but I do meet drivers who would religiously stick to the limit (and when I say that, they are for the most part under the limit). Often they are driving older and smaller power cars which take longer to gain speed (back up towards the limit) where it is
safe to do so. I find this frustrating when I am behind them and the road will not allow me to pass. However I do not sit and tailgate, I wait patiently, checking at every oppertuinty if it would be SAFE to overtake, when that first oppertunity comees, Im away!

IMO do not pass signs and continuos white lines are there for a reason, because an overtaking manouver would be unsafe, therefore with a bit of logic you should have been able to deduce that I would not overtake when they are present (given I said overtake at the first SAFE oppertuinity - which you incidently chose not to quote)

Sleipnir wrote: »

No I didn't at all.
The journalist said that she drives at the speed limit on a road with "do not pass" signs and the poster said
" I meet driver's like that regularly, they are infuriating but they get a surprise when 300 bhp shoots past them in a blur"

Writer says "I drive at the speed limit", poster says "I meet people like that"
and poster says "I shoot past them"

No, sorry, read the articale agian, she says she drives obeying the maximum speed limit which means she is often under it.

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Its a well known fact that speedos can be way off the mark. My bikes is 15%off.

+1

Mine is 10%, it will always say I am going 10% afster than I actually am! (checked with 3 different GPS Sat navs). I am assuming but I would be pretty confident in this assumtion that the woman who wrote that articale would not be aware of that, or would not take that into account when she is driving "at the limit"

Sleipnir wrote: »

So what should everybody on the road do?
Add 15%? 20%? My car's 40 years old so maybe I could add 50%?
Basically you're saying that people can guess how much their speedometer is off and add whatever they think is appropriate. That's good driving practice is it?
Let's just cover them with tape and use The Force eh?

WTF???

Find out how much your speedo is off and adjust your speed accordingly!!

Jesus, "cover your speedo and use the force"???

Its the national speed limit, not the limit according to your speedo!

Ush1

While I don't agree with her methods, I certainly agree with her sentiments.

While someone may find unnessacery braking in front of them infuriating, which is totally understandable, someone who gets infuriated by driving at the speed limit, is a dangerous driver.

If you are tail gating at the speed limit, you ARE in the wrong.

stevenmu

Tbh I slow down for tailgaters as well. As far as I'm concerned if someone is sitting right on my back bumper they are posing a danger to me. If we're going to collide then I'm going to make sure it happens at a slow speed. Pi**ing off the person tailgating is a nice bonus.

If somebody is going quicker than me I'm happy to do what I can to let them past, but if they start tailgating I'll do whatever I need to to be safe, including driving at a very small fraction of the speed limit until they back off.

Ush1

Ush1 wrote: »

someone who gets infuriated by driving at the speed limit, is a dangerous driver.

I don't know weather to laugh or cry at that statement.

Ush1

Kevin Harsh Polyester wrote: »

I don't know weather to laugh or cry at that statement.

What's wrong with that statement?

Ush1

Ush1 wrote: »

What's wrong with that statement?

How did you come to the conclusion that someone who gets frustrated by being forced to travel at sometimes painfully slow speed limits is a dangerous driver. Its dangerous if they tailgate or take risks but getting frustrated in itself does not make someone dangerous.

galwaytt

Ush1 wrote: »

What's wrong with that statement?

being infuriated impairs your judgement, that's what. And that is exactly what Sarah is guilty of, too.

FWIW, I did email the paper, and she emailed me back. Long story short, she professes to a good driver education, full licence for 15yrs etc, but did say the act she wrote of was a 'rage reaction', which doesn't/won't do anymore. Still likes to think that acting as a mobile chicance by sticking to the posted limit, irrespective of what's behind is ok, though.

...which is why I told her that's the job of the likes our NiceGuyAlways and TheNog, around here............their lights flash blue, not red, like her brake lights...........;)

Ush1

Kevin Harsh Polyester wrote: »

How did you come to the conclusion that someone who gets frustrated by being forced to travel at sometimes painfully slow speed limits is a dangerous driver. Its dangerous if they tailgate or take risks but getting frustrated in itself does not make someone dangerous.

To quote the user above;

"being infuriated impairs your judgement, that's what"

It's painfully slow in YOUR judgement, not the laws. That's how I came to the conclusion.

Ush1

galwaytt wrote: »

being infuriated impairs your judgement, that's what. And that is exactly what Sarah is guilty of, too.

FWIW, I did email the paper, and she emailed me back. Long story short, she professes to a good driver education, full licence for 15yrs etc, but did say the act she wrote of was a 'rage reaction', which doesn't/won't do anymore. Still likes to think that acting as a mobile chicance by sticking to the posted limit, irrespective of what's behind is ok, though.

...which is why I told her that's the job of the likes our NiceGuyAlways and TheNog, around here............their lights flash blue, not red, like her brake lights...........;)

Which is why I said I don't agree with her methods and said excessive, unnessacery braking is infuriating.

JHMEG

Scenario: you are being tailgated on the old N4 at 80km/h by a lorry. It's night. There is no hard shoulder. And there are no gardaí to be seen. What would you do?

Rowley Birkin QC

I'm starting to think that Sarah Careys sole function at the IT is to pi$$ off anyone with even a modicum of common sense.

Tigerbaby

JHMEG wrote: »

Scenario: you are being tailgated on the old N4 at 80km/h by a lorry. It's night. There is no hard shoulder. And there are no gardaí to be seen. What would you do?

I had a similar experience about 3 years ago. Coming back from Cork on the M7 at Portlaoise . tired after a hard day. was only doing 80 - 90 kph. Its 2 am in the morning.. no -one on the roads. I was just cruising. This d*ck in an artic heaves up behind me and I mean RIGHT BEHIND ME. where he stays with his full beams on for about 10 kilometres. I eventually slowed to such an extent that he overtook me. During that 10 kilometres no-one overtook us. the motorway was empty. Why didnt he overtake me ? I tried to get his reg to report him but of course he had no tail reg.

I regard what he ( she? ) did as attempted murder. There is a minumum speed limit on motorways of 50kph. I was doing at least 30 above that. I hope that bas*rd retrieved his karma since then. Upper Speed limits are MAXIMA not MINIMA people.

galwaytt

Ush1 wrote: »

It's painfully slow in YOUR judgement, not the laws. That's how I came to the conclusion.

Irrelevant - you're making the same mistake as Sarah. The actual speed, or the posted speed limit, is completely irrelevant. What is at issue here is the handling of a situation which, instead of being objective, safe, and good defensive driving, is in fact, subjective, unsafe and aggressive. Which is the same crime the person harrassing you from behind is guilty of.

Last time I checked, even on the Moral High Ground, 2 wrongs don't make a right, and in vehicular terms 2 wrongs invariably ends up in a 999 call. Dead or injured, being 'right' won't heal anything...........or your family's...........

galwaytt

Tigerbaby wrote: »

I had a similar experience about 3 years ago. Coming back from Cork on the M7 at Portlaoise . tired after a hard day. was only doing 80 - 90 kph. Its 2 am in the morning.. no -one on the roads. I was just cruising. This d*ck in an artic heaves up behind me and I mean RIGHT BEHIND ME. where he stays with his full beams on for about 10 kilometres. I eventually slowed to such an extent that he overtook me. During that 10 kilometres no-one overtook us. the motorway was empty. Why didnt he overtake me ? I tried to get his reg to report him but of course he had no tail reg.

I regard what he ( she? ) did as attempted murder. There is a minumum speed limit on motorways of 50kph. I was doing at least 30 above that. I hope that bas*rd retrieved his karma since then. Upper Speed limits are MAXIMA not MINIMA people.

... a couple of things:

1. There is NO legal minimum speed limit on a motorway. There should be, but there isn't....
2. You were driving too slow for the conditions: i.e. not making allowance for other traffic, by impeding them. If you're that tired, pull over and sleep, just like the RSA ask you to
3. The reason the truck didn't pass you out is simple: you were travelling just under his maximum allowable speed, and he cannot overtake you (esp in modern unit, due to the speed restrictor)
4. The truck couldn't overtake you because any truck over 3500kg is not allowed in the r.h. lane of a motorway at any time.

TwoShedsJackson

galwaytt wrote: »

Irrelevant - you're making the same mistake as Sarah. The actual speed, or the posted speed limit, is completely irrelevant. What is at issue here is the handling of a situation which, instead of being objective, safe, and good defensive driving, is in fact, subjective, unsafe and aggressive. Which is the same crime the person harrassing you from behind is guilty of.

Last time I checked, even on the Moral High Ground, 2 wrongs don't make a right, and in vehicular terms 2 wrongs invariably ends up in a 999 call. Dead or injured, being 'right' won't heal anything...........or your family's...........

So if you're driving at about the limit give or take a couple of kmh, someone is tailgating you where it is unsafe to pass and is obviously trying to get you to speed up, what is the objective, safe, good defensive driving way of dealing with that situation?

Assume the road has no hard shoulder, one lane in each direction.

Ush1

galwaytt wrote: »

Irrelevant - you're making the same mistake as Sarah. The actual speed, or the posted speed limit, is completely irrelevant. What is at issue here is the handling of a situation which, instead of being objective, safe, and good defensive driving, is in fact, subjective, unsafe and aggressive. Which is the same crime the person harrassing you from behind is guilty of.

Last time I checked, even on the Moral High Ground, 2 wrongs don't make a right, and in vehicular terms 2 wrongs invariably ends up in a 999 call. Dead or injured, being 'right' won't heal anything...........or your family's...........

Sorry, what mistake am I making exactly?? I said I don't agree with her methods??

Perhaps you need to reread my posts as I explicitly stated both unnessacery braking in front of someone and tailgating are infuriating and are dangerous.

Also, speed limit is completely relevant as there is no excuse at all for tail gating or dangerous overtaking when you are already driving at the speed limit.

voxpop

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

So if you're driving at about the limit give or take a couple of kmh, someone is tailgating you where it is unsafe to pass and is obviously trying to get you to speed up, what is the objective, safe, good defensive driving way of dealing with that situation?

Assume the road has no hard shoulder, one lane in each direction.

Can you not just ignore the tailgater ?