Tailgating and Road Rage

TheChizler

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

Agreed, there should be penalty points for this. According to the blue sign entering the motorway you must do >50kph on the motorway, I feel this is too lenient, it should be >100kph.

I am sick to my teeth hearing "Uncle Gaybo" saying "speed kills". It doesn't !!! If I speed on this road at 120kph, then I might end up in an accident.

http://goo.gl/maps/k7TPS

But on straight stretches of motorway, the "speed kills" is nonsense. Bad driving kills, and undertaking slow drivers kills.

On roads such as the M1/A1 to Belfast or the M6 Westbound, the speed limit should be a tonne / 160 kph. With penalty points for going above 160kph and penalty points for lane hoggers.

If you come around a bend on a motorway at 170 into a column of cars overtaking a truck doing 80 you tell us again that speed isn't dangerous.

Muir

If people get that stressed out and wound up by slower drivers, you shouldn't be on the road. If you get so annoyed that you will tailgate or speed or engage in other dangerous driving behavior then you shouldn't be driving. & I'm not encouraging driving slowly, you should be making progress on the road, but you are far more of a danger than a slower driver if you are getting stressed out over it.

You can't control what they do, only what you do.

Elfinknight

dukedalton wrote: »

If he/she doesn't have the ability to drive to the speed limit then he/she should not be on the road. Simple as that.

I do a fair bit of mileage and the most infuriating thing is to see someone plodding along at half the limit in normal driving conditions. This to me is as dangerous as someone speeding, because it can get the person behind frustrated into attempting an overtaking maneuver they shouldn't carry out.

The speed limit is there for a reason. If you can't handle that, get off the road.

As another poster has said the speed limit is exactly that, a limit, not a target.

The road outside my ma's house is 80 KPH. None of the locals will even try to do that on it and the last guy who tried it wrote off his car a hundred yards from her house.

The limits posted are not always the right one

Iwannahurl

dukedalton wrote: »

Links that substantiate anything you've written here:

Where is the "some evidence"?

These will do you for a start:

http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/ruralspeed/RURALSPEED.PDF

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/ACC672-Down-with-speed.pdf

http://www.trg.dk/elvik/740-2004.pdf

Pay particular attention to any mentions of Solomon and speed variance...

Iwannahurl

Muir wrote: »

If people get that stressed out and wound up by slower drivers, you shouldn't be on the road. If you get so annoyed that you will tailgate or speed or engage in other dangerous driving behavior then you shouldn't be driving. & I'm not encouraging driving slowly, you should be making progress on the road, but you are far more of a danger than a slower driver if you are getting stressed out over it.

You can't control what they do, only what you do.

"Encouraging or forcing slow drivers to speed up beyond their comfort level is contrary to road safety wisdom. Not only is this strategy likely to increase the crash risk of the slowest drivers, but, if these drivers subsequently became involved in a crash, any injuries would be much more severe than if they had travelled at slower speeds. Thus, rather than encouraging slow drivers to increase their speed and expose themselves to greater risk, a more beneficial road safety measure would be to encourage them to pull over periodically at safe locations if they hold up traffic.

It is fast drivers, rather than slow drivers, however, who comprise the core safety problem, and encouraging all speeding drivers to slow down would have great benefits for overall road safety. There are no increased risks associated with this approach."

From a report I linked to earlier: http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/ACC672-Down-with-speed.pdf

Muir

Iwannahurl wrote: »

"Encouraging or forcing slow drivers to speed up beyond their comfort level is contrary to road safety wisdom. Not only is this strategy likely to increase the crash risk of the slowest drivers, but, if these drivers subsequently became involved in a crash, any injuries would be much more severe than if they had travelled at slower speeds. Thus, rather than encouraging slow drivers to increase their speed and expose themselves to greater risk, a more beneficial road safety measure would be to encourage them to pull over periodically at safe locations if they hold up traffic.

It is fast drivers, rather than slow drivers, however, who comprise the core safety problem, and encouraging all speeding drivers to slow down would have great benefits for overall road safety. There are no increased risks associated with this approach."

From a report I linked to earlier: http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/ACC672-Down-with-speed.pdf

Yeah, that would be the smart thing.

dukedalton

This thread is going around in circles. I'm not advocating speeding. But from my first post I said there is no reason why people should drive significantly below the speed limit under normal conditions (i.e. reasonable weather, good surface, relatively straight road). In these conditions, your "comfort level" should be the speed limit. If it isn't you have to ask the question, why? The purpose of driving tests is to ensure people are competent to drive. If it's a lack of ability, then I would question why the person is on the road to begin with. And it's not good enough to say, I don't feel comfortable. If you're on a road, driving in normal conditions, you should be at or near the speed limit.

A Dub in Glasgo

Looks like the ethos here is to dumb down to the lowest ability driver rather than raising standards of the lower ability driver. Is it any wonder that the standard of driving in Ireland is terrible?

TheChizler

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Looks like the ethos here is to dumb down to the lowest ability driver rather than raising standards of the lower ability driver. Is it any wonder that the standard of driving in Ireland is terrible?

Is driving slow dumb driving? I would consider it smart to know when it's appropriate to slow down.

dukedalton

It is if it's unnecessary. Just like speeding.

Iwannahurl

What's 'necessary speeding' when it's at home, or away?

dukedalton

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What's 'necessary speeding' when it's at home, or away?

Who said anything about "necessary speeding" (whatever that is)?

Iwannahurl

dukedalton wrote: »

It is if it's unnecessary. Just like speeding.

Are you not even reading your own posts now?

Iwannahurl

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Looks like the ethos here is to dumb down to the lowest ability driver rather than raising standards of the lower ability driver.

Quote/link?

Fuinseog

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

If you cannot drive at a reasonable speed you should not be driving at all.
End of

thats the spirit. anyone not driving to the speed you want them to should be driven into the ditch or forced off the road.

dukedalton

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Are you not even reading your own posts now?

The question was asked by a previous poster, is slow driving dumb driving. I said it is, if it's unnecessary, just like speeding.

I'm flattered to see that you just dive straight for the keyboard as soon as you see a post by me, not bothering to read what I was actually replying to

:rolleyes:

A Dub in Glasgo

TheChizler wrote: »

Is driving slow dumb driving? I would consider it smart to know when it's appropriate to slow down.

Slow driving irrespective of the road conditions or the limit on the road is dumb driving.. how can you claim it is not?

Fuinseog

even if you have a full licence it takes time to build up confidence in driving.

Iwannahurl

dukedalton wrote: »

The question was asked by a previous poster, is slow driving dumb driving. I said it is, if it's unnecessary, just like speeding.

I'm flattered to see that you just dive straight for the keyboard as soon as you see a post by me, not bothering to read what I was actually replying to

:rolleyes:

Q. Is driving slow dumb driving?

A. It is if it's unnecessary. Just like speeding.


So, does your response imply (1) speeding is also dumb driving, or (2) "unnecessary" speeding is also dumb driving, or (3) something else?

Your answer not as clear as you seem to think it is.

dukedalton

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Q. Is driving slow dumb driving?

A. It is if it's unnecessary. Just like speeding.


So, does your response imply (1) speeding is also dumb driving, or (2) "unnecessary" speeding is also dumb driving, or (3) something else?

Your answer not as clear as you seem to think it is.

It's clear that (1) is correct- a sentiment I have expressed more than once on this thread already. Not to sure how you managed to construe any other meaning, but I'm happy to have relieved you of your confusion

TheChizler

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Slow driving irrespective of the road conditions or the limit on the road is dumb driving.. how can you claim it is not?

If for no reason you're going so slow that people have to significantly adjust their speed in order to avoid you, then I would agree. For example 50-70ish in a single laned 100 zone. If you're just going annoyingly slow for no reason and all danger can be attributed to the impatient driver behind you, I would put that in the inconsiderate driving category. If you're within 20-30% of the limit and others can easily overtake then I have absolutely no issue with that.

All figures are ballpark estimates.

I try not to get too worked up on the road. No reason to be angry, even if people are deliberately trying to piss you off. Just relax and get there safe.

Topper Harley

Iwannahurl wrote: »

By the same token other people breaking any of the road rules is not your concern.

Presumably.

I point out some of the rules of the road, which I regularly see being broken by people who drive along oblivious to them, with the hope of helping to educate motorists in this country. I do this on a popular internet forum. What I don't do (unlike some), is try enforce the rules while on the road and then justify this on the basis of other's wrongdoing. Perhaps I'll rephrase in order to avoid any further evasion of the issue. Other people speeding is your concern but on the road is not the place for you to do something about it. Leave that to the Gardai.

I accept that tailgating and speeding are wrong. I don't try to justify these actions by blaming excessively slow drivers and nor should you justify excessively slow drivers just because other people are wrong to speed and tailgate.

dukedalton wrote: »

It's clear that (1) is correct- a sentiment I have expressed more than once on this thread already. Not to sure how you managed to construe any other meaning, but I'm happy to have relieved you of your confusion

I suspect that was an opportunistic misinterpretation in order to easily knock your argument rather than actually accept your real point that unnecessary slow driving is a bit stupid. In any case, necessary speeding... how about Emergency Services?

SuperInfinity

Slow driving for no reason can be highly dangerous and cause an accident. If a driver can't learn to drive at the correct speed, then they shouldn't be on the road... or at least on that particular road where they refuse to keep up with the traffic. Merging from a busy lane onto a busy motorway is something that could legitimately make a person nervous, can you imagine someone who refuses to go above 40-50mph on a straight normal main road matching the speed of the other traffic and doing this well?

It's just a bad policy anyway. You need to be confident to go at the normal speed. If you go way below the speed limit for no reason, it is just irrational and poor. If it's a windy/narrow road or something and you don't know the road, sure that could be a legitimate reason to slow down. But if there's a person in front "leading the way" then by keeping up with them, (NOT tailgating yourself obviously!) you'll avoid all surprising hazards because they will slow down in time.

rachel101

I'm not a driver but I'm a nervous passenger, if only people realised how intimidating it is! :eek:

Chauncey

rachel101 wrote: »

I'm not a driver but I'm a nervous passenger, if only people realised how intimidating it is! :eek:

I love giving lifts to people like you.

"You will drive slowly, won't you? I get very nervous in cars."
"Yes, I will, yeah."

NNEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAOOOWWWW! Beep beep! Get the **** out of it! BEEP! BEEEEEEEEEEP!
And so on.

Shenshen

TheChizler wrote: »

If for no reason you're going so slow that people have to significantly adjust their speed in order to avoid you, then I would agree. For example 50-70ish in a single laned 100 zone. If you're just going annoyingly slow for no reason and all danger can be attributed to the impatient driver behind you, I would put that in the inconsiderate driving category. If you're within 20-30% of the limit and others can easily overtake then I have absolutely no issue with that.

All figures are ballpark estimates.

I try not to get too worked up on the road. No reason to be angry, even if people are deliberately trying to piss you off. Just relax and get there safe.

I do tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I've been lost before/looking for an address. I also at one point had to drive while suffering from a fierce migraine, and no way in hell would anyone make me do more than 80 when I'm not feeling able to cope with it. Note that I would not willfully set out in such a condition, but it developped while I was at work and I had to get home.

You never know who the person in front of you is, and what their reason for being slow might be. So why get worked up over it? Hang back, wait till it's safe and then overtake.

Shenshen

Chauncey wrote: »

I love giving lifts to people like you.

"You will drive slowly, won't you? I get very nervous in cars."
"Yes, I will, yeah."

NNEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAOOOWWWW! Beep beep! Get the **** out of it! BEEP! BEEEEEEEEEEP!
And so on.

My husband liked doing that.
He stopped when I pointed out that it was his car, and if I wet the seat he'd be the one having to clean it up.

Iwannahurl

dukedalton wrote: »

It's clear that (1) is correct- a sentiment I have expressed more than once on this thread already. Not to sure how you managed to construe any other meaning, but I'm happy to have relieved you of your confusion

I'm ecstatic too. The terminological inexactitude is in "just like".

IMO there's a cohort of motorists who believe driving as fast as possible as often as possible is not just perfectly acceptable but often 'necessary' (cf. the use of the term "excessive speeding" on Boards).

Fuinseog

SuperInfinity wrote: »

Slow driving for no reason can be highly dangerous and cause an accident. If a driver can't learn to drive at the correct speed, then they shouldn't be on the road... or at least on that particular road where they refuse to keep up with the traffic. Merging from a busy lane onto a busy motorway is something that could legitimately make a person nervous, can you imagine someone who refuses to go above 40-50mph on a straight normal main road matching the speed of the other traffic and doing this well?

It's just a bad policy anyway. You need to be confident to go at the normal speed. If you go way below the speed limit for no reason, it is just irrational and poor. If it's a windy/narrow road or something and you don't know the road, sure that could be a legitimate reason to slow down. But if there's a person in front "leading the way" then by keeping up with them, (NOT tailgating yourself obviously!) you'll avoid all surprising hazards because they will slow down in time.

with a full driving licence you can be on any road but if the road is unfamiliar to you caution is advised. on country roads I drive slower.
some people I know drive at 90km on the motorway to save fuel and cos they are not in a hurry. that is way below the speed limit.

Iwannahurl

Fuinseog wrote: »

some people I know drive at 90km on the motorway to save fuel and cos they are not in a hurry. that is way below the speed limit.

Perfectly legitimate, I would think.

However, even I would probably go (a bit) ballistic if they decided to do so in a, um, relaxed fashion in the wrong lane...