Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Lane hogging

Options
1…34689…12

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Pov06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Pov06


    mudstack wrote: »
    A lot of people would absolutely care that the person who crashed into their family member/friend was speeding.

    Nobody is saying they wouldn't. I would also care if they were not following the ROTR in any way, not just speeding.

    That's the difference between drivers. One thinks he is great because he sticks to speed limits even though he is a complete hazard to other drivers.

    Another who speeds but follows all the other rules. By the way have you considered what percentage of drivers speed on the motorway? I can bet it's more than 50%.


  • Options
    #153
    CiniO
    Registered Users Posts: 16,088 ✭✭✭✭CiniO


    mudstack wrote: »
    Yes you would have time more time to react and thats the reason for speed limits, I'm glad you finally see the point of speed limits.
    I see the point of driving at safe speed.
    For me though, safe speed is just a speed I consider to be the one where I'm in full control of a vehicle and allows me to react in nearly every circumstance which might occur (I said nearly as it's impossible to account for absolutely everything).
    This speed depends on type of road I drive, of weather and road conditions, amount of traffic, vehicle I drive and it's conditions, and my own state (f.e. if I'm tired, annoyed, or happy and rested).
    Very often my safe speed is above speed limit. Other times it's below.
    So far over last 15 years, this technique worked for me very good.

    A lot of people would absolutely care that the person who crashed into their family member/friend was speeding.
    Would you?
    Would it really make any difference for you if person who caused an accident in which your child was killed, was speeding or not?
    If it would, what kind of diffference would it be?


  • Options
    #154
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Pov06 wrote: »
    Nobody is saying they wouldn't. I would also care if they were not following the ROTR in any way, not just speeding.

    That's the difference between drivers. One thinks he is great because he sticks to speed limits even though he is a complete hazard to other drivers.

    Another who speeds but follows all the other rules. By the way have you considered what percentage of drivers speed on the motorway? I can bet it's more than 50%.

    You keep speeding and I'll follow the rules of the road. I hope your speeding doesn't cause an accident that kills another one of my family members.


  • Options
    #155
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    Mudstack, if you went around the corner of a boreen at 50mph and ploughed into a pair of kids would you consider yourself to be speeding? According to the speed limit you wouldn't


  • Options
    #156
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Jesus. wrote: »
    Mudstack, if you went around the corner of a boreen at 50mph and ploughed into a pair of kids would you consider yourself to be speeding? According to the speed limit you wouldn't

    That would not be an accident caused by speeding, my point is speeding does cause some accidents hence the reason for speed limits.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Pov06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Pov06


    mudstack wrote: »
    That would not be an accident caused by speeding, my point is speeding does cause some accidents hence the reason for speed limits.

    Speeding is not the cause of any accident. Like I said, you keep contradicting yourself.


  • Options
    #158
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    mudstack wrote: »
    That would not be an accident caused by speeding.

    What would have caused it so?


  • Options
    #159
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Pov06 wrote: »
    Speeding is not the cause of any accident. Like I said, you keep contradicting yourself.



    It is of course and I have not contradicted myself once. I will not argue with you anymore.

    A saying that you put me in mind of is "You can talk to a man with a wooden head but not a wooden leg".


  • Options
    #160
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Jesus. wrote: »
    What would have caused it so?

    In this case not speeding, accidents happen. Some accidents cannot be avoided. Some accidents that are caused by people speeding can be avoided.

    See above post regarding wooden head.


  • Options
    #161
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    mudstack wrote: »
    In this case not speeding, accidents happen. Some accidents cannot be avoided. Some accidents that are caused by people speeding can be avoided.

    So going around a corner on a boreen at 50mph isn't speeding in your view but doing 63 on the M50 is?

    And you're saying that such an accident at 50mph on a Boreen cannot be avoided? How about driving at 15mph instead!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    Pov06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Pov06


    mudstack wrote: »
    In this case not speeding, accidents happen. Some accidents cannot be avoided. Some accidents that are caused by people speeding can be avoided.

    See above post regarding wooden head.

    Great excuse! Accidents happen.

    My tyres are completely bald, but I wasn't speeding, shuuure accidents happen!

    Great, absolutely great.


  • Options
    #163
    GTE
    Registered Users Posts: 3,904 ✭✭✭GTE


    Topic is lane hogging on a motorway, everyone.

    Feckers, the lot of em. :p


  • Options
    #164
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Jesus. wrote: »
    So going around a corner on a boreen at 50mph isn't speeding in your view but doing 63 on the M50 is?

    And you're saying that such an accident at 50mph on a Boreen cannot be avoided!

    Where did I say going around a corner on a boreen isn't speeding? This is all circumstantial. It would depend on the corner and the speed limit on the road and common sense.

    What has doing 63 on the M50 got to do with 2 kids being killed on a corner?
    Some accidents can not be avoided hence the need for the word accident.
    Accidents caused by speed can be avoided by not speeding.

    You say it as if I condone someone going around a corner at a certain speed and killing 2 children. Like I said I follow the rules of the road and use common sense.

    I'm glad you see that speeding can kill though.

    Also see above post regarding wooden head.


  • Options
    #165
    9935452
    Registered Users Posts: 2,749 ✭✭✭9935452


    CiniO wrote: »
    I see the point of driving at safe speed.
    For me though, safe speed is just a speed I consider to be the one where I'm in full control of a vehicle and allows me to react in nearly every circumstance which might occur (I said nearly as it's impossible to account for absolutely everything).
    This speed depends on type of road I drive, of weather and road conditions, amount of traffic, vehicle I drive and it's conditions, and my own state (f.e. if I'm tired, annoyed, or happy and rested).
    Very often my safe speed is above speed limit. Other times it's below.
    So far over last 15 years, this technique worked for me very good.



    Would you?
    Would it really make any difference for you if person who caused an accident in which your child was killed, was speeding or not?
    If it would, what kind of diffference would it be?

    Im one who has no problem in driving the car on above the speed limit but one problem with doing this is others are following you at this speed , They tail gate you, when you need to stop quick , they will hit you.
    one of these situations is passing a speed van, you see it and brake hard , there is a chance of the car behind hitting you.
    Its amazing how close a person will drive up your rear end at 90mph


  • Options
    #166
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Pov06 wrote: »
    Great excuse! Accidents happen.

    My tyres are completely bald, but I wasn't speeding, shuuure accidents happen!

    Great, absolutely great.

    Driving with bald tyres is also breaking the rules of the road, the same as speeding.

    Accidents caused by breaking the rules of the road can be avoided but accidents will always happen.

    Your arguments get worse with every post because your original argument is a stupid one.


  • Options
    #167
    Pov06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Pov06


    mudstack wrote: »
    Driving with bald tyres is also breaking the rules of the road, the same as speeding.

    Accidents caused by breaking the rules of the road can be avoided but accidents will always happen.

    Your arguments get worse with every post because your original argument is a stupid one.

    Yeah middle lane hogging is also breaking the rules of the road. Why do you make it out to be less wrong than speeding?


  • Options
    #168
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Pov06 wrote: »
    Yeah middle lane hogging is also breaking the rules of the road. Why do you make it out to be less wrong than speeding?

    I didn't you idiot.


  • Options
    #169
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    mudstack wrote: »
    Where did I say going around a corner on a boreen isn't speeding? This is all circumstantial. It would depend on the corner and the speed limit on the road and common sense. What has doing 63 on the M50 got to do with 2 kids being killed on a corner?
    Some accidents can not be avoided hence the need for the word accident.
    Accidents caused by speed can be avoided by not speeding.You say it as if I condone someone going around a corner at a certain speed and killing 2 children. Like I said I follow the rules of the road and use common sense.I'm glad you see that speeding can kill though. Also see above post regarding wooden head.

    You never used the common sense bit until now, you just used the rules of the road (which you admitted you break with your first post).

    The problem is, you believe a speed limit dreamt up by someone in Government is infallible. Driving at 50 around a corner on a boreen is technically breaking no law so you say its unavoidable because accidents happen. You actually don't consider it to be speeding because the law says it isn't.

    Conversely you believe someone to be doing 63mph on the M50 to be speeding and more dangerous because someone in an office in Dublin tells you it is.

    Are you insane?


  • Options
    #170
    CiniO
    Registered Users Posts: 16,088 ✭✭✭✭CiniO


    mudstack wrote: »
    Where did I say going around a corner on a boreen isn't speeding? This is all circumstantial. It would depend on the corner and the speed limit on the road and common sense.
    While speeding is driving above posted speed limit, then driving at 50mph (80km/h) on country borren is not speeding. That's a fact.
    What has doing 63 on the M50 got to do with 2 kids being killed on a corner?
    Some accidents can not be avoided hence the need for the word accident.
    Accidents caused by speed can be avoided by not speeding.
    So which accidents can not be avoided?
    Every accident is caused by something - in vast majority by driver error, and in vast minority by mechanical failure. In tiny amount of cases by something else, like big boulder falling on a car off the mountain or something like that. But that's negligible really.

    If all drivers drove correctly, there would be nearly no accidents.


  • Options
    #171
    CiniO
    Registered Users Posts: 16,088 ✭✭✭✭CiniO


    mudstack wrote: »
    Driving with bald tyres is also breaking the rules of the road, the same as speeding.

    Accidents caused by breaking the rules of the road can be avoided but accidents will always happen.
    Can you give few examples of accident which will always happen and can not be avoided by obeying the rules of the road and appropriate driving technique?
    Because I can hardly think of any


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    CiniO
    Registered Users Posts: 16,088 ✭✭✭✭CiniO


    Jesus. wrote: »
    You never used the common sense bit until now, you just used the rules of the road (which you admitted you break with your first post).

    The problem is, you believe a speed limit dreamt up by someone in Government is infallible. Driving at 50 around a corner on a boreen is technically breaking no law so you say its unavoidable because accidents happen. You actually don't consider it to be speeding because the law says it isn't.

    Conversely you believe someone to be doing 63mph on the M50 to be speeding and more dangerous because someone in an office in Dublin tells you it is.

    Are you insane?

    That's the essence.
    Speed limits are average chosen by someone by the desk in the office.
    Real driving is way more complicated than obeying some number on the speedometer.
    Obeying it does not guarantee you won't crash, as well as not obeying it won't guarantee you will crash.
    In general drivers have to learn to drive with safe speed, and be able to judge it yourself.
    Speed limits are not even close to telling drivers what speed will be safe.


  • Options
    #173
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Jesus. wrote: »
    You never used the common sense bit until now, you just used the rules of the road (which you admitted you break with your first post).

    The problem is, you believe a speed limit dreamt up by someone in Government is infallible. Driving at 50 around a corner on a boreen is technically breaking no law so you say its unavoidable because accidents happen. You actually don't consider it to be speeding because the law says it isn't.

    Conversely you believe someone to be doing 63mph on the M50 to be speeding and more dangerous because someone in an office in Dublin tells you it is.

    Are you insane?

    I did not say that driving around every corner at 50 is not dangerous and I do not. I never said that your made up scenario of driving around a dangerous bend at 50kph is an unavoidable accident. Some accidents are unavoidable.

    I do not believe that driving 63mph on the M50 is more dangerous than driving around a corner at 50kph is more dangerous, nor did I say it was. It is more dangerous than driving at the speed limit though which is lower than that.

    I did not admit I break the rules of the road in my first post. You are allowed drive in the overtaking lane to overtake slower moving traffic which is what I said.

    Do everyone a favour and adhere to the rules of the road and use some common sense. Of course you don't have to drive at the speed limit around a dangerous bend just because it's the speed limit.

    Stop making things up to suit your augment.

    The only thing that would make me question my sanity is the fact I am arguing with a idiot like yourself.


  • Options
    #174
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    mudstack wrote: »
    I did not say that driving around every corner at 50 is not dangerous and I do not. I never said that your made up scenario of driving around a dangerous bend at 50kph is an unavoidable accident. Some accidents are unavoidable. I do not believe that driving 63mph on the M50 is more dangerous than driving around a corner at 50kph is more dangerous, nor did I say it was. It is more dangerous than driving at the speed limit though which is lower than that.I did not admit I break the rules of the road in my first post. You are allowed drive in the overtaking lane to overtake slower moving traffic which is what I said.Do everyone a favour and adhere to the rules of the road and use some common sense. Of course you don't have to drive at the speed limit around a dangerous bend just because it's the speed limit.Stop making things up to suit your augment.The only thing that would make me question my sanity is the fact I am arguing with a idiot like yourself.

    I said 50mph

    Do you think going around a corner on a little boreen at 50mph is speeding?


  • Options
    #175
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Pov06 wrote: »
    Remember, I'm not the tool hogging the middle lane. If you like hogging the middle lane you should realise you are an accident waiting to happen.

    Not my problem. Any time I undertake I am ready to shoot into the hard shoulder.

    You should not be undertaking or have any need to shoot into the hard shoulder.

    There could be someone sitting in the hard shoulder broken down and you could plough into them. It is not there for you to drive into when you are not in control of a situation because you are undertaking.


  • Options
    #176
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Jesus. wrote: »
    I said 50mph

    Do you think going around a corner on a little boreen at 50mph is speeding?

    By law it would depend on the speed limit. Only an idiot would drive around a corner at 50mph if it were not safe to do so.

    Would you like separate speed limits for corners to stop idiots like yourself from speeding around them?

    You don't have to drive at the speed limit but you are law bound to stay under it.


  • Options
    #177
    degsie
    Registered Users Posts: 8,738 ✭✭✭degsie


    mudstack wrote: »
    I didn't you idiot.

    a58d63e8-73af-11e3-_499536b.jpg


  • Options
    #178
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    degsie wrote: »
    a58d63e8-73af-11e3-_499536b.jpg

    Vic and Bob are funny. The arguments for speeding here are still idiotic.


  • Options
    #179
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    mudstack wrote: »
    By law it would depend on the speed limit.

    There's a speed limit of 50mph on a narrow twisty boreen. If you drove down that little road at 50mph do you think it is speeding?


  • Options
    #180
    mudstack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 174 ✭✭mudstack


    Jesus. wrote: »
    There's a speed limit of 50mph on a narrow twisty boreen. If you drove down that little road at 50mph do you think it is speeding?

    I've provided you with a link, I can't be explaining the rules of the road to you all night or when to use common sense, or spend anymore time answering your stupid questions. Speeding is dangerous, driving too slowly is also dangerous. Adhere to the roads and I hope I, or anyone I know doesn't become a victim of your idiocy in the future.


    http://www.drivingschoolireland.com/speed.html


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    Pov06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Pov06


    mudstack wrote: »
    You should not be undertaking or have any need to shoot into the hard shoulder.

    There could be someone sitting in the hard shoulder broken down and you could plough into them. It is not there for you to drive into when you are not in control of a situation because you are undertaking.

    I'm not a middle lane hogger so I am aware of my surroundings.


Advertisement