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

Road issues that irritate me.......

Options
1…4748505253

Comments

  • Options
    #1472
    CaptainR
    Registered Users Posts: 221 ✭✭CaptainR


    degsie wrote: »
    Let's have a 10 page discussion on undertaking shall we? :rolleyes:

    Better than cyclists to be fair.


  • Options
    #1473
    degsie
    Registered Users Posts: 8,746 ✭✭✭degsie


    CaptainR wrote: »
    Better than cyclists to be fair.

    Yup, but cyclists do undertake quite a bit! :P


  • Options
    #1474
    irishgeo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,409 ✭✭✭irishgeo


    Boom_Bap wrote: »
    It bothers everyone, but sticking to the rules of the road is important with middle lane hoggers.

    If you are in L1 and undertake, they may decide to get in L1 all of a sudden, if they hit you, you are at fault as you are undertaking.

    the rules of the road state you can undertake.
    Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly but traffic in the left-hand lane is
    moving more quickly than the right-hand lane – for example, in slow
    moving stop/start traffic conditions


  • Options
    #1475
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    irishgeo wrote: »
    the rules of the road state you can undertake.
    That's going to start an argument about what defines slow moving traffic :eek:
    :pac:


  • Options
    #1476
    frozenfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,882 ✭✭✭frozenfrozen


    I hate pedestrians crossing near a zebra crossing but not on it, I plan my timing for them to reach the zebra crossing not walk diagonally across it starting 10 feet away


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1477
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,741 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    prinzeugen wrote: »
    Again, can you prove that motorists are 100% directly responsible for these 200 odd deaths?
    Who else would be responsible? One motorist crashes into another motorist or cyclist or pedestrian - so one or other motorist is responsible - typically speeding or on the phone or after a few pints perhaps.

    There are a small number of cases where someone else is to blame, like the drunk who fell asleep on the road and was run over, or the drunk cyclist who road onto the M1 and got hit - but by and large, a motorist is responsible for each death.

    Unless you have another hypothesis?

    The more interesting question would be why are you so desperate to avoid motorists being held accountable for the death toll they cause on our roads?
    prinzeugen wrote: »
    No you can't. And cyclists do kill people. 6 cases last year in the UK and 600+ maimed by cyclists.
    Source please? I understood that it was 1 or 2 a year in the UK, but perhaps you have a more recent source. I'd be interested in your source of (and definition of ) maiming too.

    Yes, I accept that a tiny number of pedestrians are killed by cyclists in the UK, and possibly in other countries. The fact remains that the last time it happened here in Ireland was 2003, and thousands of people have been killed by motorists in the meantime.
    valoren wrote: »
    I know. It's those who simply walk onto the crossing without even looking around.
    Ah here, my WhatsApp conversation is important. You don't expect me to take my eyes off it and look up for a few seconds, do you?


  • Options
    #1478
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    I can't fecking stand drivers who take it upon themselves to punish other drivers for some perceived fault in their driving. For example tail-gating or putting on high beams to teach someone a lesson. It is a huge turn-off and a massive reflection on their personalities.

    I also have to reverse into my space at home which means indicating early, pulling right in to the ditch and waiting for any following cars to overtake safely before I make my manoeuvre. I put on the handbrake and go into reverse gear so that they can see that I'm doing something rather than just chilling by the side of the road for the craic! Still, the amount of drivers who just sit on my bumper waiting for no good reason is astonishing.


  • Options
    #1479
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,658 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #1480
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    mud wrote: »
    I can't fecking stand drivers who take it upon themselves to punish other drivers for some perceived fault in their driving. For example tail-gating or putting on high beams to teach someone a lesson. It is a huge turn-off and a massive reflection on their personalities.

    Most of the time I just accept bad & dangerous driving, and usually I will let anything go and just accept that some drivers are stupid. But then again, if I'm tired or if I've been driving for a long time and some dip stick just sits in the overtaking lane, then I will give him the 'full beams' and a little horn too, until he wakes up and moves over :)
    mud wrote: »
    I also have to reverse into my space at home which means indicating early, pulling right in to the ditch and waiting for any following cars to overtake safely before I make my manoeuvre. I put on the handbrake and go into reverse gear so that they can see that I'm doing something rather than just chilling by the side of the road for the craic! Still, the amount of drivers who just sit on my bumper waiting for no good reason is astonishing.

    May I suggest that you should put on your 'hazards' which, when (combined with your reversing lights) will let those on your bumper know that you're about to reverse!


  • Options
    #1481
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users Posts: 7,761 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    How many exactly?

    I apologise. "Unreal" is not a quantifiable number. I'll keep a little diary and report back in a few weeks. Can't do any fairer than that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1482
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    Patww79 wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Hopefully after you've given a couple of flashes to wake them up? Or do you go into full beams immediately? It seems so counterproductive. You're dazzling me so I'll dazzle you back in the hope that one of us has an accident?


  • Options
    #1483
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,658 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #1484
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    LordSutch wrote: »

    May I suggest that you should put on your 'hazards' which, when (combined with your reversing lights) will let those on your bumper know that you're about to reverse!

    Doesn't work around here :) If the hazards are on then people think you're in trouble and get out of their car to see if you're ok!


  • Options
    #1485
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    Patww79 wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    I know your type well.


  • Options
    #1486
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,658 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #1487
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    Patww79 wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    That must be it oh Great Road Warrior.


  • Options
    #1488
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,658 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #1489
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    Patww79 wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    I drive for a living, I understand how to drive and operate my vehicle. I see your type a lot thinking you are all that. You'd be funny if you weren't so tragic :)


  • Options
    #1490
    Jack the Stripper
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,203 ✭✭✭Jack the Stripper


    Cyclists with the flashing headlights, they have no consideration for users that have photosensitive epilepsy.


  • Options
    #1491
    OldMrBrennan83
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,658 ✭✭✭✭OldMrBrennan83


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1492
    mud
    Registered Users Posts: 2,699 ✭✭✭mud


    Patww79 wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    There's a difference between observing drivers blinding others and being the driver involved. You seem to find that hard to understand.


  • Options
    #1493
    prinzeugen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,891 ✭✭✭prinzeugen


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Who else would be responsible? One motorist crashes into another motorist or cyclist or pedestrian - so one or other motorist is responsible - typically speeding or on the phone or after a few pints perhaps.

    There are a small number of cases where someone else is to blame, like the drunk who fell asleep on the road and was run over, or the drunk cyclist who road onto the M1 and got hit - but by and large, a motorist is responsible for each death.

    Unless you have another hypothesis?

    The more interesting question would be why are you so desperate to avoid motorists being held accountable for the death toll they cause on our roads?


    Source please? I understood that it was 1 or 2 a year in the UK, but perhaps you have a more recent source. I'd be interested in your source of (and definition of ) maiming too.

    Yes, I accept that a tiny number of pedestrians are killed by cyclists in the UK, and possibly in other countries. The fact remains that the last time it happened here in Ireland was 2003, and thousands of people have been killed by motorists in the meantime.


    Ah here, my WhatsApp conversation is important. You don't expect me to take my eyes off it and look up for a few seconds, do you?

    Shows your ignorance. Not point with you as you are not going to accept anything.

    As for "maimed".. What is the definition you would use!??

    You used the term first.

    Again have you been to inquests? Going round in fecking circles now..

    What gets on my pisser is road warrior cyclists that post up stuff on twitter..

    UK law coming in to stop that and hope it will be here soon also.

    " 18-LK12345 parked illegally " posted on social media = court for the person posting it.


  • Options
    #1494
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    LordSutch wrote: »
    Most of the time I just accept bad & dangerous driving, and usually I will let anything go and just accept that some drivers are stupid. But then again, if I'm tired or if I've been driving for a long time and some dip stick just sits in the overtaking lane, then I will give him the 'full beams' and a little horn too, until he wakes up and moves over :)

    You durty bast*rd!!!


  • Options
    #1495
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    Swan necking. So you're driving along, car a few cars in front turns left. The tool immediately behind him swerves right to get around him, rather than waiting the couple of seconds to allow him complete the left turn. The amount of head on collisions I've witnessed with this manoeuvre is unreal.
    MadDog76 wrote: »
    How many exactly?
    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    I apologise. "Unreal" is not a quantifiable number. I'll keep a little diary and report back in a few weeks. Can't do any fairer than that.

    I think "unreal" was the right word to use ........ :p


  • Options
    #1496
    Danjamin1
    Registered Users Posts: 919 ✭✭✭Danjamin1


    Jack the Stripper wrote: »
    Cyclists with the flashing headlights, they have no consideration for users that have photosensitive epilepsy.

    Genuine question - is it legal to drive a car if you have photosensitive epilepsy? There's a woman I work with who has recently been diagnosed with epilepsy & as a result she can no longer drive.

    The flashing light is to draw attention so you'll be noticed btw.


  • Options
    #1497
    Quazzie
    Registered Users Posts: 28,887 ✭✭✭✭Quazzie


    Danjamin1 wrote: »
    Genuine question - is it legal to drive a car if you have photosensitive epilepsy? There's a woman I work with who has recently been diagnosed with epilepsy & as a result she can no longer drive.

    The flashing light is to draw attention so you'll be noticed btw.
    There are different grades of epilepsy. Basically active and inactive. Active means the person can take a seizure at any time. These are banned from holding a license indefinitely. Inactive means that the person knows what triggers a seizure and can prevent either by lifestyle or by medication. These people can hold a license after a set period of time being seizure free. There are a couple of periods tho which apply to the type of seizure that was had. It is usually either 6 months or 2 years.


  • Options
    #1498
    granturismo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭granturismo


    Danjamin1 wrote: »
    Genuine question - is it legal to drive a car if you have photosensitive epilepsy? There's a woman I work with who has recently been diagnosed with epilepsy & as a result she can no longer drive.

    The flashing light is to draw attention so you'll be noticed btw.

    Those lights will be noticed if they are left on constantly rather than flashing. I'm not photosensitive but some flashing cycle lights are like mini strobes.

    Some bicycle lights are angled too high, catching the sightline of oncoming drivers.


  • Options
    #1499
    Danjamin1
    Registered Users Posts: 919 ✭✭✭Danjamin1


    granturismo wrote: »
    Those lights will be noticed if they are left on constantly rather than flashing. I'm not photosensitive but some flashing cycle lights are like mini strobes.

    Some bicycle lights are angled too high, catching the sightline of oncoming drivers.

    Some of the lights are like strobes, I definitely agree with that. A constant light can easily be missed though, at least with a flash there's some activity so it's easier to spot. There's a really simple test you've probably seen online, it's a picture of a number of dots & you focus your attention on one dot. Gradually the other dots disappear out of your vision, its the way the brain filters information. This is the same principle with lights on a vehicle.


  • Options
    #1500
    granturismo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,903 ✭✭✭granturismo


    Maybe this has been posted before - On the subject of lights, parked cars with their headlights still on. Parking lights are installed for a reason.

    Its a particular problem with newer cars where the headlights dont turn off until the drivers door has been opened.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1501
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,445 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Jack the Stripper wrote: »
    Cyclists with the flashing headlights, they have no consideration for users that have photosensitive epilepsy.

    If drivers are going to have an epileptic fit from a brief encounter with a flashing cyclists lights then they shouldn't be driving in my opinion.

    Flashing lights on roads are everywhere, from flashing amber on traffiic lights, road works etc.


Advertisement