Give him a medal
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Speeding - a few questions
Next: Smartcom 12s relay?
From: Steve on 15 Aug 2006 15:35 > As a motorbike rider i'm going to go ahead and sing the guy some > praises. Unaware car drivers doing the most stupid manouvres are > possibly the most dangerous thing I can think of. I have seen a motorbike rider TEXTING while riding a bike, so dont think for one second that its just car drivers!!!! Oh, and sorry for hihacking the thread but why do motorbike riders sit on your tail hoping that you move over to the left so they can overtake you ( I do move over by the way, bikes are quicker than me, so pointless holding them back) but when they decide to slow down they sit 6 inches from the center line as if to stop cars overtaking them?? Steve
From: Steve on 15 Aug 2006 15:39 > > Well they could always start by issuing themselves with FPN's whenever > they use their push to talk half duplex personal radios while driving and > it isn't an emergency - but oops I forgot it is one law for them and > another law for the rest of us see:- > > The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations > 2003, > http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20032695.htm > s 2 [110] (4) > > EXPLANATORY NOTE > > Regulation 110(4) provides a definition of devices that are considered > similar to hand-held mobile telephones for the purpose of these > regulations. This definition excludes two-way radios. > Police dont use 2 way radios and so are covered by the regulations. 2-way radios are so defined by the name, they send and recieve data/voice between 2 radios, ie the ones you buy for your kids while out camping. Steve
From: MrBitsy on 15 Aug 2006 16:36 R. Mark Clayton wrote: > "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:S66dnUVH7su3KnzZRVny2g(a)bt.com... >> R. Mark Clayton wrote: >>> "David Taylor" <davidt-news(a)yadt.co.uk> wrote in message >>> news:slrnee3bjl.s06.davidt-news(a)outcold.yadt.co.uk... >>>> On 2006-08-15, R. Mark Clayton <nospamclayton(a)btinternet.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Well they could always start by issuing themselves with FPN's >>>>> whenever they >>>>> use their push to talk half duplex personal radios while driving >>>>> and it isn't an emergency - but oops I forgot it is one law for >>>>> them and another law for the rest of us see:- >>>> >>>> Er, no. As you quoted below it is the same law for them and us. >>>> >>>> It is entirely legal for a police officer to use a two-way radio >>>> whilst driving, just as it is entirely legal for _you_ to use a >>>> two-way radio whilst driving. >>> >>> Unless it just happens to be a mobile phone. >>> >>> The upshot is that the police use two way half duplex radio >>> (therefore you have to press to talk) all the time, whereas if you >>> use your full duplex radio phone the very same police officer who >>> has just PNC'ed your vehicle over the radio while following you >>> will give you a ticket. >> >> And? >> > Hypocrisy brings the law into disrepute and leads to it not being > respected. If a TC stops someone and tells them how dangerous it is > to use their mobile when driving (while giving them a bill for 60), > how seriously are they going to take this when they saw the TC in > their mirror talking on his radio just a moment before they were > pulled over? A good example of how ignorant so many drivers are. For your benefit; Mobile phone conversations have nothing to do with the task at hand. Much brain power is taken up with images of the conversation being discussed. Calls are constant and can take a great deal of time. Two way radio conversation between police and control, are pre-learnt short phrases. They are talking about the task in hand, so require much less concentration. -- MrBitsy
From: Alex Heney on 15 Aug 2006 16:52 On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:30:59 +0100, "DieSea" <DieSea.NoSpamPlease(a)ntlworldd.ccom> wrote: > >"burt" <burtthebike(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message >news:FanEg.105044$9d4.103973(a)fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk... >> >> "Tim S Kemp" <news(a)timkemp.karoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:OqCdnbxCm8PdaX3ZRVnyjg(a)karoo.co.uk... >>> Dave M <me2(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>> All the car owners have found their tyres have been slashed and, in >>>> many cases, a note on their windscreens. >>> >>> A medal? For criminal damage? >> >> If I find out where the piece of s**t who came within an inch of killing me on >> my journey home tonight lives, he won't just be worried about criminal damage - >> he'll need major surgery. BMW, green, north Bristol, and talking on a mobile >> phone. 17:10, N914 YOG, young, black driver. Oh dear, have I accidentally >> published his details? What a shame. >> >> I did what you're supposed to do and reported it to the police. Guess what? >> nothing will happen according to the officer I reported it to. Is it any wonder >> that people take the law into their own hands? If following the law means that >> criminals who threaten my life will never be convicted, then maybe it's time for >> direct action. >> > >Talking to a traffic cop that is in a group I get together with on a rgular basis > >I told him of an experience of mine recently and asked what should be done > >The situation was that a car towing a tatty old camping trailer was tailgating me >in the middle lane of a motorway , flashing his lights for me to get out of the >way > >I was solo and doing a BIT more than 70 > >He eventfully came up on the inside and pushed me out into the outside lane > >Would the cops do anything , not unless you had to independent witness's > >Ohhh well > They should have done you for inconsiderate driving. (Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 3) If it was *possible* for him to pass you on the inside, then you should have been in the inside lane. Regardless of what speed you were doing. -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Trust me, I'm a lawyer.. To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
From: Alex Heney on 15 Aug 2006 16:57
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 20:21:17 +0100, "DieSea" <DieSea.NoSpamPlease(a)ntlworldd.ccom> wrote: > ><hairydog(a)despammed.com> wrote in message >news:lp54e2dk0lv1sp7rsnkmmmh7japmeao4kb(a)4ax.com... >> On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:30:59 +0100, "DieSea" >> <DieSea.NoSpamPlease(a)ntlworldd.ccom> wrote: >> >>>The situation was that a car towing a tatty old camping trailer was tailgating >>>me >>>in the middle lane of a motorway , flashing his lights for me to get out of >>>the >>>way >>> >>>I was solo and doing a BIT more than 70 >> >> Perhaps he wanted you to move over because trailers aren't allowed in >> the third lane. >> >> If he was able to drive up on your nearside, you can't have been >> overtaking, so you were breaking the law. >> >> -- >> >> Iain >> the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones >> http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html >> Browse now while stocks last! > >No Iain I was overtaking , but I travel with sufficient space between me and the >vehicle in front > So how was he able to pull alongside you in the inside lane - *after* tailgating you and flashing lights at you? >There was no way he should have been travelling at 70 MPH with an un-braked >trailer Even if you know the trailer was un braked, that is totally irrelevant. He may have been breaking the law, but so were you by not allowing him past. > >You learn by other peoples misfortunes You obviously don't. -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Don't mess with Murphy. To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom |