High Way Code omission
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: JNugent on 13 Jun 2010 19:31 Brimstone wrote: > "JNugent" <JN(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote: >> Brimstone wrote: >>> "JNugent" <JN(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote: >>>> NM wrote: >>>>> Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>>>> NM wrote: >>>>>>> It does, try entering such a road when it's busy, you need to >>>>>>> wait for >>>>>>> a gap in the lorry 'train' before you launch yourself from the slip >>>>>>> road, similarly you need to plan ahead to find a suitable gap long >>>>>>> before your exit, some don't this can lead to very hairy cutting >>>>>>> across the bows. >>>>>> The lorries should be leaving a larger gap as a matter or course. If >>>>>> not, they should be prosecuted for driving with excess meat to the >>>>>> head. >>>>> Why? They are doing nothing wrong, they are complying with law, >>>> Driving too close to the vehicle in front is not complying with the >>>> law. >>> Define "too close". > No definition then? Did you think it was up to *me* to define it? >>>> Failing to allow overtaking traffic (on the right) to pull left (and >>>> failing to leave a gap into which that traffic *can* pull left) is >>>> similarly unlawful. >>> Under what legislation? >> The Road Traffic Act. > Which one? Whichever one is currently in force (a series of Road Traffic Acts have been in force). >> The early sections include a catch-all offence of driving without due >> care and attention *or* (not *and*) without consideration for other >> road-users. It covers everything from read-ending the vehicle in fron >> to splashing a pedestrian by driving through a deep puddle. > So "failing to allow overtaking traffic to pull left" and "failing to > leave a gap into which that traffic *can* pull left" are not actual > offences? They are the essential elements of driving without due care and attention and/or driving without consideration for other road users. Picking up a �5 note is not an offence in itself. But picking it up in certain contextual circumstances will be an offence. >> Endorsable, of course. > Only if proven beyond all reasonable doubt and convicted and such a > punishment is considered appropriate. Ever sat at a Magistrates' court and listened to the cases?
From: Brimstone on 14 Jun 2010 02:17 "JNugent" <JN(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote in message news:87l824FdpaU1(a)mid.individual.net... > Brimstone wrote: > >> "JNugent" <JN(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote: >>> Brimstone wrote: >>>> "JNugent" <JN(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote: >>>>> NM wrote: >>>>>> Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>>>>>> NM wrote: > >>>>>>>> It does, try entering such a road when it's busy, you need to wait >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> a gap in the lorry 'train' before you launch yourself from the slip >>>>>>>> road, similarly you need to plan ahead to find a suitable gap long >>>>>>>> before your exit, some don't this can lead to very hairy cutting >>>>>>>> across the bows. > >>>>>>> The lorries should be leaving a larger gap as a matter or course. If >>>>>>> not, they should be prosecuted for driving with excess meat to the >>>>>>> head. > >>>>>> Why? They are doing nothing wrong, they are complying with law, > >>>>> Driving too close to the vehicle in front is not complying with the >>>>> law. > >>>> Define "too close". > >> No definition then? > > Did you think it was up to *me* to define it? Given the manner in which you quote various laws I was sure that you would have it to hand. It seems you don't. Is this because it doesn't exist? >>>>> Failing to allow overtaking traffic (on the right) to pull left (and >>>>> failing to leave a gap into which that traffic *can* pull left) is >>>>> similarly unlawful. > >>>> Under what legislation? > >>> The Road Traffic Act. > >> Which one? > > Whichever one is currently in force (a series of Road Traffic Acts have > been in force). I know there have been a number of RTAs, many of which are still in force hence I asked for clarification. >>> The early sections include a catch-all offence of driving without due >>> care and attention *or* (not *and*) without consideration for other >>> road-users. It covers everything from read-ending the vehicle in fron to >>> splashing a pedestrian by driving through a deep puddle. > >> So "failing to allow overtaking traffic to pull left" and "failing to >> leave a gap into which that traffic *can* pull left" are not actual >> offences? > > They are the essential elements of driving without due care and attention > and/or driving without consideration for other road users. Can you show me where that is written down so that all might read it and be enlightened? > Picking up a �5 note is not an offence in itself. But picking it up in > certain contextual circumstances will be an offence. What "contextual circumstances" might they be? >>> Endorsable, of course. > >> Only if proven beyond all reasonable doubt and convicted and such a >> punishment is considered appropriate. > > Ever sat at a Magistrates' court and listened to the cases? Not as a habit. And, the last time I checked the Magistrates were not the final arbiters of the law.
From: NM on 14 Jun 2010 14:37 On 13 June, 15:37, Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > On 13/06/2010 15:23, NM wrote: > > > > > On 13 June, 15:10, Silk<m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> On 13/06/2010 14:22, NM wrote: > > >>> It does, try entering such a road when it's busy, you need to wait for > >>> a gap in the lorry 'train' before you launch yourself from the slip > >>> road, similarly you need to plan ahead to find a suitable gap long > >>> before your exit, some don't this can lead to very hairy cutting > >>> across the bows. > > >> The lorries should be leaving a larger gap as a matter or course. If > >> not, they should be prosecuted for driving with excess meat to the head. > > > Why? They are doing nothing wrong, they are complying with law, if you > > find their behaviour irritating then why are you not campaigning for > > the law to be changed instead of whinging and calling them stupid, I'm > > not sure they are the only stupid ones. > > They should be leaving a decent gap for something called safety. Not a > concept lorry drivers are familiar with, so it would seem. Statistically more likely to crash in a car than a truck, explain please?
From: NM on 14 Jun 2010 15:09 On 13 June, 15:56, JNugent <J...(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote: > NM wrote: > > On 13 June, 15:10, Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> On 13/06/2010 14:22, NM wrote: > > >>> It does, try entering such a road when it's busy, you need to wait for > >>> a gap in the lorry 'train' before you launch yourself from the slip > >>> road, similarly you need to plan ahead to find a suitable gap long > >>> before your exit, some don't this can lead to very hairy cutting > >>> across the bows. > >> The lorries should be leaving a larger gap as a matter or course. If > >> not, they should be prosecuted for driving with excess meat to the head. > > > Why? They are doing nothing wrong, they are complying with law, > > Driving too close to the vehicle in front is not complying with the law. > Failing to allow overtaking traffic (on the right) to pull left (and failing > to leave a gap into which that traffic *can* pull left) is similarly unlawful. Define too close please.
From: NM on 14 Jun 2010 15:11
On 13 June, 16:09, JNugent <J...(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote: > Brimstone wrote: > > > "JNugent" <J...(a)nonexistentaddress.com> wrote in message > >news:87k9t8FmriU2(a)mid.individual.net... > >> NM wrote: > >>> On 13 June, 15:10, Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >>>> On 13/06/2010 14:22, NM wrote: > > >>>>> It does, try entering such a road when it's busy, you need to wait for > >>>>> a gap in the lorry 'train' before you launch yourself from the slip > >>>>> road, similarly you need to plan ahead to find a suitable gap long > >>>>> before your exit, some don't this can lead to very hairy cutting > >>>>> across the bows. > >>>> The lorries should be leaving a larger gap as a matter or course. If > >>>> not, they should be prosecuted for driving with excess meat to the > >>>> head. > > >>> Why? They are doing nothing wrong, they are complying with law, > > >> Driving too close to the vehicle in front is not complying with the law. > > > Define "too close". > > >> Failing to allow overtaking traffic (on the right) to pull left (and > >> failing to leave a gap into which that traffic *can* pull left) is > >> similarly unlawful. > > > Under what legislation? > > The Road Traffic Act. > > The early sections include a catch-all offence of driving without due care > and attention *or* (not *and*) without consideration for other road-users. It > covers everything from read-ending the vehicle in fron to splashing a > pedestrian by driving through a deep puddle. > > Endorsable, of course. But it dosen't define too close does it? My opinion of too close and yours may differ if you choose to prosecute me under this legislation I will have an opportunity to refute your assesment. |