Prev: Car detailed with Zaino
Next: Stitched up by a talivan
From: JNugent on 12 Jul 2008 16:37 Palindrome wrote: > JNugent wrote: >> Nick Finnigan wrote: >>> Alex Heney wrote: >>>> Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> If the act of opening the door (rather than leaving it open) causes >>>>> him to stop, then the other road user can not reasonably and safely >>>>> take avoiding action. >>>> You clearly have a very different definition of "reasonably and safely >>>> take avoiding action" than that any reasonable person would use. >>> In the first context reasonable => "moderate, not excessive". I do >>> not regard an emergency stop as being moderate. >> Not every stop is an emergency stop. I haven't made an emergency stop >> for ages (and I'm not posting this from the driver's seat of a moving >> vehicle). >> Being forced to stop by an obstruction in the crriageway does not >> equal "emergency stop" without further data. > My last one was when the ramp of the trailer being towed by a tractor in > front of me fell open. Instantly followed by a dozen or so large sheep > charging out like the fifth cavalry. > That one certainly would have counted as, "Bringing the vehicle to a > halt as quickly as possible, whilst maintaining full control". > You just don't get incidents like that in London. > Oh, and yes. A sheep can do a forward roll.. :-) I can't claim anything similar, but when I took my driving test, xxxxxxxty-six years ago, in N London, the examiner did not belt up (well, he wasn't obliged to at the time, none of us were) and he sat sort of half-sideways, watching me all the time. We were approaching a zebra crossing. A small child ran out of the aweetshop straight across the zebra crossing without pausing. I jammed the brakes on and the examiner, who had not seen the child at first, banged his head against the windscreen. I still passed (first time).
From: Brimstone on 12 Jul 2008 16:50 JNugent wrote: > Nick Finnigan wrote: > >> JNugent wrote: >>> Nick Finnigan wrote: >>>> Alex Heney wrote: >>>>> Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: > >>>>>> If the act of opening the door (rather than leaving it open) >>>>>> causes him to stop, then the other road user can not reasonably >>>>>> and safely take avoiding action. > >>>>> You clearly have a very different definition of "reasonably and >>>>> safely take avoiding action" than that any reasonable person >>>>> would use. > >>>> In the first context reasonable => "moderate, not excessive". I do >>>> not regard an emergency stop as being moderate. > >>> Not every stop is an emergency stop. I haven't made an emergency >>> stop for ages (and I'm not posting this from the driver's seat of a >>> moving vehicle). > >> Further support for it not being moderate. > > Is that part of the shipping forecast? > > It's certainly not a comprehensible reposne to what I wrote. > >>> Being forced to stop by an obstruction in the crriageway does not >>> equal "emergency stop" without further data. > >> The further data is a door opening. > > That could be further data, but it is not sufficient further data. A > door opening half a mile in front of you in a narrow street with cars > parked on both sides might still require you to stop by the time you > got to that spot. Not by any stretch of the reasonable man's > imagination could you call it an emergency stop - or even an > emergency. Sometimes, and whether we like it or not, we all have to > stop. It's just life. Are you quite determined to appear silly?
From: Alex Heney on 12 Jul 2008 17:26 On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:01:39 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: >Alex Heney wrote: >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 21:08:18 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> >> wrote: >> ( Context re-inserted) >>>> I don't think causing him to stop would count, provided he reasonably >>>> could do so. >>>> >>>> It is only endangering him if it is done at such time that the other >>>> road user cannot reasonably and safely take avoiding action. >>> >>> If the act of opening the door (rather than leaving it open) causes >>>him to stop, then the other road user can not reasonably and safely take >>>avoiding action. >> >> >> You clearly have a very different definition of "reasonably and safely >> take avoiding action" than that any reasonable person would use. > > In the first context reasonable => "moderate, not excessive". I do not >regard an emergency stop as being moderate. Neither do I. I did NOT say or suggest that it would be OK if he had to do an emergency stop. Note the "provided he *reasonably* could do so" above (emphasis added here). An emergency stop is not "reasonable". -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Useless Invention: AC adapter for solar calculators. To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
From: Alex Heney on 12 Jul 2008 17:27 On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 21:50:04 +0100, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-ng03(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >JNugent wrote: >> Nick Finnigan wrote: >> <snip> >> >>>> Being forced to stop by an obstruction in the crriageway does not >>>> equal "emergency stop" without further data. >> >>> The further data is a door opening. >> >> That could be further data, but it is not sufficient further data. A >> door opening half a mile in front of you in a narrow street with cars >> parked on both sides might still require you to stop by the time you >> got to that spot. Not by any stretch of the reasonable man's >> imagination could you call it an emergency stop - or even an >> emergency. Sometimes, and whether we like it or not, we all have to >> stop. It's just life. > >Are you quite determined to appear silly? > If he is, then what he posted was doing a VERY bad job of it, since there was nothing remotely "silly" in what he correctly said. -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Useless Invention: AC adapter for solar calculators. To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
From: Digiman on 12 Jul 2008 17:39
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:27:47 +0100, Alex Heney <me8(a)privacy.net> wrote: >On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 21:50:04 +0100, "Brimstone" ><brimstone520-ng03(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>JNugent wrote: >>> Nick Finnigan wrote: >>> > ><snip> >>> >>>>> Being forced to stop by an obstruction in the crriageway does not >>>>> equal "emergency stop" without further data. >>> >>>> The further data is a door opening. >>> >>> That could be further data, but it is not sufficient further data. A >>> door opening half a mile in front of you in a narrow street with cars >>> parked on both sides might still require you to stop by the time you >>> got to that spot. Not by any stretch of the reasonable man's >>> imagination could you call it an emergency stop - or even an >>> emergency. Sometimes, and whether we like it or not, we all have to >>> stop. It's just life. >> >>Are you quite determined to appear silly? >> > >If he is, then what he posted was doing a VERY bad job of it, since >there was nothing remotely "silly" in what he correctly said. He appears silly because he's using a standard troll technique of imputing obviously inappropriate generality to what someone whrote purely for the sake of causing or prolonging an argument. I had my some doubts this morning as to whether you were a troll yourself as you did make some reasonably sensible points in amongst your troll defending. In now appears that my doubts were unfounded. You really do make a habit of defending trolls and as such can be considered nothing more than a troll yourself. |