Undertaking MLOCers - pet hate
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: GT on 9 Aug 2010 12:10 <boltar2003(a)boltar.world> wrote in message news:i3p8bh$3fq$1(a)speranza.aioe.org... > On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 16:43:40 +0100 > Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >>On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 15:18:33 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)boltar.world wrote: >> >>> So why >>> do they feel that undertaking is dangerous? >> >>because its unexpected. > > So is someone pulling out of a side road but that doesn't inherently make > it dangerous. Pulling out of a side-road is normal behaviour and taught to every driver - this is something to anticipate and expect. Undertaking is the opposite on all counts (in the UK), making it dangerous (just playing devils advocate).
From: Ian Dalziel on 9 Aug 2010 13:06 On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 13:11:24 +0100, Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 04:55:16 -0700 (PDT), Ian Dalziel wrote: > >>> Not personnally, but you have and so has Chelsea. Anything else you need >>> help with? >> >> No-one has quoted a law which says it is illegal to pass on the >> nearside. > >except where its quoted as an example of careless driving, thats good >enough for most people. Only for those who don't understand, I think. Is it careless driving if you pass someone who is turning right, then? No. Because that is not illegal. Careless driving is illegal. Have you got it yet? -- Ian D
From: Ian Dalziel on 9 Aug 2010 13:08 On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 13:46:28 +0100, "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: >"Ian Dalziel" <iandalziel7(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:0703ef2f-f66f-4e02-b949-66f838980666(a)z28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >> On 9 Aug, 10:45, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: >>> "Ian Dalziel" <iandalz...(a)lineone.net> wrote in message >>> news:uopr56l84gqa1fu322g7iv1eck6gahs0t5(a)4ax.com... >>> >>> > You haven't quoted a law, though, have you? >>> >>> Not personnally, but you have and so has Chelsea. Anything else you need >>> help with? >> >> No-one has quoted a law which says it is illegal to pass on the >> nearside. > >Yes they have - in your own text, 2 posts ago, quote: "you could be >prosecuted for driving without due care and >attention". Chelsea has said the same thing and I haven't reposted it, but >agree. It is documented in the goverment document linked to by Chelsea. > >What more do you need > >> No-one is going to quote a law which says it is illegal to pass on the >> nearside. > >See above - 2 people (including you!) have. > >> This is because there is no law which says it is illegal to pass on >> the nearside. > >Yes there is - you quoted it yourself! > >> Is that simple enough for you? Try re-reading the thread. Print it out >> and use a ruler to move your finger along if that makes it easier. > >I suggest that you re-read it yourself - you might want to focus on your own >posts as you quoted the law yourself, that you are now denying!! > THAT LAW DOES NOT MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO PASS ON THE NEARSIDE. That law makes it illegal to drive without due care and attention. Passing on the nearside can be an example of that. It is not always, or even often. -- Ian D
From: Ian Dalziel on 9 Aug 2010 13:12 On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 13:43:24 +0100, "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote: >"Ian Dalziel" <iandalziel7(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >news:b0d8703d-2135-42ab-8d23-a9fe35d33678(a)5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com... >On 9 Aug, 10:47, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: >> "Nick Finnigan" <n...(a)genie.co.uk> wrote in message >> >> news:i3m9gh$uet$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> > GT wrote: >> >> "Nick Finnigan" <n...(a)genie.co.uk> wrote in message >> >>news:i3he1p$6k6$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> >>> Chelsea Tractor Man wrote: >> >>>> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 22:47:34 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote: >> >> >>>>>> Didn't you see Chelsea's post - dwdca. >> >>>>> Which does not mention overtaking, undertaking, passing, inside, >> >>>>> outside, on the left, on the right, exceptions nor anything remotely >> >>>>> connected. >> >>>> do you think ignoring the highway code is driving with due care and >> >>>> attention? >> >>> It can be. e.g. to pass on the left at a suitable speed, where there >> >>> is >> >>> room: >> >> >> Yes, we already quoted most of those as legitimate examples (without >> >> the >> >> > I was asked a question specifically about the HC, so I answered it. >> >> No, we were talking about the law. However it has been answered already - >> the relevant law and goverment documentation has been quoted and accepted >> by >> all but you. >> >> >> specific road examples) - we are talking specifically about the >> >> undertaking of lane hoggers - you jumped in and told us that it is >> >> perfectly legal. >> >> > The HC and the CPS document make no distinction for 'lane hogging'. >> >> Apart from the 2 lines that say undertaking is considered 'dangerous >> driving' and lane hogging is 'inconsiderate driving'. > >Read it again. That's not what it says. > >OK Ian... lets read it together... The link was : >http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/fact_sheets/dangerous_driving/ > >The lines in question are: > >**** >Some examples of careless driving are: > >overtaking on the inside; >**** > >and > >**** >Examples of inconsiderate driving include: > >unnecessarily staying in an overtaking lane; >**** > >Now which part is confusing you? > The part which is confusing you is that you seem to think "dangerous" is spelt "careless". Go on - get your thumb paper out and try to read it again. C for cat, A for apple... -- Ian D
From: Ian Dalziel on 9 Aug 2010 17:47
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:34:27 +0100, Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 18:08:57 +0100, Ian Dalziel wrote: > >> Passing on the nearside can be an example of that. It is not always, >> or even often. > >usually. Why don't you just accept the bloody obvious? Why don't you accept the law? |