Drivers and their problems

Jacques Cousteau you say?

https://youtu.be/Kpe_KHDEfgw?t=27

Sorry Mate, Horse Didn't See You.  Although it does seem to wearing tinted blinkers - hope they're carriageway-legal.

Alternatively - "although a lifelong careful driver, my client was momentarily and unavoidably distracted when their postillion was struck by lightning..."

You should have say that it was a curious picture but then reminded them of e.g. Pierre Curie being killed by a cart (although this was considered distracted walking in part).  Then point out that there are a lot more carts now with a lot more horsepower and speed.  But the drivers are still humans.

Alternatively you could connect this with the Matthew Parris / Rod Liddle "banter" and compared this to a lynching postcard.  But then everyone would definitely know you were a nutter and you'd probably get blocked.

Quote:

Driving a blue Volkswagen Beetle, he sped through 30 mile per hour zones at an average of 45 miles per hour. The highest speed he was clocked at through a zone with the same speed restrictions was 69 miles per hour, more than double the limit.

Was he driving a classic (real) Beetle or a nu-Beetle?

Would a classic ever reach 69mph ?

Have you seen the way brooksby drives ?!

hirsute wrote:

Have you seen the way brooksby drives ?!

Actually, my kids always complain that I drive far too slowly, and certainly slower than my wife...

Awavey wrote:

Would a classic ever reach 69mph ?

I have once.  On a motorway.  Downhill.  With a tailwind...

The interesting part about that is why 58 offences were racked up. It was stopped elsewhere for having no insurance, but implicit in that was the registration did not tie up to an address and they needed the information from another force to identify the driver. They then sent 58 notices all at once.

Clearly a deliberate attempt to drive outside the law. They must have known they were setting off speed cameras and not getting tickets so they believed their ploy was working.

I can't see that ban being abided by given that no other aspect of vehicle law was abided by. Watch this space.

gofundme.com/imalawbreaker/46880

They've been talking about the Bristol CAZ for years, and it has nearly been put in place a couple of times over the last year before being pushed back. 

But only now, a month before its implementation, are protesters appearing saying it will 'lock them in their homes'.

I disagree.  Its a crappy road layout and what businesses are down by the lakes are irrelevant.  Basically its a 4 way slightly offset crossroads but with only 3 roads being traffic light controlled.  Its a recipe for disaster.

If you are turning up into Cav park village from the lakes and there is a queue of traffic in the nearside lane you do have to pull out blindly into the far side lane and hope no-one is barrelling down the outside of the queue.

Just coz drivists are raising petitions doesnt mean they are automatically wrong. 

Secret_squirrel wrote:

I disagree.  Its a crappy road layout and what businesses are down by the lakes are irrelevant.  Basically its a 4 way slightly offset crossroads but with only 3 roads being traffic light controlled.  Its a recipe for disaster.

If you are turning up into Cav park village from the lakes and there is a queue of traffic in the nearside lane you do have to pull out blindly into the far side lane and hope no-one is barrelling down the outside of the queue.

Just coz drivists are raising petitions doesnt mean they are automatically wrong. 

 

I posted that article because I use that Junction and my experience is, yes, you need to be cautious but you aren't blind. I've come out of the lakes on foot and by car. I wouldn't like doing that direction on two wheels though I do that Junction on the bike going between Sonning and Cav Park (up lowfield).

I'm not saying it's great, I'm saying that making junctions easier is keeping shit drivers on the road. The danger on that junction is people speeding, racing the lights and blocking the keep clear box not the design itself.

I'm not totally closed to persuasion but it would take a lot to convince me that some one who can't negotiate that should be on the road. Blaming the business, as opposed to tackling dangerous driver behaviour is madness. Besides, I bet you the numpties that can't manage that are the same ones that can't manage Briants Ave.

Edit: i think the biggest danger is drivers coming out of the lakes racing the lights, and drivers from Sonning racing the lights so they are a danger to each other. Let them take each other out, Darwinsim in action. If you exit the Lakes and don't think you should wait a phase, you are too entitled to be in a car.

Thats a disingenous arguement.   We dont tolerate not fit for purpose cycle lane layouts and therefore its perfectly valid for drivists not to tolerate poor road layouts.

Active safety is about designing (roads etc) so that poor behaviours are minimised - especially when there's a high likeyhood of interaction with other road users.

Saying its all the drivists fault is a copout as much as it would be convienient and tempting to do so.

The businesses down by the lake seem to be operating without Planning Permission for the recent major enlargement, unless it has changed.

They have set up a large aqua park with various activities with no PP.

Such a PP would perhaps require improvement to the Junction as a Planning Condition, which would address the issue.

https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/20880189.caversham-lakes-uncerta...

David9694 wrote:

Will someone please think of the drivers?  Welcome to my world, guys. 

'John Reynolds recently travelled up to Gainsborough to go walking and he thinks the recent reports are "shocking". The 69-year-old from Peterborough said: "It's shocking really when you think about how dangerous that could be, it's life-threatening.'

https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/local-news/residents-scared-worr...

That sounds very scary. I wonder if it was these two?