Drivers and their problems

David9694 wrote:

...but isn't using buses a life skill like brushing your teeth or tying your shoe laces??

Exactly like it, in that you have to be taught; if "everyone" uses electric toothbrushes or slip-on shoes you probably won't!

Presumably "I have to drive the kids everywhere" at least in part because that's simply what everyone else does (and your kids will be the butt of jokes / abuse / social isolation if you don't.  Assuming they still spend some time not online?

I saw that. Comments closed and wiped out !
She made up the bit about roadworks.
And she also would have to have used the bus lane to access the pedestrian area.

This was linked.

The cars have to be very long, but Wokingham is one of them...

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/drivers-cars-too-lon...

David9694 wrote:

Drivers failing tests for stopping at red light due to little-known law

A quirk of the Highway Code is to blame for the failure, which has gone viral on YouTube and social media apps.

Ah - our sometime commentator "Nigel" was only half-right!  Clearly you not only can go through a red light if it isn't yet "established", but you also should if it's been permanently establish in the wrong place!

David9694 wrote:

OK this article and the post it's based on is probably nonsense, although I have occasionally seen it happen in my locality.

Drivers failing tests for stopping at red light due to little-known law

A quirk of the Highway Code is to blame for the failure, which has gone viral on YouTube and social media apps.

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/drivers-failing-test...

Here's the video referenced, from a year ago.

You can't buy stupid

I like the response from herefordman99:

Quote:

even if the scooter is road legal, then why use the road when the footpath is more than adequate? Surely it should only be used on the road where there is no available footpath to use? [...] Before anyone says anything, my wife uses one (not class 3 though), so i know the regulations surrounding them.

Doesn't appear to know the regulations that a C3 scooter rider cannot use its legally permitted 8 mph top speed on the pavement (must stay at or below 4 mph), so there is a perfectly good reason for them to be on the road even if there is an available footpath.

Hirsute wrote:

Apparently this is just a bike or e-bike…

I get that this is the point you're making, but in what world is that an "e-bike"?  It is an electric motorcycle.  Styled to look like a motorcycle.  Being (illegally) ridden by a 13 years old boy wearing a motorcycle helmet.

Good grief!  It's things like this that lead to councils panicking about the e-bike menace and putting stupid PSPOs in place… 

 clearly isn't one of life's winners but yet our laws can't see him deprived of his right to drive for life

Looks like Rab C. Nesbitt!

David9694 wrote:

business as usual for drivers as regards people with disabilities:

Worcestershire Parkway disabled parking, 'unexpected demand' to blame

A spokesperson for Great Western Railway said: "We offer 23 accessible parking bays immediately outside the station, and a separate pick-up/drop off point, both of which are clearly signposted.

https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/24731866.worcestershire-parkway-dis...

Other drivers only care about disabled people when it gives them a way to object to cycling infrastructure.

brooksby wrote:

Hirsute wrote:

Apparently this is just a bike or e-bike…

I get that this is the point you're making, but in what world is that an "e-bike"?  It is an illegal (if ridden on the road, or cycle path, or pavement, or ... probably most places) electric motorcycle.  Styled to look like a motorcycle.  Being (illegally) ridden by a 13 years old boy wearing a motorcycle helmet.

Just to emphasise; because there's a certain strain of adults (near to where I stay also) who are perfectly happy to buy their kids such "toys" (clearly how they think of them).  "How come I could buy it (in the shops) if it's illegal?"

I think this is somewhat like the early days before the government got prodded into classifying new pharmaceuticals where apparently you could e.g. go into certain pubs and see people openly dealing containers of stuff or even snorting it off the tables because "it's legal, you can't touch me!"

Hopefully it doesn't take too many deaths / injuries to people in this case before the government decides to give a monkeys'?  I believe it's "don't care" (because not a car) rather than ignorance.  Or even "it's all good for the economy, maybe they can even help with congestion?"

wtjs wrote:

 clearly isn't one of life's winners but yet our laws can't see him deprived of his right to drive for life

Looks like Rab C. Nesbitt!

Sadly that is the first thing I thought...

David9694 wrote:

Another cost to everyone else arising from cars - putting in the substantial bollards described here isn't going to come cheap. 

Obviously a woke waste of money!  We just need better drivers! Through .. er ... more police / "tech" / "self-driving cars" (one for "non-drivers and their problems"?) / sending everyone "back where they came from" we don't like (is this right?) etc.

chrisonabike wrote:

David9694 wrote:

Another cost to everyone else arising from cars - putting in the substantial bollards described here isn't going to come cheap. 

Obviously a woke waste of money!  We just need better drivers! Through .. er ... more police / "tech" / "self-driving cars" (one for "non-drivers and their problems"?) / sending everyone "back where they came from" we don't like (is this right?) etc.

We (society) would probably get a lot more value out of using the sensors, computers, and controllers that were intended to enable self-driving cars, to give us self-stopping cars. Cars that refuse to drive into people or buildings, go too fast around corners, drive on the wrong side of the road, or drive onto pavements. If it needs to be over-ridden for legitimate reasons, the car could go into a 5 MPH mode.

We (society) would probably get a lot more value out of using the sensors, computers, and controllers that were intended to enable self-driving cars, to give us self-stopping cars

I, for one, would prefer self driving cars with all their software failings to cars driven by Audi/ BMW drivers (and their ilk)

A chance that he thought his bike might be stolen from him.

Someone's been watching re-runs of Line Of Duty..

David9694 wrote:

Councillor 'does job' (TIFTFY)

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/24635829.bcp-councillor-investiga...

Echo wrote:

The complainant claimed because the registration plates and faces had not been pixelated, it was a breach of the code of conduct. 

If you've done nothing wrong etc etc.

I don't understand the obsession with pixellating number plates - if the car is obviously parked illegally/inconsiderately, or is being driven in a dangerous manner, then they deserve the recognition IMO.

Great! People driving more to the car park, in order to get their money's worth, all subsidised by cyclists and others not using the car parks. I'd be voting to get rid of the town councillors.

brooksby wrote:

Echo wrote:

The complainant claimed because the registration plates and faces had not been pixelated, it was a breach of the code of conduct. 

If you've done nothing wrong etc etc.

I don't understand the obsession with pixellating number plates - if the car is obviously parked illegally/inconsiderately, or is being driven in a dangerous manner, then they deserve the recognition IMO.

Also, there's often issues where the owner of a specific car denies knowing who was driving it at the time of an incident, so surely the number plate doesn't actually identify an individual?

There's also the fact that number plates are easily visible in public places and so there should be no expectation of privacy from the vehicle owner.

It's to spare the car blushes - presumably when they're not crashing into buildings they sometimes get embarrassed by what their driver has done - and it would be unfair to out them for that?

Meanwhile, on the Town Council's own website:

"In 2019 Bollington Town Council declared a Climate Emergency so affirming a strong and positive commitment to take action on climate change."

Was the use of CCTV cameras banned for number plate capture a few years ago. If so, how do these robbing bar-stewards keep getting away with it?

David9694 wrote:

We need to stop listening to whingeing drivers. 

Anger as four Dover town centre streets to shut for Fastrack bus contraflow works

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/it-s-insane-four-town-centre-str...

Doesn't that red circle sign mean no buses and bicycles in both directions?