binners – Member

Is this a genuine significant safety issue or more something for motorway drivers to whine about??

If the ****-wits who sit in the middle lane didn’t, and stayed in the lane they were meant to be in instead, then the whole network would function as it was designed too, making life a lot easier for everyone. And, yes… safer.

Pick pretty much any process, and decide that you’re going to totally ignore one massively fundamental and significant part of it, and see what happens? [/quote]

Ah…of course…the road network hasn’t been working…and for this reason?

Well its certainly one of the reasons.

I like the way 60mph (85% of the applicable speed limit) is now considered “Chugging”…

We’ve become a nation of arseholes in cars, motorways are just full of lob-ons Furiously “making progress” these days… I’ll admit I used to partake in the culture a bit, but I’m finding driving less and less of an enjoyable activity and more of a harassed exercise in surviving a journey.

The fact that six delicate little flowers who had to apply the brakes, use the indicators and turn their steering wheel a bit are considered “victims” tells a tale IMO…

Or was there an actual accident? did I miss something here? I hope they feel the £6.66 they’re in line to receive cover’s the emotional suffering the have undergone…

The fact that six delicate little flowers who had to apply the brakes, use the indicators and turn their steering wheel a bit are considered “victims” tells a tale IMO…

They’re victims of the crime of bell-endery. A crime for which there should be far more prosecutions 😀

You have misunderstood what the Victim Surcharge is (not unreasonably given the terminology). It funds Victim Support services in general. It isn’t compensation. I would imagine the inconsiderate driving by this chap was witnessed by police who then stopped him, rather than six delicate flowers going to the trouble of reporting him.

Yep, lane hogging does no harm at all and doesn’t slow people down, cause jams or encourage people to undertake – so it should definitely be left alone.

And I’m certain that the drivers of the 6 cars mentioned in the report all called the police and complained, so are certainly deserving of the epithet ‘delicate little flowers’.

Jeez.

Most French autoroutes are just 2 lanes, difficult to hog a middle lane then. (At least the ones I’ve been on).

If the ****-wits who sit in the middle lane didn’t, and stayed in the lane they were meant to be in instead, then the whole network would function as it was designed too, making life a lot easier for everyone. And, yes… safer.

Well, I think you might want some evidence there. As a counter-hypothesis (well, a hypothesis to counter to an assumption) one could suggest that more lane changing actually reduces safety because of the greater number of interactions.

It’s also worth adding some context to the issue of middle lane hogging, which is that plenty of countries allow passing on the inside. I’ve no idea whether any research has been done to ascertain whether such rules reduce safety (removing confounding factors would be tricky) but it shouldn’t be assumed that a system that passes on one side but encourages more lane changes should be inherently safer than one that allows passing on both sides and may as a result reduce the need to change lanes.

I think it’s fairly clear that ducking in and out of every gap between vehicles in the inside lane would be seen as more dangerous than passing several in one go, so clearly there’s a balance to be struck.

Fundamentally, though, all of this is missing the point, which is that collisions on motorways are mainly caused by people driving such that they’re unable to avoid whatever unfolds ahead of them. 60mph is the speed limit for plenty of vehicles on such roads, and if people think that someone doing 60 in front of them is somehow dangerous, then they need to take a good long look at their own driving.

Fundamentally, though, all of this is missing the point, which is that collisions on motorways are mainly caused by people driving such that they’re unable to avoid whatever unfolds ahead of them. 60mph is the speed limit for plenty of vehicles on such roads, and if people think that someone doing 60 in front of them is somehow dangerous, then they need to take a good long look at their own driving.

Far more succinct +1…

Having one vehicle in a lane doesn’t constitute ‘the middle lane going slower’. If you went past in the inside lane, you’d be done.

Done for what, exactly?

60mph is the speed limit for plenty of vehicles on such roads, and if people think that someone doing 60 in front of them is somehow dangerous, then they need to take a good long look at their own driving.

Speed isn’t the issue. Incorrectly sitting in the middle lane, oblivious to whats going on around you, is the issue. Someone could be doing 20 for all I care. As long as they do it in the corresct lane, so I can get past them as I wildly hurtle along at 70.

Sitting in the middle lane, whatever the speed is you’re doing, is simply bell-endery, which I believe is what our resident middle-lane-sitting ****-wit was prosecuted for. Here hoping for more prosecutions. Might make the idiots actually think about how motorways are meant to operate. Its hardly bloody complicated, is it?

The fact that six delicate little flowers who had to apply the brakes, use the indicators and turn their steering wheel a bit are considered “victims” tells a tale IMO…
Or was there an actual accident? did I miss something here? I hope they feel the £6.66 they’re in line to receive cover’s the emotional suffering the have undergone…

Whatever you do, don’t let the fact that you clearly don’t understand the topic, stop you from ranting about it.

Whatever you do, don’t let the fact that you clearly don’t understand the topic, stop you from ranting about it.

Feel free to enlighten me…

nice rant but I seriously doubt the police took details of the 6 cars that had to break and are now trying to contact them to give them a share of 40 bloody quid.

lol

Speed isn’t the issue. Incorrectly sitting in the middle lane, oblivious to whats going on around you, is the issue.

Yes, but it’s a really quite unimportant one.

It’s just a case of some people being a bit annoyed because they have to move their hands and feet a bit.

Don’t get me wrong, I find middle lane hoggers a little annoying, but it’s really nothing to get angry about and it’s not, per se, a safety issue. If it was, we’d have to ask some pretty searching questions about two-lane carriageways.

It’s getting into the realms of inconsiderate though, which is what he’ll have been done for.

Agree Cougar.

Done for what, exactly?

I think that when people get used to getting away with inconsiderate and poor driving a considerable proportion of them start pushing it further. Hogging the middle lane ignorant of all the other road users is the same mindset as driving into a low sun and not reducing speed. It is the drivers entitlement to drive however they want and **** everyone else.

I do like a good* STW driving thread, where two camps quickly form:

The first, the righteously indignant who want to demonstrate to everyone their amazing knowledge of the law, driving conventions and sheer skill behind the wheel (while refusing to acknowledge their own regular rule-breaking), and
The second, the passive aggressive who proudly pronounce their conversion from the stressed sales rep to the conscious ditherer: “I’m driving at 45 and see if I care”

There is, as yet, no sign of a clear winner….

*Don’t worry, this doesn’t qualify

Well, I think you might want some evidence there. As a counter-hypothesis (well, a hypothesis to counter to an assumption) one could suggest that more lane changing actually reduces safety because of the greater number of interactions.

So one arsehole sitting in the middle lane when one lane change could have put them in the correct lane actually decreases safety, because they have forced at least six other drivers to change lane who would otherwise not have needed to.

It’s getting into the realms of inconsiderate though, which is what he’ll have been done for.

Similarly inconsiderate to the cyclist not using the cycle lane, and holding up motorised traffic.

I suspect that on motorways in the SE there isn’t sufficient space to accommodate all traffic not engaged in overtaking.

So one arsehole sitting in the middle lane when one lane change could have put them in the correct lane actually decreases safety, because they have forced at least six other drivers to change lane who would otherwise not have needed to.

It is of course a given that none of those drivers feeling the need to overtake are themselves engaged in unsafe practices, for example, exceeding the speed limit.

Good. I do a lot of motorway driving and get so **** off with useless **** sat in the middle or outside lane going way less than the limit.

It’s just a case of some people being a bit annoyed because they have to move their hands and feet a bit.

No. It’s a case of reducing a three-lane carriageway down to one lane, and causing those behind who are driving correctly to either travel at the same speed as the rolling road-block, make four lane changes to pass instead of the two it would normally take, or pass on the left.

Or I suppose, a fourth option could be to blip your headlights to alert the other driver, but mostly the oblivious ones don’t see you anyway and the ones doing it intentionally can react in all manner of unpredictable and potentially dangerous ways.

It is of course a given that none of those drivers feeling the need to overtake are themselves engaged in unsafe practices, for example, exceeding the speed limit.

The driver in this case was doing 60mph on a motorway so there would be no need to exceed the posted limit to need to overtake.

Done for what, exactly?

Rule 268, Highway Code.

If you went past in the inside lane, you’d be done.

[quote]Done for what, exactly? [/quote]being a smartarse ?

As a driver of a less sporty car I find the sort of bell end who hogs the middle lane really dangerous and inconsiderate I come up behind them in the left lane at 70 followed by other people who have the wit and skill to follow the high way code they stay square in the middle I pull out to the middle signalling they can’t drive so stay where they are because they either are unaware of me in their morrror or believe they have a god given right to block the lane I now have to either decelerate or try and accelerate out into the outer lane where cars are already overtaking. I then go past and pull across to the nearside keeping an eye out for others who have undertaken the lane hogger.
I know the person who prosecuted this no delicate flowers bleating to complain no compensation to victims just someone who can’t follow a very simple rule who has been punished for driving poorly without regard to other road users.

Oh yes quite a few tickets issued all bar this Muppet suck it up and pay rather than dispute .

So one arsehole sitting in the middle lane when one lane change could have put them in the correct lane actually decreases safety, because they have forced at least six other drivers to change lane who would otherwise not have needed to.

If the six drivers who overtook him hadn’t needed to change lane to do so, they’d have necessarily been in the middle or outside lane. So what you’re saying is that six cars failing to move across as required is safer than one car failing to move across as required…? 😉

I still think my idea of snipers strategically placed on motorway bridges is betterer

Along with 5 points and a grand in fines…

Pah! Lightweight deterrents. I raise you with roadside decapitation and the still bleeding head skewered on a pole in the central reservation as a warning to all the other feckless idiots who can’t or won’t keep left unless overtaking.

That’d sort it.

No. It’s a case of reducing a three-lane carriageway down to one lane, and causing those behind who are driving correctly to either travel at the same speed as the rolling road-block, make four lane changes to pass instead of the two it would normally take, or pass on the left.

Well, yes (though it’s reducing it to two lanes rather than one, unless you argue that simply using a dual carriageway is basically the same offence as staying in the middle lane). I do agree. It’s annoying and inconsiderate.

I’m playing devil’s advocate because (a) anyone who argues it presents danger probably needs to adjust their own driving and (b) I have a large chip on my shoulder, namely the fact that this inconveniencing of others carries an identical punishment to the use of a mobile phone, which is a considerable and wilful addition to road danger.

Pah! Lightweight deterrents. I raise you with roadside decapitation and the still bleeding head skewered on a pole in the central reservation as a warning to all the other feckless idiots who can’t or won’t keep left unless overtaking.

That’d sort it. Doubtful – between glancing occasionally at the road ahead and then more frequently between mobile screen and hair-view mirror, there’s precious little chance of most drivers even knowing there is a reservation

Well, yes (though it’s reducing it to two lanes rather than one, unless you argue that simply using a dual carriageway is basically the same offence as staying in the middle lane). I do agree. It’s annoying and inconsiderate.

Even more so on 4 lane sections of the M25 where 4 lanes become 2, because the middle lane hogger sits in lane 3 of 4.

Along with the snipers, can we please have landmines on those dodgy areas marked with lots of diagonal white lines, like in the middle where a lane ends? The mines being just big enough to take out a tyre, we don’t want pile-ups, thanks.

Along with the snipers, can we please have landmines on those dodgy areas marked with lots of diagonal white lines, like in the middle where a lane ends? The mines being just big enough to take out a tyre, we don’t want pile-ups, thanks.

Yeah! That’s more like it. War on motorists. Has a nice ring to it methinks.

Rule 268, Highway Code.

I’m aware of that, but it doesn’t answer the question.

Let’s try again. Done for what exactly? What law is being broken by passing on the left? One cannot be “done” for “rule 268 of the Highway Code,” one can only be “done” for breaking laws.

Driving without due care. Evidence of this would be that you ignored Rule 268 of the Highway code. If you don’t believe me, pick a police car in the middle lane of the DC & then undertake it. See what happens.

War on Motorists, no, just getting the attention of the careless and impetuous.

I missed this,

The first, the righteously indignant who want to demonstrate to everyone their amazing knowledge of the law, driving conventions and sheer skill behind the wheel (while refusing to acknowledge their own regular rule-breaking),

I fail to see why either a knowledge of the law or a competence in a pastime which could potentially kill someone if done badly is in any way something to be criticised.

Unless you’re conflating “competent” and “awesome” of course.

Done for what, exactly?
being a smartarse ?

Ooh, yeah thats me. Compared to the fwits that sit in the middle lane my arsehole is a longstanding champion of Countdown.