Is this dangerous?
Discussion
Is there a lawful authority or excuse being exercised here?
HA 1980 said:
Wilful Obstruction of the Highway
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
oldsoak said:
Is there a lawful authority or excuse being exercised here?
Report says the police state what they have done is not illegal. I guess as the lorries can still pass, albeit awkwardly, there is no foul?HA 1980 said:
Wilful Obstruction of the Highway
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
Edited by Marf on Wednesday 4th November 12:26
Marf said:
oldsoak said:
Is there a lawful authority or excuse being exercised here?
Report says the police state what they have done is not illegal. I guess as the lorries can still pass, albeit awkwardly, there is no foul?HA 1980 said:
Wilful Obstruction of the Highway
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
Edited by Marf on Wednesday 4th November 12:26
IIRC it isn't necessary for the whole of the highway to be blocked for the offence to be committed....if I'm wrong I'm sure I'll be corrected shortly.
The obstruction also has to be ‘wilful’, so if one of those lorry drivers complains, BiB will ask you to move and if you do not then this will be used as evidence of your ‘wilful’ obstruction when you appear in 'Maggies' court to answer the charge.
oldsoak said:
Is there a lawful authority or excuse being exercised here?
Depends how to interpret "obstruct". According to my dictionary, it can mean 1. "to block with an obstacle"; 2. "to make (progress or activity) difficult"; or 3. "impede or block a clear view of". Ignoring the last, if a narrow interpretation is taken (definition 1) there appears to be no offence; if the broader definition 2 is taken, perhaps there is. HA 1980 said:
Wilful Obstruction of the Highway
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
By section 137 of the Highways Act 1980: "(1) If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence . . . "
Bunch of NIMBY tosspots IMHO. Kids shouldn't be playing in the road anyway, so it makes no odds whether it's a HGV or a Mini coming through. And every person in the village will buy things delivered by lorries. So unless they're proposing a bypass for every village and town in the land, what do they expect?
Deliberately adding obstructions then claiming it's dangerous for children to be playing, seems a bit like cutting off their noses to spite their faces...
Deliberately adding obstructions then claiming it's dangerous for children to be playing, seems a bit like cutting off their noses to spite their faces...
Edited by PeteG on Wednesday 4th November 13:52
No sound as I'm at work, but my initial thoughts from what I see are:
1) If there's an alternative route to the tip that isn't a significant inconvenience to the lorries, then they have every right to be annoyed
2) If that route is the only way to the tip, or it's a 15-20 minute detour, then it's pretty stupid and selfish.
1) If there's an alternative route to the tip that isn't a significant inconvenience to the lorries, then they have every right to be annoyed
2) If that route is the only way to the tip, or it's a 15-20 minute detour, then it's pretty stupid and selfish.
PeteG said:
Bunch of NIMBY tosspots IMHO. Kids shouldn't be playing in the road anyway, so it makes no odds whether it's a HGV or a Mini coming through. And every person in the village will buy things delivered by lorries. So unless they're proposing a bypass for every village and town in the land, what do they expect?
Deliberately adding obstructions then claiming it's dangerous for children to be playing, seems a bit like cutting off their noses to spites their faces...
Your right. Lorry drivers are just doing a job and tackling traffic with yet more traffic is even more irresponsible, an increase in people crossing from between parked cars?Deliberately adding obstructions then claiming it's dangerous for children to be playing, seems a bit like cutting off their noses to spites their faces...
If they have issues they need to have a f
king ghey council meeting and deal with it like a fking responsible adults!The Wookie said:
No sound as I'm at work, but my initial thoughts from what I see are:
1) If there's an alternative route to the tip that isn't a significant inconvenience to the lorries, then they have every right to be annoyed
2) If that route is the only way to the tip, or it's a 15-20 minute detour, then it's pretty stupid and selfish.
+11) If there's an alternative route to the tip that isn't a significant inconvenience to the lorries, then they have every right to be annoyed
2) If that route is the only way to the tip, or it's a 15-20 minute detour, then it's pretty stupid and selfish.
+1 on the NIMBY.
They should have protested the landfill site, that's the problem here.
I suspect they still generate a fair amount of rubbish though, so they just want their rubbish put somewhere else: classic NIMBY.
If there was an alternative landfill site which allowed lorry access without going through ANY villages then perhaps they have a point. That seems extremely unlikely.
Those trucks don't appear to be held up much by their chicane protest so I doubt the villagers will achieve anything until they have a chance at the 7.5t ban.
They should have protested the landfill site, that's the problem here.
I suspect they still generate a fair amount of rubbish though, so they just want their rubbish put somewhere else: classic NIMBY.
If there was an alternative landfill site which allowed lorry access without going through ANY villages then perhaps they have a point. That seems extremely unlikely.
Those trucks don't appear to be held up much by their chicane protest so I doubt the villagers will achieve anything until they have a chance at the 7.5t ban.
I noticed part of the report was to stop "things like this happening" with a photo of a Alfa being squished by a lorry (1:14).
Down to the stupidity of the driver itself if you ask me. He/she should be fully aware of the turning circle of a HGV and the need to take up a little more room than most vehicles when negotiation bends. Should have held back...
Down to the stupidity of the driver itself if you ask me. He/she should be fully aware of the turning circle of a HGV and the need to take up a little more room than most vehicles when negotiation bends. Should have held back...
Edited by DeputyDawg on Wednesday 4th November 14:41
Kevin VRs said:
The Wookie said:
No sound as I'm at work, but my initial thoughts from what I see are:
1) If there's an alternative route to the tip that isn't a significant inconvenience to the lorries, then they have every right to be annoyed
2) If that route is the only way to the tip, or it's a 15-20 minute detour, then it's pretty stupid and selfish.
+11) If there's an alternative route to the tip that isn't a significant inconvenience to the lorries, then they have every right to be annoyed
2) If that route is the only way to the tip, or it's a 15-20 minute detour, then it's pretty stupid and selfish.
I think we're losing track of what roads are for, good comunications from one place to another and not 'this is my piece of road, I'll stop anything I dont like coming through, let it go through the other village'.
Or are we heading for a universal toll system
Is the chicane of cars more or less dangerous than leaving the road clear?
I know parked cars are a normal obstacle.
Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 4th November 14:49
Typical biased sensationalist anti Lorry BBC report, "Trucks monstering through the quiet village" and my piss boiler phrase of the month "Juggernauts"
The trucks are driving through the place because of demand, they do not do it for fun. Its a fact of life, stuff needs to move from A to B, the trucks are what is doing it.
Once the Trucks are stopped what will they moan about then ? They will moan about something, cars probably, or eachother.
NIMBY wkers.
The trucks are driving through the place because of demand, they do not do it for fun. Its a fact of life, stuff needs to move from A to B, the trucks are what is doing it.
Once the Trucks are stopped what will they moan about then ? They will moan about something, cars probably, or eachother.
NIMBY w
kers.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff