Road Rage - Small bump leading to assault.
Discussion
Tuvra said:
Im sorry but it sounds like you tried to force your way in, f
ked it up and rear ended the BMW?
Whether the Navara should have let you merge is another argument, but surely your at fault for hitting it? You essentially "merged in" to a space that never existed?
Then I'm sorry but perhaps you should re-read the thread. No 'forcing' other than by the Navara which hit me. Space existed, she tried to close it.ked it up and rear ended the BMW?Whether the Navara should have let you merge is another argument, but surely your at fault for hitting it? You essentially "merged in" to a space that never existed?
Silverbullet767 said:
According the the OP, he did and it was the Navara's decision to cause an accident. But we only have one side of the story.
The point was about manners, not anything else.Edited by Silverbullet767 on Tuesday 11th November 09:27
If you choose to enter a lane without the permission of the vehicle who, essentially, has priority (by already being in the correct lane) then it's always going to be a gamble.
For me, this is less to do with the assault or accident, but the OP recognising that he had the ability to avoid the situation and, based on his prior topic, is showning a lack of willingness to learn from the incident.
Maybe the Nissan driver was an idiot, and the BMW driver was a psychopath, but the road is full of people like this, so it's an inevitability that if you're not careful and considerate that you'll end up being the victim of such drivers.
romeogolf said:
Tuvra said:
Im sorry but it sounds like you tried to force your way in, fked it up and rear ended the BMW?
Whether the Navara should have let you merge is another argument, but surely your at fault for hitting it? You essentially "merged in" to a space that never existed?
Then I'm sorry but perhaps you should re-read the thread. No 'forcing' other than by the Navara which hit me. Space existed, she tried to close it.ked it up and rear ended the BMW?Whether the Navara should have let you merge is another argument, but surely your at fault for hitting it? You essentially "merged in" to a space that never existed?
Al U said:
I'm genuinely not trying to annoy you. We both just clearly have differing opinions. This really is a marmite situation where you either think one way or the other. I'm a person that will queue, whereas you are a person that will cut in at the last minute. It really doesn't bother me that much because like the other people who are patient and just queue, we are quite laid back.
It's not "cutting in". That's the problem. You sit in the left hand lane and view everyone who uses the right-hand lane and merges at the correct merge point, as completely in the wrong and somehow queue jumping. They aren't. They are utilising the road space as it's intended. It's only "cutting in" when you get a bunch of people with your mentality in the left hand lane..."well, he's just cutting in, I'm not going to let him!"...who then deliberately close gaps to stop people merging and slow traffic down even further.
If the people in the left really were so patient and laid back they'd just crawl along, leave a gap in front of them big enough for a car to merge and then those queuing on the right would merge into those gaps and no one would even have to slow down. And we wouldn't end up with situations like the OP.
Conscript said:
It's not "cutting in". That's the problem. You sit in the left hand lane and view everyone who uses the right-hand lane and merges at the correct merge point, as completely in the wrong and somehow queue jumping.
They aren't. They are utilising the road space as it's intended. It's only "cutting in" when you get a bunch of people with your mentality in the left hand lane..."well, he's just cutting in, I'm not going to let him!"...who then deliberately close gaps to stop people merging and slow traffic down even further.
If the people in the left really were so patient and laid back they'd just crawl along, leave a gap in front of them big enough for a car to merge and then those queuing on the right would merge into those gaps and no one would even have to slow down. And we wouldn't end up with situations like the OP.
You're correct, but the point is that not everyone behaves that way. As a responsible driver, ideally, you should wait for confirmation (if required, based on judgement) that the driver to your left intends to let you merge. Expecting it via opportunism can have consequences, as per this scenario.They aren't. They are utilising the road space as it's intended. It's only "cutting in" when you get a bunch of people with your mentality in the left hand lane..."well, he's just cutting in, I'm not going to let him!"...who then deliberately close gaps to stop people merging and slow traffic down even further.
If the people in the left really were so patient and laid back they'd just crawl along, leave a gap in front of them big enough for a car to merge and then those queuing on the right would merge into those gaps and no one would even have to slow down. And we wouldn't end up with situations like the OP.
Best thing I learnt back when I was a learner driver was this: Drive according to the Highway Code, but always be prepared for drivers who choose not to follow it.
Conscript said:
It's not "cutting in". That's the problem. You sit in the left hand lane and view everyone who uses the right-hand lane and merges at the correct merge point, as completely in the wrong and somehow queue jumping.
They aren't. They are utilising the road space as it's intended. It's only "cutting in" when you get a bunch of people with your mentality in the left hand lane..."well, he's just cutting in, I'm not going to let him!"...who then deliberately close gaps to stop people merging and slow traffic down even further.
If the people in the left really were so patient and laid back they'd just crawl along, leave a gap in front of them big enough for a car to merge and then those queuing on the right would merge into those gaps and no one would even have to slow down. And we wouldn't end up with situations like the OP.
I'm not sure about that. I think it depends on the markings, I've seen it where Merge In Turn is signed, and road markings show each lane merges into one. I've also seen it where the right lane merges to the left, so the right lane ceases and traffic should move over into the left (which incidentally is what I think happened in the OP) They aren't. They are utilising the road space as it's intended. It's only "cutting in" when you get a bunch of people with your mentality in the left hand lane..."well, he's just cutting in, I'm not going to let him!"...who then deliberately close gaps to stop people merging and slow traffic down even further.
If the people in the left really were so patient and laid back they'd just crawl along, leave a gap in front of them big enough for a car to merge and then those queuing on the right would merge into those gaps and no one would even have to slow down. And we wouldn't end up with situations like the OP.
No problem with using all available lanes, but when the right lane closes it's kind of a given that you need an invite from the car behind to get into the left, rather than push through. This is also what I think happened in the OP, door was closed, OP didnt realise then involved a BMW which was nothing to do with the other car closing the gap.
gazza285 said:
There's about 50 yards of two lane off that roundabout, I'm not saying you deserved a slap for trying your maneuver, but I'm not surprised people aren't happy with you, is it worth the aggravation to gain so little?
What is the 50 yds of road there for? Decoration?It is there to improve the flow of traffic off the roundabout by moving the point at which the traffic has to merge 50 yds away from the roundabout, instead of making it merge on the roundabout.
So the road engineer wants people to leave the roundabout in two lanes and merge in turn at the merge point. Otherwise traffic doesn't flow properly and a jam develops. Then people who use the road correctly get accused of "jumping in" and then the mouth breathing sheep in the line think they are being treated unjustly.
Merge in turn at the merge point and everything will be fine.
andy-xr said:
No problem with using all available lanes, but when the right lane closes it's kind of a given that you need an invite from the car behind to get into the left, rather than push through. This is also what I think happened in the OP, door was closed, OP didnt realise then involved a BMW which was nothing to do with the other car closing the gap.
Generally the invite would be the driver to your left and behind leaving a gap which you can then judge moving into. A flash is courteous, but technically not to be relied on anyway.The way I read the OP, such a gap existed, he attempted to move into it, but the woman in the Navara then deliberately closed it off and actually ended up driving into him. How she is not considered to be at fault, I don't know.
Al U said:
Just to clarify, I'm not talking about dual lane exits, you can't be cutting in if there are 2 lanes and one of them is open. I'm talking about single lane slip roads where at the point of exit there is only one lane.
You mean, where the right hand lane physically ends and the traffic has to merge into the left hand lane? Such as, due to roadworks?That is what I am talking about. The merge point is generally just before the point where the right hand ends.
If the intention was that everyone merged as soon as it became apparent that the right hand lane would be closed off, and sat in a queue on the left, you'd end up with 800 - 100 yards of empty right hand lane not being used for queueing traffic, which means the queues are longer. By driving up the right hand lane and merging only at the point you are supposed to, drivers are actually reducing the length of the congestion. It's the selfish ones in the left who close ranks and prevent them from merging, due to some misplaced sense of being wronged by an evil queue-jumper, that cause the snarl ups.
I'm imagining a situation where the queue on the right is a load of cars that are all indicating at various points to get into the left lane, and the OP essentially overtakes these cars as they move in and gets right to the end where it's physically impossible to go any further in the right lane and keeps moving slowly left to muscle his way in.
Whether or not that's the intention of the road markings, the Highway Code, or whatever, it's certainly not the prevailing attitude. Just as the prevailing attitude can change Laws, and words like "selfie" enter the Oxford dictionary, it's the prevailing attitude that counts in my opinion. If most otherwise right thinking people think it's poor manners, then it is - whether you're prepared to accept responsibility or not.
Generally speaking I merge later than I ought to, and I feign a bit of surprise that the merge in has "crept up on me", so I'm not a total saint but it's never so close to the end that it irritates anyone, or is otherwise remarkable. Consequently I've never had anyone cause me any issues when I start indicating.
The OP's attitude - whilst strictly speaking is perfectly legitimate - is not in practice. That's what counts. Merging right at the end sends the message that you think your journey is more important than everyone else who not only got there before you, and therefore deserves to be ahead, but also had the good grace to follow other peoples example and queue. No one wants to do it, it's a sacrifice for the greater good, and setting yourself aside from that by pushing in at the last moment is, frankly, disrespectful.
As was said earlier in the thread - it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.
EDIT: The grander point I'm trying to make is that all of the "Bravo! Why don't X get it?" is all academic when you (the OP) is the one with a damaged car & glasses. The prevailing attitude, rightly or wrongly, is what counts as you can't control it. If people do have the attitude of the Navara woman and the BMW driver, then you have to moderate your behaviour accordingly. Acting like it's some great revelation when cutting in at the end (again, whether legitimate behaviour or not) can have this outcome is as perhaps just as ignorant as it's claimed the actions of the early left lane queuers.
Whether or not that's the intention of the road markings, the Highway Code, or whatever, it's certainly not the prevailing attitude. Just as the prevailing attitude can change Laws, and words like "selfie" enter the Oxford dictionary, it's the prevailing attitude that counts in my opinion. If most otherwise right thinking people think it's poor manners, then it is - whether you're prepared to accept responsibility or not.
Generally speaking I merge later than I ought to, and I feign a bit of surprise that the merge in has "crept up on me", so I'm not a total saint but it's never so close to the end that it irritates anyone, or is otherwise remarkable. Consequently I've never had anyone cause me any issues when I start indicating.
The OP's attitude - whilst strictly speaking is perfectly legitimate - is not in practice. That's what counts. Merging right at the end sends the message that you think your journey is more important than everyone else who not only got there before you, and therefore deserves to be ahead, but also had the good grace to follow other peoples example and queue. No one wants to do it, it's a sacrifice for the greater good, and setting yourself aside from that by pushing in at the last moment is, frankly, disrespectful.
As was said earlier in the thread - it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.
EDIT: The grander point I'm trying to make is that all of the "Bravo! Why don't X get it?" is all academic when you (the OP) is the one with a damaged car & glasses. The prevailing attitude, rightly or wrongly, is what counts as you can't control it. If people do have the attitude of the Navara woman and the BMW driver, then you have to moderate your behaviour accordingly. Acting like it's some great revelation when cutting in at the end (again, whether legitimate behaviour or not) can have this outcome is as perhaps just as ignorant as it's claimed the actions of the early left lane queuers.
Edited by Durzel on Tuesday 11th November 10:12
Durzel said:
Whether or not that's the intention of the road markings, the Highway Code, or whatever, it's certainly not the prevailing attitude. Just as the prevailing attitude can change Laws, and words like "selfie" enter the Oxford dictionary, it's the prevailing attitude that counts in my opinion. If most otherwise right thinking people think it's poor manners, then it is - whether you're prepared to accept responsibility or not.
From my experience, it's also the prevailing attitude that sitting in the middle lane of a motorway appears to be "correct". Should we just accept that despite the fact that it causes more congestion, slows traffic down, and is symptomatic of the selfish attitude that plagues Britain's roads?romeogolf said:
Tuvra said:
Im sorry but it sounds like you tried to force your way in, fked it up and rear ended the BMW?
Whether the Navara should have let you merge is another argument, but surely your at fault for hitting it? You essentially "merged in" to a space that never existed?
Then I'm sorry but perhaps you should re-read the thread. No 'forcing' other than by the Navara which hit me. Space existed, she tried to close it.ked it up and rear ended the BMW?Whether the Navara should have let you merge is another argument, but surely your at fault for hitting it? You essentially "merged in" to a space that never existed?
Being punched and your glasses broken is inexcusable, but the worrying thing for me about this thread is that you seem to be completely convinced that there is nothing you could or should have done differently whatsoever. If that's the case then you're going to be punched again at some point.
If you showed any awareness you would have known the Navara was right beside you. If you showed any pragmatism you would have just waited until the car behind the Navara let you in.
In the same way that bikers point out that there's no point in being right when you're dead, there's no point in holding your firm beliefs in lane merging when you're exposed to such hostile responses. If you don't mind being thumped again - crack on. If you don't want to be thumped again, rethink your policy on other road users.
romeogolf said:
So yesterday I was involved in a small bump which was then an assault.
Two lanes, merging into one. I merged admittedly quite late, but I am of the opinion you should use all the road available. Ahead of me is a silver BMW 3-series. To my left and slightly behind a black Nissan Navara.
Well you put yourself in the danger area. I can't justify the violence of the other driver but I personally cannot stand people who merge at the pinch point. Two lanes, merging into one. I merged admittedly quite late, but I am of the opinion you should use all the road available. Ahead of me is a silver BMW 3-series. To my left and slightly behind a black Nissan Navara.
Conscript said:
From my experience, it's also the prevailing attitude that sitting in the middle lane of a motorway appears to be "correct". Should we just accept that despite the fact that it causes more congestion, slows traffic down, and is symptomatic of the selfish attitude that plagues Britain's roads?
You can't control it, so why shouldn't you accept it?I'm not saying it's right (it isn't), but fighting a one man battle against it - e.g. by trying to force them over or whatever is not only a war you can't win, but is more likely to result in you getting prosecuted if it's deemed to be aggressive driving. The road to hell is paved with good intentions et al.
Jasandjules said:
press charges.
And sue the BMW driver in the civil courts for your losses including the injury and the cost of your glasses.
I would also be interested in any insurance bod's views as to whether or not a policy would pay out to the BMW driver when he has committed assault?
+1And sue the BMW driver in the civil courts for your losses including the injury and the cost of your glasses.
I would also be interested in any insurance bod's views as to whether or not a policy would pay out to the BMW driver when he has committed assault?
There is no reason for assault. Press charges.
Al U said:
Silverbullet767 said:
Read the highway code, and grow up.
Just admit that you're in the "inconsiderate git who pulls in late" camp.ks sake, there is no 'pulling in late'. If you were too late to pull in you'd be through the cones or over the kerb.There is a difference between 'merging correctly at the zip point' and 'bulling your way in', the two do not go hand-in-hand.
There are three ways of doing it, merging 'too early', merging correctly and considerately at the merge point, and 'forcing your way in with no consideration of those in the other lane', however most people seem to be of an opinion that only Option 1 and 3 are ever a possibility.
Al U said:
I think this went a lot worse for you than it should of. BUT, I hate people like you that think their journey is more important than other people's and cut in at the last minute when people like me have been queuing for 5 minutes or so. Maybe in the future you'll just join the back of the queue now?
Well, if you used the empty lane to queue and merge properly the queue would move along nicely. As a result there wouldn't be a 'queue jumper' as you put it.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff