The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Dashcam" Thread
Discussion
Nice to see a s
t driver get their comeuppance for once. https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2015/06/...
t driver get their comeuppance for once. https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2015/06/...heebeegeetee said:
Nice to see a st driver get their comeuppance for once. https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2015/06/...
That is well worth a read! The most shocking thing is she parked in a bus stop and then nearly ran someone over for the sake of transporting her children a few hundred metres from the school back to her home. How f*cking lazy can you get. t driver get their comeuppance for once. https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2015/06/...I mean what a shocking example to set your own children.
heebeegeetee said:
The bloke who caused the crash was the one who turned sharp right into the other two.
The other two might have been stupid, but they haven't made anyone do anything.
I'm not taking blame away from the Camaro driver but effectively what happened there would be angry aggressive Camaro dThe other two might have been stupid, but they haven't made anyone do anything.
head trying to push in at the bar, then Mr Pickup continuously slapping the back of his head saying "you mad bro", "you mad bro" over and over again and splashing his pint at him until Mr angry snaps and throws a punch which accidentally connects with the powerfully built barmaid. If I saw that happen I wouldn't consider Mr Pickup to have "not made anyone do anything".It was the behaviour of both that caused the crash, As much as Mr Camaro was perfectly able to prevent the crash by not doing the manouevere, if pickup guy had completed his overtake and moved over nothing would have happened.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Well obviously it's no defence but a better analogy might be you explaining to the judge that because the guy had tried to barge past you to the bar, you'd then spent the next several minutes deliberately standing in his way so he couldn't get served even after you'd finished, in order specifically to wind him up. No legal defence still but most people would consider that you helped create a violent situation that need not have existed.anonymous said:
[redacted]
But the abused wife has no obligation to make a satisfactory meal, In English law (I know not necessarily where filmed) there is an obligation to other road users for such things as overtaking, lane discipline and probably many others so the other drivers actions could very well be used as mitigation.How much a magistrate or a judge would accept would probably be down to their personal opinion but I suspect it would be a tiny amount due solely to the fact that another road user (the trucker) nearly go the s
tty end of the other twos argument. mcdjl said:
Sorry, But i'm confused. I've taken three frames from the film (below). At 2s when the filming car is overtaking the car in lane 2 there are clearly 3 lanes. At 14s as the lorry moves from the slip lane into L1 there are still 3 lanes, the lorry merges. At 16s, just before the lorry moves to L2 there are still 3 lanes. At 23s we pass under the first sign that says L1 will become a slip lane (it isn't one at this point- we pass a 2nd warning at 27s), the lane markers have not changed to indicate that L1 is now a slip lane. The lorry should in my opinion not pulled out on to the videoing car.
Poor anticipation from dash cam driver ( or not as he has a dash cam and YouTube....just sayin) and a little eager from the euro truck driver for me. If I am not mistaken that is the entry slip from Brackmils ind est? So the road splits further down, the trunk is lanes 2 and 3 which become 1 and 2 past the junction, the A road splits off.
The truck driver, looking ahead and not from these shores may have noticed the sign as he joined and before the camera car was on top of him, or in sight of the sign too?
He may have noticed the split due to the green sign over 2 and 3, maybe even more so the blue motorway number and decided he should get in place asap due to piss poor vision and the usual selfishness from some car driver when they sense that the nice cruise in lane 2 they were having might be ended by a truck just needing to stay on the trunk? I agree he may have looked harsh, however I fully appreciate his need to make the switch in one go while drivers notice him.
God forbid the cam car was making a drama out of nothing in order to get some views on YouTube?
I tend to give foreign truckers as much space as I can, and I'm a HGV driver, it must be very very hard doing what they do and I guess he may have focused a little too much on the signs rather than the traffic closing in lane 2.
On the plus side, at least he had his indicator on, unlike a vast number of my HGV brethren!!!
PS: with a massive amount of irony, any chance we can have more vids and less pathetic girly squabbling about who can google legal quotes and wiki the most in order to be the cleverest muppet on the Internet?
rxtx said:
If nothing else, this thread really does highlight the amount of nuggets the forum has attracted over the years, especially the anti-cyclist lobby. I'm almost ashamed to be a member.
I have found that when car driving is criticised the is usually a general consensus formed rather quickly as we all hate middle lane morons e.t.cThe reason that cycling thread tend to go on is purely down to that group generally refusing to accept any criticism or responsibility for their actions and the affects that can have on others.
I really don't think anybody is anti-cycle, I myself rode one to work for years but the growth in cycling has presented problems from road design to driver training and cyclist will tell you that, but mention cycle training and you end up with another 30 pages, yet it would obviously help just as much as better driver training.
NoNeed said:
I have found that when car driving is criticised the is usually a general consensus formed rather quickly as we all hate middle lane morons e.t.c
The reason that cycling thread tend to go on is purely down to that group generally refusing to accept any criticism or responsibility for their actions and the affects that can have on others.
I really don't think anybody is anti-cycle, I myself rode one to work for years but the growth in cycling has presented problems from road design to driver training and cyclist will tell you that, but mention cycle training and you end up with another 30 pages, yet it would obviously help just as much as better driver training.
Yes I agree, the roads are, I feel, perhaps 2-3 times more congested than when I passed my test in 1989. I do about 2500-3000 miles a year now, and I don't enjoy it at all in the south east.The reason that cycling thread tend to go on is purely down to that group generally refusing to accept any criticism or responsibility for their actions and the affects that can have on others.
I really don't think anybody is anti-cycle, I myself rode one to work for years but the growth in cycling has presented problems from road design to driver training and cyclist will tell you that, but mention cycle training and you end up with another 30 pages, yet it would obviously help just as much as better driver training.
However, when you have someone sticking up for a bus driver playing sudoku at the lights, in central London, with passengers on board (anongst others) you have to wonder what sort of crap they think is acceptable on the roads. Probably the same sort of person that thinks someone eating a bowl of cereal in traffic is OK because they weren't moving, and of course the cyclist that saw it is a "lycra clad idiot".
Utter bellends.
NoNeed said:
rxtx said:
If nothing else, this thread really does highlight the amount of nuggets the forum has attracted over the years, especially the anti-cyclist lobby. I'm almost ashamed to be a member.
I have found that when car driving is criticised the is usually a general consensus formed rather quickly as we all hate middle lane morons e.t.cThe reason that cycling thread tend to go on is purely down to that group generally refusing to accept any criticism or responsibility for their actions and the affects that can have on others.
I really don't think anybody is anti-cycle, I myself rode one to work for years but the growth in cycling has presented problems from road design to driver training and cyclist will tell you that, but mention cycle training and you end up with another 30 pages, yet it would obviously help just as much as better driver training.
as you know damned well you've started the "another 30 pages" that you reckon you wanted to avoid.
rxtx said:
Yes I agree, the roads are, I feel, perhaps 2-3 times more congested than when I passed my test in 1989. I do about 2500-3000 miles a year now, and I don't enjoy it at all in the south east.
However, when you have someone sticking up for a bus driver playing sudoku at the lights, in central London, with passengers on board (anongst others) you have to wonder what sort of crap they think is acceptable on the roads. Probably the same sort of person that thinks someone eating a bowl of cereal in traffic is OK because they weren't moving, and of course the cyclist that saw it is a "lycra clad idiot".
Utter bellends.
I think that is more the hypocrisy of these wannabe vigilantes that seem intent on making everybody else follow rules that they themselves do not have or want.However, when you have someone sticking up for a bus driver playing sudoku at the lights, in central London, with passengers on board (anongst others) you have to wonder what sort of crap they think is acceptable on the roads. Probably the same sort of person that thinks someone eating a bowl of cereal in traffic is OK because they weren't moving, and of course the cyclist that saw it is a "lycra clad idiot".
Utter bellends.
In that bus driver case my after thought was that his employer can't be very good as a bus full of cameras should deter such behaviour as everything can be seen, he was obviously not concerned about that, even when a cyclist gave him the b
king he looked like he didn't give a st. Most people at work make a real attempt to follow rules for fear of consequences, his employer does not supervise very well was my conclusion.
I did a youtube search to watch that again and found another from abroad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNesjnod7fE
It's not his employer's responsibility though is it? He's in control, it's his responsibility to do his job properly and he's responsible for his passengers. Bikes (motor and push) filter through traffic in London all the time, and he wasn't paying attention. My first thought was "what a tt", not "his employer isn't keeping enough of a check on him". If they need to do that, then they're employing the wrong people.
I wonder what happened to the driver. If I were his boss he'd be sacked. I asked this on the cereal thread but nobody answered because it was obvious (then they carried on defending the stupid cow), if a policeman saw it what would they do?
t", not "his employer isn't keeping enough of a check on him". If they need to do that, then they're employing the wrong people.I wonder what happened to the driver. If I were his boss he'd be sacked. I asked this on the cereal thread but nobody answered because it was obvious (then they carried on defending the stupid cow), if a policeman saw it what would they do?
The Sodoku guy? Not a damn thing. He wasn't committing any offence. He posed no possible danger to anyone.
You could have a football match in a bus with it in neutral and the handbrake on without causing anyone the slightest problem (well, as long as the football didnt knock it into gear...bad example
).
What if the driver simply rested his eyes? There's no strong obligation to sit in neutral, with the handbrake on and scanning around. You do that before pulling off - that's when potential danger arises.
I don't think it's good driving, and I dont 'switch off' like that at lights, but maybe those lights are a really long wait; maybe he still has 20 seconds to make sure all is well before moving off, etc.
Saying he should be fired is absolutely shameful. I hope you get fired for doing something so minor.
You could have a football match in a bus with it in neutral and the handbrake on without causing anyone the slightest problem (well, as long as the football didnt knock it into gear...bad example
). What if the driver simply rested his eyes? There's no strong obligation to sit in neutral, with the handbrake on and scanning around. You do that before pulling off - that's when potential danger arises.
I don't think it's good driving, and I dont 'switch off' like that at lights, but maybe those lights are a really long wait; maybe he still has 20 seconds to make sure all is well before moving off, etc.
Saying he should be fired is absolutely shameful. I hope you get fired for doing something so minor.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff