UnmarkedBlack 911 Carrera 4 on M4 near Reading!!
Discussion
vonhosen said:
LongQ said:
vonhosen said:
LongQ said:
vonhosen said:
slowly slowly said:
vonhosen said:
Who says they are ?
Someone may say they are being tailgated, others may say they are not tailgating.
Tailgating is not as simple a thing as being closer than the two second rule. There are times that it is OK to be closer than that & times where it is not. Circumstances matter & opinions will differ over what constitutes tailgating or not.
If you *think* (which is waht I said in my post) you are being tailgated by a vehicle, the advice is not to try & outrun it, but to extend they braking distance available to you gradually & let the vehicle pass at the first safe opportunity.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 9th November 18:43
IMO you don't normally talk rubbish but I think you have excelled yourself here.
Is somebody else using your handle? (like one of your kids)
What bit do you have issue with then ?
This bit
"If you *think* (which is waht I said in my post) you are being tailgated by a vehicle, the advice is not to try & outrun it, but to extend they braking distance available to you gradually & let the vehicle pass at the first safe opportunity."
Now that is exactly what I would if all other tactics that seemed vaguely pertinent at the time had failed, (Flashed brake lights, glare from rear fog lights if was a really bad case, maybe a couple of firm to very fiorm brake tests .... (that's a joke by the way)). But whether easing away looking for a suitably safe gap or running a quick sprint to take the tailgater by surprise (hopefully) and slipping into a gap where there is time to slow without the idiot re-attaching to your bumper before you get there or, worse, following you into it. Either way if the person at the back is an unmarked there is a chance of being done. Much more of a chance, I would suggest than, than of the unmarked driver thinking - What a smart and sensible person there must be driving that vehicle to be able to avoid the grief I am giving them in such a safe fashion.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen - who would know? I just think it is rather unlikely these days.
One of the nice things about a reasonably powerful car is that it offers more options for moving away from road conflict situations. Even so I recently found that you can buy much more time for the maneouvre if you pick your moment well and gently touch the brake pedal and hold it as you floor the throttle.
Anyway, smart arse observations over, that's the gist of why I have a problem the words quoted above from your earlier post. Have I misconstrued something?
So you'd knowingly commit offences, simply using the justification that you *believe* someone else is commiting an offence would make that OK ?
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 9th November 20:53
What?
Exactly where do you get that from?
If attempting to manage my road space (As per guidance in Roadcraft for example) and reduce or hopefully eliminate the possibility of some idiot, civilian or otherwise, attempting to bully me out of the way when I am travelling at or near the limit and there is nowhere to go that would get me safely out of his way without inconveniencing someone else and impinging on their roadspace, just what do you expect me to do? That was the point of my previous post.
Perhaps what I should do is get a rear facing video camera and record any prat who is too blind to read the traffic, too stupid to care or whatever other reason they might give. But what to do with the results if such attitudes are condoned by those who would lecture us?
Are you having a really bad day for some reason? If so PH is really not the place for you to be if you are distracted.
You did say using rear fogs glare didn't you ?
You did say speeding up to get away where you were traveling at/near the limit didn't you ?
Just increase your braking distance subtly & move out of the way at the first safe opportunity. Don't be commiting offences because you don't have to, there are safe legal options.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 9th November 22:16
Yes I did say fog lights glare and misused they are an abomination. However if a quick flash of rear fogs to a tailgater counts as an illegal action under any circumstances but still has the desired effect it is a law worth breaking, IMHO, for a second or two. If that was enough for a tailgating member of the police service to feel the need to pull me I would feel extremely aggrieved and letters would follow.
If the flash of lights does not have the desired effect you know you have a nutter to deal with and so had better move to the next step.
My next step, absent the opportunity to pull into a different lane which we can already discount since it would have happened already were it possible, woudl be to accelerate slightly in the hope of increasing the gap and then pulling out of the idiot's way at the earliest opportunity. This usually work, although of course it may still involve exceeding the limit but hopefully within the boundaries of sensible tolerance.
Would that meet with your approval?
If not how exactly would you "increase your braking distance subtly "?
If I've tried that, maybe several times, and the idiot is still trying get in through my tailgate then I may resort to my alternative tactics since it would appear that the idiot is also a danger. Getting out of the way when and where safe to do so would seem the advisable thing to do.
Doing this within a short distance would of course mean I should be entirely safe from any prosecution since if it was a proprely trained police driver following he or she would recognise the validity or removing oneself from danger. Indeed after realising he or she was tailgating in the first place the problem would undoubtedly have been resolved when he or she dropped back to leave sufficient space, wouldn't it?
If the tailgating vehicle was not a police vehicle but events were observed correctly by a police vehicle with fully trained occupants I would feel sure that they would also be able to interpret what was happening and I would expect them to take an interest in the tailgater rather than the tailgated.
Would I be mistaken in those beliefs?
I'm still interested in how you would subtly increase your braking distance - in fact reading the comment again I'm not exactly sure of what you mean. Are you suggesting slowing down? It's the only way I can think of to increase MY braking distance, but how does that really help with the guy on the rear bumper and a solid lane of traffic to the left travellin g at the same speed?
vonhosen said:
Just increase your braking distance subtly & move out of the way at the first safe opportunity. Don't be commiting offences because you don't have to, there are safe legal options.
If, on a drive up the M1, I were to slow down and pull into lane 2 (assuming any space) every time I was in lane 3 (sitting at the minimum safe distance behind the car in front in the hope of passing him) and found someone tailgating me, then I would have to do so several dozen - possibly even hundred - times. Each time that would be at a cost to the smooth progress of traffic, for it would cause those behind also to decelerate and they would have to reassess their safety distance each time I pulled back out. I would arrive at my destination somewhat later. And all of those manoeuvres would be to "reward" (think experiemtal psychology in animals here) every driver who, in bullying fashion, had tailgated me and risked our safety. That would encourage them to do the same again, and I'm really not sure I want to encourage such behaviour on the roads. Do you?
What about an LED sign saying "please back off"? How would the unmarked Porsche view that?
LongQ said:
Yes I did say fog lights glare and misused they are an abomination. However if a quick flash of rear fogs to a tailgater counts as an illegal action under any circumstances but still has the desired effect it is a law worth breaking, IMHO, for a second or two. If that was enough for a tailgating member of the police service to feel the need to pull me I would feel extremely aggrieved and letters would follow.
If the flash of lights does not have the desired effect you know you have a nutter to deal with and so had better move to the next step.
My next step, absent the opportunity to pull into a different lane which we can already discount since it would have happened already were it possible, woudl be to accelerate slightly in the hope of increasing the gap and then pulling out of the idiot's way at the earliest opportunity. This usually work, although of course it may still involve exceeding the limit but hopefully within the boundaries of sensible tolerance.
Would that meet with your approval?
If not how exactly would you "increase your braking distance subtly "?
If I've tried that, maybe several times, and the idiot is still trying get in through my tailgate then I may resort to my alternative tactics since it would appear that the idiot is also a danger. Getting out of the way when and where safe to do so would seem the advisable thing to do.
Doing this within a short distance would of course mean I should be entirely safe from any prosecution since if it was a proprely trained police driver following he or she would recognise the validity or removing oneself from danger. Indeed after realising he or she was tailgating in the first place the problem would undoubtedly have been resolved when he or she dropped back to leave sufficient space, wouldn't it?
If the tailgating vehicle was not a police vehicle but events were observed correctly by a police vehicle with fully trained occupants I would feel sure that they would also be able to interpret what was happening and I would expect them to take an interest in the tailgater rather than the tailgated.
Would I be mistaken in those beliefs?
I'm still interested in how you would subtly increase your braking distance - in fact reading the comment again I'm not exactly sure of what you mean. Are you suggesting slowing down? It's the only way I can think of to increase MY braking distance, but how does that really help with the guy on the rear bumper and a solid lane of traffic to the left travellin g at the same speed?
If they have closed on you quickly & are intent on getting past you, then you accelerating does not alleviate the problem, because they will accelerate too.
My suggestion is that you ease off, losing speed subtly & slightly (no braking) to increase the braking distance. And also indicate your intention of wanting to move lanes in order to get out of their way.
You seem to be assuming that however you view the situation, the observing Police officer will naturally always concur with your interpretation of it & therefore accept your breaking the law to remedy it. That may not be the case & could end up with you being prosecuted. By contrast if you took an option that was both safe & legal instead, you could avoid that.
vim fuego said:
could someone define tailgating please
from the descriptions i've read i.e closer than the 2 second rule, i tailgate everyone i come across
from the descriptions i've read i.e closer than the 2 second rule, i tailgate everyone i come across
That's half the problem because it is an opinion that someone is driving hazardously & inappropriately close to a vehicle they are following. It's not a defined distance, it depends when, where & why it's being done.
vonhosen said:
vim fuego said:
could someone define tailgating please
from the descriptions i've read i.e closer than the 2 second rule, i tailgate everyone i come across
from the descriptions i've read i.e closer than the 2 second rule, i tailgate everyone i come across
That's half the problem because it is an opinion that someone is driving hazardously & inappropriately close to a vehicle they are following. It's not a defined distance, it depends when, where & why it's being done.
Still doesn't answer my question, what about the slogan "only a fool breaks the 2 second rule", and it's relationship to the slogan "Speed kills" I have been quoted this by a traffic cop, so obviously he thought that it was a defined distance. You can't uphold one and ignore the other, that's being two faced. If there are circumstances where being inside a 2 second gap is OK, then there are circumstances where being above the speed limit is OK. That is if you believe the slogans.
slowly slowly said:
vonhosen said:
And also indicate your intention of wanting to move lanes in order to get out of their way.
Excuse my French but this is unbelievable CRAP.
Well what are you going to do then, where it's *your perception* that it's tailgating & any officer viewing may disagree ?
Out drag the "tailgater" & potentially get the speeding prosecution ?
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 10th November 00:29
andmole said:
vonhosen said:
vim fuego said:
could someone define tailgating please
from the descriptions i've read i.e closer than the 2 second rule, i tailgate everyone i come across
from the descriptions i've read i.e closer than the 2 second rule, i tailgate everyone i come across
That's half the problem because it is an opinion that someone is driving hazardously & inappropriately close to a vehicle they are following. It's not a defined distance, it depends when, where & why it's being done.
Still doesn't answer my question, what about the slogan "only a fool breaks the 2 second rule", and it's relationship to the slogan "Speed kills" I have been quoted this by a traffic cop, so obviously he thought that it was a defined distance. You can't uphold one and ignore the other, that's being two faced. If there are circumstances where being inside a 2 second gap is OK, then there are circumstances where being above the speed limit is OK. That is if you believe the slogans.
Forget sound bites.
The law is clear in that it has an absolute offence of speeding, you MUST NOT exceed the limit.
Where is the statute that defines the distance YOU MUST leave between you & the car infront ?
vonhosen said:
Well what are you going to do then, where it's *your perception* that it's tailgating & any officer viewing may disagree ?
Out drag the "tailgater" & potentially get the speeding prosecution if the officer doesn't agree with your perception ?
What we're talking about here is when a normal, or even a good, driver feels that he is being pushed or intimidated by the car behind.
The lead driver could have these feelings randomly, I suppose, especially if he is delusional, mentally ill, etc. I hope it is fair to say that this does not apply to most drivers.
Therefore the lead driver is likely to have these feelings when there actually is something discomfiting about the behaviour of the car in back.
Since so much tailgating goes on in the UK (as surely you would agree), if every single time that it happened one were to feel discomfited, one would spend almost all of one's time over-reacting to cars behind. Reacting thus so frequently, many people would go mad, or give up driving altogether.
Therefore, if the normal or even the good driver is actually discomfited by the tightness of the gap created by the car behind, there is a strong likelihood that that gap is rather tighter than normal. Because tailgating is so common, a gap that is tighter than the normal gap, which in itself is dubiously tight, must be very tight indeed, and certainly would in most cases be tailgating.
So it's clear that usually in these cases one really is being tailgated, and it's not merely a matter of "your perception" (btw, "perception" means grasp of the truth, not a personalised, mistaken interpretation of it).
Now why is it that tailgating is illegal and, separately, unadvisable? Because it is dangerous, right?
It's dangerous because it makes a collison more likely.
A tailgating collision is likely to occur between the lead car and the tailgater.
Therefore if you are in the lead car, you quite rightly conclude that the moron behind, be he (or she) a boy racer, a drunk, or the rare police officer who is also a jerk, is endangering you by following so closely that you are uncomfortable, and certainly more closely than you are followed in the hundreds of times a day that you look in your mirror and perceive the car following you.
You're in danger. You deal with the situation by trying to extricate yourself as quickly as you can, whilst not endangering anyone else - unlike how the twit behind is endangering you. If you're going past a line of traffic, you often cannot find a space to move left.
You obviously cannot trust the idiot tailgating you to react responsibly to your slowing down. If you could trust him, he wouldn't be tailgating you worse than normal in the first place.
You have one option - to elevate your speed enough to get out of the predicament in which you've been placed by trailing idiot.
In the case of perhaps only a few rogue cops, however, this is exactly what they want. To intimidate you into doing the only rational thing - to reduce your Time Exposed to Danger by momentarily speeding up.
You do that and then they pull you.
What about this do you not understand?
VH, I read your posts and most of the time I agree ( in a way, because I wouldnt want your job ) with what you say, as a normal mop who has been driving for over 35 years, but every now and then you talk absolute b0llox, get in the real world, drive as a normal mop on todays roads and then look back on what you spout.......stop reading from the manual and talk like a human being who has to cope with todays traffic. I would love to be in you in a car for a hundred mile journey on your way home from the office after a 9 hour day........Christ welcome to the real world. There aint no book!!! And I think most PHers would want to be cut a bit of slack because driving with your eye on the speedo rather than the roads is not the way to go, and if I was honest and feeling as I do right now you and your underhand Porsche/Subaru/Omega/whatever would have a challenge.......
i think what vonhosen is saying is the 'legal' way of getting out of a being tailgated, what everyone else is suggesting involves breaking the law by exceeding the speed limit.
i think some of you are being equally stubborn by refusing to see that there is another way out of the situation other than accelerating over the speed limit.
i think some of you are being equally stubborn by refusing to see that there is another way out of the situation other than accelerating over the speed limit.
flemke said:
vonhosen said:
Well what are you going to do then, where it's *your perception* that it's tailgating & any officer viewing may disagree ?
Out drag the "tailgater" & potentially get the speeding prosecution if the officer doesn't agree with your perception ?
What we're talking about here is when a normal, or even a good, driver feels that he is being pushed or intimidated by the car behind.
The lead driver could have these feelings randomly, I suppose, especially if he is delusional, mentally ill, etc. I hope it is fair to say that this does not apply to most drivers.
Therefore the lead driver is likely to have these feelings when there actually is something discomfiting about the behaviour of the car in back.
Since so much tailgating goes on in the UK (as surely you would agree), if every single time that it happened one were to feel discomfited, one would spend almost all of one's time over-reacting to cars behind. Reacting thus so frequently, many people would go mad, or give up driving altogether.
Therefore, if the normal or even the good driver is actually discomfited by the tightness of the gap created by the car behind, there is a strong likelihood that that gap is rather tighter than normal. Because tailgating is so common, a gap that is tighter than the normal gap, which in itself is dubiously tight, must be very tight indeed, and certainly would in most cases be tailgating.
So it's clear that usually in these cases one really is being tailgated, and it's not merely a matter of "your perception" (btw, "perception" means grasp of the truth, not a personalised, mistaken interpretation of it).
Now why is it that tailgating is illegal and, separately, unadvisable? Because it is dangerous, right?
It's dangerous because it makes a collison more likely.
A tailgating collision is likely to occur between the lead car and the tailgater.
Therefore if you are in the lead car, you quite rightly conclude that the moron behind, be he (or she) a boy racer, a drunk, or the rare police officer who is also a jerk, is endangering you by following so closely that you are uncomfortable, and certainly more closely than you are followed in the hundreds of times a day that you look in your mirror and perceive the car following you.
You're in danger. You deal with the situation by trying to extricate yourself as quickly as you can, whilst not endangering anyone else - unlike how the twit behind is endangering you. If you're going past a line of traffic, you often cannot find a space to move left.
You obviously cannot trust the idiot tailgating you to react responsibly to your slowing down. If you could trust him, he wouldn't be tailgating you worse than normal in the first place.
You have one option - to elevate your speed enough to get out of the predicament in which you've been placed by trailing idiot.
In the case of perhaps only a few rogue cops, however, this is exactly what they want. To intimidate you into doing the only rational thing - to reduce your Time Exposed to Danger by momentarily speeding up.
You do that and then they pull you.
What about this do you not understand?
I'm not suggesting that you move over for everyone who is a bit close behind you. If you think they are closer than they should be, but you can deal with them safely within your driving plans, then I wouldn't attempt to alleviate my position by changing my behaviour greatly. Where however I perceive that threat as far higher from their displayed behaviour, I will take action to address it within the law so that it isn't me on the sharp end of it. I will relinquish my level of progress to remove the now higher threat.
I'll do it by lawful means.
Just like if someone had bad mouthed me, I wouldn't take illegal action and resort to giving them a slap, I would act legally & thereby avoid leaving myself open to prosecution instead of them.
You can remove the threat by legal means rather than illegal & if someone is looking to go faster than you, you upping the anti isn't likely to change that a great deal because you have no idea exactly how fast they'll want to go.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 10th November 07:11
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff