Oncoming drivers failing to give way.
Discussion
r-kid said:
saaby93 said:
Back to the question - anyone seen those signs with 'give way' plates?
They are on all the ones near me, the other side has priority over oncoming vehiclesThis is just down from me:
r-kid said:
saaby93 said:
Have you got a photo of the other end too?
Crazy
Setting aside the signs theyve designed it to give conflict so both sides are equally blocked so they have to 'take turns'
then messed it up by saying that at busy times one side may never get a turn
yellowjack said:
Basics?
'Right of Way' does exist. It is your 'Right' to pass and repass over the Public Highway. To earn that right in a motor vehicle you must pass a test, maintain a roadworthy vehicle and purchase insurance. Pedestrians (and cyclists too, I believe) have an absolute right of way,but a motor vehicle driver can have that portion of his/her 'right' taken away by withdrawal of their license to drive. Beyond that, "Right of Way" is a meaningless phrase.
'Priority'. This is what most people mean when they say 'right of way'. The most important rule I was taught on this subject was that "Priority can be given, but shouldn't be taken". As in, you negotiate with other road users all the time. Don't barge through when another is already in a bottleneck, for instance. Just because, according to a plate on a pole, another driver is "in the wrong", don't decide to cause conflict even if you are "in the right" because that instantly puts you both "in the wrong".
This "wrong side of the road" thing is claptrap too. Unless the carriageway is specifically marked to preclude it (solid lines etc) then any vehicle may use either side of the carriageway provided that it is safe to do so. Once an oncoming vehicle has committed to passing a row of cars parked on 'their' side, for instance, they can be said to be "established" on the road, and even drivers on their own (so-called 'correct' side) should cede priority to the established traffic.
The conflict arises when oncoming traffic which is not already "established" on the 'wrong' side of the road continues around the obstruction, despite the obvious presence of traffic coming the other way, who face no obstruction other than the already "established" driver. The correct, safe course to take is to allow them to pass, but blank their arrogant wave of thanks. This I tend to do, but in certain circumstances, oncoming drivers begin to get even more arrogant, and decide to drive nose-to-tail past the obstruction. Where idiots take the piss in such a fashion, I'd be tempted to push forward to force them to stop. In practice, though, I worry about damaging my car and blemishing my record, and so let them get away with their abysmal driving. Sadly, by allowing bullying drivers to have it their way, we create a greater problem, for the more times it works for them, the more often they do it, and the riskier their behaviour gets, making the roads a smidgin less safe for us all every time they "get away with it".
Honestly I don't know what the solution is, but when one driver exhibits risky behaviour by disobeying the instructions given by a road sign, displaying equally risky behaviour to cause unnecessary conflict won't do anything to eliminate the risk...
Absolutely nail on head.'Right of Way' does exist. It is your 'Right' to pass and repass over the Public Highway. To earn that right in a motor vehicle you must pass a test, maintain a roadworthy vehicle and purchase insurance. Pedestrians (and cyclists too, I believe) have an absolute right of way,but a motor vehicle driver can have that portion of his/her 'right' taken away by withdrawal of their license to drive. Beyond that, "Right of Way" is a meaningless phrase.
'Priority'. This is what most people mean when they say 'right of way'. The most important rule I was taught on this subject was that "Priority can be given, but shouldn't be taken". As in, you negotiate with other road users all the time. Don't barge through when another is already in a bottleneck, for instance. Just because, according to a plate on a pole, another driver is "in the wrong", don't decide to cause conflict even if you are "in the right" because that instantly puts you both "in the wrong".
This "wrong side of the road" thing is claptrap too. Unless the carriageway is specifically marked to preclude it (solid lines etc) then any vehicle may use either side of the carriageway provided that it is safe to do so. Once an oncoming vehicle has committed to passing a row of cars parked on 'their' side, for instance, they can be said to be "established" on the road, and even drivers on their own (so-called 'correct' side) should cede priority to the established traffic.
The conflict arises when oncoming traffic which is not already "established" on the 'wrong' side of the road continues around the obstruction, despite the obvious presence of traffic coming the other way, who face no obstruction other than the already "established" driver. The correct, safe course to take is to allow them to pass, but blank their arrogant wave of thanks. This I tend to do, but in certain circumstances, oncoming drivers begin to get even more arrogant, and decide to drive nose-to-tail past the obstruction. Where idiots take the piss in such a fashion, I'd be tempted to push forward to force them to stop. In practice, though, I worry about damaging my car and blemishing my record, and so let them get away with their abysmal driving. Sadly, by allowing bullying drivers to have it their way, we create a greater problem, for the more times it works for them, the more often they do it, and the riskier their behaviour gets, making the roads a smidgin less safe for us all every time they "get away with it".
Honestly I don't know what the solution is, but when one driver exhibits risky behaviour by disobeying the instructions given by a road sign, displaying equally risky behaviour to cause unnecessary conflict won't do anything to eliminate the risk...
I think the crux of the problem is that we (generally) seem to regard a traffic conflict as a personal conflict.
Come to Germany - any short delay seems to make a driver lose it and go mental. If you practice give way when the obstruction is on your side UK style, quite often you'll be overtaken whilst giving way and waiting for the oncoming car to pass. The overtaker then blocks the whole road causing even more waiting whilst they negotiate their way along the pavement.
saaby93 said:
p1esk said:
FreeLitres said:
Hypothetical situation;
You are on a long straight road only wide enough for one vehicle in each direction. Ahead, there is an obstruction on the other side of the road such as a bus picking up a long line of passengers. As you approach from some distance away, you can see a line of cars starting to overtake the bus as expected. However, as you get closer, the oncoming cars are still passing the bus and now you are almost level with the bus and they are still coming, blocking your side of the road so you have to stop.
If the oncoming cars just keep coming, what do you do?
Hold back until they stop coming through, and then I continue. It's not how it should work, but what else can one do?You are on a long straight road only wide enough for one vehicle in each direction. Ahead, there is an obstruction on the other side of the road such as a bus picking up a long line of passengers. As you approach from some distance away, you can see a line of cars starting to overtake the bus as expected. However, as you get closer, the oncoming cars are still passing the bus and now you are almost level with the bus and they are still coming, blocking your side of the road so you have to stop.
If the oncoming cars just keep coming, what do you do?
A lot of people confuse priority with giving way
At a roundabout priority is to the right but you give way to anyone on the roundabout. i.e. you dont drive onto it into the side of someone because you think you have right of way. You dont have right of way
This sign says give priority to approaching vehicles
It doesn't say one or the other has right of way
It's implicit that you need to give way to anyone else to avoid a collision, and an attached plate can reinforce that. Ideally theyd put the give way plate at both ends.
p1esk said:
I don't see what is wrong with my reply to the OP's question. You seem to be dealing with a different situation.
your reply was in two halves.I was agreeing with your 'holding back' until they stop coming through
but not necessarily with 'it's not how it should work'
If used to the letter, one side could wait what feels like all day.
That's not the intention of these works. Its not to take hours out of your life, just to slow you down. They could take a car each way in turn or preferably a bunch of cars one way, then a bunch the other way. Which is what happens if people follow through for a while then let the others have a go. Should they be used as a set of traffic lights without any lights?
Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 5th August 18:35
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff