The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread (Vol 4)
Discussion
rambo19 said:
Narcisus said:
No probably not. I'm a bit of a soft touch.... She had just passed her test !! I think she is terrified in case there is damage we cant see.... As long as its just cosmetic and she doesn't mess me about getting the bumper blown over i'll leave it.
Even more reason to report her!Check out the 'F on the spelling test' sketch in the C&H thread, and start from there. We live in an age where the loony lefties have it drummed in to kids that everyone is a winner; add the 'where there's blame' culture, the 'I know my rights' attitude and finally a dose of 'it's someone else's fault, my actions might have consequences but I won't be to blame'.
Using a mobile whilst driving is illegal, yet people do it blissfully unaware of the havoc they cause around them. The fact she's more concerned about the impact damage and oblivious to the cause of the collision - her mobile phone use - and we have a classic example of someone utterly clueless as to the consequences of her actions.
Otherwise, at what point will she be held accountable for her actions? When someone dies?
You've been whacked up the chuffer by someone who doesn't give a s
t, as all their life their actions have not had consequences.It's time for a dose of the real world, a sharp shock, points and a fine (and more than likely revocation of licence)
Accidents happen, but the first years after passing the test are when bad habits set in. Mobile phone use is one of those habits, and whilst the probability is she'll not have to face those consequences again, failing to nip the bad habits in the bud at this early stage when you have the opportunity shows a disregard to the wider society.
Soft touch or not, everyone has a moral responsibility towards society as a whole. In 10 years time, she could be driving her PCP'd Qashquai at 55mph, phone glued to her ear and be in exactly the same situation as the learner driver with the kid on the crossing 2 pages back. It still won't be her fault and the phone use would have had no bearing on the outcome; having never been challenged or made to face consequences, she'll be the "real victim".
I'm speaking from both sides of experience; as a hormonal 19 year old I wrapped my car around a tree and took it as a life warning; last year an 18 yr old girl trashed my wingmirror as a result of one of the most insane overtaking manoeuvres I've seen, and I've seen some shockers. Her dad was furious, her mum wept at the dashcam footage. Nothing was gained by going down the insurance route, she had to get a job at the local pub to pay for the damage which by prior agreement with her 'rents was over-inflated - but that my side of the bargain was to arrange an IAM skill for life package for her.
Sorry for the rant but this sort of stuff really roasts my pelican, no concerns about the phone, more concerned about hidden damage.
dickbdly said:
Sadly he seemed to be able to walk away. dly said:dickbdly said:
Looks like a lovely place to live.dly said:saaby93 said:
jamei303 said:
saaby93 said:
Pedestrians dont expect stuff to be filtering mbike or cyclist
They do in Cambridge, unless it's their first day in the city.York has quite a few cyclists, no?
Until the various cycling threads on here I didnt realise filtering was so common place - something for the risk takers
Until then most mbikes, cyclists hold their place in the queue
Maybe it depends which town or city and what the roads are like
In the video the biker on the left doesnt filter
"hold their place in the "queue""?
If you'd taken a bike test you'd be aware that sitting in a queue of traffic would score a point against you. You'd be penalised for "failing to make progress". Enough minor points and you fail. You can rack up "progress" points enough in a test to fail (not making progress when it is safe to do so, and this includes filtering)
Half the point of having a motorbike (or a bycicle) is that you can make progress through traffic. Filtering is your option when the outside is not available, or too dangerous.
All busy towns/cities have stand still traffic, and consequently filtering. When I moved from the countryside to London I nearly got swiped by a bike courier within the first week. I now always look left and right when crossing stationary/slow traffic when not on a pedestrian crossing. It is my responsibility to make sure it is safe, as I'm crossing the road not at a pedestrian crossing.
As stated by someone else, a wide angle (they all are) action camera gives a very unrealistic view. Certainly not one that the motorcylist had. For starters, even without "wide angle eyes", the rider is wearing a helmet, which is pretty much like wearing blinkers. That woman was moving fast, and off to the side. very hard to see as a rider when you are generally concentrating straight ahead to make sure no one switches lanes , or opens a cab door, or glancing at yoru speedo, or blinking)
I had (as a bike rider) plenty of people run into my path in London. I didn't hit any luckily. Partly because I'd already had a near miss as a ped. and was very aware of the risk.
Where I live now (country side again), I often see bikers sitting in traffic queues. It always baffles me. I asked a friend who rides round here, and he told me that quite often cars will swerve at him to "teach him" for "jumping the queue". ......
RogerDodger said:
I had (as a bike rider) plenty of people run into my path in London. I didn't hit any luckily. Partly because I'd already had a near miss as a ped. and was very aware of the risk.
See this most days I’m in London - folks walking out without thinking of filtering bikes.In respect to this video - it looks and sounds like the biker _speeds up_ as soon as he starts filtering.. which is kind of opposite to ‘keeping your speed low’ when filtering as you’re supposed to..? It’s all relative, but looks like the cars must be doing 30 in the first instance which means he is filtering at a similar or greater speed through stopped cars which is quite some differential.
When I’m in the car I tend to be wary of my speed differential to other traffic when lanes are moving at different speeds in the hope of avoiding both people and other cars that aren’t looking..
RogerDodger said:
"Risk takers"?
"hold their place in the "queue""?
If you'd taken a bike test you'd be aware that sitting in a queue of traffic would score a point against you. You'd be penalised for "failing to make progress". Enough minor points and you fail. You can rack up "progress" points enough in a test to fail (not making progress when it is safe to do so, and this includes filtering)
I believe that's no longer the case on the Mod2. Certainly if you did it while being followed by the examiner in a car you'd cause a bit of bother "hold their place in the "queue""?
If you'd taken a bike test you'd be aware that sitting in a queue of traffic would score a point against you. You'd be penalised for "failing to make progress". Enough minor points and you fail. You can rack up "progress" points enough in a test to fail (not making progress when it is safe to do so, and this includes filtering)
Imho he was filtering too quickly, regardless of whether or not he could see her.
Krikkit said:
RogerDodger said:
"Risk takers"?
"hold their place in the "queue""?
If you'd taken a bike test you'd be aware that sitting in a queue of traffic would score a point against you. You'd be penalised for "failing to make progress". Enough minor points and you fail. You can rack up "progress" points enough in a test to fail (not making progress when it is safe to do so, and this includes filtering)
I believe that's no longer the case on the Mod2. Certainly if you did it while being followed by the examiner in a car you'd cause a bit of bother "hold their place in the "queue""?
If you'd taken a bike test you'd be aware that sitting in a queue of traffic would score a point against you. You'd be penalised for "failing to make progress". Enough minor points and you fail. You can rack up "progress" points enough in a test to fail (not making progress when it is safe to do so, and this includes filtering)
Imho he was filtering too quickly, regardless of whether or not he could see her.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 18th December 13:17
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 18th December 13:17
cgauk said:
RogerDodger said:
I had (as a bike rider) plenty of people run into my path in London. I didn't hit any luckily. Partly because I'd already had a near miss as a ped. and was very aware of the risk.
See this most days I’m in London - folks walking out without thinking of filtering bikes.In respect to this video - it looks and sounds like the biker _speeds up_ as soon as he starts filtering.. which is kind of opposite to ‘keeping your speed low’ when filtering as you’re supposed to..? It’s all relative, but looks like the cars must be doing 30 in the first instance which means he is filtering at a similar or greater speed through stopped cars which is quite some differential.
When I’m in the car I tend to be wary of my speed differential to other traffic when lanes are moving at different speeds in the hope of avoiding both people and other cars that aren’t looking..
colonel c said:
The ‘crash’ at 4:41 was so easily avoidable, he knew he was in the van’s blind spot. Drama seeker. 
colonel c said:
7.09 a sniceection of the A894 just north of Kylesku Bridge. colonel c said:
Doesnt it open with an idiot cammer?what car on fire at 6:12?
Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 18th December 23:18
colonel c said:
I don't belive that, that is real at all! saaby93 said:
colonel c said:
Doesnt it open with an idiot cammer?what car on fire at 6:12?
Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 18th December 23:18
What the hell is going on at the end with the Nissan that drove straight into the roundabout - that was odd.
colonel c said:
This Mr escos isn’t the best driver...Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff