Do you ever 'self-police' the roads?

[soupdragon1]

superlightr said:

Sorry English is my first language but I don't understand - if you stopped between the train barriers or on the tracks then you are on the tracks are you not?

If you chose to drive forward without your exit clear then that's still your error if you then stop on the tracks if your exit is blocked. You chose to move forward without your exit clear.

Come on don't weezle your way out of this - I'm pleased you agree some of your errors but the track thing was also a poor choice you made. if you said "my exit was clear of the tracks and I went forward but then suddenly an elephant fell from the sky and blocked my exit" then I would agree you did not "choose" to stop on the tracks.

That's was kind of my point though. I made a mistake by assuming that the traffic would flow once the barrier went up, but it came to an abrupt standstill in a matter of seconds. As I described, it only ever happened once. That was an error. And it was in the same discussion as the gentleman who let lots of cars turn right at this particular crossing for no apparent reason....the self appointed traffic light. But as I discovered, he was just managing the traffic flow to ensure that 'gridlock' on the crossing didn't happen. An example of self-policing.

[soupdragon1]

culpz said:

Respectfully, what did you expect when writing on a public forum about appointing yourself as a holier-than-thou self Police officer for the roads?

I know you've since edited your first post but you made this thread to get reactions and responses. It's clear to see that it's completely back-fired on you and yet you're still here somehow defending yourself. Stick your head in a lion's mouth and what do you honestly expect to happen?

Do yourself and everyone else a favour, just pack it in and delete the topic.

Im not defending myself, just having a discussion about it.
I don't see the need to delete, unless a moderator thinks it should, it's not doing anyone any harm really.

[soupdragon1]

oceanview said:

Can someone tell me how to "self-police"a tailgater?

I've noticed this is getting much worse and it drives me mad, no matter how much I try and ignore it!

I think the women that do it are just thick/entitled princesses , whilst men do it for more aggressive reasons.

Although I would like to stop my car and firebomb theirs , I realise this might be frowned upon- so what to do?

I find that sometimes even when they could overtake safely, they wont- just want to ride my shiny arse!!


Sometimes , i'll just floor it and unless they're pretty mad or driving something pretty quick, they wont be behind for long but this makes me break the law then and risk a collision etc?? Or just keep to the speed limit and put up with it- or pull over and let them past but I don't want to be stopping that much because of some retard behind me!

I try pressing the hazard lights for a couple of clicks to see if they get the message. Sometimes works.

[soupdragon1]

Had a decision to make this morning, was behind a tractor and another chap sitting behind me. Traffic coming other way so no overtake.

Tractor then indicates to turn right but it's one of those tiny bulb lights and hard to see in low blazing sunlight. He did look round to me and pointed to the right. At that point, the oncoming traffic had p
cleared so a perfect overtake opportunity. I'm thinking that the chap behind is ready to pass and might not realise tractor is about to turn. Should I maybe 'pretend' to overtake and block the guy behind me? I didn't, but maybe I should have as once he realised I wasn't overtaking he passed me.....and then tried to pass the tractor turning right too. Tractor seen this and stopped his manoeuvre thankfully, and car behind passed without issue.

No incident, tractor guy was alert and anticipated it. You do wonder though, may be you should just block the overtake as it's a potential accident about to occur. Thoughts?

[soupdragon1]

culpz said:

The answer is never to self-Police the roads, regardless of how many various scenarios you throw at us. You clearly haven't learnt the error of your ways.

I suggest you read my post again. I didn't self-police - I didn't do anything. I stated that I was worried about the consequences of doing nothing/finding a way to alert the driver behind me of what was happening. You've literally got a couple of seconds to think and you're anticipating a scenario where a collision could happen. Nothing happened of course - but it could have - that's the point.

Edit:

and just to add - if you're one of those drivers who can anticipate a potential risk but think 'well its nothing to do with me, I know I'll be alright' then that's just as bad (in my opinion of course!)

Edited by soupdragon1 on Thursday 24th May 09:23

[soupdragon1]

culpz said:

soupdragon1 said:

culpz said:

The answer is never to self-Police the roads, regardless of how many various scenarios you throw at us. You clearly haven't learnt the error of your ways.

I suggest you read my post again. I didn't self-police - I didn't do anything. I stated that I was worried about the consequences of doing nothing/finding a way to alert the driver behind me of what was happening. You've literally got a couple of seconds to think and you're anticipating a scenario where a collision could happen. Nothing happened of course - but it could have - that's the point.

Edit:

and just to add - if you're one of those drivers who can anticipate a potential risk but think 'well its nothing to do with me, I know I'll be alright' then that's just as bad (in my opinion of course!)

Edited by soupdragon1 on Thursday 24th May 09:23

You were contemplating blocking someone behind you, in an effort to refrain them from overtaking. That's self-Policing. This whole thread, made by you, is about self-Policing.

I'm not one of those drivers, but you're going to cause an accident one day and blame everyone else for it. It's not your say so, you can't control other driver's actions.

Someone mentioned Rospa earlier. Pro lorry drivers are trained to anticipate risk before it happens and react accordingly. Many stories I've heard of lorry drivers saving people from themselves by being smart and safe on the roads. To say you shouldn't self police under the correct circumstances is just wrong. You can't blanket every road situation with a 'no' I'm afraid.

It's why I created the thread. It does happen and sometimes, it 'should' happen.

[soupdragon1]

Royce44 said:

Well I'm kind of guilty for doing what the OP does. ( I keep small gaps not the accelerating thing)

Driving in London means you have to be an arse sometimes, which is a shame but its the difference between getting home at 6pm or missing my sons betime at 7pm.

I'm amazed that people are so quick to throw the OP under the bus. It's the wkers that are are *dangerously* cutting in that need the abuse which appears to be getting defended somewhat in this thread.

M2 J3 at rush hour and people will literally stop in lane 1 till there let in meanwhile HGV's have to swerve into lane 2 last minute to avoid a rear ender as no one will let him out.

I guarantee every single one of you at some point has got frustrated with queue jumpers and closed the gap in front to prevent it.

Ps- I'll happily let in a car using the zip merge.
I also will let in lost drivers as there is a clear difference in behaviour those lost and queue jumpers.

Thank you.

I'm going to write another post in a moment as I haven't really given the full perspective in my 1st post - if anyone knows anything about a 'risk matrix chart' or has been trained in IOSH (which I have - a safety course) I have taken some of these skills and applied them to how I drive.
While I've been flamed for my OP, and I get the reasons why, people won't have understood the full picture. For example, in risk mitigation, its all about reducing risk. My actions were to try to reduce risk overall.
Quite rightly, people have pointed out that my actions are risky. I agree - there is an element of risk - without question. The other side of the coin, is, which is riskier - the cutter inners action, or my action?

Originally, I had worked it out that my action was less risky than theirs, so therefore my decision was correct. However - I've also considered other elements that have been brought to my attention by this thread (eg, some nut job not taking kindly to my actions and then behaving badly as a result of my actions) so that changes the overall risk. My view on my original post is that I will no longer do that.

A better course of action would be to flash at people, beep the horn loudly for example, as there is a risk that when he cuts in, someone in my inside lane will want to take my gap - and then they collide. The person from the inside can't see the car on my otherside, and, because its 2 separate motorways, they will certainly not be expecting someone to arrive from that motorway onto ours.

I'll expand on this in another post and the logic from where it came from.

[soupdragon1]

jimmy the hat said:

In all seriousness, just leave them to it. You hadn't thought it all the way through. On reflection you now realise that particular thing was dumb, bravo but you're still not getting the fundamentals. If they haven't thought it all the way through, anything, ANYTHING, that you do that's unexpected stands a much better chance of eliciting an adverse reaction than a good one. If it's already a 'dangerous' manouevre, adding a distraction or additional thought-process by hooting or flashing is only likely to make it much more so.

Make your driving your business, make sure it's as predictable as possible and that you can stop before you hit anything should they get it wrong and that's really all anyone can ever do.

Cheers, Jim

Good post Jim and that last line in particular is very good advice - keep your own driving predictable is a good Mantra to have.

[soupdragon1]

I also should add that starting the thread with 'self-policing' in the title and continuing to use that term - very poor choice of words in hindsight.

I've decided not to revisit some of the other stuff I was going to write - people have formed an opinion of me based on what I've written here, but of course, the written word can never truly describe the situation and unless you are sitting in the car with me - you can only take from what I've written as how I've been driving for over 20 years. That's the nature of posting like this. I'm not a dangerous driver.

The 1st instance was poor judgement and I've taken on the useful feedback.

The next instance on the train track - very easy to get caught out like that but people have interpreted that like I'm the world stupidest driver, or words to that effect. An easy error to make, it really is, multiple things out of the ordinary happened which caused it to happen but of course, you learn from it. Clearly, that won't happen again. And on the same subject, the guy who became the self-proclaimed mobile traffic light - why is nobody commenting on that. Is he doing the right thing or not? That is the thread topic after all!

The most recent instance of the Tractor turning right while the guy behind me is overtaking - that's an instance where maybe I should have intervened. In all honesty, when you look at risk - if I stopped him completing his manoeuvre, I've virtually eliminated the risk from the situation. But according to some people here, I should just do nothing and let the risky manoeuvre take place? Can someone please explain to me in logical terms why that's the best course of action? I am prepared to listen and take on board a good reason.

When I've thought back on it - I rationalise it by saying that I can do no harm by intervening but by not intervening, something harmful could happen. As a rational thinker (at least, most of the times I try to be rational) I really struggle to find a reason 'not' to do something in this kind of scenario.

[soupdragon1]

Toltec said:

With the tractor you could have moved out for a look then just pulled back in and slowed or just simply slowed, this might have made the person behind realise that you had checked and decided the pass was not on making them take a better look themselves. If nothing else by slowing you would open a gap between you and the tractor to avoid the fallout of a collision.

That's what I did do - I slowed down - and so did the tractor and a second later, he was out from behind me. Happened so quickly.

[soupdragon1]

jimmy the hat said:

It's almost like you're not getting it. Quite a few people have said much the same thing in a variety of different ways but you just seem to be refusing to get it. Don't do anything.

If they drive into a tractor, it's their risky manouevre and their fault.

As Toltec says, if they nearly drive into the tractor but manage to stop/miss, maybe they learn something.

If you swerve to block them and don't manage to, they're distracted by you, less likely to realise the tractor's turning and more likely to hit it which is then their risky manouevre compounded by your determination to stick your nose in.

If they swerve and hit a tree then it's their risky manouevre compounded by your determination to stick your nose in.

In either of those scenarios, if the car behind them has a dash-cam recording their fiery death, you could find yourself in a lot of trouble.

That's my last try, I'm sure there'll be others only too happy to try to explain.

Cheers, Jim

I am getting it, I really am but people don't really seem to be getting me.

To start with, its a tractor, and tractors obviously go slow, especially when they are slowing down to turn. Not a high speed incident. I also described the road became clear in front, so no other cars were coming - this is what made the overtake possible. Just the tractor, me, and the chap behind.

And I do get the point that he will learn something by realising he nearly had a collision. But he would learn it anyway - if I didn't let him overtake then he would have quickly figured out the reason - ie - the tractor takes his right turn and that is clearly visible. He'll have likely been glad he couldn't 'blind pass' on this occasion.

As it stands - he overtook both of us and might not have any idea that the tractor was turning - I don't know if he checked his mirror or not. So he may have learned nothing at all.

In summary, how people think its best to do nothing here is beyond me....there is no risk to, lets call it, 'helping out' another driver. You've actually reduced the risk significantly.

Edit:

and just to add - I originally said to 'pretend' to overtake - not 'swerve' into their path. That would increase the risk for everyone by doing that - obviously.

Edited by soupdragon1 on Thursday 24th May 16:16

[soupdragon1]

aaron_2000 said:

I just skipped from 1 to 12 to see if it all ended in argument, gonna read through it all in bed later

I've tried to keep my cool and take on the feedback, and share my train of thought too. Particularly the bits around you've no idea who is in the other car, and their state of mind etc, and you're actions could subsequently make them do something rash. Bang on the money with that advice.

A special note to the poster who said 'try and keep your driving as predictable as possible, as it helps everyone around you. This is my new mantra behind the wheel. I mentioned earlier about knowing some lorry drivers and that's a key part of their training as a professional driver, whether via Cpc or Rospa training. They are always on the lookout for everyone, anticipate, anticipate, anticipate. If we all drive as predictable as possible, then we can anticipate so much easier and it's a great view to take. So I'm keeping this mantra, it's a real good one.

On another note, I play footy once a week and one of the guys is a policeman (not traffic branch though)
I shared my OP with him tonight, while we were doing our stretches/warming up.
I'll share in a minute what his slant on that situation would be.

[soupdragon1]

As per previous post. I had a chat with a policeman tonight and explained the motorway situation and me closing the gap.

It's no surprise to know he said you shouldn't be doing that. He followed straight up by saying you don't know who they are or what their intentions or reasons are, and you're mad to even get involved. Pretty much exactly what others have said on here.

So I asked him what level of punishment would there be. He said their wouldn't be any punishment, they would be more interested in pulling over the other person, as they are dangerous driving.

I also asked well, say you did pull me over anyway, what would the punishment. He said, technically, I could possibly do you for careless driving, but would probably just explain that you shouldn't do it, it's a bad idea for the reasons mentioned.

He knows the road well, and he said there are hundreds of people doing the same thing as me. And literally thousands of drivers driving nose to tail to try and stop the queue jumpers. They really try and target people cutting in dangerously bit they don't have the resources to be manning rush hour morning and evening every day of the week.

So there you go. He didn't get the rest of the players to come after me with pitchforks and take my license off me, that's for sure! So I feel a bit better with his perspective on the matter. Don't be at it anymore is his view in summary, but it's not really a huge offence in the grand scheme of things.

Edited by soupdragon1 on Thursday 24th May 23:38

[soupdragon1]

Hatson said:

Original Post

"So I self police.

I leave a very attractive gap, inviting them to cut in in a safe manner. But I drop a gear and sit bang in the optimum power band, ready to 'speed match' them. As they are about to pass me and take the big gap, I speed up. They soon realise I'm not letting them in and their plan is foiled."

There's no way you described this to a policeman as per your original post and got such a mild response!
How did you really put it?

I tried to explain earlier that using the written word can be hard to accurately describe the situation. Much easier face to face, or even better, sitting in the car or being familiar with the road and the way people drive on it.

But if you try and imagine it, hopefully you can, then it doesn't sound as extreme. We've all seen people on motorways closing a gap to not let someone in. It's not 'hand your license in' type of offence that some people have interpreted.

[soupdragon1]

Wills2 said:

soupdragon1 said:

Hatson said:

Original Post

"So I self police.

I leave a very attractive gap, inviting them to cut in in a safe manner. But I drop a gear and sit bang in the optimum power band, ready to 'speed match' them. As they are about to pass me and take the big gap, I speed up. They soon realise I'm not letting them in and their plan is foiled."

There's no way you described this to a policeman as per your original post and got such a mild response!
How did you really put it?

I tried to explain earlier that using the written word can be hard to accurately describe the situation. Much easier face to face, or even better, sitting in the car or being familiar with the road and the way people drive on it.

But if you try and imagine it, hopefully you can, then it doesn't sound as extreme. We've all seen people on motorways closing a gap to not let someone in. It's not 'hand your license in' type of offence that some people have interpreted.

You drive in manner that should mean your licence should be removed, it's dangerous and you're a liability and or troll I suspect.

When I read it back, it does sound a bit 'fast and furious'. What I was trying to describe was speed matching. Ie, if he gets past me and cuts in while I'm accelerating to close the gap, I end up in his blind spot and that could be highly dangerous. The speed matching description I was using to describe that if we're instantly side by side, he simply can't cut in. That is all. As I say, it does sound a bit fast n furious but I was actually trying to describe a 'speed matching' manoeuvre. Ie, no gap, we're side by side, he stays in his lane, he can't cut in at the last moment and therefor can't continue with HIS dangerous manoeuvre. It's been discussed to death now anyway - 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[soupdragon1]

Hatson said:

"I leave a very attractive gap, inviting them to cut in in a safe manner." You then accelerate into the gap to stop HIS dangerous manoeuvre.
It is hard to see the two wrongs here.

You're a bit late to come into the discussion, it's over now - thread was dying up til now, best just let it go. Original objective of discussions such as the tractor discussion earlier isn't interesting to anyone and there's no more to say that hasn't been said already when discussing the op. No reason to continue anymore to be honest.