Am I blaming the wrong person?
Discussion
I was stuck behind a volvo driving numpty the other day, as happens from time to time, at about 40mph. We got to a straightish bit of road with good visibility and I thought, OK I can pass him. Then a Sierra Cosworth appeared coming the other way accelerating as hard as he could get away with and I thought, OK discretion is the better part etc, stick at 40 and curse.
A Bolt-on type came screaming up behind me and obviously thought otherwise, pulled out, and went charging past the numpty. The Cosworth driver stood on his brakes for all they were worth, and I backed away hurriedly to avoid any flying debris. The Maximillian Power type squeezed between the numpty and the Sierra with what looked like a few inches to spare on either side, the Cossie driver looked a bit shaken.
So far, so friggin' lucky, quarter of a second away from death or destruction for two drivers.
Undoubtedly if there had been an a accident the verdict would have been it was the bolt on type's fault (I don't think the Sierra was actually braking the speed limit, just accelerating out of a roundabout. I'm sure he would have broken the speed limit later given the chance
So here's the question: am I wrong to feel most annoyed at the numpty who, throughout all this, kept plodding along at a steady-as-she-goes 40 mph rather than ease off for a second or two and allow two other drivers to avert a serious accident following a misjudgement by one?
Did the 'driver' think -
1. this person has had the nerve to overtake me when it wasn't safe, so it's only right that he should plough into this oncoming car whose driver obviously likes to speed as well, possibly killing them both. OR -
2. Oh dear, these two speeders are going to crash, well, none of my business (and of course as a result of crashing so near me there's no way they could hit me, I'm only doing 40). OR -
3. Where did he come from? What's happening? What should I do? Never mind I'll be safe at 40.
A Bolt-on type came screaming up behind me and obviously thought otherwise, pulled out, and went charging past the numpty. The Cosworth driver stood on his brakes for all they were worth, and I backed away hurriedly to avoid any flying debris. The Maximillian Power type squeezed between the numpty and the Sierra with what looked like a few inches to spare on either side, the Cossie driver looked a bit shaken.
So far, so friggin' lucky, quarter of a second away from death or destruction for two drivers.
Undoubtedly if there had been an a accident the verdict would have been it was the bolt on type's fault (I don't think the Sierra was actually braking the speed limit, just accelerating out of a roundabout. I'm sure he would have broken the speed limit later given the chance
So here's the question: am I wrong to feel most annoyed at the numpty who, throughout all this, kept plodding along at a steady-as-she-goes 40 mph rather than ease off for a second or two and allow two other drivers to avert a serious accident following a misjudgement by one?
Did the 'driver' think -
1. this person has had the nerve to overtake me when it wasn't safe, so it's only right that he should plough into this oncoming car whose driver obviously likes to speed as well, possibly killing them both. OR -
2. Oh dear, these two speeders are going to crash, well, none of my business (and of course as a result of crashing so near me there's no way they could hit me, I'm only doing 40). OR -
3. Where did he come from? What's happening? What should I do? Never mind I'll be safe at 40.
John,
it's probably the best, when the numpty keeps the 40 in a situation, in which other drivers are forced to make quick decisions.
What would have happened, when numpty retarded or accelerated?
For the last question, I vote 2.)
>>edited to er?
>> Edited by Bodo on Wednesday 30th October 23:27
it's probably the best, when the numpty keeps the 40 in a situation, in which other drivers are forced to make quick decisions.
What would have happened, when numpty retarded or accelerated?
For the last question, I vote 2.)
>>edited to er?
>> Edited by Bodo on Wednesday 30th October 23:27
Wouldn't boy nearly racer cause the problem. He is the one everyone has to react to. Cossie is accelerating before a clear view of the road so part of the problem.
Volvo has the right to travel at whatever speed he wants (within reason) so you have to react to that?
Or am I way off the mark?
Volvo has the right to travel at whatever speed he wants (within reason) so you have to react to that?
Or am I way off the mark?
It doesn't take too much brain power to work out who was the person most likely to be at fault and it wasn't the Volvo driver.
Think about who will be sitting on a jury. You would be very lucky to find 12 bolt on types from the jurors that you are offered in a situation like this.
Most likely you will have to chose from mainly Volvo drivers with the odd bolt on if you were lucky to have any turn up for their jury service.
Think about who will be sitting on a jury. You would be very lucky to find 12 bolt on types from the jurors that you are offered in a situation like this.
Most likely you will have to chose from mainly Volvo drivers with the odd bolt on if you were lucky to have any turn up for their jury service.
JohnL - it's your fault.
Edited to explain - If you had taken the numbers of both the numpty and the bolton boy you could have tracked them down and exicuted them. The problem would never have occured again, allowing yourself and Sierra man to drive unimpeded by useless twats.
Cull the stupid.
>> Edited by Captain Muppet on Thursday 31st October 07:03
Edited to explain - If you had taken the numbers of both the numpty and the bolton boy you could have tracked them down and exicuted them. The problem would never have occured again, allowing yourself and Sierra man to drive unimpeded by useless twats.
Cull the stupid.
>> Edited by Captain Muppet on Thursday 31st October 07:03
CHUMPS! It is Max Powas fault for thinking he has a fast car.
The numpty was quite right to maintain a speed a let the other cars do what they want. If Volvo had braked hard would you have tail ended it?
Numpty may not have noticed that MP guy (I assume it was a bloke) was screaming up the outside - and why would you look two cars behind for some t**t doing reckless manoeuvers whilst you are sauntering along
The numpty was quite right to maintain a speed a let the other cars do what they want. If Volvo had braked hard would you have tail ended it?
Numpty may not have noticed that MP guy (I assume it was a bloke) was screaming up the outside - and why would you look two cars behind for some t**t doing reckless manoeuvers whilst you are sauntering along
From your descrption it's a no brainer.
Part of my (day) job is to estimate the legal apportionment of liability in collisions.
Ask the simple question:
If there had been a collision which fault was most causative?
Answer:
The bolt on boy's actions to create a collision situation in the first place.
The oncoming driver took action to avoid a collision. Assuming he was within the legal (and safe for conditions) speed limit, he was entittled to be where he was, as was the numpty who would have found it very difficult to accurately judge (in their mirrors) speeds, distances and available space. You admit that you thought that a collision was inevitable.
Take away the action of the BoB and no collision risk - QED he would have been 100% blame had a collision occurred
Part of my (day) job is to estimate the legal apportionment of liability in collisions.
Ask the simple question:
If there had been a collision which fault was most causative?
Answer:
The bolt on boy's actions to create a collision situation in the first place.
The oncoming driver took action to avoid a collision. Assuming he was within the legal (and safe for conditions) speed limit, he was entittled to be where he was, as was the numpty who would have found it very difficult to accurately judge (in their mirrors) speeds, distances and available space. You admit that you thought that a collision was inevitable.
Take away the action of the BoB and no collision risk - QED he would have been 100% blame had a collision occurred
Without a doubt, I think it would be 100% down to Mr Bolt On. Ok, so the volvo may have been able to go faster, so what. There could just as easily have been a tractor or lorry there, or a learner driver, unable to go much faster. The bottom line is that he made at least 1 bad judgemet call, unlike JohnL ,(1: He failed to judge if he had space to overtake safely, 2: He failed to allow for the fact that his car is not as fast as he thinks!)and nearly made himself and others pay the price.
Jon H
Jon H
If the Volvo driver had backed off to let the bolt on boy past and he'd carried on, all well and good. However, if the BoB decided he wasn't going to make it, hit the brakes and tried to tuck in behind Volvo man then backing off would have been a disaster, IMHO.
Best to keep on at the same speed, I reckon.
Dan
Best to keep on at the same speed, I reckon.
Dan
The local news reports would have been
' Mark enjoysadrive Smith owner of a Rally and Race car Ford Cosworth capable of 200mph lost control of his high performance car and crashed and killed War vertern Bert 88 and his wife 87 in their volvo.
Witness to the incident was Joe Scrote Blogs who said ' the Cosworth was going so fast and almost hit me had I not taken avoiding action. Im so lucky Ive just passed my driving test so I know how to drive well.'
JohnL also witness to the accident was arrested at the sceen after launching into an unprovoked attack on Joe Scrot Bloggs causing actual bodily harm and damaging his Novcosa turbo. He is expected to get 5 years.
Reporter Daisy Greentree puts the question; Why are cars capable of going above the speed limit allowed on our roads. Speed kills. The Police must put more speed cameras up to prevent this sort of thing ever happening again. Please sign our petition below to call for a ban of all high performance race cars on our roads.
>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 31st October 09:40 for spelling
>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 31st October 20:14 ted wheres the spell checker pls
>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 31st October 20:17
' Mark enjoysadrive Smith owner of a Rally and Race car Ford Cosworth capable of 200mph lost control of his high performance car and crashed and killed War vertern Bert 88 and his wife 87 in their volvo.
Witness to the incident was Joe Scrote Blogs who said ' the Cosworth was going so fast and almost hit me had I not taken avoiding action. Im so lucky Ive just passed my driving test so I know how to drive well.'
JohnL also witness to the accident was arrested at the sceen after launching into an unprovoked attack on Joe Scrot Bloggs causing actual bodily harm and damaging his Novcosa turbo. He is expected to get 5 years.
Reporter Daisy Greentree puts the question; Why are cars capable of going above the speed limit allowed on our roads. Speed kills. The Police must put more speed cameras up to prevent this sort of thing ever happening again. Please sign our petition below to call for a ban of all high performance race cars on our roads.
>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 31st October 09:40 for spelling
>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 31st October 20:14 ted wheres the spell checker pls
>> Edited by superlightr on Thursday 31st October 20:17
I'm in no doubt that the overtaking guy would have been liable in law. I was commenting more on who irritated me more.
It just struck me that the 40mph bloke could have made things a little easier to help other road users in trouble. However, good point DanL, I'll bear that in mind myself!.
Superlightr:
It just struck me that the 40mph bloke could have made things a little easier to help other road users in trouble. However, good point DanL, I'll bear that in mind myself!.
Superlightr:
Yer BoB was most definitely the one at fault here. Sure Volvo numpty is irritating in that they are unable to make the speed limit on a straight road but that is their perogative, frankly. They might fail their Advanced Test for not making progress - but they certainly weren't driving dangerously.
In fact...I'd rather come up behind the old bloke doing 40mph than the goody-two-shoes-blue-rinser who wants to drive at 55mph. The former is overtaken easily. The latter requires an illegal act to get past quickly and safely...if you see what I mean.
The ones that drive me potty are the types who do 40 everywhere. Corners. Straights. Country. 30mph limits.
DanL's point about keeping a constant velocity: Unless it is clear that the correct course of action is to brake, steer or accelerate hard to avoid an accident retaining speed and direction at least means your course along the road is predictable to the other drivers and they may get a better chance of adjusting their speed and direction and avoiding an accident. DanL - I agree.
In fact...I'd rather come up behind the old bloke doing 40mph than the goody-two-shoes-blue-rinser who wants to drive at 55mph. The former is overtaken easily. The latter requires an illegal act to get past quickly and safely...if you see what I mean.
The ones that drive me potty are the types who do 40 everywhere. Corners. Straights. Country. 30mph limits.
DanL's point about keeping a constant velocity: Unless it is clear that the correct course of action is to brake, steer or accelerate hard to avoid an accident retaining speed and direction at least means your course along the road is predictable to the other drivers and they may get a better chance of adjusting their speed and direction and avoiding an accident. DanL - I agree.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff