Piss off people - obey the speed limit

damien · 26-03-2006 10:32pm #1

4 lanes. 4 cars obeying the speed limit. 100s of pissed off motorists.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5366552067462745475

Breaker breaker, looks like we've got ourselves a convoy.

Diarmsquid · 26-03-2006 11:10pm

Actuallly my parents and I were driving on the Swords road once and decided to slow down to 90 (the road sign) and people were going mad because we were slowing them up. Giving the two fingers passing by and everything.

Manic Moran · 26-03-2006 11:11pm

Idiots. That sort of thing will get you pulled over. What they don't realise in their attempts to 'obey the law' is that there is another law which says that if you're slower, pull over to the right. That law does not become nullified simply because the guy trying to overtake you is speeding.

I am aware of instances where people held up by drivers who don't yield call the highway patrol, and the HP would send an unmarked unit to see what happened. When they failed to yield, they were ticketed.

There are legal defenses for exceeding the speed limit in the US. There is no legal defense for the charge of impeding the flow of traffic.

NTM

damien · 26-03-2006 11:19pm

Manic Moran wrote:

There are legal defenses for exceeding the speed limit in the US. There is no legal defense for the charge of impeding the flow of traffic.

There are legal defenses for everything otherwise there's no need for court cases or a legal system.

Wertz · 26-03-2006 11:32pm

Just as well they're better drivers than they are sound recordists, or it'd have turned to tragedy.

Fortunately we only need two cars to do this here. Or a toll plaza...

Sparky · 27-03-2006 12:08am

Wertz wrote:

Or a toll plaza...

Nice input there. It's madness with that yoke.

blu_sonic · 27-03-2006 5:25am

the same thing happened on the Long Mile road because the speed limit changes from 40(mph) to 30(mph) rather abruptly

Victor · 27-03-2006 6:04am

blu_sonic wrote:

rather abruptly

You mean the sign appears "just like that"? :rolleyes:

blu_sonic · 27-03-2006 6:21am

well if you've used the strech of road you understand, its outside my old school, its a dual carriage way and there is a 40(mph) sign at the top of the road, and midway there is a sign (between trees) for 30(mph) there used to be a garda catching the cars that were still going 40

rubadub · 27-03-2006 10:07am

Manic Moran wrote:

Idiots. That sort of thing will get you pulled over. What they don't realise in their attempts to 'obey the law' is that there is another law which says that if you're slower, pull over to the right. That law does not become nullified simply because the guy trying to overtake you is speeding.

It might not be the law there. If you did it on a motorway in Ireland I do not see how you could be done, if you are both beside each other doing the speed limit what could anybody say? One car is trying to pass the other out. Is the one in the slow lane legally obliged to slow down in this case? I doubt it or there would have to be a set limit they should slow by, i.e. technically they could slow down a tiny bit so they would be side by side for a mile or so still.

Manic Moran wrote:

I am aware of instances where people held up by drivers who don't yield call the highway patrol, and the HP would send an unmarked unit to see what happened. When they failed to yield, they were ticketed.

If the person is on the speed limit I cannot understand why the HP would respond. The person phoning up is basically saying "I made a premeditated decision to break the speed limit but the guy in front prevented me, can you please send out a car to catch them so I can then break the law". The HP could be done for aiding and abetting!

Sam Vimes · 27-03-2006 10:16am

Manic Moron wrote:

I am aware of instances where people held up by drivers who don't yield call the highway patrol, and the HP would send an unmarked unit to see what happened. When they failed to yield, they were ticketed.

i doubt that would happen. the slow lane is for people who drive below the limit. if someone was driving at the limit and pulled into the slow lane, they'd be breaking the law. i sincerely doubt the highway patrol would force one person to break the law by driving fast in the slow lane, just so that someone else could break the law by speeding

jdwals · 27-03-2006 10:17am

Actually, I for one would be delighted if people obeyed the speed limit. And when I say this, I mean actually drive at the maximum speed allowed! If the road lets you drive at 100kph - then bloody well drive at 100kph! (Weather and road conditions allowing!)
Not 80kph or even 60kph but 100kph!
The type of driving that pi**es me off the most is when I have to drive from Dublin to Kerry and back and get stuck behind some idiot travelling as low as 40kph (yes, they are out there) below the posted speed limit and I can't get past them either due to traffic, lack of overtaking stretches or more likely the tendency of these slower drivers to be so far into the middle of the road, they may as well be driving on the other side of it!
If on the other hand someone is going above the speed limit, I give them as much space as I can to safely overtake and let them on their way. That way, they are happy, I am happy - everyone is happy!

Hobbes · 27-03-2006 10:19am

rubadub wrote:

Is the one in the slow lane legally obliged to slow down in this case?

The speed limit is a limit. It is not a target. Just because it says 80 or 120 doesn't mean you have to be running at that speed and anyone who thinks you have to needs to go back for some driving lessons. The exceptions being where you have minimum speed laws (Eg. Motorway is 60kph).

The other lane is an overtaking lane. If you have to break the law to overtake then you shouldn't be in that lane.

If a car is overtaking you it is the proper rules of the road to let them pass, even if this means slowing down. Accelerating to stop them is dangerous driving.

robinph · 27-03-2006 11:31am

Hobbes wrote:

The exceptions being where you have minimum speed laws (Eg. Motorway is 60kph).

That isn't a minimum speed limit though, its that your vehicle has to be capable of travelling at at least that speed not that you have to keep to at least that speed. The only place I'm aware of minimum limits is on the outside lanes of the autobahn.

bounty · 27-03-2006 11:38am

no, its the fast and slow lane, everyone knows that

Hobbes · 27-03-2006 11:54am

robinph wrote:

That isn't a minimum speed limit though, its that your vehicle has to be capable of travelling at at least that speed not that you have to keep to at least that speed.

You do have to keep to at least that speed if it is safe enough to do so (eg. no traffic in front of you). Its the whole point of having cars/bikes that are able to travel that speed on the motorway. Different story when the M50 turns into a car park.

Macha · 27-03-2006 12:48pm

People who stay in the overtaking lane, without overtaking are breaking the rules of the road. Drivers in private cars are not the Traffic Corps and should not take it upon themselves to start determining whether other people obey the speed limit or not.

However, people do not normally stay in the outside lane just to spite other people - most of the time it's just because they're totally unaware of what's happening around them. What happened to checking the rear-view mirror every minute?!!

Kersh · 27-03-2006 1:06pm

The speed limit is a limit. It is not a target. Just because it says 80 or 120 doesn't mean you have to be running at that speed and anyone who thinks you have to needs to go back for some driving lessons. The exceptions being where you have minimum speed laws (Eg. Motorway is 60kph).

Yes, but dont forget you can get a driving test fail for not keeping up with the flow of traffic and/or getting up to speed quick enough.

ruprect · 27-03-2006 1:21pm

Hobbes wrote:

The speed limit is a limit. It is not a target.

Yep

Hobbes wrote:

The other lane is an overtaking lane. If you have to break the law to overtake then you shouldn't be in that lane.

Yes

If a car is overtaking you it is the proper rules of the road to let them pass, even if this means slowing down.

Now it is common sense, but I doubt it is an actual law.

People who stay in the overtaking lane, without overtaking are breaking the rules of the road.

if both cars are 2 abreast on the motorway driving at the speed limit, then there is nothing any highway patrol could do. One is trying to pass out the other and not breaking the law. I doubt the one on the inside is breaking the law, just common sense.

Nightwish · 27-03-2006 1:52pm

Myself and my boyfriend (who's only driving a week, so a learner) were driving along the bypass outside the town last night, doing exactly the speed limit, which has been reduced for extensive roadwroks on the road, a truck came right up behind the car and started tailgating him and flashing the big lights on top of the cab....f*cking idiot.

27-03-2006 2:10pm

ruprect wrote:

if both cars are 2 abreast on the motorway driving at the speed limit, then there is nothing any highway patrol could do.

I would imagine one or the other could be done for driving without due care and attention for other users of the road. The rules of the road certainly state that you should not accelerate if a car is overtaking you. If someone is accelrating enough to get by but suddenly both cars are travelling at the same speed, then clearly one or other has declerated to cause the obstruction. Bit like splashing a pedestrian by driving through a puddle (which there have been convictions for) - it's just the high of ignorance.

I think a Garda who was held up by two gob****es staying neck and neck would be able to issue a summons and noone would have any sympathy.

draftdispenser · 27-03-2006 3:34pm

The laws in this country regarding motoring are fine, its the drivers that need to be sorted out.
I travel alot account of work and one major problem on the roads is not young fast drivers, its the 40+ age group. Alot (not all) have no regard for any one other than themselves.
*They pull out in front of you,
*Drive at stupidly low and dangerous speeds,
*Speed up when you try to over-take them,
*Dont bother using indicatators at all (they assume you know where they are going!)
I know, statistically, majority of road accidents are pinned on young drivers going too fast, or what not, but can anyone answer this..... How many of them accidents involve stupid or dangerous driving by people who got their licence for 5 pound many years ago?
New drivers must sit driving tests, why not all these older generation?

Gegerty · 27-03-2006 4:32pm

Driving in Australia really changed my attitude on speed limits. Almost everyone keeps to the speed limit on the motorways, even when overtaking. Alot of their roads are 2 laners like ours. You just gotta sit back and relax and keep to the speed limit. I don't have a link but I think its been proven that if everyone kept to the speed limit we'd all get to our destination quicker.

It's not a fast lane by the way, its an overtaking lane. If you're overtaking you still have to stick to the speed limit. The guys in this video are not overtaking they're driving side by side, granted they're sticking to the speed limit but if they're not overtaking they should pull into the left lane. They should get their facts straight before they go putting peoples lives in danger.

tSubh Dearg · 27-03-2006 5:43pm

Gegerty wrote:

I don't have a link but I think its been proven that if everyone kept to the speed limit we'd all get to our destination quicker.

There was a piece on this on the radio the other day. This guy had driven from Dublin to Portlaoise at the speed limit and over the speed limit. Driving over the speed limit got you there 30 secs faster than driving at the speed limit.

Gegerty · 27-03-2006 5:52pm

tSubh Dearg wrote:

There was a piece on this on the radio the other day. This guy had driven from Dublin to Portlaoise at the speed limit and over the speed limit. Driving over the speed limit got you there 30 secs faster than driving at the speed limit.

I'm sure everyones seen someone bomb past them only to meet up with the same car at a red light further down the road. You're only getting to your next red light quicker.

27-03-2006 5:53pm

draftdispenser wrote:

I travel alot account of work and one major problem on the roads is not young fast drivers, its the 40+ age group. Alot (not all) have no regard for any one other than themselves.
*They pull out in front of you,
*Drive at stupidly low and dangerous speeds,
*Speed up when you try to over-take them,
*Dont bother using indicatators at all (they assume you know where they are going!)

I completely agree.

I have rarely had a problem with some smartarse kid on the road. If they want to speed along, I will always pull in and let them overtake me.

But I've had plenty of problems with old people sticking to the speed limit or well below and hogging the middle of the road, or some old fellow on a tractor or in a jeep drawing a (badly lit) trailer and crawling along. That sort of driving forces those behind into taking risks. As for the indicators, does anyone ever indicate going into a roundabout anymore?

Gegerty · 27-03-2006 6:03pm

Deleted User wrote:

does anyone ever indicate going into a roundabout anymore?

Well they shouldn't if they're going straight on. Old people are entitled to podder along if they want. People on Irish roads need to relax a little. OK you'll get stuck behind them until its clear to overtake, get over it. Nobody can argue that young drivers don't speed, myself included until I turned 28 and copped on. Nobody can argue that speed is not the main killer on our roads.

Rovi · 27-03-2006 6:16pm

tSubh Dearg wrote:

There was a piece on this on the radio the other day. This guy had driven from Dublin to Portlaoise at the speed limit and over the speed limit. Driving over the speed limit got you there 30 secs faster than driving at the speed limit.

Hmmm...
Given that it's approx. 80 kilometres, and it's all motorway with a 120km/h limit, I figure that the guy doing the limit did the journey in 40 minutes, and the guy who did it 30 seconds quicker (39.5 minutes) was doing 121.5km/h.

What a maniac! :eek:

.

27-03-2006 6:21pm

Gegerty wrote:

People on Irish roads need to relax a little. OK you'll get stuck behind them until its clear to overtake, get over it.

Around these parts (Kerry), its not that simple. There are plenty of roads around here where you might only get a chance every 5 or 10 miles to overtake, and if someone is plodding along oblivious to you and refusing to pull in then it can force people to overtake on areas where it might be dangerous.

Manic Moran · 27-03-2006 6:22pm

Commander Vimes wrote:

i doubt that would happen. the slow lane is for people who drive below the limit. if someone was driving at the limit and pulled into the slow lane, they'd be breaking the law. i sincerely doubt the highway patrol would force one person to break the law by driving fast in the slow lane, just so that someone else could break the law by speeding

Well, they do. Evidently we have a difference between Irish and American laws on the issue. (I take it the film wasn't made in Canada?)

http://www.driverightpassleft.com/laws/index.asp

"The Uniform Vehicle Code states:

'Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic ...'

Note that this law refers to the 'normal' speed of traffic, not the 'legal' speed of traffic. The 60 MPH driver in a 55 MPH zone where everybody else is going 65 MPH must move right. "(My bold)

This is the relevant part of the code from my state's (California) law:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=21001-22000&file=21650-21664
"(b) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is
not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as
practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima
facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation
of subdivision (a) of this section." (Subdivision (a)'s first phrase is 'notwithstanding the speed limit')

Basically, obstructing the normal flow of traffic is likely to get you done in.

Another example of the speed limit not being an absolute is, for example,when travelling at 55mph on a single lane 55mph road, and you encounter something doing 53mph. It is permitted to exceed the speed limit (Generally by 10mph) when overtaking because crawling past at only 2mph is more dangerous.

NTM

SouperComputer · 27-03-2006 6:28pm

Nobody can argue that speed is not the main killer on our roads.

Speed doesn’t kill. Inappropriate speed is ONE possible cause amongst many of accidents and there is a major difference.

I find it interesting the scapegoat that "speeding" has become. I have to laugh at the TV shows preaching about speeding, and yet the incident involves a lunatic running a red light at 40MPH or whatever. That has nothing to do with speeding whatsoever!

Speed or speeding is an easy target as it can be quantified, but IMO the real issue is people's attitude and understanding towards\of driving. This of course is much more difficult to judge and to apportion blame in a post-mortem (not neccarily in the death sense) situation.

The risks\dangers don’t get necessarily higher because you have crossed a legal limit. Yes, reaction distances increase obviously, but this is where inappropriate use of speed comes in, it has nothing to do with the legal limit.

As a few people pointed out, this "exercise" was illegal, provocative and unnecessary. Also, chances are they were probably driving nearer 50MPH if they were using their vehicle's speedo's to judge their speed.

Piss off people - obey the speed limit

Comments