Overtaking the cops

BrianD3

What is it with people who are afraid of their sh1t to overtake Garda cars even if the cops are doing well under the speed limit and its perfectly safe and legal to overtake. Eg I was on a dual carriageway (100 km/h limit) the other day and there were a line of cars who refused to overtake a marked cop car dawdling along at 80 km/h in the inside lane. I overtook the lot of them and naturally there was no problem.

Funny thing is 5 minutes earlier the same cars who wouldn't overtake the cops had overtaken me and I caught up with them when they got "stuck" behind the cops.

It's quite similar to drivers who slam on the brakes when going past a Gatso camera even though they're already doing well under the speed limit :rolleyes:

On single carrigeway roads I'd be more relutant to overtake a Garda car as I usually break the speed limit when overtaking on these roads. Having said that the other day I passed a lorry, 3 cars and an unmarked Focus safely and legally on a long straight without breaking the speed limit.

prospect

I remember Jasper Carrot telling a story about how he was filming his show, and he had to dress up as a cop in a particular episode and he had a police car aswell. When they stopped for lunch he took the Police car with him, and for the laugh he kept driving slower & slower on the motorway to see how long it would take before someone picked up the courage to pass him out.

Dunno if it was a true story but it was pretty funny how he told it.

_Kaiser_

Whilst I agree with you that people give the traffic cops too much unwarranted "respect" on the roads (look at Stark's post in the Dangerous Driving thread), with the recent raft of new penalty points, speed traps, quotas etc, they probably just don't think it's worth giving some bored, power-tripping cop an excuse.

Note for balance: Obviously they're not all like this but those that are can really spoil your day!

kikel

one of my pet hates.
And also people slowing down for the camera on the N4. Why do people have to slow to 60KPH in a 80 KPH zone. Just because there ias a camera present doesn't mean you have to stop and do your hair.

HelterSkelter

Have to admit I have been guilty of this once or twice. Sometimes you are driving and not watching your speed when suddenly you see the speed camera and hit the breaks because you think you might be over the limit.

unkel

BrianD3 wrote:

What is it with people who are afraid of their sh1t to overtake Garda cars even if the cops are doing well under the speed limit and its perfectly safe and legal to overtake. Eg I was on a dual carriageway (100 km/h limit) the other day and there were a line of cars who refused to overtake a marked cop car dawdling along at 80 km/h in the inside lane. I overtook the lot of them and naturally there was no problem

That never ceases to amaze me. Indeed also people breaking before passing fixed cameras while they weren't speeding in the first place

omega man

Ye but if they dont like been overtaken is it not your word against theirs
if they pull you up for speeding??

seamus

Indeed, annoys me too. Particularly the braking for cameras bit. I've had a go at people more than once when I've been a passenger in their car and they've done this.

The Gardai won't pull you over if you're under the limit and driving normally. "Power-tripping" or bad days regardless.

I do remember a year or two back I was driving a rental car along a country motorway (M7 I think), it was nice and clear, except for me and a green Kangoo who were both doing a little over the limit. As I can up behind him to overtake, I flashed briefly, he moved over and as I passed, I saw two Gardai in the cab. I was doing around 140km/h, but neither of them even looked over at me, let alone tried to stop me.

My rationale was that they had seized the vehicle, but if it was an issue, surely they would have radioed someone to pull me in...

egan007

The simple and very obvious answer to this question is:

Because people in this country are not trained to drive properly.

FACT.

prospect

seamus wrote:

Indeed, annoys me too. Particularly the braking for cameras bit. I've had a go at people more than once when I've been a passenger in their car and they've done this.

It is highly annoying I agree.
But, what gives you (as a passanger) the entitlement to "have a go" at the driver of a car for this. They are in control of the vehicle, and unless they are doing something that blatently endangers you or another road user, you should not really interfere with their driving.
If I was driving and felt like staying behind any car, rather than overtake, and a passanger "had a go" at me I can tell you I'd put them in their place quick-smart.

_Kaiser_

omega man wrote:

Ye but if they dont like been overtaken is it not your word against theirs
if they pull you up for speeding??

Wouldnt even have to be speeding... "dangerous overtaking", "you crossed a white line" (who was it posted a story a few weeks back about getting done for this when it was the cop who was wrong/blind/whatever) etc.

The whole problem in general IS that it's your word against theirs.

seamus

prospect wrote:

It is highly annoying I agree.
But, what gives you (as a passanger) the entitlement to "have a go" at the driver of a car for this. They are in control of the vehicle, and unless they are doing something that blatently endangers you or another road user, you should not really interfere with their driving.
If I was driving and felt like staying behind any car, rather than overtake, and a passanger "had a go" at me I can tell you I'd put them in their place quick-smart.

The people I've had a go with are family. So I'm allowed to have a go at them. I've no problem with people staying behind other traffic, but slamming on the brakes for a speed camera is dangerous and only serves to slow down the entire traffic flow, just like rubbernecking, etc.

prospect

seamus wrote:

slamming on the brakes for a speed camera is dangerous and only serves to slow down the entire traffic flow, just like rubbernecking, etc.

True,

I was only considering the 'driving-slow-behind-the-squads' bit.

Anan1

seamus wrote:

The people I've had a go with are family. So I'm allowed to have a go at them. I've no problem with people staying behind other traffic, but slamming on the brakes for a speed camera is dangerous and only serves to slow down the entire traffic flow, just like rubbernecking, etc.

To be fair, having a go at anyone while they're driving is dangerous for obvious reasons. You would, however, be quite right to say something afterwards, when you are both out of the car.

Skyuser

kikel wrote:

one of my pet hates.
And also people slowing down for the camera on the N4. Why do people have to slow to 60KPH in a 80 KPH zone. Just because there ias a camera present doesn't mean you have to stop and do your hair.

They can go whatever speed they want, it aint a target speed.

Anan1

Skyuser wrote:

They can go whatever speed they want, it aint a target speed.

Surely you can see that slowing needlessly from 80km/h to 60km/h for a camera is at best inconvenient for other road users?

andrew_ireland

There was a white van parked on the side of the M50 northbound just after where the M50 and M11 merge for about a week. Without fail, everytime I'd pass it I was treated to a nice display of brakelights! Thing is, it was in bad nick, had yellow plates on it and you could clearly see into it.

Idleater

Anan1 wrote:

Surely you can see that slowing needlessly from 80km/h to 60km/h for a camera is at best inconvenient for other road users?

It is at best inconvenient for other road users if the other road users in question are not driving a recommended safe distance behind the vehicle that is braking.

If driving at a recommended safe distance, the slowing down can be done gradually without the brake lights that cause the "phantom" traffic jams.

What is the difference between a car slowing to 60 for a speed camera and a car slowing to 60 because they can see a cyclist up ahead or that the road narrows etc etc?

It is because people drive too close to see adequately that they get "surprised" when someone decides to apply the brakes.

Surely all you great drivers should be anticipating the car in front braking when they see the Gardai/speed camera/GATSO van, because you are using your experience to adapt to the road conditions and are expecting the unexpected?


No?


However, I do agree, that there is no need to apply the brakes if you are doing less than the speed limit, and are doing so just because it is a speed camera.

L.

Riamfada

BrianD3 wrote:

Having said that the other day I passed a lorry, 3 cars and an unmarked Focus safely and legally on a long straight without breaking the speed limit.

are you one of those overtake freaks who usually ends up dead somwhere along the N6?

RobAMerc

Suddenly slowing from the speed limit to a much lower speed is stupid and dangerous. That is why speed cameras should be clearly market an not covert as they are here.

Also having the population so afriad of getting caught speeding that they are too busy staring at the speedo to spot the poor kid jumping out from behind a car!

layke

Just a note Brian, there is no way in hell can you stick to the speed limit and overtake. It's just not possible.

e.g person doing 80km on a 100km road, if you stick to 100km you will crawl past them and risk a collision on the other side of the road. Imagine a 50km limit, I see people doing 35km/h and the additional 15kmh isn't going to give you the boost needed.

Imo you should put the foot down, pass the car and return to the limit as quickly as possible. I dunno what tey law says on this.

HelterSkelter

layke wrote:

Just a note Brian, there is no way in hell can you stick to the speed limit and overtake. It's just not possible.

e.g person doing 80km on a 100km road, if you stick to 100km you will crawl past them and risk a collision on the other side of the road. Imagine a 50km limit, I see people doing 35km/h and the additional 15kmh isn't going to give you the boost needed.

Imo you should put the foot down, pass the car and return to the limit as quickly as possible. I dunno what tey law says on this.

I agree, and that is what I was told to do in the Ignition course. If you're gonna overtake someone put the boot down. You are putting your own life and others at risk by spending longer than necessary on the wrong side of the road. People are brainwashed by the "Speed Kills" line the Government keeps harping on about (to cover up their inaction on the real issues) and this could actually cause more accidents.

_Kaiser_

HelterSkelter wrote:

I agree, and that is what I was told to do in the Ignition course. If you're gonna overtake someone put the boot down. You are putting your own life and others at risk by spending longer than necessary on the wrong side of the road. People are brainwashed by the "Speed Kills" line the Government keeps harping on about (to cover up their inaction on the real issues) and this could actually cause more accidents.

Is this legal though? I'd agree (and do it myself) but is it something you can technically get done for?

HelterSkelter

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Is this legal though? I'd agree (and do it myself) but is it something you can technically get done for?

Not 100% sure but I reckon it is illegal. But sometimes, the law is an ass!

Seth Brundle

By all means put the foot down but you must also remember that you are not legally allowed to exceed the speed limits.

Alun

kbannon wrote:

By all means put the foot down but you must also remember that you are not legally allowed to exceed the speed limits.

True, but this one of those "lesser of two evils" situations like the one discussed here at nauseam, where you either undertake or add to a moving roadblock. Given a choice between "speeding" and being on the wrong side of the road for a microsecond longer than I have to, the choice is really easy IMO.

Seth Brundle

But given that we are talking about overtaking the gardai, I would be reluctant to speed past them (don't interpret this as don't overtake!).
If it came to it I would rather wait than get some powertrip/pissed off garda pull me over for being 5km/h over the limit whilst overtaking 'safely' - the rebuttal to the 'safe' overtaking defence is that if there was a danger then you should not have initiated the act.

Anan1

nereid wrote:

It is at best inconvenient for other road users if the other road users in question are not driving a recommended safe distance behind the vehicle that is braking.

If driving at a recommended safe distance, the slowing down can be done gradually without the brake lights that cause the "phantom" traffic jams.

Unfortunately, this is not true. If you are driving at a safe distance behind someone doing 80km/h and they panic brake to 60km/h (which is what these people often do), then you will have to brake too.

nereid wrote:

What is the difference between a car slowing to 60 for a speed camera and a car slowing to 60 because they can see a cyclist up ahead or that the road narrows etc etc?

The difference is that braking for the above reasons is necessary.

nereid wrote:

Surely all you great drivers should be anticipating the car in front braking when they see the Gardai/speed camera/GATSO van, because you are using your experience to adapt to the road conditions and are expecting the unexpected?

It's still inconvenient, isn't it?

Sleepy

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Is this legal though? I'd agree (and do it myself) but is it something you can technically get done for?

Definitely not legal, a guy I know was done for doing it whilst over-taking a squad car.

Idleater

Anan1 wrote:

Unfortunately, this is not true. If you are driving at a safe distance behind someone doing 80km/h and they panic brake to 60km/h (which is what these people often do), then you will have to brake too.

If you are able to antisipate the actions of these "bad" drivers, then no, you will not have to slam on the brakes like the "bad" driver in front of you.

You can use the engine braking from your vehicle to adapt to the circumstances that you have seen because you have left sufficient distance between you and the car in front and have therefore seen the speed camera and taken into account that the driver in front may slow.

If you don't see the speed camera or whatever then you are not giving yourself enough room to see and adapt to the road in front of you and are therefore putting yourself, your passengers and other road users in danger because of your actions.

Worst case (for you) in this situation is if the car does not brake, is that you are .5 of a second later at your destination.

Anan1 wrote:

It's still inconvenient, isn't it?

Don't get me wrong, I am fully in agreement with the absurdedness of slowing down purely for the camera/gardai. And yes I tut tut to myself when I see people doing it but I think that people "surprised" and "annoyed" at the drivers slowing them down should take a look at their driving because it shows that they were not in control of the situation for their own vehicle.

L.

kikel

Skyuser wrote:

They can go whatever speed they want, it aint a target speed.

i know about road conditions and speed etc. But to be in the outside lane of a dual carriage way. have nothing on the inside lane. and drivers break suddenly to to 60KPH when the speed limit is 80KPH. All i'm saying is that drivers should be aware of there enviroment and there speed. Then there would be no need for silly hard breaking when it's not needed.
Thenn the traffic would move faster and we all get there sooner within the speed limits.