Tailgating and Road Rage

--Kaiser--

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

People shouldn't be allowed to drive alone on public roads until they get their license. That's the way it is in most countries

Shenshen wrote: »

Which countries do not allow learners on the roads at all? That's the first time I've ever heard of this.

Most countries will insist though that as a learner, you're in a driving school car with an instructor. You're not allowed to drive with anyone else, or by yourself, if that's what you mean.

I meant just what I typed

SuperInfinity

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

People shouldn't be allowed to drive alone on public roads until they get their license. That's the way it is in most countries

What do you mean "most countries"? I hugely doubt there is anything like that in most countries. Maybe you mean most european countries? Massive difference. I'm sure in countries like Brazil they're all going to be going around in their instructor cars.

So every time you want to go out you have to pay upwards of €80 an hour for the instructor and use of a vehicle. And this is all legit and has nothing to do with money, yeah right. What point is the "driving vehicle" for anyway? What point could that possibly serve other than to make money?

And furthermore, a lot of countries distinguish between "learner" and "provisional". So maybe it's only the VERY start, when it's car parking lot time in Ireland, you would have those ones. So the question is, do you have any clue of what you're talking about when you say that a learner can only drive in a proper car on a proper road without paying a massive fee to an instructor when they have a full licence?

Also, most european countries have shocking drivers. So bad that a large fraction of the accidents here occur from foreign drivers.

TheChizler

SuperInfinity wrote: »

What do you mean "most countries"? I hugely doubt there is anything like that in most countries. Maybe you mean most european countries? Massive difference.

So every time you want to go out you have to pay upwards of €80 an hour for the instructor and use of a vehicle. And this is all legit and has nothing to do with lobbying by the driving instructors etc, yeah right. What point is the "driving vehicle" for anyway? I mean what point could that possibly serve other than to make money?

Also, most european countries have shocking drivers. So bad that a large fraction of the accidents here occur from foreign drivers.

The key word that most people seem to be missing is ALONE.

Muir

I think --Kaiser-- was picked up wrong about the alone part because SuperInfinity was pointing out that someone argued on here recently that people shouldn't be allowed drive at all until they pass a driving test (it was in the penalty points for learners thread). So I think a few people scanned the post by --Kaiser-- and just assumed it was agreeing with that point and just missed the word alone. That's what happened to me anyhow, apologies!

Still, I became a better driver when I started to get out in the car alone instead of with an instructor beside me. I had very little confidence in my own abilities until I did that. I think you should have to learn with an instructor the way it is now (although I don't like the 12 lesson thing, I think everyone is different in regards to how many they need and it kinda tells people you should & will know everything after 12 lessons when some people might need 30) then after you have learned with the instructor and are capable, you should be allowed gain some experience in the car alone. Even just going to the local shop by yourself can make such a difference to how comfortable you feel in the car.

RustyNut

SuperInfinity wrote: »

What do you mean "most countries"? I hugely doubt there is anything like that in most countries. Maybe you mean most european countries? Massive difference. I'm sure in countries like Brazil they're all going to be going around in their instructor cars.

Learners here should be dam glad they are not in brazil. No picnic getting a licence there. How much experience do you think would be appropriate before someone should be allowed out on their own?

Elfinknight

Muir wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be that way in most countries from what I'm reading, care to share some examples? I'm curious how learners actually learn without being allowed on the road.

Ireland for one.

On your 1st, 3rd and subsequent provisional licences, you are meant to have a person with a full licence with you when you are driving.

Muir

Elfinknight wrote: »

Ireland for one.

On your 1st, 3rd and subsequent provisional licences, you are meant to have a person with a full licence with you when you are driving.

If you read my above post you'll see I thought they meant learner drivers should not be allowed on the roads at all. I am aware of the rules in Ireland.

Fuinseog

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

People shouldn't be allowed to drive alone on public roads until they get their license. That's the way it is in most countries

there is 'what should be' and 'what is'. you have to learn somewhere. its possible to get lessons, past the test and know very little about how to drive.

Fuinseog

Shenshen wrote: »

I do think they could change that rule, though.
Not to allow all learner drivers onto it, definitely not. But to allow learner drivers in driving school cars and with instructors by their side?
After all, that's the way it's being taught in other countries and it does seem to work ok for them?

In my opinion it takes a few hundred hours of driving to become remotely confident. i spent up to a grand on lessons and it as only when I went out onto the road myself did I really learn.
other countries also have things like driving lessons on the motorway and at night.
giving the poor state of driving in this country maybe people should have to sit a driving test every five years.

Elfinknight

Apologies Muir

Came to it after I posted

Muir

Elfinknight wrote: »

Apologies Muir

Came to it after I posted

Fair enough =]

Elfinknight

grange mac wrote: »

drivin yest a ****x in his x5 pulled out in front of me, i had to swerv to avoid goin into back of him....he then flashes and beeps and passes me in a rage...then brakes forces me to stop behind him....says did i realise speed woz doin i replied i did...woz bout 50 in a 40mph...i said he needed to go pull out rules of road about pulling out when there is a car coming from behind...also mentioned specsavers..lost the rag...said i will b reportrd for speeding...i said ill report him for dangerous driving, threatn me and gettin out of his x5 to do same....he said once he indicated out he fully entitled to pull out...i akways thought can onky proceed when safe to do so ....with me coming he knew it woznt but he just didnt like being passed....dont like people who think they own the road....this was aplace where trucks stop on a country road not a motor way....anythoughts...

You're right there and I think you are quite entitled to report him. Hope you got his number.

A Dub in Glasgo

I was in Dublin a couple of weeks ago for a family funeral. I drove from Glasgow via Larne. I was amazed at the amount of drivers who drive in the middle lane of the M50 even when the left hand lane is clear for miles. Then you get those who venture out to the right hand lane and drive +1kph to overtake.

TheChizler

Elfinknight wrote: »

Ireland for one.

On your 1st, 3rd and subsequent provisional licences, you are meant to have a person with a full licence with you when you are driving.

That was changed a few years ago, now there always needs to be a supervising passenger before you get the full licence, even on 2nd learner permit, provisional licences have been done away with.

Muir

TheChizler wrote: »

That was changed a few years ago, now there always needs to be a supervising passenger before you get the full licence, even on 2nd learner permit, provisional licences have been done away with.

I thought Elfinknight had included 2nd in that post. Not on the ball reading things lately!

rogieop

why are traffic core gardai not put in unmarked cars and detailed to drive up and down the countries motorways pulling people over for all these offences?

Its blatantly obvious in this country too many people are oblivious as to how to actually drive safely on a motorway.

Id like to see them out pulling people over for the likes of this and giving them on the spot fines/penalty points.

Jesus, if they gave me the authority id do it for free!!!

right hand lane, no traffic about... woop woop, bang, €80 and 2 points.

Autosport

Shenshen wrote: »

I do think they could change that rule, though.
Not to allow all learner drivers onto it, definitely not. But to allow learner drivers in driving school cars and with instructors by their side?
After all, that's the way it's being taught in other countries and it does seem to work ok for them?

I've seen this on the M9 motorway, it makes sense people should be able to use the motorway properly.

Elfinknight

TheChizler wrote: »

That was changed a few years ago, now there always needs to be a supervising passenger before you get the full licence, even on 2nd learner permit, provisional licences have been done away with.

Well just goes to show, every day is a school day. never realised it had changed

Neewbie_noob

marshbaboon wrote: »

My brother has the most incredible solution to tailgating. He slows down. Doesn't matter if he has somewhere important to be, he'll drive as slow as he can get away with, and feed on their tears of rage.

That's a childish attitude to have to be honest. I agree that the speed limit, is as it says, a limit and not a target. I am a cardiac first responder, if you don't know what that is, I am on call 10 hours a week and if someone has cardiac arrest or is choking, I will be paged and go to the scene and perform the Heinrich or do CPR until the paramedics arrive. If that was me behind your brother, then someone's life could be at risk. As I mentioned, I do agree that the speed limit is a limit and not a target. When I am driving, I will do the limit, and not 1KPH more, but I would feel very uncomfortable doing a lot less than the limit. Just think that the person behind you could really have somewhere important to be and by deliberately slowing down, your brother could be delaying someone and it could have drastic consequences.

Muir

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

That's a childish attitude to have to be honest. I agree that the speed limit, is as it says, a limit and not a target. I am a cardiac first responder, if you don't know what that is, I am on call 10 hours a week and if someone has cardiac arrest or is choking, I will be paged and go to the scene and perform the Heinrich or do CPR until the paramedics arrive. If that was me behind your brother, then someone's life could be at risk. As I mentioned, I do agree that the speed limit is a limit and not a target. When I am driving, I will do the limit, and not 1KPH more, but I would feel very uncomfortable doing a lot less than the limit. Just think that the person behind you could really have somewhere important to be and by deliberately slowing down, your brother could be delaying someone and it could have drastic consequences.

But you shouldn't be tailgating someone. You should be leaving adequate distance between you and the car in front. What use are you to the person you're responding to if you end up in an accident because you were driving up someones ass on the road? The point is tailgating is not safe.

soundbyte

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

That's a childish attitude to have to be honest. I agree that the speed limit, is as it says, a limit and not a target. I am a cardiac first responder, if you don't know what that is, I am on call 10 hours a week and if someone has cardiac arrest or is choking, I will be paged and go to the scene and perform the Heinrich or do CPR until the paramedics arrive. If that was me behind your brother, then someone's life could be at risk. As I mentioned, I do agree that the speed limit is a limit and not a target. When I am driving, I will do the limit, and not 1KPH more, but I would feel very uncomfortable doing a lot less than the limit. Just think that the person behind you could really have somewhere important to be and by deliberately slowing down, your brother could be delaying someone and it could have drastic consequences.

Heinrich?

Neewbie_noob

Muir wrote: »

But you shouldn't be tailgating someone. You should be leaving adequate distance between you and the car in front. What use are you to the person you're responding to if you end up in an accident because you were driving up someones ass on the road? The point is tailgating is not safe.

But most people wouldn't tailgate if the person on front was driving at a reasonable speed. Driving abilities in Ireland are apparently one of the worst in the World. As I said, I never break the speed limit but I do drive up the the speed limit, road conditions permitting but I have often been on a perfectly straight stretch of road where the person on front was doing well below the speed limit. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a dangerous driver or boy racer by any stretch of the imagination.

Neewbie_noob

soundbyte wrote: »

Heinrich?

Heimlich manoeuvre, auto correct, sorry.

fasttalkerchat

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

That's a childish attitude to have to be honest. I agree that the speed limit, is as it says, a limit and not a target. I am a cardiac first responder, if you don't know what that is, I am on call 10 hours a week and if someone has cardiac arrest or is choking, I will be paged and go to the scene and perform the Heinrich or do CPR until the paramedics arrive. If that was me behind your brother, then someone's life could be at risk. As I mentioned, I do agree that the speed limit is a limit and not a target. When I am driving, I will do the limit, and not 1KPH more, but I would feel very uncomfortable doing a lot less than the limit. Just think that the person behind you could really have somewhere important to be and by deliberately slowing down, your brother could be delaying someone and it could have drastic consequences.

Agree 100% I was being rushed to a hospital once and we had to overtake on a hard shoulder because someone was driving slow for a laugh.

fasttalkerchat

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

But most people wouldn't tailgate if the person on front was driving at a reasonable speed. Driving abilities in Ireland are apparently one of the worst in the World. As I said, I never break the speed limit but I do drive up the the speed limit, road conditions permitting but I have often been on a perfectly straight stretch of road where the person on front was doing well below the speed limit. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a dangerous driver or boy racer by any stretch of the imagination.

I wouldn't say they're the worst, India, Russia, even New Zealand are worse on many points. New Zealand in particular when it comes to undertaking at motorways. Ireland is poor on seatbelts, phones and roundabouts as well as the slightly different issue as driving with no licence.

Muir

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

But most people wouldn't tailgate if the person on front was driving at a reasonable speed. Driving abilities in Ireland are apparently one of the worst in the World. As I said, I never break the speed limit but I do drive up the the speed limit, road conditions permitting but I have often been on a perfectly straight stretch of road where the person on front was doing well below the speed limit. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a dangerous driver or boy racer by any stretch of the imagination.

People do tailgate even when the person in front is driving at a reasonable speed. I see it regularly. And furthermore that's not an excuse to drive dangerously. If the person in front drives too slow for your liking, stay back so you can see clearly & overtake when it's safe to do so. Tailgating someone wont get you anywhere any faster if they're driving slow, you're just more likely to cause an accident if the person in front needs to jam on the breaks.

TheChizler

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

someone was driving slow for a laugh.

do you seriously believe they were doing it for the laugh?

Solutions!

The hard sell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0G66aOUzOc

or the soft option.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAx7UO9Sajk

Lippy C

This morning I was forced to break as some asshole pulled out of a side road(no problem with that) but then proceeded to plod along at 50kph when the road is a 100kph.He pulled into garage further along I was going there too and I spoke to him older gentleman and said how I had to hit the brakes as he cruised along after coming onto main road.His reply was well I don't think that road should be 100kph so I won't drive above 50kph. Seriously!!!!!!!!!!!!!

fasttalkerchat

TheChizler wrote: »

do you seriously believe they were doing it for the laugh?

Yea. The driver tried to pass him once and the other driver floored it to stop him. Our driver put on the hazard lights and beeped the horn to let him no there was an emergency, he then slowed to 60 km/h on a 100 limit road. Thankfully the M50 was quite clear for the time of day and we made it to the hospital on time.

fasttalkerchat

Lippy C wrote: »

This morning I was forced to break as some asshole pulled out of a side road(no problem with that) but then proceeded to plod along at 50kph when the road is a 100kph.He pulled into garage further along I was going there too and I spoke to him older gentleman and said how I had to hit the brakes as he cruised along after coming onto main road.His reply was well I don't think that road should be 100kph so I won't drive above 50kph. Seriously!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You should always drive according to the road and your ability. What he did was 100% right. Possibly there is the issue that he shouldn't be driving at all as his ability would suggest.

Lippy C

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

You should always drive according to the road and your ability. What he did was 100% right. Possibly there is the issue that he shouldn't be driving at all as his ability would suggest.

Yes I agree he possibly should not be on the roads same as my dad they are a liability ...he said he saw my car but pulled out anyway!!! What was he 100% right on sorry didn't get that??!!

fasttalkerchat

Lippy C wrote: »

Yes I agree he possibly should not be on the roads same as my dad they are a liability ...he said he saw my car but pulled out anyway!!! What was he 100% right on sorry didn't get that??!!

He was right to drive at that speed rather than drive faster than his ability.

A Dub in Glasgo

He was 100% wrong and is a danger to others on the road

fasttalkerchat

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

He was 100% wrong and is a danger to others on the road

SO he should have driven faster??
Surely the right way to resolve this is for him to hand in his licence?

Lippy C

Oh right ...well I disagree with you there he could have caused an accident just because he decided speed limit should be lower doesn't mean we are all mind readers..no other cars on road thank god as it was early when I left for work.

fasttalkerchat

Lippy C wrote: »

Oh right ...well I disagree with you there he could have caused an accident just because he decided speed limit should be lower doesn't mean we are all mind readers..no other cars on road thank god as it was early when I left for work.

I see where you are coming from. I drive at the limit on all motorways but will drive at half the limit on streets with houses where kids play, the same on some bad country roads. If the limit on motorways was changed to 170 km/h I would not drive at that speed because it is beyond my ability. If me driving at my highest safe speed was too low to be safe I would have to stop driving on motorways.

A Dub in Glasgo

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

SO he should have driven faster??
Surely the right way to resolve this is for him to hand in his licence?

Either way he was 100% wrong

fasttalkerchat

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Either way he was 100% wrong

Wrong to drive so slowly or wrong to be on the road? I agree with the latter.

Fuinseog

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I was in Dublin a couple of weeks ago for a family funeral. I drove from Glasgow via Larne. I was amazed at the amount of drivers who drive in the middle lane of the M50 even when the left hand lane is clear for miles. Then you get those who venture out to the right hand lane and drive +1kph to overtake.

if you are driving at 100km per hour on the 100km per hour M50 surely the lane is not that important.

although on the motorways driving at 120km I get out of the way for those who want to overtake me.

.jacksparrow.

Fuinseog wrote: »

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I was in Dublin a couple of weeks ago for a family funeral. I drove from Glasgow via Larne. I was amazed at the amount of drivers who drive in the middle lane of the M50 even when the left hand lane is clear for miles. Then you get those who venture out to the right hand lane and drive +1kph to overtake.

if you are driving at 100km per hour on the 100km per hour M50 surely the lane is not that important.

although on the motorways driving at 120km I get out of the way for those who want to overtake me.

Of course its important,why don't people understand how to use motorways in this country?

rogieop

Fuinseog wrote: »

if you are driving at 100km per hour on the 100km per hour M50 surely the lane is not that important.

although on the motorways driving at 120km I get out of the way for those who want to overtake me.

you are an idiot.

Hand in your driving license. please.

you make commuting to work a nightmare for people.

You stay in the lane as far to the left as possible untill you need to overtake. once you have over taken you return to the lane closest to the left as possible.

As long as you watch yuor own speed you need not worry about others.

fasttalkerchat

rogieop wrote: »

you are an idiot.

Hand in your driving license. please.

you make commuting to work a nightmare for people.

You stay in the lane as far to the left as possible untill you need to overtake. once you have over taken you return to the lane closest to the left as possible.

As long as you watch yuor own speed you need not worry about others.

You're right about the 2nd part but no need to call him an idiot. Its his driving instructor's fault and the fault of the system in the republic.

jessiejam

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Wrong to drive so slowly or wrong to be on the road? I agree with the latter.

I think he was well out of order driving so slowly. He could have caused an accident or a pile up. FFS 100km per hour isn't that fast at all. If he can't drive at that speed sometimes, he shouldn't be on the road. Especially when there is an oncoming car. Complete disregard for other road users as far as im concerned.

Maybe there should be a compentency test after you reach a certain age. There are some people out there driving the last 60 years. Times have well changed since they did their test.

Saying that not all elderly drivers are rubbish at it. I find the majority to be very courteous, by pulling in when they can, to let you pass. But there are the odd few that are oblivious to other road users. Saying that I see an awful lot of women on the road driving cars that they can't drive properly practically sitting on the steering wheel their noses almost touching the windscreen. It takes all types really I suppose

Muir

jessiejam wrote: »

Saying that I see an awful lot of women on the road driving cars that they can't drive properly practically sitting on the steering wheel their noses almost touching the windscreen. It takes all types really I suppose

I'm short. I need to sit as far forward as my seat allows to reach the pedals properly. Why would that mean I can't drive properly?

jessiejam

Muir wrote: »

I'm short. I need to sit as far forward as my seat allows to reach the pedals properly. Why would that mean I can't drive properly?

Ya probably:p

In all seriousness though if you re-read my post you will see this-
Saying that I see an awful lot of women on the road driving cars that they can't drive properly practically sitting on the steering wheel their noses almost touching the windscreen. It takes all types really I suppose


If you can drive properly the nose touching off the windscreen doesn't matter!

dukedalton

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

He was right to drive at that speed rather than drive faster than his ability.

If he/she doesn't have the ability to drive to the speed limit then he/she should not be on the road. Simple as that.

I do a fair bit of mileage and the most infuriating thing is to see someone plodding along at half the limit in normal driving conditions. This to me is as dangerous as someone speeding, because it can get the person behind frustrated into attempting an overtaking maneuver they shouldn't carry out.

The speed limit is there for a reason. If you can't handle that, get off the road.

Hande hoche!

I have got to stop reading this thread the nights before my driving lessons.

fasttalkerchat

dukedalton wrote: »

If he/she doesn't have the ability to drive to the speed limit then he/she should not be on the road. Simple as that.

Agreed. And encouraging that person to drive faster is making the problem worse.

TheChizler

dukedalton wrote: »

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

He was right to drive at that speed rather than drive faster than his ability.

If he/she doesn't have the ability to drive to the speed limit then he/she should not be on the road. Simple as that.

I do a fair bit of mileage and the most infuriating thing is to see someone plodding along at half the limit in normal driving conditions. This to me is as dangerous as someone speeding, because it can get the person behind frustrated into attempting an overtaking maneuver they shouldn't carry out.

The speed limit is there for a reason. If you can't handle that, get off the road.

That's a bit of a general statement. Its widely agreed that many of the speed limits are excessive of what would be considered safe. And there are many reasons why you would have reason to drive considerably below the limit.