Trivial things that annoy you

SV

Part troll wrote: »

i hate to see "doughnuts" or zig-zag tyre tracks on the road.

you just know, that some a$$hole boy racer, has been tearing down this road, in his souped up tin box, pulling doughnuts, thinking its the greatest thing in the world, without a care for other road users or themselves...


(i see them every day on the drive into work.... :mad::mad::mad:)

Why does this annoy you?
If you don't actually see them doing it then they obviously have some care for other road users as they do it without them around.

Part troll

SV wrote: »

Why does this annoy you?
If you don't actually see them doing it then they obviously have some care for other road users as they do it without them around.

well IMO

doing "doughnuts" or screeching handbrake turns etc, would be classed as reckless driving.

no matter that they "have some care for other road users as they do it without them around"

by taking part in this act, they are endangering other road users.

the very act of "performing" a doughnut, results in thier car being on the completly wrong side of the road, for what ever lenght of time.

and its not beyond the realms of possibilty, that some one, coming the opposite direction, in the dead of night, will crash into them while performing this act.

saltyjack silverblade

Between the crisps, corn flakes and doughnuts this thread is annoying me as I am starving.

SV

Part troll wrote: »

well IMO

doing "doughnuts" or screeching handbrake turns etc, would be classed as reckless driving.

no matter that they "have some care for other road users as they do it without them around"

by taking part in this act, they are endangering other road users.

the very act of "performing" a doughnut, results in thier car being on the completly wrong side of the road, for what ever lenght of time.

and its not beyond the realms of possibilty, that some one, coming the opposite direction, in the dead of night, will crash into them while performing this act.

So they're endangering other road users by partaking in an act when other road users aren't around.
yeah....


btw, your last little bit makes what they do seem as dangerous as overtaking..but anyway.

gramar

SV wrote: »

So they're endangering other road users by partaking in an act when other road users aren't around.
yeah....


btw, your last little bit makes what they do seem as dangerous as overtaking..but anyway.

They are public roads open 24 hours a day. They don't get closed off so gobsheens can drive the shyte out of their cars.

Vincent Vega

OldNotWIse wrote: »

... that once you get back before your items reach the til, it's ok.

I suppose this is fair enough but.....

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

Fact is some people are cnuts and would plough you down to save a few minutes of queuing time.

... i guess some people (like the ones mentioned) might still be holding a bit of resentment towards what mammy did.

----
I dislike ATM queues that form across a busy street or walkway when there's an ample stretch of wall either side.

Minor dislike for people whose FB statuses/pics I enjoy being always posted as Public.
I like to stay low profile, and occasionally ignore people and don't need everybody on my list informed that I liked this or commented on that.

SV

gramar wrote: »

They are public roads open 24 hours a day. They don't get closed off so gobsheens can drive the shyte out of their cars.

Just because they're open 24 hours doesn't mean other road users are around.
The argument makes absolutely no sense.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

SV

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I didn't say it makes it all ok. I said if other road users aren't about then it isn't endangering other road users. The other posters seem to think, by some twisted kind of logic, that it is.

empacher

SV wrote: »

I didn't say it makes it all ok. I said if other road users aren't about then it isn't endangering other road users. The other posters seem to think, by some twisted kind of logic, that it is.

Other road users are always around, ever hear of people called night owls? Although a minority of the populace they do stuff at night what others might so during the day. Like shopping, working, or even go for a quiet night time drive. Last thing they need is some gear head trying to impress his mates or the cam shaft sucking slag in the passenger seat, doing donouhts, burnouts, and whatever other reckless things he picked up on while playing need for speed.

SV

empacher wrote: »

Other road users are always around, ever hear of people called night owls? Although a minority of the populace they do stuff at night what others might so during the day. Like shopping, working, or even go for a quiet night time drive. Last thing they need is some gear head trying to impress his mates or the cam shaft sucking slag in the passenger seat, doing donouhts, burnouts, and whatever other reckless things he picked up on while playing need for speed.

See, this is the cop out that always comes with this kind of thing.

Thing is, other road users aren't always around. Especially not in certain areas. It's also especially easy to see when they're around at night time. but for the sake of all your arguments, let's just say road users appear magically on the road.
There ya go, you win

veryangryman

SV wrote: »

See, this is the cop out that always comes with this kind of thing.

Thing is, other road users aren't always around. Especially not in certain areas. It's also especially easy to see when they're around at night time. but for the sake of all your arguments, let's just say road users appear magically on the road.
There ya go, you win

Ever wonder why most accidents happen in the queer hours (3am-5am)?

You cant just assume that nobody will be around at time X. Sure, its unlikely youll meet someone, but theyll also assume that they wont meet a nut doing doughnuts on a motorway. It only takes the mix of those 2 assumptions to equal complete carnage.

Its funny how the people you see on ads in wheelchairs etc go on about how they wish theyd copped on sooner. One is stuck waiting for you all to end up in wheelchairs (or worse) before cop on enters your head.

whirlpool

SV wrote: »

I didn't say it makes it all ok. I said if other road users aren't about then it isn't endangering other road users. The other posters seem to think, by some twisted kind of logic, that it is.

Another car could come along unexpectedly at any time. Do you honestly believe that boy racers doing doughnuts are in a position to be able to act suddenly and safely without putting anyone at risk? Is that honestly what you're saying? Seriously?

OldNotWIse

SV wrote: »

Why does this annoy you?
If you don't actually see them doing it then they obviously have some care for other road users as they do it without them around.

Yes, citizens of the year they are. It's likely that the time they choose to be there, after they've stolen the car and had a gutfull of drink just happens to coincide with the small hours, when others may not be about.

I was nearly orphaned by joyriders when I was a young teen. I say fuuck them and fuuck the bleeding hearts who defend them.

OldNotWIse

SV wrote: »

See, this is the cop out that always comes with this kind of thing.

Thing is, other road users aren't always around. Especially not in certain areas. It's also especially easy to see when they're around at night time. but for the sake of all your arguments, let's just say road users appear magically on the road.
There ya go, you win

Night shifts.

Designated drivers returning home from the club.

Airport runs.

Emergency trips to dying relatives/local hospital.

Do these all constitute copouts?

And does some different set of road rules kick in after midnight?

No, people are not always on the road, but I believe that is not being argued. People are sometimes on the road, and can be on the road...therefore the risk is not justified...at all.

OhHiMark

SV, have you ever done doughnuts on a motorway at night? You seem to be working awfully hard to defend an indefensible position here.

stefan idiot jones

Mmmmmm............Donuts.

OldNotWIse

In any case, such dangerous activity hardly constitutes a trivial thing.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

LordSutch

Irish People/Irish companies who give out their freephone number as "one eight hundred" (1 - 800), instead of eighteen hundred (1800).

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Part troll

SV wrote: »

So they're endangering other road users by partaking in an act when other road users aren't around.
yeah....


btw, your last little bit makes what they do seem as dangerous as overtaking..but anyway.

I’d say it’s more dangerous than overtaking. Spinning around in a circle, smoke obstructing your view, taking over both lanes, not sure what side of the road you end up on.....

While overtaking maybe be a bit dangerous, it’s still a valid manoeuvre for motorist.

Plenty of adds from the RSA explaining to users how to overtake safely and properly.

I haven’t seen the RSA video for “how to complete a doughnut safely on an open road” , I’ll keep an eye out for it though..:rolleyes:

jimgoose

SV wrote: »

See, this is the cop out that always comes with this kind of thing.

Thing is, other road users aren't always around. Especially not in certain areas. It's also especially easy to see when they're around at night time. but for the sake of all your arguments, let's just say road users appear magically on the road.
There ya go, you win

You can't beat some bouncing-off-the-rev-limiter, high-G-force, smoke-bollowing-everywhere, full-opposite-lock-powersliding to augment and enhance awareness and observation. Keep that stuff off the road, youngfella.

SV

whirlpool wrote: »

Another car could come along unexpectedly at any time. Do you honestly believe that boy racers doing doughnuts are in a position to be able to act suddenly and safely without putting anyone at risk? Is that honestly what you're saying? Seriously?

No, hardly, if that was the case, but I think if you honestly think that cars come along that unexpectedly that maybe you shouldn't be driving.

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Yes, citizens of the year they are. It's likely that the time they choose to be there, after they've stolen the car and had a gutfull of drink just happens to coincide with the small hours, when others may not be about.

I was nearly orphaned by joyriders when I was a young teen. I say fuuck them and fuuck the bleeding hearts who defend them.

I like how we've gone from boy racers to people who steal cars and drink drive.

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Night shifts.

Designated drivers returning home from the club.

Airport runs.

Emergency trips to dying relatives/local hospital.

Do these all constitute copouts?

And does some different set of road rules kick in after midnight?

No, people are not always on the road, but I believe that is not being argued. People are sometimes on the road, and can be on the road...therefore the risk is not justified...at all.

The 'unexpected' appearance is a cop out. As it could never be unexpected in the areas I've seen it done.
I just don't see how anyone could get annoyed over something they don't actually see being done.

OhHiMark wrote: »

SV, have you ever done doughnuts on a motorway at night? You seem to be working awfully hard to defend an indefensible position here.

I do it all the time, I also do doughnuts in hospital car parks and handbrake turns in old folks homes.

No, ffs, I'm not defending the act of doing doughnuts on a motorway. It's a silly act, but it's equally silly to say that car users can come 'out of nowhere' and if you honestly believe that then I honestly believe you shouldn't be driving.



oh btw, do you really think that those 3-5am crashes are caused by lads stationery doing doughnuts? in fairness now. It may be by the same lads doing shocking speeds but it's definitely not doughnuts.

SV

Part troll wrote: »

I’d say it’s more dangerous than overtaking. Spinning around in a circle, smoke obstructing your view, taking over both lanes, not sure what side of the road you end up on.....

While overtaking maybe be a bit dangerous, it’s still a valid manoeuvre for motorist.

Plenty of adds from the RSA explaining to users how to overtake safely and properly.

I haven’t seen the RSA video for “how to complete a doughnut safely on an open road” , I’ll keep an eye out for it though..:rolleyes:

I just said that it makes it seem as dangerous. I didn't say that overtaking was as dangerous as doing a doughnut.

and making your font size bigger doesn't make your point any more valid

eisenberg1

SV wrote: »

I just said that it makes it seem as dangerous. I didn't say that overtaking was as dangerous as doing a doughnut.

and making your font size bigger doesn't make your point any more valid

How many hours driving experience do you have?

jimgoose

eisenberg1 wrote: »

How many hours driving experience do you have?

I wonder indeed!

OldNotWIse

SV wrote: »

No, hardly, if that was the case, but I think if you honestly think that cars come along that unexpectedly that maybe you shouldn't be driving.


I like how we've gone from boy racers to people who steal cars and drink drive.


The 'unexpected' appearance is a cop out. As it could never be unexpected in the areas I've seen it done.
I just don't see how anyone could get annoyed over something they don't actually see being done.

I do it all the time, I also do doughnuts in hospital car parks and handbrake turns in old folks homes.


oh btw, do you really think that those 3-5am crashes are caused by lads stationery doing doughnuts? in fairness now. It may be by the same lads doing shocking speeds but it's definitely not doughnuts.

Er...if you think joyriding is ok maybe you shouldn't be driving?

We haven't "gone" from boy racers to stealing cars and drunk driving...they have always been pretty much one and the same.

Re getting annoyed over something you dont see? Wtf? If a tree falls in a forest and there's nobody there, does it fall? Laws are laws, and just because nobody is around to see you breaking them, doesn't make it ok. I dont see people being raped, tortured and killed every day - it still upsets me when I read about it on the news, and it doesn't make it ok because there was nobody watching.

Your last line suggests that doughnuts and speeding are somehow mutually exclusive... not so. Do you have a link to back up your idea that crashes are caused by "speeding not doughnuts".

You're kinda creepily protective of doughnuts tbh...are you Homer Simpson?

Thanks for ruining my favourite thread btw!

OldNotWIse

SV wrote: »

I just said that it makes it seem as dangerous. I didn't say that overtaking was as dangerous as doing a doughnut.

and making your font size bigger doesn't make your point any more valid

It does I tell ya, open yer ears and listen!

SV

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Er...if you think joyriding is ok maybe you shouldn't be driving?

We haven't "gone" from boy racers to stealing cars and drunk driving...they have always been pretty much one and the same.

Re getting annoyed over something you dont see? Wtf? If a tree falls in a forest and there's nobody there, does it fall? Laws are laws, and just because nobody is around to see you breaking them, doesn't make it ok. I dont see people being raped, tortured and killed every day - it still upsets me when I read about it on the news, and it doesn't make it ok because there was nobody watching.

Your last line suggests that doughnuts and speeding are somehow mutually exclusive... not so. Do you have a link to back up your idea that crashes are caused by "speeding not doughnuts".

You're kinda creepily protective of doughnuts tbh...are you Homer Simpson?

Thanks for ruining my favourite thread btw!

Find where I said joyriding is ok and I'll respond to that..lol.

and no, boy racers and stealing cars and drinkin driving have NEVER been one and the same and if you think that then more fool you.

Right, analogy being drawn with rape and torture now..jesus we really are jumping ship



You're very welcome for ruining the thread, you very much contributed to it.

btw I have about 12000 hours driving experience. Not that it has any relevance.