Get outta my lane.

padraig.od

Gmol wrote: »

I always drive the speed limit in the fast lane, I don't see the need to pull into the slow lane even if there are no cars there

**** you

Seachmall

IM0 wrote: »

ill give you a three for persistence, still crap though

It's not crap.

The idea that the blocker is somehow more in the wrong is absolutely hilarious.

They only become a danger when others insist on breaking the law. The idea that these others are more right is blatant lunacy.

They're the ones who take a harmless situation (someone driving at the limit in the wrong lane) and turn it into a dangerous one.

Viper_JB wrote: »

I've often been held up by people doing 80kph or less in the overtaking lane, so I wouldn't assume that just because someone is looking to overtake that they're speeding, also there can be a large variance in the speed according to your speedo and the speed according to their speedo so to assuming someone is speeding just because your speedo says you're doing the limit is not necessarily correct. Either way the overtaking lane is not for driving in, it's for overtaking in.

I get that, I'm just starting with the assumption that they are driving at the limit.

It was spurred by this comment/troll/joke

Gmol wrote: »

I always drive the speed limit in the fast lane, I don't see the need to pull into the slow lane even if there are no cars there

Capt'n Midnight

I'd hate to think this would be allowed here.

The only reason for spending €1 bn upgrading the M50 to three lanes was so I'd have my own private lane on the left and the idiots could fight over the other two.





Seriously does anyone have any stats on lane occupancy on the M50 or N7 or N4 to prove just how much of the billions the NRA have spent on roads has been completely pissed away because morons are still allowed to hog the middle lane ? (Bonus points for Taxi drivers on the N4 travelling at 10Km under the limit with TWO empty lanes to their left)


If there was any intention of increasing capacity by the addition of the third lanes then they would have enforced the keep left rules long ago. :mad:

Penalty Points
Failure to drive on the left-hand side of the road 1 3 €60 €90
Driving without reasonable consideration 2 4 €80 €120
Driver found to be driving carelessly 5 Court Fine


In Oz it's up to $1,000 for not Keep Left Unless Overtaking.

OldGoat

Seachmall wrote: »

I'm don't disagree. In the moment it's definitely smarter and safer to let them be but the idea that it's wrong not because it's simply against the rules of the road but because it blocks other drivers who are also breaking the rules of the road just reeks of WTF.


For what it's worth I attempt to avoid being an ass on the roads regardless of who's right or wrong, but I just can't get over how people complain about others who are impeding on their ability to break the law.

If we were only talking people driving at the top speed allowed you might have a point on the irony of it all but how often have you come across drivers in the overtaking lanes unecessarly who are driving below the speed limit? And other road users who don't realise that undertaking IS an option in this case just queue up behind causing a block of traffic.

IM0

Seachmall wrote: »

It's not crap.

The idea that the blocker is somehow more in the wrong is absolutely hilarious.

They only become a danger when others insist on breaking the law. The idea that these others are more right is blatant lunacy.

They're the ones who take a harmless situation (someone driving at the limit in the wrong lane) and turn it into a dangerous one.


I get that, I'm just starting with the assumption that they are driving at the limit.

It was spurred by this comment/troll/joke

you are a **** driver if you drive like you have been argueing, that is not an insult but a fact and ILLEGAL

tommythecat

Seachmall wrote: »

It's not crap.

The idea that the blocker is somehow more in the wrong is absolutely hilarious.

They only become a danger when others insist on breaking the law. The idea that these others are more right is blatant lunacy.

They're the ones who take a harmless situation (someone driving at the limit in the wrong lane) and turn it into a dangerous one.

Oh dear. You have it all arseways. You are going to end up with either three cars side by side on a motorway with no where for any of them to go if something happens or two empty lanes and some clown in the overtaking lane. Thats a bloody nightmare

wildlifeboy

so if i am in lane 1 doing 110 kmph and the person in lane 2 is doing 95 kmph i am not allowed pass them on the left? i do this all the time.

ibarelycare

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It can't happen quick enough here, I find myself undertaking as much as overtaking these days.

Yes!

I'm so glad I don't have to drive every day to work any more, because I think I'd give myself an ulcer with all the road rage.

Irish people have NO idea how to use a 3-lane motorway. It seems that the vast majority of people think that the middle lane is the default lane to be driving in. It drives me absolutely crazy. Every time I'm on the M50, there are huge stretches of road in which the left hand lane is empty, and the middle and right hand lanes are full. It causes other cars to weave in and out of lanes, and undertake, which is so dangerous. It's not something I would do but I can understand why people do it.

IM0

wildlifeboy wrote: »

so if i am in lane 1 doing 110 kmph and the person in lane 2 is doing 95 kmph i am not allowed pass them on the left? i do this all the time.

no that is undertaking which is not allowed, the only time you are allowed to pass on the left is when you are undertaking a car indicating to turn right coming up to a junction

tommythecat

IM0 wrote: »

no that is undertaking which is not allowed, the only time you are allowed to pass on the left is when you are undertaking a car indicating to turn right coming up to a junction

Thats not true. As OldGoat pointed out from the rules of the road

Overtake only on the right, unless traffic is travelling in slow moving queues and the traffic queue on your right is travelling more slowly than you are.

wildlifeboy

IM0 wrote: »

no that is undertaking which is not allowed, the only time you are allowed to pass on the left is when you are undertaking a car indicating to turn right coming up to a junction

oh well you learn something new everyday so i have to switch three lanes to the right pass them and then pass three lanes again to get in front of them.. seems logical. when i change lanes i check all mirrors to make sure its safe.

Menas

If others choose to speed in the overtaking lane then they are breaking the law, but two wrongs do not make a right and frustrating the person behind you can lead to an accident as they may do something rash.

There are many reasons why someone may decide to break the speed limit. Stupidity is just one of them.
But rushing to a hospital or to someones death bed are also reasons.

I once needed to get to Crumlin st hospital due to an emergency and decided to break the law by speeding. The cops pulled me over and when I explained the emergency they gave me an escort at about 30kph over the speed limit on the motorway.
Thank fck there was no numpties in the overtaking lane that day cruising along admiring the scenery.
The clue is in the name - overtaking lane!

Celly Smunt

wildlifeboy wrote: »

so if i am in lane 1 doing 110 kmph and the person in lane 2 is doing 95 kmph i am not allowed pass them on the left? i do this all the time.

No,you can only undertake them if you're hitting 100km/h or less.If you're travelling at 110km/h you have to go to the far right lane,overtake them,return to the middle lane and jam on your breaks to teach them a lesson.

wildlifeboy

i also stay in the overtaking lane for much longer than necessary. if someone appears behind me then i change. if theres no one around it doesnt matter which lane i am in.

tommythecat

wildlifeboy wrote: »

i also stay in the overtaking lane for much longer than necessary. if someone appears behind me then i change. if theres no one around it doesnt matter which lane i am in.

And when I'm murdering prostitutes its doesn't count if no one sees me right?

drunkmonkey

wildlifeboy wrote: »

i also stay in the overtaking lane for much longer than necessary. if someone appears behind me then i change. if theres no one around it doesnt matter which lane i am in.

I want to bang your head off a very blunt wall. Get out of the f'n lane if there's no one to the left of you.

Unless your driving with eyes coming out of your hole you can't and won't see every car or motorbike that approaches from behind you.

Seachmall

IM0 wrote: »

you are a **** driver if you drive like you have been argueing, that is not an insult but a fact and ILLEGAL

I stated I don't drive like this.

The reason I'm arguing it is because how blatantly stupid the idea that the blocker is some rogue on the road for impeding people's ability to speed.

You cannot take a high ground over someone because they're impeding your ability to break the law.

It's as simple as that.

I'm not arguing that driving at the limit in the right lane is correct, just how absurd the reasons are for believing they're some sort of motorway scum.

Tommy The Cat makes the point why it's illegal, and it's fair enough that it is. But dear Lord people have some silly sense of entitlements.

IM0

tommythecat wrote: »

Thats not true. As OldGoat pointed out from the rules of the road

Overtake only on the right, unless traffic is travelling in slow moving queues and the traffic queue on your right is travelling more slowly than you are.

oh you mean like when they are indicating to turn right at a side road with a lane for over taking to turn right

Jimoslimos

Can there also be fines and penalty points for artic drivers who constantly overtake/re-overtake each other to slipstream? Plus drivers who crawl onto the slip road. FFS it's there for you to build your speed UP!:mad:

Zulu

Seachmall wrote: »

The idea that the blocker is somehow more in the wrong is absolutely hilarious.

If you have to look at it in those terms, consider this:

Two drivers are acting illegally.
Only one driver is acting like an obnoxious jerk by blocking the other.

So yeah, maybe both are legally wrong but only one is morally, ethically and legally wrong. More wrong? Certainly.

IM0

Seachmall wrote: »

I stated I don't drive like this.

The reason I'm arguing it is because how blatantly stupid the idea that the blocker is some rogue on the road for impeding people's ability to speed.

You cannot take a high ground over someone because they're impeding your ability to break the law.

It's as simple as that.

I'm not arguing that driving at the limit in the right lane is correct, just how absurd the reasons are for believing they're some sort of motorway scum.

Tommy The Cat makes the point why it's illegal, and it's fair enough that it is. But dear Lord people have some silly sense of entitlements.

read the ****ing thread

also in other unrelated events, I ****in hate unfunny retarded trolls, who just simply get off on getting others wound up

kc90

Seachmall wrote: »

It's not crap.

The idea that the blocker is somehow more in the wrong is absolutely hilarious.

They only become a danger when others insist on breaking the law. The idea that these others are more right is blatant lunacy.

They're the ones who take a harmless situation (someone driving at the limit in the wrong lane) and turn it into a dangerous one.


I get that, I'm just starting with the assumption that they are driving at the limit.

It was spurred by this comment/troll/joke

Well, the blocker is being an obstruction and driving in the wrong lane. That's 2 for 1 and more in the wrong.
The point is, if you're in the right lane and not overtaking, regardless of your speed, you're being a hindrance to other road users.

blackwhite

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Can there also be fines and penalty points for artic drivers who constantly overtake/re-overtake each other to slipstream? Plus drivers who crawl onto the slip road. FFS it's there for you to build your speed UP!:mad:

On a two-lane motorway it's actually illegal for an artic to move into the right-hand lane.

Seachmall

Zulu wrote: »

If you have to look at it in those terms, consider this:

Two drivers are acting illegally.
Only one driver is acting like an obnoxious jerk by blocking the other.

So yeah, maybe both are legally wrong but only one is morally, ethically and legally wrong. More wrong? Certainly.

Actually, the second is acting like an obnoxious jerk by insisting on speeding.

The blocker is reasonably harmless on his own, it's only when the speeder joins the equation do they begin to be a danger to the other road users.

So at best they're equal in all regards.

Although a blocker on his own, with no speeders, is probably less likely to cause a crash than a speeder. Or he's at least no more likely to cause a crash than if he were in the left lane. So maybe the speeder takes the edge in being in the wrong.

It doesn't really matter. The whole idea is just nuts.

Celly Smunt

Seachmall wrote: »

Actually, the second is acting like an obnoxious jerk by insisting on speeding.

The blocker is reasonably harmless on his own, it's only when the speeder joins the equation do they begin to be a danger to the other road users.

So at best they're equal in all regards.

The person impeding the person speeding,is increasing the risk of causing an accident.

Zulu

Seachmall wrote: »

Actually, the second is acting like an obnoxious jerk by insisting on speeding.

:rolleyes: So everyone who speeds is obnoxious? Jesus dude...

Topper Harley

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpYX-1rXVg8

For those complaining about speeding, it's a different issue so start a new thread...unless of course you are trolls in which case you'll carry on here anyway. :rolleyes:

Seachmall

pmcmahon wrote: »

The person impeding the person speeding,is increasing the risk of causing an accident.

The blocker only becomes a danger to other road users when you introduce someone who insists on speeding.

Zulu wrote: »

:rolleyes: So everyone who speeds is obnoxious? Jesus dude...

Obviously there are exceptions. I'm talking about people who speed because, well, they just do. You don't need me to point out that there's quite a few.

Das Kitty

IM0 wrote: »

no that is undertaking which is not allowed, the only time you are allowed to pass on the left is when you are undertaking a car indicating to turn right coming up to a junction

Wrong.

You may overtake on the left when

• You want to go straight ahead when the driver in front of you has moved out and signalled that they intend to turn right.
• You have signalled that you intend to turn left.
• Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane.

[Source]
So yeah, you can undertake on a laned road, if you're travelling slowly. Although it doesn't define slowly, so, ymmv.

HurtLocker

To all speeding vigilantes everywhere,

The overtaking lane is for overtaking only. If you are not overtaking you pull in. If someone wants to go over the limit that between them and the guards. Vigilantes on the road are not asked for. The guards wouldn't be too impressed if a group of people decided to drive in the overtaking lane at the limit all the time because "Sure no one can go faster than me legally" and thinking they are doing the guards a favour. You cause tailbacks at high speeds. Go the limit but pull into the left when not overtaking. If you want to enforce traffic laws join the traffic corps if not pull into the left lane and let us get on with our lives. Leave the RSA dribble to Gaybo. Again I'll say it you are not a vigilante behind the wheel. You are an asshole hogging the overtaking lane for no good reason but to satisfy your ego.

Karl Stein

Seachmall wrote: »

The reason I'm arguing it is because how blatantly stupid the idea that the blocker is some rogue on the road for impeding people's ability to speed.

He's impeding people's ability to pass safely. Also the morons in the overtaking lanes are almost never doing the limit but something annoyingly below which causes frustration.

The roads are simply not policed enough. There are too many fuckwits out there getting away with shitty driving for years and are oblivious to their own poor standards. These goons believe passing the test to be the end of learning when really it's the minimum bar. Driving is a life-long-learning skill where you should be striving to improve continuously.

Celly Smunt

Seachmall wrote: »

The blocker only becomes a danger to other road users when you introduce someone who insists on speeding.

No.The impeder is a risk to other road users due to his/hers impedance,take the speeder away and he is still a risk.

Menas

Seachmall wrote: »

Although a blocker on his own, with no speeders, is probably less likely to cause a crash than a speeder.

No, a blocker on his own is stupid enough to cause a crash as they do not know or respect the rules of the road and are unaware of good driving etiquette.

Also, as said above, your speedo showing you as driving in the overtaking lane at exactly the speed limit does not mean that you are driving at the speed limit.
Your speedometer could be out. If your speedo is showing 120kph for example and the fella behind you has one showing 110kph then he is going to get pretty pissed off with you and do something rash as he believes he is doing no wrong.

Now we have a greatly increased chance of an accident and the blocker is the one increasing that risk.

We do not have the luxury of deciding which laws we should and should not obey. The 'overtaking lane' is in place across the western world....but in this country we have a few drivers who think it is daft. Go figure.

IM0

Das Kitty wrote: »

Wrong.

wrong.

this is fun isnt it

Celly Smunt

Das Kitty wrote: »

Wrong.

It's in fact right.

Seachmall

pmcmahon wrote: »

No.The impeder is a risk to other road users due to his/hers impedance,take the speeder away and he is still a risk.

How so?

Trigger Happy wrote: »

No, a blocker on his own is stupid enough to cause a crash as they do not know or respect the rules of the road and are unaware of good driving etiquette.

That's stepping too far from the point. The blocker in my example is simply someone who blocks. So when I say "the blocker is only a risk..." I mean the "the act of blocking is only a risk...".

You could read into that and decide he is an unfit driver in other situations or an unfit husband in marriage but the point is simply about driving at the limit in the wrong lane with and without a speeder (who is simply someone who speeds, may be a fantastic driver otherwise and a loving husband).

IM0

pmcmahon wrote: »

It's in fact right.

oh you want one too, wrong. come again!

Celly Smunt

Seachmall wrote: »

How so?

For example,if somebody intends to overtake a car in the middle lane,the person impeding in the overtaking lane might run the risk of boxing in the person who intends to overtake.Causing braking on the motorway and increasing congestion,all of which cause accidents.

DeanAustin

I love how riled up people get on here about this. Tis comical.

Combine the two biggest personality changers (the internet and driving) and you tend to see a lot of aggression and ranting.

Celly Smunt

IM0 wrote: »

oh you want one too, wrong. come again!

I was agreeing with you

Celly Smunt

DeanAustin wrote: »

I love how riled up people get on here about this. Tis comical.

Combine the two biggest personality changers (the internet and driving) and you tend to see a lot of aggression and ranting.

It's just scary how some people ignore the rules of the road,especially when their actions affect the people who abide by them.

Karl Stein

Seachmall wrote: »

How so?

Because it's good evidence he's a knobhead of a driver who doesn't know the ROTR.

Seachmall

pmcmahon wrote: »

For example,if somebody intends to overtake a car in the middle lane,the person impeding in the overtaking lane might run the risk of boxing in the person who intends to overtake.Causing braking on the motorway and increasing congestion,all of which cause accidents.

True, the cat person made that point earlier as the reason for it to be illegal.

You're right.

Celly Smunt

Seachmall wrote: »

True, the cat person made that point earlier as the reason for it to be illegal.

You're right.

I can't believe two people met a resolution in after hours,this must be a milestone. :cool:

Seachmall

Seachmall wrote: »

How so?

Lane hoggers are a danger on the roads simple as that. Our motorways are designed for much higher speeds than the speed limits set here, so exceeding the limit is not necessarily dangerous depending on driving conditions, type of car etc (my car is absolutely cursing at 160km/h and is safer than a lesser car doing the 120km/h limit on a motorway, not that I drive around at that speed all the time just making the point).

Some people just don't want to sit at the limit when they can safely drive faster than it and get to their destination faster, lane hoggers are a scourge and force other drivers to do dangerous things like undertaking. They are also very very rarely travelling at the actual limit as you suggest they are usually travelling at 100km/h or less on motorways or as others have said pulling out to over take a car a mile up the road at 2km/h more than the car in front is travelling.

IM0

pmcmahon wrote: »

I was agreeing with you

oh as a double negative :pac:

Zulu

pmcmahon wrote: »

I can't believe two people met a resolution in after hours,this must be a milestone. :cool:

Nah, I saw it once before in 2006. Two posters misunderstood each other, and after 6 pages realised they were making the same point. Some year that was!

b318isp

M50 @ 8:15 this morning: the inner lane is COMPLETELY clear for at least 400m twice (between Finglas and Blanch, and again between Ballymount and Tallaght). Middle and outer lanes reasonably full. Go figure...

...and then there are the posts today of the M50 being too congested and a stupid suggestion of increased tolls. Not surprised given in is often 33% under utilised

The reality is that a significant proportion of drivers are in autopilot mode, with no active awareness going on.

Capt'n Midnight

Das Kitty wrote: »

So yeah, you can undertake on a laned road, if you're travelling slowly. Although it doesn't define slowly, so, ymmv.

The speed limit is not a target. Drivers must also take into account the weather and conditions. Also for many road users 80Kmph is the absoute maximum speed they can do on any road, so my guess is that any possible definition of slowly is a lot less than 80Kmph.

Mr. CooL ICE

Every post in this thread where 'speedometers' has been abbreviated to 'speedos' has made me giggle. I think I need a break from the internet