Safe Speed Forums

Robin's got the cheek to call me a troll.

I've seen nothing in your posts to confirm to me that you "do not speed" - ever - therefore it can be assumed that your a speeder and go above the law with the 10% speedo errors you mention earlier...

I've given you plenty of opportunity to condone speeders and their agressive actions - but you wont.

Also from your earlier posts your guessing your speed and using the 10% rule without any confirmation that your car is actually misreading the speed. Therefore we can assume that your guessing and will be above the lawful speed limit - and therefore again a speeder.

Your yet another on the forum that seem to believe laws are not for you and will come up with excuses to get round the facts...

As for calling me a troll - you lowered the tone a long time back (20 pages or so) when you started calling other peoples input "rot".

I dont believe I've called your inputs "rot" but only disagreed with your concepts of whats safe and lawful...

As for the earlier post on speed differential - wow this really is pushing the excuses to justify a cause.

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

Peegee has the cheek to libel me on a public forum!

I thought at the time that you didn't understand the concepts being discussed regarding speedo errors, thanks for confirming that. The error in a legal speedo is never an underreading, therefore you cannot be speeding if your legal speedo says you're not. I have never claimed to 'guess' speeds, quite the opposite, I have a GPS unit which gives my speed to a far greater accuracy than even the best car speedos.

You've given me opportunity to condone speeders, and I haven't, you're right, because I don't necessarily condone it. We are, however, discussing lane hogs here, nice try though. (Unless you meant condemn, in which case, you're misusing words again, try a dictionary http://www.dictionary.com )

I do not have to justify myself to you, but as you see, I can do so with the greatest of ease, and yet you still cannot justify your middle lane hogging for the purpose of annoying other drivers. Thats very telling.

If I call your postings rot, it'll be because they are.

Ahh, more of your 'two wrongs make a right' logic, brilliant!

One last afterthought before I leave for work:

You actually seem to be the one who thinks they can pick and choose which rules to obey; you're quite happy to discard the 'keep left unless overtaking' one so long as you adhere the 'do not speed' one. Your excuse to get round this is that other people are speeding.

Who was the arrogant one again?

...and I thank you, goodnight!

Does anybody recall the experiment from the USA, where all lanes were used by cars driving side-by-side exactly at the speed limit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuM2AfJ4fmc

This is exactly the sort of driving Peegee is advocating.

_________________
Why can't we just use Common Sense?

I'm afraid that is how you have been behaving.


I might remind you of your exact words:
"You've already said that you'd do high speed smeggy and so has robin"
Your diversion of an answer is unacceptable, actually presumption of a poster's behaviour is ad hominem, as is:
"Your yet another on the forum that seem to believe laws are not for you".

What about my repeated claims of you having made numerous false assertions: you’ve not denied them, so from your logic will you accept that you indeed do make numerous false claims?


I have already prompted you several times to justify your assertion that those who wish to pass you are actually aggressive, you’ve never replied, yet I’ve given you reasons why their behaviour may not be so. Also, I’ve explained why your definition of ‘leaving an appropriate gap’ or ‘not tailgating’ is unreasonable and unfounded. "1/10th of a mile" !!!!!!

And I have explained why exceeding a motorway speed limit is not as bad as lane-hogging, in fact it need not be considered bad at all (so long as the differentials aren’t excessive and the behaviour isn't unexpected).


That's acceptable, so long as he could justify it at the time. The sad fact is that you've not supported any claim you’ve made (which were countered I might add) whilst making numerous false claims - is that not what can be considered 'rot'?




No it is not. In keeping with the spirit of the site we don’t act on every transgression of the rules, rather we act when doing so becomes a problem. I think it has now become a problem. You would do well not to antagonise site moderators.