Safe Speed Forums

As a learner scrag considers her knuckles wrapped. Was meant jestful but fair enough

Personally I'd never say something was bad just because it was against the rules. Unnecessary lane-hogging which results in impeding is demonstrably inconsiderate, selfish and sometimes even dangerous. Speeding, millions of times a day, is none of those things.

I don't believe that many (if any) Safe Speed members would condemn lane-hogging, or anything else, simply because it was against the rules of the road and for no other reason. That would arguably be something of a double standard.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

A question for Cooler. If it could be demonstrated that by sitting unnecessarily in Lane 2 at 70mph, you were also delaying those behind you who weren't travelling (or trying to travel) at above 70mph, would you stop doing it?

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

Scrag,

No worries from me. I saw it as a joke; good one too.

C.

Bombus,

From your reply, I take it that you see speeding as less bad than lingering in the middle lane of a motorway. I can see your angle. However, as I understand it, speeding carries penalty points and a fine. Is there anyone on record who has received penalty points and a fine for lingering in the middle lane?

C.

Bombus,

Well, this is a hypothetical as far as I can see. Given that, I could imagine an example. If the fast lane (L3) were closed for roadworks; leaving only L1 and L2 open, then a slow driver hogging L2 would be giving faster moving traffic in that lane (within prevailing speed limits) a hard time. In these circumstances I would expect slow moving traffic in L2 to pull back into L1 if there was space.

If I were that driver I would most definitely pull back into L1.

C.

Why do you differentiate between pulling into L1 on a dual carriageway, than pulling into L1 on a three lane carriageway, you could be holding up a faster driver on either.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Let's say that I was absolutely 100% dead-set against exceeding the speed limit by even so much as a gnat's crotchet. I would still expect a speed limit observing lane hogger to move out of the way if a psycho turbo-nutter came screaming up behind them, because I don't need to condone speeding in order to accept that it will happen, but I DO need to expect the lane-hogger to move otherwise I'd be condoning an attempt to police the speed limit by someone not authorised to do so...

_________________
Chris

Yes, it would be. People tend to be hypocritical about this, basically wanting to break the speed limit but saying that you shouldn't be breaking the law by daring to drive (at the speed limit) in the middle lane. At least I can see the hypocrisy of it. Why can't they?

_________________
Before you moan about middle-lane hoggers, check that you yourself are obeying all the rules of the road.

See MY sig:

_________________
Before you moan about middle-lane hoggers, check that you yourself are obeying all the rules of the road.

If I see someone attacking a person, should I try to intervene (if realistic) to stop the person receiving serious injuries or wait for the police to turn up to try and catch the person and also to help the seriously injured person?

_________________
Before you moan about middle-lane hoggers, check that you yourself are obeying all the rules of the road.

Oh God. Now there's no hope for this thread. I certainly won't be reading any more of it.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

I would say that those who break the speed limit should be dealt with very strictly. (And no, at the moment, in my opinion, they're not.)



And what about the petulant self-righteous little shits who expect people to get out of their way so that they can endanger others by driving at higher speeds?



People who regularly speed should simply be banned.



I hope you're not referring to me, Bombus, because (a) as I've told you many times before, I'm not cycling forum-connected (you can obsessively go on about it all you want but it won't make it true), (b) I'm not a troublemaker (in fact, you're more of a troublemaker with all your completely unsubstantiated bullshit accusations you've made against me), and (c) I'm not a moron, however much you want me to be.



Again, if you're referring to me, I don't actually spend my time lane-hogging, but if I do happen to be driving in the middle lane a bit longer than strictly necessary, I don't take kindly to aggressive drivers like yourself expecting me to instantly get out of your way just so that you can carry on speeding. And if I am impeding others whilst I'm doing about the speed limit, then I am preventing them from breaking the law. Basically, Bombus, you really do need to try and realise the hypocrisy of your situation.



We shouldn't have to share the roads (or anything for that matter) with those who have a psychological need to feel good by driving fast. Tell me something, should criminals not be punished because it may make them feel bad?



Well by that logic why have speed limits at all?



Any road rage is being caused by the person who can't control their urges to drive fast.



No, you decided that, because you want to drive fast and want to find some sort of moral excuse for doing so. If you're so fed-up with middle-lane hoggers doing the speed limit, why not just stick to the speed limit yourself?

So basically you like to throw completely unsubstantiated accusations around and then not stick around to defend them. What a troll.

Cooler, I think the point that was trying to be made is that, whilst the person you immediately see yourself impeding may need to exceed the speed limit to drive faster than you, the knock-on effect, further back along the carriageway, of reducing the capacity of the road by a lane (the de facto effect, undertaking notwithstanding, of lane hogging) is likely to also impede those who are not, or would not, exceed the limit.

The fact remains that it is incumbent upon all road users to conduct themselves in a safe and courteous manner, regardless of our impressions or opinions of other drivers and their practices. Deliberately (or negligently) lane hogging carries no advantages, and plenty of disadvantages, so why do it?

If you want the real answer to the original question, no you shouldn't be middle lane hogging at any speed. If you can't change lanes and get 'boxed in by trucks' then your observation and forward planning needs a lot of work. Doesn't make any odds what I drive-artic, bike,car or spacehopper or what speed I drive-I never get stuck in L1. There's no reason you should either. Anything else is just excuses.

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

I remember a case, back in the 1980s, of a woman driving at 70-75 in L3 of the M3 in Surrey, and refusing to move over when she could have done. The police took action against her and she was prosecuted/convicted - I believe the offence was driving without due care and attention.

Personally, I would not hog the middle lane even if there was no rule against it. It is always unwise to do anything to annoy or aggravate another driver and/or cause delays. However, if someone were to drive on a motorway at 90, I don't see that as dangerous or annoying, assuming it's safe. And just because the limit is lower does NOT make it unsafe, IMO. We've surely had enough discussion on this board to have established that beyond reasonable doubt.

Nor will I.

Dixie,

Well, my point would be that on a three lane carriageway there is still a L3 for overtaking but on a dual carriageway there isn't. I would feel uncomfortable if there was nowhere at all for the flasher to go. Part of my argument for using the middle lane more generously is that there is a L3 for overtaking. Of course on a four lane carriageway, there is even more reason to use L2,particularly if lane one is specifically set aside for lorries, as happens on long gradients.

C.

Nor will I, except for this once

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.