Honest John made reference to an American law last week that basically states that any vehicle holding up five or more vehicles commits an offence. I have heard many people discussing this innovative piece of legislation and wondered how it is policed in practice?
Cameras surely could not be utilised? Does this mean for example, that travelling at an indicated 30mph in a 30mph area, as soon as I have 5 or more vehicles behind me, I have to pull over to let them speed past? What if you have had four cars following you for the previous 5 miles; you then accumulate the 5th car just as you pass a camera, but there are no lay-bys or other stopping points to allow them to overtake? Although private indibviduals should not seek to police the roads by virtue of their style of driving, it does seem that law-abiding motorists are the likely losers in this legislation. (Unless it's aimed specifically at middle lane hoggers)
Perhaps the rule is designed for American superhighways and not for our overcrowded motorways and quaint, quintessentially British 'A' and 'B' roads?
|
The law that should be used over here is -the ability to be able to turn left,on a red light, if it's clear. I have no idea on the penalties in the U.S. should you cause an accident -but its a sensible law.
I like the OP's law in principal, on N.S.L. routes, but how it would be implemented, and would it include lorries, who on single lane n.s.l. legally only do 40 mph -they'd never get anywhere, if they had to pull over.
|
I like the Florida law (it's the only state I've driven in) that states you MUST use your headlights if it's raining - and their interpretation is - if you need to use your wipers, then you must have your headlight on.
But their law that doesn't require motor cyclists to wear a crash helmet is beyond belief.
|
But their law that doesn't require motor cyclists to wear a crash helmet is beyond belief.
I've no doubt the US authorities can justify that. Are there any American Backroomers that can explain?
|
>> But their law that doesn't require motor cyclists to wear a crash helmet is beyond >> belief. >> I've no doubt the US authorities can justify that. Are there any American Backroomers that can explain?
That, I think, varies US state by state. Here in Nevada I believe there is a helmet law, but everybody gets around it by wearing the flimsiest piece of metal on their heads and calling it a helmet--you seldom see anyone with a full-on motorcycle helmet, it's usually some old thing that looks like a little black metal pot turned upside down.
Anyway, it's a civil liberties thing--if you want to wear a helmet, great--if not, you shouldn't have to, if you realise the possible consequences when you crash your bike. In the same vein, my car might have seat belts but I'd never wear them myself.
|
Anyway it's a civil liberties thing--if you want to wear a helmet great--if not you shouldn't have to if you realise the possible consequences when you crash your bike. In the same vein my car might have seat belts but I'd never wear them myself.
Perhaps we in the UK should have some (but not all) of that civil liberties thing.
|
|
|
|
|
There is similar situation in east of Germany where a green arrow allows you turn right at red light(a remant of the communist days) it sounds good but causes all sorts of problems especially as pedestrians try to cross the road a car stops and the following car runs into the back of it.One good law is that a HGV is only allowed I think 30 seconds to pass a vehicle on the autobahn failure to comply is a heavy fine and points thats why you don't have the miles of trucks in two lanes trying to pass each other like the UK.
|
>>One good law is that a HGV is only allowed I think 30 seconds to pass a vehicle on the autobahn failure to comply is a heavy fine and points thats why you don't have the miles of trucks in two lanes trying to pass each other like the UK.
I agree - there's a law that should be championed in the UK - or, just ban HGVs from overtaking altogether.
|
I agree - there's a law that should be championed in the UK - or just ban HGVs from overtaking altogether. Some of you may know i`m a HGV driver, that there is a `Journey Time Trial` on the A14 which supposedly prohibits HGV`s from overtaking during daylight hours between j1/j2 eastbound and j2/j1 westbound. Since it`s not camera monitored a few unscrupulous drivers ignore it, HGV`s should only do 50mph on dual carriageways anyway.
If you were to ban all HGV`s from overtaking, lane 1 would be clogged from one end to the other.
|
|
|
|
-crash helmets
I like Jerry Seinfeld's take on crash helmets-in any activity where you need to wear a crash helmet, basically the helmet is wearing you.
|
|
|
|
|
Problem in this country is that we dont have hardcore enforcement of speed limits so its quite possible to do the legal limit and still accumulate a queue of cars behind you unintentionally due to general disregard for motoring laws.
We dont have the means to make it viable, such as the mentioned lay-bys etc.
We have too much legislation as it is, personally id like to see less of it and more cops in cars pulling people over and making sure they are legal.
|
There are so many common sense laws in other countries that make driving in the UK on returning home so immensely frustrating by comparison. I get the impression the traffic "experts" who pass laws in Britain never venture abroad and have a look at things from a different perspective and then make any effort to give us the best of all worlds.
My top ten laws to introduce right now would be:
1. (USA) Provision of "freeway" style driving (allowing overtaking on either side) under certain conditions (i.e. four lanes of traffic, peak hours, strictly enforced speed limits, and with large overhead signs advising when FREEWAY rules are in force.)
2. (France/Spain) obligation to steer a wide path round a cyclist on overtaking, leaving as much room as possible and also warning following car of the cyclist's presence.
3. (Germany) severe fines for tailgating, aggressive hooting/flashing and gesticulating and insulting other drivers, especially with the amusingly-named "Stinkenfinger". End to road rage?
4. (NZ) Graded driving licences, beginning with restrictions on carrying passengers, night driving, maximum speed, etc., and allowing you to "accelerate" to top grade licence after taking a further defensive driving course.
5. (Italy) Re-test every ten years. Or at the very least, medical and mechanical reflex and eyesight test as in Spain, where it's every five years from the age of 40, (he says wistfully...)
6. (Spain) Obligation to carry all vehicle documents incuding driving licence at all times. Also allow "notarised" official photocopies (except licence), which are valid for police checks but not for buying and selling etc.
7. (Channel Islands) Filtering in turn at junctions.
8. (Spain) Any modification to vehicle's structure, engine, lighting, etc. to be carried out at a registered garage; requires fresh MoT, where receipt for work carried out must be produced.
9. (Scotland) No wheel clamping permitted on private land!
10. (France) On the spot fines and possibility to clamp or impound cars for *major* traffic transgressions, which will, obviously, be backed by appropriate video evidence. Chance to appeal through the courts.
Obviously, there are a number of our traffic laws which are well thought out and intelligent and ought to be exported, too!
|
|
|
|
As far as i'm aware, this law already exists in the UK for Tractors and other slow moving vehicles doing less than 30mph should move over for more than 5 following vehicles.
Maybe someone can put me right if i'm wrong?
I would be all up for this law to apply to other traffic in sensible situations. Having to pull over for 8 cars following you in a 30mph limit when you are doing an indicated 30mph (say true 28mph) is a bit stupid, but apply this to a national speed limit, on a road with limited overtaking spots, and the leading car only doing 45, I think its a good idea.
I use on a regular basis, the A1198 from Rotston to Huntingdon, and alough most of it is wide open, straight 60mph single carrigeway, if a all too often Sainsbury truck is using it, at its legal speed limit of 40mph, and 5+ cars are all bunched up behind not overtaking (when there is ample room), it is impossible to get past them all safely, even in a 230+bhp car.
Neil
|
I use on a regular basis the A1198 from Rotston to Huntingdon and alough most of it is wide open straight 60mph single carrigeway if a all too often Sainsbury truck is using it at its legal speed limit of 40mph and 5+ cars are all bunched up behind not overtaking (when there is ample room) it is impossible to get past them all safely even in a 230+bhp car.
Why do car drivers allow themselves to get too close to a slower moving vehicle such as a truck? If a car driver`s doing 60 and a truck is doing it`s legal 40, common sense should tell said driver to look well ahead and see if it safe to overtake then indicate his/her intentions to do so ,I don`t mind being overtaken but i hate it when car drivers drive right into my blindspot then keeps weaving in and out and zips past without indicating, where possible i move as close to the kerb as possible to allow faster traffic to see past me, but not many take the hint and instead move back into my blindspot!!!
|
|
|
|
I think the OP is referring to the "Slow Moving Traffic Law" in the USA. As far as I know, it only applies to designated vehicles such as farm machinery which are not designed to be driven at above about 20mph. Applying the same law in the UK would, sadly, not mean that the driver of the beige coloured VW Polo holding up half a mile of traffic by doing 25mph in a 60 limit has a legal obligation to pull over and let everyone past.
Sorry, I've got it in for Polos at the moment. At the head of every long traffic queue there seems to be either a large truck, a caravan or a VW Polo.
|
|
|
|
We've already got it, effectively. HC rule 169, + enforcement. It's very rare that this is a serious issue here - and IMO being held up for a few minutes is not a serious issue.
|
Undertaking - people do it here often in motorways anyway
Graded license - will be difficult and expensive to implement. NZ has much less population than UK.
Turn left on traffic lights - Most coutries (which drive on left) have this provision by default. But here in most traffic lights, turning left usually requires less wait for green than turning right.
Carry driving license with you all the time - most countries have this requirement.
Re-test every ?? years - Agreed, but it shouldn't be used as a money generation exercise
No wheel clamping - [sigh]
Holding up traffic - there should be a minimum speed limit and drivers should be fined for driving slowly without a valid reason!
|
|
Stunorthants has it right. There are too many laws already and many people's knowledge of even the important ones is sketchy. Nothing to be gained by overloading their brains with more regulations.
|
"Nothing to be gained by overloading their brains with more regulations."
Very low opinion of your fellow man. A very apathetic sweeping statement. How about we adopt some better rules suggested and drop others. Not very taxing. The highway code booklet for goodness sake isn't exactly War and Peace. Give us some credit for absorbing information.
|
We have driven alot in america and you sometimes see signs that say "pull over and allow faster vehicles to pass"
I have also seen these alot on the roads in parts of scotland!!!
|
|
|
Very low opinion of your fellow man.
isn't exactly War and Peace. Give us some credit for absorbing information.
Nothing wrong with the man himself. But he is much reduced, on a large scale, by what one can only call cultural and social factors. I am surprised you haven't noticed this on the road.
I agree by the way that a more rational set of road regulations would be a good idea. But these things inevitably are always done piecemeal. You end up with a confusing, ever-changing patchwork. A lot of people, again inevitably, don't bother to absorb the stuff and just play it by ear, with the variable results we see every day.
|
Reading about UPS' vans in the US, I found that they take advantage of the turn right on red regulation, planning all routing (pronounce it as you will !) so that a truck never has to wait at a red light to turn left, this has not only reduced delivery times but decreased fuel consumption and emmisions by a measurable amount.
Driving conditions in the US are far superior to the UK, with far more tolerance to other drivers and pedestrians that you could dream of in this country.
Laid back driving styles are noticeable and speed limits are sensible and intuative, I found when I saw a limit sign a glance at the speedo showed I was generally close to that speed anyway.
Helmet laws vary from state to state for instance in Maine one could ride without but in Mass you had to make the effort.
When I came home I realized what a bleak, vicious and downright nasty little motoring nation we had become, the lazy rumble of a V configured engine replaced by tinny little chav-mobiles driven by impolite, impatient, egotistic oiks. You know you can genuinely pose in a V8 Pontiac but I don't think that that a Lexused lit 106 or Saxo makes quite as credible a chariot.
The only inconsistency for me is the 47,000 fatalities (against a population of 300 million) against the 3000 odd here against a 60 Million population - something amiss I think.
|
|
I've always felt that being forced to wear a helmet is a major contribution to speeding, try hitting a bee at 70mph without a lid and you'd see why.
|
|
I have ridden helmetless and not for me I'm afraid.
|
I have ridden helmetless and not for me I'm afraid.
Same here. "Wear a helmet" has been advice in the UK for at least 50 years.
A few years ago I forgot (yes, really!) to put on my helmet and drove a couple of miles to the town centre. I got some odd looks on the way, and wondered what was wrong with the 'bike. When I got there, I put the thing on its' side-stand, and reached up to undo the chin-strap. This resulted in some laughter and the realisation that I didn't dare ride back like that! Taxi!!
|
In Florida, we saw signed that said "penalties doubled when workers present" - meaning, of course, that (over here) if you speed at roadworks or anywhere where there are people working at the roadside, you get double the fine and double the points.
In the US it probably means you get double the cop cars, two sets of handcuffs, double the rough treatment extricating you from the car, and double the number of bruises!
|
In France and Ireland, every section of main road has a marked speed limit, so there is no 'deristricted' or 'national speed limit applies' sign, as far as I can remember.
I think it's time we phased out the derestricted sign too and replaced it with '60' signs.
|
>>I think it's time we phased out the derestricted sign too and replaced it with '60' signs.
You foul little person (nothing personal).
|
|
Right on a red light is brilliant. Only problem is I'm pretty sure I'm going to have to work to stop myself doing it (left turns) when I get back to the UK.
|
>>Anyway, it's a civil liberties thing--if you want to wear a helmet, great--if not, you shouldn't have to, if you realise the possible consequences when you crash your bike. In the same vein, my car might have seat belts but I'd never wear them myself.
In the US, I once saw a large-ish and generously-bearded biker wearing a tee-shirt that read 'Helmet Laws Suck! Let Those Who Ride Decide!'
Individual states have a lot of leeway in setting traffic laws. There is no American law about turning right on red, for example. Some states have it some don't. Last time I checked, the NSL was set by the Federal government by making it a condition of receiving any highway funding. Similarly, there is a de facto national drinking age of 21 because the US government would withhold highway funding from any state that set a lower drinking age.
|
I too read about UPS saving loads on fuel by keeping most of their turns to the right.
We need more sensible signs here, not those unbelievably expensive stupid gantries.
I was late and stuck behind a horsebox going from Cumbria to Yorkshire, is it the A66? There was a HUGE queue, and the horsebox only had to pull over to let us all pass. It was doing about 30 on a "national speed limit" road. It didn't. I turned the air blue. That driver should have had a much bigger fine than some unlucky dude going 33 in a 30 zone.
|
There was a HUGE queue and the horsebox only had to pull over to let us all pass. It was doing about 30 on a "national speed limit" road. It didn't.
That I sympathise with - when I towed a caravan I used to keep an eye on my mirrors and if I got a "tail" I'd try to find somewhere 'safe' to pull over and let them past - but only if it was safe to do so - did he drive past laybys then?
|
I think it's time we phased out the derestricted sign too and replaced it with '60' signs.
Reasons for not doing so ........
(1) The enormous cost of changing all the trillions of signs.
(2) The signs couldn't all be changed simultaneously, so for quite a time the limit for any particular road would have to depend on whether the relevant sign had been updated or not.
(3) With the current sign the national speed limit can be altered (up as well as down) without any physical changes to the signs.
Edited by L'escargot on 02/08/2008 at 08:36
|
Converting the "National Limit" signs to X Mph could be done relativelt easily and cheaply by simply pasting a reflective PVC layer over the top of the existing diagonal sign.
And they could check & trim any obscuring bushes at the same time.
|
|
|
|
What I would like to see is not so much a LAW but a 'good-driving' practice by lorries & other relevant vehicles, that when the driver notices that he has a tail-back of numerous vehicles and he comes to a roundabout the lorry driver makes an extra circuit around the roundabout. This lets most of the tail-back through with minimal disruption of the lorry driver's travel.
I've done this a number of times myself in my car when I'm not in a hurry and am just enjoying the driving and consequently not blasting away at the speed limit. Usually this is when just one or two cars have come up behind me. It save me the bore and the fuel cost of going faster just for the benefit of those hurry bugs behind me :-)
|
What about the very strange law in the US that doesn't set different speed limits for trucks - we were regularly passed by trucks well over 44 tonnes doing 75mph. When they came behind me, I as quickly as poss moved into another lane, as no way could they stop.
Approaching traffic lights on a main highway, the lights changed to red when I was about 100 feet from then, I could stop no bother - the truck behind me in another lane applied his brakes and didn't stop until well over the crossroads. Thankfully, nothing was coming across his path................. the Highway Patrol guy wasn't too impressed either!
|
|
|
|
