SLOW driving is DANGEROUS

[Cyclone]

Safe overtaking is still more dangerous than not overtaking at all.

 

It's not a question about what's more dangerous. Just because something else is more dangerous doesn't alter the fact that slow driving creates danger.

[Deltic]

Safe overtaking is still more dangerous than not overtaking at all.

It's not a question about what's more dangerous. Just because something else is more dangerous doesn't alter the fact that slow driving creates danger.

 

Why? On what basis is that calculated?

[Cyclone]

Like anything on the road, be it a parked vehicle, a slow moving one, one travelling at the speed limit, or lots of other things, it is a hazard. How a driver reacts to the hazard determines the level of danger.

 

A slow vehicle is no more dangerous than one travelling at or around the speed limit.

 

Or no more dangerous than a huge boulder blocking a carriageway.

 

Oh right, hazards are dangerous, the level of danger can be altered by how you deal with them, but dangerous nonetheless.

[Cyclone]

Why? On what basis is that calculated?

 

You're expecting some maths to prove that changing lane, accelerating past something and pulling back in is more dangerous than staying in your lane, without accelerating? Isn't common sense enough?

[Waldo]

Safe overtaking is still more dangerous than not overtaking at all.

 

It's not a question about what's more dangerous. Just because something else is more dangerous doesn't alter the fact that slow driving creates danger.

 

If we're talking about a slow driver creates more danger, than if he was driving at normal (e.g. speed limit) speeds. I'm not convinced that's the case.

 

What if everyone drove at 10mph. Wouldn't that make the roads far safer than they are now? If so, surely it's the faster drivers who are making the roads a dangerous place to be.

[Deltic]

You're expecting some maths to prove that changing lane, accelerating past something and pulling back in is more dangerous than staying in your lane, without accelerating? Isn't common sense enough?

 

Not necessarily maths but reasons why you think that safely overtaking increases risk by any meaningful amount. Changing direction and speed all occur whilst not overtaking.

[SnailyBoy]

On Saturday morning driving through Rivelin Valley at 40mph, the posted limit was 40mph.

 

Conditions as many of you will know were dry and clear.

 

Why then was I still overtaken by a maroon Vauxhall Corsa?

 

I couldn't have been deemed to be slow, after all the posted limit was 40mph and I was doing 40mph.

[DT Ralge]

On Saturday morning driving through Rivelin Valley at 40mph, the posted limit was 40mph.

 

Conditions as many of you will know were dry and clear.

 

Why then was I still overtaken by a maroon Vauxhall Corsa?

 

I couldn't have been deemed to be slow, after all the posted limit was 40mph and I was doing 40mph.

 

Because in some drivers' makeup/psychology, they can't bear to be behind someone else; they have agendas and, on occasions, poor attitude.

 

Someone doing the limit, in their mind maybe, is a loser, overtaking them means they win.

 

I will bow out of this circular argument soon enough. But I will always argue that to say slow driving CREATES danger in itself rather than say that the response to slow driving can be dangerous gives succour to those drivers with poor attitude who, mindlessly, can't bear to be behind a caravan, van, truck, learner driver and overtake stupidly whatever the prevailing speed or posted limit in an almost Pavlovian and involuntary response.

 

And this is more widespread and more of an issue from my standpoint (in my experience of driving 25000 miles per year) than dealing with occasional pootling Micras, Clios or whatever.

[Cyclone]

If we're talking about a slow driver creates more danger, than if he was driving at normal (e.g. speed limit) speeds. I'm not convinced that's the case.

 

What if everyone drove at 10mph. Wouldn't that make the roads far safer than they are now? If so, surely it's the faster drivers who are making the roads a dangerous place to be.

 

Given that the norm is to travel close to the speed limit when conditions allow, and indeed that's expected if you want to get a driving license, it's the unusual behaviour of driving slowly that creates the danger of traffic needing to overtake.

If everyone drove at 10 mph and that was the norm, then yes the roads would be safer (and our economy would collapse).

If someone drives slowly on a road with no other traffic then they've not made that road any more dangerous, but you'll struggle to find many roads like that, and anyway nobody would complain about it then.

[Cyclone]

Not necessarily maths but reasons why you think that safely overtaking increases risk by any meaningful amount. Changing direction and speed all occur whilst not overtaking.

 

Changing direction and speed do occur, but there's little chance of oncoming traffic in your lane when you aren't overtaking, you don't have to cross the potentially slippery centre marking, there basically less chance of getting it wrong by making a misjudgement. Non of which would make it the fault of the slow driver, but they will still have contributed to the situation by creating a hazard.