donkey Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 Why didn't you quote the whole part? Why didn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 This is the OP I replied to. He is clearly refering to pushing in on a queue where motorists have - as recomended by the highway code - got into lane as early as possible. In that context, the section of the Highway Code I have quoted is relevant. When they say 'merge in turn' they are obviously refering to a situation where there are queues in two lanes. Otherwise it is not 'merging' at all. It is pushing in. Are you saying that I have to get into lane 1 from lane 2? Won't I be "pushing in" wherever I do that?If everyone got into the queue in lane one then there would never be a queue in 2 lanes..what happens when you're the first to queue in lane 2 are you "pushing in"? ..there are two running lanes..why not use them both..the HC recommends using both lanes...happy queuing... .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 Why didn't you? I did quote the whole of rule 134... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lauren84 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 What about the drivers who use the outside lane as they will be turning right at the roundabout 2 miles away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ sheffield Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 I very rarely need to overtake out of necessity, its almost exclusively for the buzz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 Are you saying that I have to get into lane 1 from lane 2? Won't I be "pushing in" wherever I do that?If everyone got into the queue in lane one then there would never be a queue in 2 lanes..what happens when you're the first to queue in lane 2 are you "pushing in"? ..there are two running lanes..why not use them both..the HC recommends using both lanes...happy queuing... .. Queues form in two lanes under two circumstances which I can think of (there are probably others) A: When traffic density is such that it is impossible for everyone to get into the right lane(s) before the lane closure. B. When there is little or no warning (eg an accident or breakdown.) In such cases, it is obvious that traffic should merge in turn, and if anyone needs the HC to point that out for them...Bless. If you re-read the OP I replied to, you will see he is clearly refering to a situation where there is advanced warning of a lane closure. When there is advanced warning, it is equally obvious that you should - as stated in the HC - get into the correct lane. Not drive up the empty lane as far as possible and slow or stop the other lane so you can push in at the front. You can not justify such behaviour by mis-interpreting the Highway Code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 Queues form in two lanes under two circumstances which I can think of (there are probably others) A: When traffic density is such that it is impossible for everyone to get into the right lane(s) before the lane closure. B. When there is little or no warning (eg an accident or breakdown.) In such cases, it is obvious that traffic should merge in turn, and if anyone needs the HC to point that out for them...Bless. If you re-read the OP I replied to, you will see he is clearly refering to a situation where there is advanced warning of a lane closure. When there is advanced warning, it is equally obvious that you should - as stated in the HC - get into the correct lane. Not drive up the empty lane as far as possible and slow or stop the other lane so you can push in at the front. You can not justify such behaviour by mis-interpreting the Highway Code. Read rule 134..I'll repeat it for you.. "134 You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed. In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily. Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed." Follow the signs...advance warning surely.. no misinterpretation just because you don't agree ...I think we'll have to disagree on this one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 The rule you have quoted is clearly refering to a completely different situation where traffic is slow moving in two or more lanes and therefore, quoting 'rule 134' does not refute my original assertion that driving fast up an empty lane of traffic in the full knowledge that there is a lane closure ahead, so that you can avoid the queue and push in at the front is anti-social and egocentric. About this, I won't 'agree to disagree.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul2412 Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 This is the OP I replied to. He is clearly refering to pushing in on a queue where motorists have - as recomended by the highway code - got into lane as early as possible. In that context, the section of the Highway Code I have quoted is relevant. When they say 'merge in turn' they are obviously refering to a situation where there are queues in two lanes. Otherwise it is not 'merging' at all. It is pushing in. How is using an EMPTY lane, then merging in turn called pushing in? Maybe we should abandon all second lanes if nobody is going to use them? Only in the UK do people have your mentality. I bet you get excited when someone uses the road and then attempts to merge, just so you can practically touch the car in fronts bumper "there, that'll teach them for using the road". Am I correct in assuming that if you queue on foot for a ticket office and see 2 lines, one with 400 people in it and one with 50 people in it, you'd choose the longest line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 The rule you have quoted is clearly refering to a completely different situation where traffic is slow moving in two or more lanes and therefore, quoting 'rule 134' does not refute my original assertion that driving fast up an empty lane of traffic in the full knowledge that there is a lane closure ahead, so that you can avoid the queue and push in at the front is anti-social and egocentric. About this, I won't 'agree to disagree.' I'm not sure I've ever advocated "driving fast up an empty lane..." But having said that there are two lanes there to be used..if you want to queue for ever then fair enough...do you also join the longest queue at the supermarket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.