m1 accident

[Sir Fynwy]

If you know he drink drives report it to the police.

This was years ago and I didn't know about it until later.

[Great Boos Up]

I drive, on average, 50-60 thousand miles a year and have done since the late '70s..Used to do 150k plus all over Europe, so have seen my fair share of appalling driving and 'hold your breath' incidents. 

For all the congestion, Britain's roads are way up there as being the safest to drive on in the whole continent.  Even some of the supposed 'advanced' nations of Western Europe can be bloody hair-raising places to drive....as for  the Eastern bit...bloody hell!!

 

IMHO there isn't any particular age group that cause more of a problem than any other. There may be a % of OAP's who are over cautious and others guilty of making poor decisions,  but in general they're no worse than younger drivers. 

 

There's a hell of a lot of dangerous behaviour amongst drivers. Phone usage and texting  whilst driving is becoming an epidemic in this country.. Can't really notice I've seen a great number of 'over 70s' doing that.!!!!

 

Biggest danger on our roads??? Personal view on this is probably a bit controversial, but foreign drivers, (HGV,LGV, coach and car) statistically are far more likely to cause an accident than 'native' drivers, whether the 'Brit' be 18 or 80!!

 

As someone who personally witnessed a Hungarian registered 'artic' REVERSING down the M1 , (J29), having missed the slip road I'd go with the weight of statistics!

I Agree Mr Worthington, same amount of miles in my car through England. I always look out for the lorry number plates.

Assuming by your post you are a HGV driver. British goods vehicles are brilliant considerate drivers. Always see the potential dangers.

I myself spend as much time on the motorway looking behind as much as in front. We all have places to go and people to see in a short time. You give way to me and I in return give you space and we all get out of the way for Mr White Van Man who probably has the most restraints on time to complete his living.

It all goes tits up weekends and early Monday mornings.

[Strokes]

I drive, on average, 50-60 thousand miles a year and have done since the late '70s..Used to do 150k plus all over Europe, so have seen my fair share of appalling driving and 'hold your breath' incidents.

For all the congestion, Britain's roads are way up there as being the safest to drive on in the whole continent. Even some of the supposed 'advanced' nations of Western Europe can be bloody hair-raising places to drive....as for the Eastern bit...bloody hell!!

IMHO there isn't any particular age group that cause more of a problem than any other. There may be a % of OAP's who are over cautious and others guilty of making poor decisions, but in general they're no worse than younger drivers.

There's a hell of a lot of dangerous behaviour amongst drivers. Phone usage and texting whilst driving is becoming an epidemic in this country.. Can't really notice I've seen a great number of 'over 70s' doing that.!!!!

Biggest danger on our roads??? Personal view on this is probably a bit controversial, but foreign drivers, (HGV,LGV, coach and car) statistically are far more likely to cause an accident than 'native' drivers, whether the 'Brit' be 18 or 80!!

As someone who personally witnessed a Hungarian registered 'artic' REVERSING down the M1 , (J29), having missed the slip road I'd go with the weight of statistics!

I nearly got cleared up by some lorry willy puller this morning, I would have blasted my horn at him but still had my phone in my hand.

Also I'm piling on the weight these days because I'm drinking so much red bull to avoid falling sleep at the wheel, about time they invented an effective low calorie/sugar version. The one that they do is shit.

[Thracian]

So. Those that drive comfortably when they've had a few do you think they'd drive better or worse without a substance (or amount of a substance) proven to impair their judgement imbibed?

And should we continue to attempt to stop this happening by having breathalyser tests and what have you?

 

So long as they drive carefully and competently I wouldn't give a toss one way or the other. If they didn't I would but the same would apply to someone who's not taken any of the substances you refer to. 

Lots of things affect people's ability to drive properly and they're not always about drink or substances of any kind.

So why just focus on drink and substances?

Why not depression or have a law to say it is illegal to drive a car when your balance of mind has been disturbed?

I'm not at all sure about breathalyser's.

Lives have been saved on the roads without a doubt but instead we've had other injuries and fatalities caused by a massive increase in traffic, lorry drivers falling asleep at the wheel, crashes caused by a river bridge being poorly signposted in the entirely predictable event of sea mist and so much more that could have been avoided. Seems like a case of carrying when it suits and not carrying when it doesn't. 

Bottom line is have we gained overall?

I don't know but is it not right anyway to also consider the massive impact the breathalyser's had on the licensed trade too, not only in terms of lost jobs but the considerable loss of social life in pubs and clubs?

No, I don't suppose lives lost to loneliness or jobs lost to progress really count much alongside the assumed benefits of the breathalyser in terms of preventing injuries and fatalities on the roads.

I just wonder if there might have been a better way.

[Thracian]

I drive, on average, 50-60 thousand miles a year and have done since the late '70s..Used to do 150k plus all over Europe, so have seen my fair share of appalling driving and 'hold your breath' incidents. 

For all the congestion, Britain's roads are way up there as being the safest to drive on in the whole continent.  Even some of the supposed 'advanced' nations of Western Europe can be bloody hair-raising places to drive....as for  the Eastern bit...bloody hell!!

 

IMHO there isn't any particular age group that cause more of a problem than any other. There may be a % of OAP's who are over cautious and others guilty of making poor decisions,  but in general they're no worse than younger drivers. 

 

There's a hell of a lot of dangerous behaviour amongst drivers. Phone usage and texting  whilst driving is becoming an epidemic in this country.. Can't really notice I've seen a great number of 'over 70s' doing that.!!!!

 

Biggest danger on our roads??? Personal view on this is probably a bit controversial, but foreign drivers, (HGV,LGV, coach and car) statistically are far more likely to cause an accident than 'native' drivers, whether the 'Brit' be 18 or 80!!

 

As someone who personally witnessed a Hungarian registered 'artic' REVERSING down the M1 , (J29), having missed the slip road I'd go with the weight of statistics!

 

 

Seems like a lot of sense talked there backed up by a lot of first hand experience.  

[filbertstreet]

Get foreigners, women, old people, BMW drivers, middle lane hoggers, unmarked police cars, Forest fans, SUVs and young kids off the roads and it'd be great

[Jon the Hat]

This is turning to comedy now. Things that are proven to consistently impair driving ability are fine, but oh those bad drivers!!!

[Carl the Llama]

Wir wollen sehen ein reich! HALT! Hammerzeit!

 

Time to goosey goose step on outta here.

[DB11]

An acquaintance of mine had a crash on a road outside Sheffield. He was unfamiliar with the road, crossed the central reservation on a bend and collided with a car coming the other way.

Happily no-one was injured and my acquantance admitted that he was entirely at fault and the woman driver involved was entirely blameless.

He got fined for driving without due care and attention while she got fined and disqualified because she was over the limit.

That's not justice in my book.

Sounds fair to me - if you're unfamiliar with an area then you should be taking extra care and paying more attention.

[Finnaldo]

I can't see how Thrac could possibly argue against the fact you're more likely to suffer certain vision or judgement impairments as you get older, because it's in all honesty tragic to protest against.

And if he thinks there's no problem with older drivers, then surely a test wouldn't matter anyway? By his thinking they'll all pass with flying colours and it won't be a problem.

[Vardinhio]

So long as they drive carefully and competently I wouldn't give a toss one way or the other. If they didn't I would but the same would apply to someone who's not taken any of the substances you refer to. 

Lots of things affect people's ability to drive properly and they're not always about drink or substances of any kind.

So why just focus on drink and substances?

Why not depression or have a law to say it is illegal to drive a car when your balance of mind has been disturbed?

I'm not at all sure about breathalyser's.

Lives have been saved on the roads without a doubt but instead we've had other injuries and fatalities caused by a massive increase in traffic, lorry drivers falling asleep at the wheel, crashes caused by a river bridge being poorly signposted in the entirely predictable event of sea mist and so much more that could have been avoided. Seems like a case of carrying when it suits and not carrying when it doesn't. 

Bottom line is have we gained overall?

I don't know but is it not right anyway to also consider the massive impact the breathalyser's had on the licensed trade too, not only in terms of lost jobs but the considerable loss of social life in pubs and clubs?

No, I don't suppose lives lost to loneliness or jobs lost to progress really count much alongside the assumed benefits of the breathalyser in terms of preventing injuries and fatalities on the roads.

I just wonder if there might have been a better way.

How can you not be sure about breathalysers? You talk nonsense sometimes. If the police couldn't enforce drink driving the country would be in absolute chaos not to mention the numerous deaths caused by those under influence.

[DB11]

I don't know but is it not right anyway to also consider the massive impact the breathalyser's had on the licensed trade too, not only in terms of lost jobs but the considerable loss of social life in pubs and clubs?

No, I don't suppose lives lost to loneliness or jobs lost to progress really count much alongside the assumed benefits of the breathalyser in terms of preventing injuries and fatalities on the roads.

I just wonder if there might have been a better way.

 

I'd take a loss of jobs and social life in pubs and clubs over the loss of life by a drink driver, as well as the knock on effects on those affected, any day

[Rincewind]

If someone is stupid enough to drink and drive putting others at risk then maybe  a loss of a job will be a wake up call.If there was not a limit the drink driving situation would be abused by the idiots who think that they are immune from the affects of overindulging in alcohol.

The same goes for those who are tired  using mobiles  or getting on a bit and suffer from arthritis or forgetfulness thinking that they are still perfect drivers and its the other drivers to blame  for the accidents they will be involved in.

[Thracian]

They seem to do very little about mobiles, tiredness, centre-lane hoggers, people who can't read the road signs,  people using borrowed cars without a licence or insurance. Their focus is firmly on drink yet there seems to be far more who fall into the other categories. Indeed there's hardly a day I don't see some a dozen idiots driving with a mobile to their ear, men and women and with noticeable effect on their driving.    

[Itsthejoeker]

They seem to do very little about mobiles, tiredness, centre-lane hoggers, people who can't read the road signs,  people using borrowed cars without a licence or insurance. Their focus is firmly on drink yet there seems to be far more who fall into the other categories. Indeed there's hardly a day I don't see some a dozen idiots driving with a mobile to their ear, men and women and with noticeable effect on their driving.    

 

Which would you consider the most dangerous of those you've listed?

 

And to say they do nothing about anything but drink driving is pretty ignorant if you ask me. They've introduced fines for people driving in the middle lane without needing to be there, and they've cracked down on driving without insurance and licenses.

 

But how on earth do you expect police to pull over every single person driving around on their phone? Do you think there's enough room in the police budget and enough officers to drive up and down the motorway all day everyday in hope of catching a couple of people on their phones? 

 

Do you think speeding is dangerous? You've not highlighted that.

[Finnaldo]

They seem to do very little about mobiles, tiredness, centre-lane hoggers, people who can't read the road signs,  people using borrowed cars without a licence or insurance. Their focus is firmly on drink yet there seems to be far more who fall into the other categories. Indeed there's hardly a day I don't see some a dozen idiots driving with a mobile to their ear, men and women and with noticeable effect on their driving.    

1) Using mobiles whilst driving is a illegal and the general consensus is that it's a stupid thing to do. However its hard to enforce unless the Police come by it by chance.

2) Centre-lane hoggers are bells but in terms of danger it doesn't quite compare to anything you listed or drink-driving & unfit elderly drivers, which makes it quite bizarre that you're angered by something pretty petty whilst defending something the former which kills people on a weekly basis and the latter which has caused two awful accidents recently (this one and the bus in Coventry).

[Thracian]

I can't see how Thrac could possibly argue against the fact you're more likely to suffer certain vision or judgement impairments as you get older, because it's in all honesty tragic to protest against.

And if he thinks there's no problem with older drivers, then surely a test wouldn't matter anyway? By his thinking they'll all pass with flying colours and it won't be a problem.

 

 

Typically selective comment.  I've not argued in favour of people with vision or judgemental impairments. If people have them they should wear glasses/contact lenses and act responsibly in relation to their limitations, whether in terms of driving more cautiously or not driving at all.

What I've said is that such shortcomings can and do effect all ages and I've noticed at first hand how virtually all over 35's from the Middle East have vision problems.

Whether that's connected to their reported susceptibility to diabetes I don't know but they clearly have a problem. It's there to see on the roads as well, by the way so many drive gently along the centre lane quite oblivious to anyone around them and have their faces almost on their windscreens.

But I waste my words. So many people form an opinion - or have it formed for them - and refuse to change whatever. Ask yourselves how many of you have voted Labour every time you've stepped into a polling booth and will continue to do so whatever. None of you? I don't believe it. I'll go further about health and safety on roads.

When it comes to truly assessing people's health and mental stability I'd question that perfection exists at all, even from an early age.

There are simply degreees of good health. Just as there are in old follk.

And I'd argue that a good many older people drive more conservatively on the roads and have fewer short-term worries than younger folk but, of course, the younger lobby chooses not to consider this when it comes to assessing driver safety.

Insurers do. They weigh premiums quite heavily against young people because of their inexperience, impetuousness, bravado and the chances of taking risks after a good night out.

In the main I actually think young drivers quickly learn to take responsibility but not when they're subject to the pressures and stress of love, job or peer problems when too many will storm off in their cars with a mindset that is almost totally out of control. And there's one or two on here could pay testimony to that and testimony to the impact it so sadly had on young people rather than old  .  

Having read so many seemingly selective reactions to my comments, it remains  ironic that when I travelled to away games with Foxestalk members, all seemed quite comfortable that I should drive, including the city mayor at the time though that was a mixed blessing!

I wouldn't wish to drive them now because I've never live with the consequences if I ever made a mistake - and it's quite clear it would be my fault whatever. I'm happy to let my son drive. 

[Thracian]

Which would you consider the most dangerous of those you've listed?

 

And to say they do nothing about anything but drink driving is pretty ignorant if you ask me. They've introduced fines for people driving in the middle lane without needing to be there, and they've cracked down on driving without insurance and licenses.

 

But how on earth do you expect police to pull over every single person driving around on their phone? Do you think there's enough room in the police budget and enough officers to drive up and down the motorway all day everyday in hope of catching a couple of people on their phones? 

 

Do you think speeding is dangerous? You've not highlighted that.

 

 

Any one of them is potentially dangerous but mobile phone use is by far the most obviously prevalent. I didn't say they not introduced measure to deal with these things - just that they don't appear enthusaistic about acting on them.

 

The police never stopped every single person doing anything and no I don't believe it will ever be a police priority. But that doesn't change the problem, the fact that it's viewably ignored or the need to pursuade people to act differently.

 

As for speeding it largely depends on the time, the conditions and the circumstances or a comination of all three. I can't see much danger in driving a decent car at 80-100mph at 2.30 in the morning and on a virtually empty three-lane motorway, were it legal of course and depending on the level of a driver's awareness.

 

Then again, driving at 60 on the same road in rush-hour traffic during a rainstorm with the spray from lorries obscuring visibility would be totally irresonsible except that to drive any slower might as easily cause a crash from the rear as trying to maintain the same speed as everyone else.  .     

[Sir Fynwy]

Any one of them is potentially dangerous but mobile phone use is by far the most obviously prevalent. I didn't say they not introduced measure to deal with these things - just that they don't appear enthusaistic about acting on them.

 

The police never stopped every single person doing anything and no I don't believe it will ever be a police priority. But that doesn't change the problem, the fact that it's viewably ignored or the need to pursuade people to act differently.

 

As for speeding it largely depends on the time, the conditions and the circumstances or a comination of all three. I can't see much danger in driving a decent car at 80-100mph at 2.30 in the morning and on a virtually empty three-lane motorway, were it legal of course and depending on the level of a driver's awareness.

 

Then again, driving at 60 on the same road in rush-hour traffic during a rainstorm with the spray from lorries obscuring visibility would be totally irresonsible except that to drive any slower might as easily cause a crash from the rear as trying to maintain the same speed as everyone else.  .     

Where does driving whilst pissed on a motorway with one wheel on the rim due to a flat tyre fit into the Thracian highway code?

[Finnegan]

Some absolutely top trolling from Tony in here. Fair play, sir, you've not lost your touch.

[Carl the Llama]

Saw a van driving all the way down a long slip-road at about 60km/h trying to join a 120km/h motorway.  We're talking over half a kilometre at least of slip-road which he drove down with his indicator on, but without joining the pretty much empty motorway until the very last second.  That action of itself isn't dangerous purely because there wasn't any traffic, but the obvious inability of the driver to assess the road and realise he had acres of space and that he was driving way too slowly to merge onto a major motorway is incredibly worrying, I hate to think how he would have got on were there any other vehicles around.

 

As I overtook the van having followed it most of the way down the slip-road before realising the driver had no intention of actually merging despite indicating to do so, I looked to my right to see that the person in the driver's seat was little old man with his face pressed against the windscreen.

 

What do we think, Thrac?  Should I track this guy down and let him know what a champion of the modern age he is, sticking it to those nasty young folk who care whether innocent people get mowed down by someone who has no idea what time of day it is?

[Rincewind]

Maybe those hogging the middle lane or using mobiles have also been drinking. Which is why they are hogging the middle lane or even speeding or pulling out onto a dual carriageway a fraction too early or late. Maybe they lift their leg to fart just before plougihing into a mother with a pushchair. But no it is not their fault. They have been driving for 70 years and always have a few pints on a Saturday and never been in an accident. They may have seen some with cars behind them or ahead swerving for no reason.

[DB11]

As for speeding it largely depends on the time, the conditions and the circumstances or a comination of all three. I can't see much danger in driving a decent car at 80-100mph at 2.30 in the morning and on a virtually empty three-lane motorway, were it legal of course and depending on the level of a driver's awareness.

If the driver has awareness then they're not going to get prosecuted for speeding as they'll notice and realise that the vehicle following them closely behind is a police car, thus slow down. If you're speeding with a police car behind you for miles then you've only got yourself to blame for not having the awareness to realise a police car is behind you and you're speeding.

[Itsthejoeker]

Maybe those hogging the middle lane or using mobiles have also been drinking. Which is why they are hogging the middle lane or even speeding or pulling out onto a dual carriageway a fraction too early or late. Maybe they lift their leg to fart just before plougihing into a mother with a pushchair. But no it is not their fault. They have been driving for 70 years and always have a few pints on a Saturday and never been in an accident. They may have seen some with cars behind them or ahead swerving for no reason.

 

[Mike Oxlong]

If the driver has awareness then they're not going to get prosecuted for speeding as they'll notice and realise that the vehicle following them closely behind is a police car, thus slow down. If you're speeding with a police car behind you for miles then you've only got yourself to blame for not having the awareness to realise a police car is behind you and you're speeding.

Not if it's unmarked.

Fairplay if you're pulled by a shiny bells and whistles patrol car but the unmarked ones are cheating.