Really, I somehow doubt that if it’s a standard part. So you are saying there are thousands of a certain make of vehicle that break the standard rules?
That could be very interesting for the manufacturer. What type of vehicle are we taking about?
as usual your spouting complete and utter waffle jake old bean…
i dunno about crap on the windscreen.what about all that crap on the bonnet?
and how can the other driver be expected to see a disabled kitten lying in the gutter with all that non manufacturers crap stuck on the screen?
police shouldnt be allowed to drive such vehicles ,especially when they are so accident prone driving in normal conditions.
jakethesnake:
Really, I somehow doubt that if it’s a standard part. So you are saying there are thousands of a certain make of vehicle that break the standard rules?That could be very interesting for the manufacturer. What type of vehicle are we taking about?
Rules is rules. But I suspect that much like my satnav that sits in the bottom right of my windscreen, the authorities turn a blind eye. Until something goes wrong of course. But by government guidelines, the whatever sensor it is that pokes up about 4 or 5 inches into the middle of my windscreen breaks the rules.
dieseldog999:
as usual your spouting complete and utter waffle jake old bean…
i dunno about crap on the windscreen.what about all that crap on the bonnet?and how can the other driver be expected to see a disabled kitten lying in the gutter with all that non manufacturers crap stuck on the screen?
police shouldnt be allowed to drive such vehicles ,especially when they are so accident prone driving in normal conditions.
Listen my spouting is minimal compared to yours. I reckon secretly you would love to be a traffic cop. Speeding legally in a car you could only ever dream about buying. 
You and RR would make a great pair in my book.
Stop arguing with that driving instructor creep you two, only one winner there! For the record I had a center table in an R series for almost 4 years without problem ( no kittens or kids slaughtered) but only had flat stationary stuff on it, the pic of the offending vehicle does look ridiculous though so can’t defend that. Condolences to the victim here though, she paid a high price. Think what’s really needed here is educating cyclists about truck blind spots and not to take chances, but they, and I am one myself, come across as arrogant save the planet types so it’s gonna be a hard battle.
Hmmm me and DD being the Regan and Carter, or the Starsky and Hutch of the M6. 
I like it. 
jakethesnake:
I 100% guarantee your electronic box is not dangerous in any way.
Factory fit from MAN. Dangerous? Debatable. Legal? Most probably not according to the letter of the law.
robroy:
Hmmm me and DD being the Regan and Carter, or the Starsky and Hutch of the M6.
I like it.
I bet you…
Still have the flared trousers in yer wardrobe now mate lol.
Driving a 3 litre Granada like a loon, screeching to a halt whilst rushing out of the car holding a small firearm shouting ‘get the bar stewards’ was my life ambition at one time.
the maoster:
jakethesnake:
I 100% guarantee your electronic box is not dangerous in any way.Factory fit from MAN. Dangerous? Debatable. Legal? Most probably not according to the letter of the law.
Wow I am surprised at that. I doubt it’s dangerous if you have an observant driver however I wonder why they have it there? I presume it needs to pick up some sort of signal?
I think RR said it was for lane departure warning. Useless bit of kit. Do away with it and just get rid of drivers that cant steer or stay awake. Job done.
yourhavingalarf:
robroy:
Hmmm me and DD being the Regan and Carter, or the Starsky and Hutch of the M6.
I like it.I bet you…
Still have the flared trousers in yer wardrobe now mate lol.
Driving a 3 litre Granada like a loon, screeching to a halt whilst rushing out of the car holding a small firearm shouting ‘get the bar stewards’ was my life ambition at one time.
Love it.
Yep, this would be me as a copper. .
youtu.be/-RUoEog2M1Q
the maoster:
jakethesnake:
I 100% guarantee your electronic box is not dangerous in any way.Factory fit from MAN. Dangerous? Debatable. Legal? Most probably not according to the letter of the law.
You ain’t listening mate…‘‘100% guarantee’’ the man said.
Pay attention.
It’s JAKE 
…he knows these things.
robroy:
the maoster:
jakethesnake:
I 100% guarantee your electronic box is not dangerous in any way.Factory fit from MAN. Dangerous? Debatable. Legal? Most probably not according to the letter of the law.
You ain’t listening mate…‘‘100% guarantee’’ the man said.
Pay attention.
It’s JAKE
I take it you think it IS dangerous by that remark?
After seeing it I agree with myself. It ain’t dangerous.
jakethesnake:
robroy:
the maoster:
jakethesnake:
I 100% guarantee your electronic box is not dangerous in any way.Factory fit from MAN. Dangerous? Debatable. Legal? Most probably not according to the letter of the law.
You ain’t listening mate…‘‘100% guarantee’’ the man said.
Pay attention.
It’s JAKEI take it you think it IS dangerous by that remark?
After seeing it I agree with myself. It ain’t dangerous.
That’s my whole point Jake, you say my old table which was one inch above the dash is ‘dangerous’…even though it was not one bit dangerous in reality.
If it had restricted my view to any great extent, it would have been taken down…but trust me it never did!
Where as the box in the Actros, and the whatever it is in Maoster’s MAN, can be view restrictive and therefore potentially dangerous…whatever tf YOU say.
Whether it fits your agenda or not, or whatever speed I am doing (the justification in your other post 
) there is a point in time when the car can be and (has been) totally obliterated because of it.
Now if this was a sticker, a ridiculously big sat nav, …a ■■■■ ■■■ aid or a picture of Holly with her Eartha’s out, it would be deemed ‘dangerous’., but suddenly the dangerous status ceases to be because VOSA (and of course true to form you) says it’s safe.
Ffs Jake man, make my Christmas , and for once in your Trucknet life admit that you are (or at least may be)…WRONG. 
robroy:
Ffs Jake man, make my Christmas , and for once in your Trucknet life admit that you are (or at least may be)…WRONG.
You’ve got…
More chance of shoving cooked spaghetti up an angry lions arse mate.
The problem here is speaking of ‘absolutes’ when it’s all relative.
Mirrors block vision on the front quarters. Therefore they are dangerous.
But a relatively greater danger would be to remove them and have both sides and rear invisible. (I’m ignoring cameras here).
The thinking is that the added safety of a mirror outweighs the loss of vision.
The same with these Lane Departure cameras. Losing a bit of vision is (arguably) outweighed by fitting theses devices.
I haven’t seen anyone arguing that dash tables contribute anything to safety, in any way, so any loss of vision they cause is unjustifiable.
Realistically, a low shelf is gonna cause minimal dangers. But it’s easier to say “zero tolerance” rather than rely on judgments of individuals.
Ffs Jake man, make my Christmas , and for once in your Trucknet life admit that you are (or at least may be)…WRONG.
Now let’s be fair here. I have looked back and I did not say your one inch table was dangerous. I said the 3 tier one was and unappropriately placed stickers and silly frilly curtains were.
TBH I think we probably agree some of these items may be potentially dangerous and maybe I was wrong.
Now you can have a wondeful Xmas.
robroy:
Hmmm me and DD being the Regan and Carter, or the Starsky and Hutch of the M6.
I like it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
im waiting on someone to suggest cagney and lacey…which would imply someone is calling us a couple of fannies. 
youtube.com/watch?v=0RtZ5AQLOMg
personally i could think theres more similarity to dempsey and makepeace.( domestos and codpiece).
how do you feel about having a shave and wearing a wig? 
dieseldog999:
robroy:
Hmmm me and DD being the Regan and Carter, or the Starsky and Hutch of the M6.
I like it.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
im waiting on someone to suggest cagney and lacey…which would imply someone is calling us a couple of fannies.youtube.com/watch?v=0RtZ5AQLOMg
personally i could think theres more similarity to dempsey and makepeace.( domestos and codpiece).
how do you feel about having a shave and wearing a wig?
Personally I was thinking Drake and Hunt. I’ll let you two decide who’s who though.
Franglais:
The problem here is speaking of ‘absolutes’ when it’s all relative.Mirrors block vision on the front quarters. Therefore they are dangerous.
But a relatively greater danger would be to remove them and have both sides and rear invisible. (I’m ignoring cameras here).The thinking is that the added safety of a mirror outweighs the loss of vision.
The same with these Lane Departure cameras. Losing a bit of vision is (arguably) outweighed by fitting theses devices.I haven’t seen anyone arguing that dash tables contribute anything to safety, in any way, so any loss of vision they cause is unjustifiable.
Realistically, a low shelf is gonna cause minimal dangers. But it’s easier to say “zero tolerance” rather than rely on judgments of individuals.
I see your point and I kind of agree with it. But it now looks like we’re removing mirrors and replacing them with cameras to increase drivers vision. Why block it again with a new piece of tech that in all honesty will probably get turned off by the driver anyway. We’re back to where we started.
Nite Owl:
Franglais:
The problem here is speaking of ‘absolutes’ when it’s all relative.Mirrors block vision on the front quarters. Therefore they are dangerous.
But a relatively greater danger would be to remove them and have both sides and rear invisible. (I’m ignoring cameras here).The thinking is that the added safety of a mirror outweighs the loss of vision.
The same with these Lane Departure cameras. Losing a bit of vision is (arguably) outweighed by fitting theses devices.I haven’t seen anyone arguing that dash tables contribute anything to safety, in any way, so any loss of vision they cause is unjustifiable.
Realistically, a low shelf is gonna cause minimal dangers. But it’s easier to say “zero tolerance” rather than rely on judgments of individuals.
I see your point and I kind of agree with it. But it now looks like we’re removing mirrors and replacing them with cameras to increase drivers vision. Why block it again with a new piece of tech that in all honesty will probably get turned off by the driver anyway. We’re back to where we started.
I’m certainly not saying the Lane Departure stuff is worth a light!
Just that it’s perceived benefit, makes it acceptable it to the powers that be.