Police interceptors & lorry driver camera

[carryfast]

mickyblue:
one second, or maybe a second half gap behind the truck in front. BUT, how are they to blame if the car driver decides to pull in front of a truck when it must of been clear to him that he wouldn’t make it before he even had a think about it.

Curryfart. I can drive and i DO stay back futher then that truck in the video, and i am also not stupid as your trying to make me out to be.

I drive 5 days a week in a P280 Scania rigid 6 wheeler 52mph max.

You have it fixed in your head that the trucks are to blame. We will go around in circles and won’t agree. You will also just drag this topic out for a further 10 pages as you do. Enjoy

I’ll try again.The car driver is to blame.However the truck driver is ‘also’ to blame because the truck driver should have anticipated exactly that scenario of traffic needing to merge between the two trucks ahead and not only hadn’t left sufficient speration distance to allow for that but also didn’t allow sufficient speration distance for an emergency stop situation by the truck ahead for whatever reason.

Therefore as I see it the video is no different to some muppet posting a video of a similar type of collision,involving a car travelling in lane 1,approaching a motorway entry slip road at 165 mph.By your logic the resulting accident would still be the result of the driver on the entry slip road who crossed the give way line not the driver who approached the entry slip road at 165 mph just relying on the right of way provided by being on the road with priority to prevent the resulting inevitable collision.

By the way what if it was a drunk driver who was on the motorway having hit someone who failed to give way at a motorway entry slip road.Maybe you’ll get some idea now of how I view muppets who tail gate especially when the tossers do it on the approach to entry slip roads.

[mickyblue]

Carryfast:
Therefore as I see it the video is no different to some muppet posting a video of a similar type of collision,involving a car travelling in lane 1,approaching a motorway entry slip road at 165 mph.By your logic the resulting accident would still be the result of the driver on the entry slip road who crossed the give way line not the driver who approached the entry slip road at 165 mph just relying on the right of way provided by being on the road with priority to prevent the resulting inevitable collision.

Please don’t compare my thinking from this topic to another video that i haven’t seen. Once again thank you

[farnboroughboy11]

mickyblue:
one second, or maybe a second half gap behind the truck in front. BUT, how are they to blame if the car driver decides to pull in front of a truck when it must of been clear to him that he wouldn’t make it before he even had a think about it.

Curryfart. I can drive and i DO stay back futher then that truck in the video, and i am also not stupid as your trying to make me out to be.

I drive 5 days a week in a P280 Scania rigid 6 wheeler 52mph max.

You have it fixed in your head that the trucks are to blame. We will go around in circles and won’t agree. You will also just drag this topic out for a further 10 pages as you do. Enjoy

Although having said that if I’ve read it right it’s not clear wether you’ve actually driven a truck ( and certainly obviously not doing around 2,000 miles per week for around 15 years mostly on motorways with a safe record ) anyway in those few years since you passed your bike test.

I do runs in areas, for example i go to Harlow for the day and do 16 drops and head back. Do in total 5-6 hours driving and go home after a 10-11 hour day. I am a day driver not a tramper so why would i be doing 2,000 miles a day?

As you can see below is information you could look at.

Don’t bother trying to justify yourself, you will never win. We are just bad drivers, you, because you haven’t driven 2000 miles a week for 15 years, and me, because I “block people in”

[mickyblue]

So true my fellow bad driver. I will carry on sitting behind the truck in front with a half a second gap (that’s if i am able to keep up doing 52mph) and flash and hopefully block them in. We might even work as a tag team doing it

[carryfast]

mickyblue:

Carryfast:
Therefore as I see it the video is no different to some muppet posting a video of a similar type of collision,involving a car travelling in lane 1,approaching a motorway entry slip road at 165 mph.By your logic the resulting accident would still be the result of the driver on the entry slip road who crossed the give way line not the driver who approached the entry slip road at 165 mph just relying on the right of way provided by being on the road with priority to prevent the resulting inevitable collision.

Please don’t compare my thinking from this topic to another video that i haven’t seen. Once again thank you

I meant that as a hypothetical scenario to show that it is possible for the idea of having the priority meaning zb all depending on other aggravating factors.No surprise though that the biker mentality would have issues in regards to priority not being seen as everything,considering that it isn’t unknown for bikers to get involved in an accident caused by someone pulling out across a give way line in front of a bike.Which was being driven approaching the hazard at well over 100 mph with it’s rider relying on having the priority to save them from the inevitable.

Seems to me that it was a similar mentality to that which the truck driver in the video was using.Which just leaves the inconsistency between your ideas,concerning having a so called ‘defencive driving outlook’ while at the same time defending the truck driver’s standard of driving as shown in the video .

[carryfast]

mickyblue:
So true my fellow bad driver. I will carry on sitting behind the truck in front with a half a second gap (that’s if i am able to keep up doing 52mph) and flash and hopefully block them in. We might even work as a tag team doing it

Yeah right and maybe next time it will be a Romanian truck on the entry slip road instead of a Micra.

[mickyblue]

Carryfast:

mickyblue:

Carryfast:
Therefore as I see it the video is no different to some muppet posting a video of a similar type of collision,involving a car travelling in lane 1,approaching a motorway entry slip road at 165 mph.By your logic the resulting accident would still be the result of the driver on the entry slip road who crossed the give way line not the driver who approached the entry slip road at 165 mph just relying on the right of way provided by being on the road with priority to prevent the resulting inevitable collision.

Please don’t compare my thinking from this topic to another video that i haven’t seen. Once again thank you

I meant that as a hypothetical scenario to show that it is possible for the idea of having the priority meaning zb all depending on other aggravating factors.No surprise though that the biker mentality would have issues in regards to priority not being seen as everything,considering that it isn’t unknown for bikers to get involved in an accident caused by someone pulling out across a give way line in front of a bike.Which was being driven approaching the hazard at well over 100 mph with it’s rider relying on having the priority to save them from the inevitable.

Seems to me that it was a similar mentality to that which the truck driver in the video was using.Which just leaves the inconsistency between your ideas,concerning having a so called ‘defencive driving outlook’ while at the same time defending the truck driver’s standard of driving as shown in the video .

This will smash your little thinking. I ride a 125cc that can only do 65 MPH. I ride in a safe manner as i know i have no BOX around me to save my life. once again your posting a post to get a reaction and another reply to drag this topic on further.

As it has been stated before you better get some toilet roll and use it to wipe your mouth as it is full of some brown stuff that is coming out of it

[carryfast]

mickyblue:

Carryfast:

mickyblue:

Carryfast:
Therefore as I see it the video is no different to some muppet posting a video of a similar type of collision,involving a car travelling in lane 1,approaching a motorway entry slip road at 165 mph.By your logic the resulting accident would still be the result of the driver on the entry slip road who crossed the give way line not the driver who approached the entry slip road at 165 mph just relying on the right of way provided by being on the road with priority to prevent the resulting inevitable collision.

Please don’t compare my thinking from this topic to another video that i haven’t seen. Once again thank you

I meant that as a hypothetical scenario to show that it is possible for the idea of having the priority meaning zb all depending on other aggravating factors.No surprise though that the biker mentality would have issues in regards to priority not being seen as everything,considering that it isn’t unknown for bikers to get involved in an accident caused by someone pulling out across a give way line in front of a bike.Which was being driven approaching the hazard at well over 100 mph with it’s rider relying on having the priority to save them from the inevitable.

Seems to me that it was a similar mentality to that which the truck driver in the video was using.Which just leaves the inconsistency between your ideas,concerning having a so called ‘defencive driving outlook’ while at the same time defending the truck driver’s standard of driving as shown in the video .

This will smash your little thinking. I ride a 125cc that can only do 65 MPH. I ride in a safe manner as i know i have no BOX around me to save my life. once again your posting a post to get a reaction and another reply to drag this topic on further.

As it has been stated before you better get some toilet roll and use it to wipe your mouth as it is full of some brown stuff that is coming out of it

Many bikers have that biker mentality that having the priority means everything from the time they start riding mopeds.

But it was that inconsistency between having a so called ‘defencive’ driving outlook,while at the same time supporting the actions of the truck driver in the video,that I was mostly referring to.Considering that those actions fell short of what would have been required of a learner driver at the driver instruction stage .Which,as I’ve said,is more an indictment of recent driver training and examination standards.

[roadsrat]

mickyblue:

RoadsRat:

mickyblue:

RoadsRat:

mickyblue:
So the Lorry drivers are not at fault at all. It was the muppet driving the car who is to blame for that as he didn’t think or use his head whilst driving and joining a busy motorway.

Didn’t they teach you any roads stuff at PCSO school?

Yes the car driver is to blame but the truck driver must also share some blame. He made no attempt to stop it from happening, something I’d expect a professional driver to do.

Firstly little fella, get with the times. Secondly, PCSO school, what is one of those, saying that when i was a PC they didn’t have a school either.

Right back on topic.

I can picture it. The lorry driver might of been watching the slip road as he was driving. Due to the speed, and the distance to the end of the slip road he might of noticed the dippy car driver sitting near to the back of his trailer wheels and thought he wouldn’t try it. So he then set his eyes on driving forward. little bit later the numpty car driver sneaks up the inside into his blind spot and attempts to squeeze in to a gap and comes out worse.

The car driver could of hung back and planned his route better, but like all car drivers they, never look past there bonnet.

By the way, your not Robk under a different name are you. Sort of have the same posting styles.

I’ve been lurking for a few years. You were a PCSO who failed to make it as a PC. Your police advice on motoring matters has provided me with much hilarity.

a few months ago mickyblue:
I will admit, i didn’t make the standard required of a copper, but i did meet the standard as a PCSO, which i regret leaving the role.

I bow down to your superior knowledge.

No, not “RobK”.

Police advice on traffic, i am giving it as a driver. The car driver should of gave in and slipped in behind him, but no he attempts to get in front like a prat. End off!

I’ve been driving since 2004 when i passed my test (Not for a living but have done some millage) We all know how to drive and we all do it differently to others around us. I drive defensively maybe that is because i ride a motorcycle. if i was that car i would have slipped behind the truck and then went in to lane 2 and went on my merry way. So this is advice as a DRIVER not police. Don’t know why you think that as i have been out of the job for 6 months, maybe your just trolling for reactions, who knows.

al to be blunt i don’t care what you think about how i did in my last job, but i would love to see how you could do it though Mr hero. (Waiting for a hero reply)

If your not “Robk” why are you hiding behind a name then?

Re police advice on traffic. I wasn’t talking about this topic, but the incorrect advice you’ve been posting over the past year or so in your role of PCSO.

So you were never really a PC, despite claiming a few hours ago you were?

So you’ve been driving since 94, and some how you’re some expert? Just for clarity, I passed my test in the 80’s. I’ve since completed both military and police advanced driving courses, so don’t you lecture me.

To be perfectly honest, I don’t care how you did your last job, other than you were just a PCSO and very briefly a PC.

You want to know how I could do your old job? Er, I’m a police officer in a Roads Policing Unit. You know, someone who deals with roads policing matters and not a PCSO who put out cones, stood guarding crime scenes or drank tea with pensioners. I have no idea why you’ve got this big opinion of yourself?

I’m not hiding behind any name. Where does it state I have to give my full name? Perhaps if you were smart enough, you’d have done the same.

[mickyblue]

Re police advice on traffic. I wasn’t talking about this topic, but the incorrect advice you’ve been posting over the past year or so in your role of PCSO.

eh? not everyone can be perfect

So were never really a PC, despite claiming a few hours ago you were?

Like to see the topic where i claimed i was a PC?

So you’ve been driving since 94, and some how you’re some expert? Just for clarity, I passed my test in the 80’s. I’ve since completed both military and police advanced driving courses, so don’t you lecture me.

I am laughing my back side of to this but i think this might be a typo but i have been driving since 04, and yes that doesn’t make me perfect at all. And since when have i ever lectured you about anything a part from this topic that the civic driver is a prat?

You want to know how I could do your old job? Er, I’m a police officer in a Roads Policing Unit. You know, someone who deals with roads policing matters and not a PCSO who put out cones, stood guarding crime scenes or drank tea with pensioners. I have no idea why you’ve got this big opinion of yourself?

I don’t care what you do to be honest. Yeah your a copper in dealing with incidents on motorways etc etc etc . I also have no big opinion about myself at all. To be honest i am glad i don’t work for the police, i feel free, so good luck with it. I think me becoming a PC and leaving after a short period done me a favor. I am now a better person, Not saying it makes you a ■■■■ person, but the job is for a certain person in life and it wasn’t for me in the end.

[pete_the_post]

mickyblue:

RoadsRat:

mickyblue:

RoadsRat:

mickyblue:
So the Lorry drivers are not at fault at all. It was the muppet driving the car who is to blame for that as he didn’t think or use his head whilst driving and joining a busy motorway.

Didn’t they teach you any roads stuff at PCSO school?

Yes the car driver is to blame but the truck driver must also share some blame. He made no attempt to stop it from happening, something I’d expect a professional driver to do.

Firstly little fella, get with the times. Secondly, PCSO school, what is one of those, saying that when i was a PC they didn’t have a school either.

Right back on topic.

I can picture it. The lorry driver might of been watching the slip road as he was driving. Due to the speed, and the distance to the end of the slip road he might of noticed the dippy car driver sitting near to the back of his trailer wheels and thought he wouldn’t try it. So he then set his eyes on driving forward. little bit later the numpty car driver sneaks up the inside into his blind spot and attempts to squeeze in to a gap and comes out worse.

The car driver could of hung back and planned his route better, but like all car drivers they, never look past there bonnet.

By the way, your not Robk under a different name are you. Sort of have the same posting styles.

I’ve been lurking for a few years. You were a PCSO who failed to make it as a PC. Your police advice on motoring matters has provided me with much hilarity.

a few months ago mickyblue:
I will admit, i didn’t make the standard required of a copper, but i did meet the standard as a PCSO, which i regret leaving the role.

I bow down to your superior knowledge.

No, not “RobK”.

Police advice on traffic, i am giving it as a driver. The car driver should of gave in and slipped in behind him, but no he attempts to get in front like a prat. End off!

I’ve been driving since 2004 when i passed my test (Not for a living but have done some millage) We all know how to drive and we all do it differently to others around us. I drive defensively maybe that is because i ride a motorcycle. if i was that car i would have slipped behind the truck and then went in to lane 2 and went on my merry way. So this is advice as a DRIVER not police. Don’t know why you think that as i have been out of the job for 6 months, maybe your just trolling for reactions, who knows.

al to be blunt i don’t care what you think about how i did in my last job, but i would love to see how you could do it though Mr hero. (Waiting for a hero reply)

If your not “Robk” why are you hiding behind a name then?

Definitely robk, who else would trawl back through months of posts just to make a (petty) point and prove they know how forums work, sure beats driving a truck for a living I suppose

[mickyblue]

From reading RoadRats post i can say that i am 90% sure he is not Robk. There to informative to be Robk

[waynedl]

In the OP, I get vehicles like that all the time on the A5 roundabout where it meets the M6 Toll
maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&ll … 19,0,7.08
Clearly states to use the outside lane for the A5, so you use that lane, lost of vehicles including many HGV’s use the middle lane and the middle lane is a more natural lane to go into the correct lane on the roundabout leaving the person in the correct (outside) lane to ‘merge’ into the correct lane on the roundabout.
Press the forward arrow a few times on the above link and you’ll see what I mean.
The same is true on ‘Denton Island’ where the M60 meets the M67, heading from Stockport direction, the outside lane only for the M67, but on the roundabout people just barge across, which resulted in my truck being bullied by a Picasso a few years back, I’d eased off because I knew what happens there, and a vehicle went in front of me, no probs until crash a Picasso tried pushing the truck out of the way
Bad road planning is sometimes partly to blame in my opinion, both of the above examples could easily use the lanes that people do anyway and things would progress smoother than they currently do.

Other vid…
Why did the civic come down the right hand lane of that slip road? The left lane was longer, making it easier to find a space (well, in fact it became it’s own lane, even better) and build speed up etc.
Why did the civic choose to drive into a truck rather than go over a white line, seriously, it might be illegal, but it sure beats driving into a truck

I’m not in the mood for 2nd guessing the truck driver, he may be a little close, but we all end up in that position at times, ready to overtake or on the start of an uphill and the truck in front that overtook you 30 seconds ago has just lost 10mph or whatever.
The car driver was a complete muppet

[roadsrat]

Again, I’m not “RobK”.

I ask the mods/admins to do their behind the scenes magic and put an end to this paranoia.

[tonka236]

RoadsRat:
Again, I’m not “RobK”.

I ask the mods/admins to do their behind the scenes magic and put an end to this paranoia.

If this is being implied…

But doesnt a (I stand to be corrected like always) computer and a mobile phone give two different sets of ISP data? So as such it wouldnt show up as being the same account?

Like i say, i stand to be corrected by the superior fellow members on here!

ETA: due to dog walking across the board!

[roadsrat]

tonka236:

RoadsRat:
Again, I’m not “RobK”.

I ask the mods/admins to do their behind the scenes magic and put an end to this paranoia.

If this is being implied…

But doesnt a (I stand to be corrected like always) computer and a mobile phone give two different sets of ISP data? So as such it wouldnt show up as being the same account?

Like i say, i stand to be corrected by the superior fellow members on here!

ETA: due to dog walking across the board!

Yes, two different IP addresses.

But admins can check if my IP address has ever been used to login here. They can also trace my IP address and a few other checks.

[dew]

And the last 4 pages relate to the video in the opening post how■■?

[mickyblue]

dew:
And the last 4 pages relate to the video in the opening post how■■?

blame curryfart

Trust me and i put my neck out, he is not Robk.

[carryfast]

mickyblue:

dew:
And the last 4 pages relate to the video in the opening post how■■?

blame curryfart

Not me.It was actually Diesel Dog who posted the second video.All the arguments that followed seem to be all about support for and against an obvious case of careless driving and driving without consideration for other road users in the case of the muppet tail gating truck driver in that video v the idiot car driver who tried to fit a car into the resulting non existent gap.

Assuming that RoadRats is really a copper that just leaves the question as to why the law haven’t decided to sort out the truck driver using the video evidence in just the same way as if it had been a video of someone approaching the entry slip road at 165 mph and blaming the resulting crash on the driver who failed to give way .

As for yourself your comments just seem to confirm my ideas that both I and probably RoadRats,assuming that he’s an advanced police driver with experience going back to the 1980’s,haven’t got anything to learn from someone who passed their test in 2004 and their LGV class 2 on 30/10/11 and who’s experience of driving trucks,so far,seems to be mainly local multi drop.In which case it’s no surprise that knowing what the safety and survival of all concerned takes,over years of long distance trunking on motorways,would be a bit of a surprise to you.

Although having said that it just leaves the question as to driver training and examination standards being that all drivers should be prepared with those basic driving skills from the start of their training.Which obviously isn’t happening in view of the video in question and many of the comments on here in support of the standard of driving shown by the truck driver in that video.

[roadsrat]

Carryfast:
Assuming that RoadRats is really a copper that just leaves the question as to why the law haven’t decided to sort out the truck driver using the video evidence in just the same way as if it had been a video of someone approaching the entry slip road at 165 mph and blaming the resulting crash on the driver who failed to give way .

We don’t know if the police were ever involved or not.

If no offence has been committed and there was no death and/or injury, there’s no need for police intervention.