3 ms·

> My driving lessons came with a booklet saying doing under 50 on such a road (in normal conditions) would be considered dangerous. Yes! A slow driver (under 5

> My driving lessons came with a booklet saying doing under 50 on such a road (in normal conditions) would be considered dangerous. Yes! A slow driver (under 50) can cause very high closing speeds for drivers who aren't paying attention. A likely accident scenario could be a driver who tailgates a white van that is itself closing fast on the slow vehicle, blocking the view of the tailgater (all are in the inside lane). If the van makes a late overtaking manoeuvre (to avoid the slow vehicle) rather than smoothly braking, the tailgater has very little time to react, and depending on traffic density, might not themselves be able to change lanes. I saw this exact situation happen a few days ago. I was in lane 2 about 100m further back down the road. The van changed lanes at the last possible moment. The tailgater slammed on his brakes and came very close to shunting the slow vehicle. Luckily there was no-one behind him so a braking wave didn't propagate back down the lane.

iso1631 5y ago
Funny how you'd blame the slow driver rather than the driver not paying attention and/or tailgating. What if the "slow driver" was a normal driver who just got a puncture and was slowing down?
- ceh123 5y ago
  If the slow driver is fully capable of driving a normal speed and makes the choice to drive well below the speed limit, they are making a choice that directly increases the probability of an accident (regardless of if they are involved in the actual accident or not). If the slow car has an issue that makes it so that they cannot go any faster they should be putting their hazards on and slowing down, in which case it would be the drivers who are not paying attention's fault. Really in both cases the drivers not paying attention share some of the blame, but in the first case the slow driver is also being irresponsible.
- KineticLensman 5y ago
  Just to be clear, I didn't assign blame when describing my little scenario. The slow driver is creating an avoidable problem that increases the impact of the poor driving behaviours exhibited by the other drivers (going too fast, too close). All three are doing at least one thing wrong.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >What if the "slow driver" was a normal driver who just got a puncture and was slowing down? Then they'd have a good excuse. Same with the shitbox running on 3cyl. Same with the concrete truck that pretty much has to drive under the prevailing speed uphill because it's so slow. To voluntarily create a hazard when you can "just not" by behaving like everyone else (which is not exactly an activity that requires a lot of cognitive thought) is simply asinine.
- wildrhythms 5y ago
  The difference is that the impaired driver is a preventable hazard; the puncture is sudden and unexpected. The actual issue is the lack of accessible public transportation that perpetuates the need for a person with some impairment to continue driving a vehicle.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
I wish. Unfortunately the moron causing the hazard almost never gets caught up in the resulting accident like you describe. What happens is you wind up with a merge (and all the shenanigans that causes) behind the blockage and given a long enough duration you eventually run into the case someone doesn't check their mirrors/blind spot and hits someone who's not on their A-game because there's no exit there and they're not expecting the person to merge there.

iso1631 5y ago

Funny how you'd blame the slow driver rather than the driver not paying attention and/or tailgating. What if the "slow driver" was a normal driver who just got a puncture and was slowing down?

ceh123 5y ago
If the slow driver is fully capable of driving a normal speed and makes the choice to drive well below the speed limit, they are making a choice that directly increases the probability of an accident (regardless of if they are involved in the actual accident or not). If the slow car has an issue that makes it so that they cannot go any faster they should be putting their hazards on and slowing down, in which case it would be the drivers who are not paying attention's fault. Really in both cases the drivers not paying attention share some of the blame, but in the first case the slow driver is also being irresponsible.
KineticLensman 5y ago
Just to be clear, I didn't assign blame when describing my little scenario. The slow driver is creating an avoidable problem that increases the impact of the poor driving behaviours exhibited by the other drivers (going too fast, too close). All three are doing at least one thing wrong.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>What if the "slow driver" was a normal driver who just got a puncture and was slowing down? Then they'd have a good excuse. Same with the shitbox running on 3cyl. Same with the concrete truck that pretty much has to drive under the prevailing speed uphill because it's so slow. To voluntarily create a hazard when you can "just not" by behaving like everyone else (which is not exactly an activity that requires a lot of cognitive thought) is simply asinine.
wildrhythms 5y ago
The difference is that the impaired driver is a preventable hazard; the puncture is sudden and unexpected. The actual issue is the lack of accessible public transportation that perpetuates the need for a person with some impairment to continue driving a vehicle.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

I wish. Unfortunately the moron causing the hazard almost never gets caught up in the resulting accident like you describe. What happens is you wind up with a merge (and all the shenanigans that causes) behind the blockage and given a long enough duration you eventually run into the case someone doesn't check their mirrors/blind spot and hits someone who's not on their A-game because there's no exit there and they're not expecting the person to merge there.