Maxwell Straker

Right...speed limits.....

These are in place to indicate the maximum speed that you can proceed along a given piece of road. Whether it is 60 or 70mph is irrelevant you must drive according to the conditions, a 70mph limit does not give you the right to drive at 70....because thats what the sign says.

What I am getting at is that the speed limit past a school is probably 30mph but you would have to be a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic to exercise your right to do 30mph at 3pm.

It has been said 20million zillion times before on here, appropriate speed is what is required not a speed limit.

On traffic lights surely it is good sense to approach all traffic lights with the expectation that you will be required to stop, not slam the brakes on or press the loud pedal when a light changes.

As John so correctly pointed out the highway code, in most cases, is guidance only and not a manual on how to drive.....i.e. if I stick my foot out of the door and use my shoe on the road I can achieve their braking distances.

sunilp

Some SIDC exceptions,

Dave T-S doesnt speed at all outside skool, he stops to pick up young girls ,

Danny Fisher stops to pick up young boys

I speed past at 3pm becoz i thought skool finished at 3.30pm?

Sunil

SimonM

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Fosters:
<B>Isn't that still technically a dual (2)carriageway (driving lanes)?[/quote]

err... No!

A carrigeway is classed as a raod that has lanes going both ways, i.e. from kerb to kerb.

So if the road only has two kerbs, then it is a single carrigeway, no matter how many 'lanes' it has.

SimonM

Stef

John.
You initially said "Seriously, in law, amber means stop if it is safe to do so, it does not mean stop."
The highway code says...
151. You MUST stop behind the white 'Stop' line across your side of the road unless the light is green.
Therefore, amber means stop. No?
Granted, it does also say "If the amber light appears you may go on only if you are so close to it that to stop might cause an accident", but in my book that does not mean "....amber means stop if it is safe to do so...".
Awaiting further debate....

Stef.

Robertio

iTrader: (1)

Sorry Stef, I'm with John on this one, it is only safe to stop if it is not going to cause an accident, therefore it does not mean stop, any more than it means go.
Not sure how it works when the person behind you should have been able to stop easily, but because the light was amber they decided to accelerate up to 2 feet behind your bumper at the same moment as you started to brake, Rover 216 you know who you are. If he had made contact (stopped approx 2 inches away)would I have been at fault because I stopped at an amber light when it was not safe to do so, despite the fact it clearly should have been?

johnfelstead

stef, stop being a muppet OK!

you cant take half a paragraph that suits you and ignore the remainder that doesnt.

Amber does not mean stop, period, if it did there would be no need for an amber light, we would just have red and green, maybe thats what some people only have the mental capacity to deal with, a yes/no answer and not a maybe!

johnfelstead

Robertio, i asked a friendly copper last night about the painted arrows question.

There is nothing in the RTA to cover these, can you believe that! As far as he is concerned they are for advise only and not an order.

They have to be backed up by road signs to be an order and are just suplementary info to the road signs. If there are no road signs, just painted arrows then you can ignore them.

Robertio

iTrader: (1)

Cheers John, that should chop about 2 minutes off my journey to work (and stop me cursing at those people who just ignore them )