Stick to The Left - vehicle travel.

nuno on 25/12/2018 - 08:14
Last edited 25/12/2018 - 10:32

Merry Christmas All,

if you're travelling by car this festive season and embarking on some long journeys on the Queens highways, please remember to stick to the left as soon as you've overtaken the vehicle in front.

Do not hog the right hand lane until your car which is travelling a mere 2km/h faster and takes 3-5 minutes to overtake. This creates an unsafe condition for yourself and the car next to you by removing buffers.

Speed up, create the safe buffer for a lead in and pull back into the LEFT lane. This should be done in a matter of seconds, not minutes.

Safe travels.

Travel

Comments

- - max900 on 28/12/2018 - 11:53
    
    +2
    
    I don't randomly throw around figures and i have dashcam footage to back this up if you insist. I have seen as low as 67km/h on 100km limit. It is on single lane rural freeway where you can only overtake on broken line with good visibility ahead of you. You can't overtake 3-5km/h on such short distance. You obviously lack experience and no idea what you are talking about.
    
    People who do excessively below the speed limit is a risk to everyone around them, have poor judgement and lack of experience.
    
    If people wants to do 103km on their speedo let them pass, not everyone has patience to follow behind them 20km.
    
    I usually don't mind doing 90-95km/h and let people pass because it is more fuel efficient.
  - TheBird on 29/12/2018 - 00:20
    
    +2
    
    I wish it hadn't been a daily experience for me for the last month. 4 lane, 110km/h zone, constantly having people driving 80km/h, occasionally slower. About twice a week, they're in the far right lane. Bloody SE Queenslanders.
    
    Some days you're better off driving in the far left lane so you can drive the speed limit.
    
    I wouldn't blame you for calling BS. I would too if I hadn't been living it over the last month. The world has gone mad.
    - bathuu on 29/12/2018 - 22:58
      
      And also they sit on all 4 lanes at same speed, blocking every lane.
- Baysew on 28/12/2018 - 11:58
  
  single lane freeway
  
  It is not a freeway, if you are talking about a single lane.
  - max900 on 28/12/2018 - 12:19
    
    My bad. It is highway with 100km limit.
bobwokeup on 26/12/2018 - 16:19

+2

Not just Christmas time you should always stay left unless you are passing traffic on the right. So many drivers that are oblivious to other people around them and they are the ones that cause accidents.

It’s usually foreigners or white trash that weren’t taught how to be considerate of others on the road. Saw a Driving Instructor without a student sitting in the right hand lane for ages. Passed him on the left doing the speed limit and it was an Indian guy driving, company name Ravi Driving School.
Morphio25 on 26/12/2018 - 16:49

I'll drive wherever I want…fight me if you don't like it.
- Zachary on 26/12/2018 - 17:45
  
  How about we all fight with a little race instead like REAL drivers?
DiscoJango on 26/12/2018 - 21:40

if im driving in reverse down the freeway, should i keep left, or right?
happirt on 26/12/2018 - 23:23

-8

i find it amusing how most people think the speed is a limit is the speed you have to be going.
its like saying you have to drive with 0.05% alcohol limit.

damn. its a limit.
- apptrack on 26/12/2018 - 23:45
  
  If the speed limits weren't so arbitrarily low, sure.
- Herbse on 26/12/2018 - 23:57
  
  No, it's actually the law.
  
  You can drive slower if the conditions call for it, otherwise driving abnormally slower than the speed limit is illegal
  
  —
  
  A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another driver or pedestrian. A driver is not considered to be unreasonably obstructing another road user if the driver is stopped in traffic; or if the driver is driving more slowly than the other vehicles (unless the driver is driving abnormally slow in the circumstances).
  
  The rules provide an example of a driver driving abnormally slow: “A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road to which a speed limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road”
  - rlay3 on 28/12/2018 - 14:11
    
    +1
    
    I remember there was a segment on current affair regarding this. A middle aged chap was insisting he was keeping the roads safer by driving no faster than 20km/h. The cops then pretty much told him what you said. He didn't understand haha.
syousef on 27/12/2018 - 09:30

+7

The attitude to speeding on this message board is a complete disgrace. Downvote me all you like. Because if you're the kind of idiot that thinks speeding is okay, I wouldn't be downvoting you if I could - I'd be collecting your licenses!

It takes one mistake to maim or kill you or someone else. It doesn't even need to be your own mistake. I'm not going into details but this is something I've had personal experience with less than a week ago and I'm glad my loved one is still alive and may make a full recovery.
- nuno on 27/12/2018 - 09:52
  
  -3
  
  Authorities impose a speed limit to cater for the lowest common denominators which includes :
  
  1) driver skill level
  2) road surface in combination with environmental conditions.
  3) vehicle capabilities.
  
  Take all above and come up with a maximum speed limit to impose in build up areas, arterials , state highways and national highways.
  
  It's not straightforward as people think.
  
  By no means exceed the speed limit but
  If you find yourself in a situation where you're overwhelmed by overtaking, merging , controlling the vehicles speed , maintaining a safe buffer around yourself, knowing your cars decellaration performance, reassess your situatuon and what you're doing wrong.
  Creating hazards on roads to compensate for your lack of skill and experience will not aid in your survival skills in the long run.
  - syousef on 28/12/2018 - 02:17
    
    +2
    
    More apologist nonsense for speeding.
    
    I didn't say that you should be panicked or incompetent aka being "overwhelmed by overtaking, merging , controlling the vehicles speed , maintaining a safe buffer around yourself, knowing your cars decellaration performance". When did I even mention those things?
    
    It is absolutely true that one mistake from someone else can kill you no matter how competent you are. e.g. You are travelling at or near the speed limit and someone suddenly turns into your path. That is EXACTLY what happened to a family member last week. Police are charging the driver that was at fault and not my family member. Thankfully it was only in a 60 zone and no speeding was involved or that family member would likely be dead. At 60 airbags deployed and both cars were written off.
- Kamsi on 29/12/2018 - 00:15
  
  No one really saying speed doesn't kill, we're talking about hoarding the right lane and if not able to overtake then move out the way so someone else can. Stopping making excuses I'm not going to speed because speed kills. If you hoarding the right lane you're in my book a selfish p***k.
  - syousef on 29/12/2018 - 07:19
    
    -1
    
    Who the hell said I was hogging the right lane? If this is your assumption the moment I mention speeding I'd say it's a case of the lady doth protest too much. If you are intentionally speeding hand in your damn license.
  - Baysew on 29/12/2018 - 11:15
    
    No one really saying speed doesn't kill
    
    Third_Gear on 25/12/2018 - 10:02 Speed doesn’t kill
    
    EightImmortals on 25/12/2018 - 09:47 Speed does not kill.
    - rlay3 on 29/12/2018 - 13:30
      
      +1
      
      Lol was about to say, that's all I've been reading
ozeebee on 27/12/2018 - 09:57

+1

Dear Self Entitled Right Lane Hoggers,

Please be kind and stay on the left lane whenever possible.
Otherwise another fantastic option for you would be to catch a train.

Thank you kindly,
The rest of society
cloudy on 27/12/2018 - 10:13

+5

Driving yesterday I saw two cars run red lights within minutes. Both cars were not hoons speeding past, so I suspect they were not familiar with the roads and distracted by something without noticing the lights.

My conclusion is many drivers are out and about, and being not familiar means they may speed, they may go under the limit, the may not be in the lane they want, they may get into the fast ending lane and need to merge into you (which seems like one of those que jumpers), they may brake suddenly without care of cars behind, they may run reds accidentally.

Some of those behaviours are inconsiderate, some are innocent mistakes like believing it’s a 70 road and not noticing it went to 80 so the cars behind are on their tail trying to pass.

Let’s all just have some patience and not assume everyone is an arse on the road. Some people are definitely arses, but you can’t assume everyone that does something annoying (to you) is one.
Bid Sniper on 27/12/2018 - 11:29

+2

This is why we can't have nice things.
DiscoJango on 27/12/2018 - 11:43

-6

beware the asian female in the toyota camry, for she knows not what road rules are.
- ozeebee on 27/12/2018 - 12:19
  
  TBH its male and female of all nationality. When you see a sudden slow down or some unexplained traffic, there's usually a Camry up ahead causing it.
  - DiscoJango on 27/12/2018 - 14:33
    
    -5
    
    the asian females in camries have downvoted us sir. lets upvote each other, show them whos boss.
swapsey on 27/12/2018 - 13:14

+3

I asked a friend why they were in the right lane while not overtaking and she was a true OB with her answer - the road is smoother cause it's less used in right lane and therefore she saves on tyre wear and tear!

I kid u not.
- whooah1979 on 27/12/2018 - 13:50
  
  +2
  
  She is right. Right lanes are often in better condition. They also have less oil and debris.
cno81 on 27/12/2018 - 13:44

+2

Couldn't agree more but I don't see how anything will change!

I only drive in Sydney but it seems madness that the majority of arterial roads have a clear-way policy at all, this has to contribute in part to the very obvious left-hand lane avoidance. I've been caught out a few times on the almost blind left-hand bend on the Hume Highway/The Boulevard area where some idiot has parked his truck during the clear way hours, so naturally that makes you think twice. Then because the majority are sitting in the right two lanes, the left hand lane is used by wanna-be racers undertaking - at significant speed, which is obviously crazily dangerous. I learned to drive in the UK, you move over left as soon as you can, always, without fail. Undertaking is a cardinal sin, over here it's national sport. It's taken years to get used to the low speed limits but I've come to the conclusion they are sensible and fair given the conditions and average standards of driving.
- ankor on 29/12/2018 - 13:26
  
  Driving around the Gold Coast, Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast, I am amazed by the number of red and green P platers going ~10-15km over the posted speed, overtaking, undertaking and whatnot. I can see why insurance premiums for people under 25 are skyhigh in some locales.
zathras on 27/12/2018 - 14:07

+1

"I drive really slow in the ultra fast lane
While people behind me are going insane… I'm an assho…"

Dennis Leary
Findo on 27/12/2018 - 15:02

I’m always overtaking because I’m speeding, can I stay in the right lane?
- LFO on 27/12/2018 - 23:06
  
  -2
  
  No.
Kranbone on 27/12/2018 - 21:03

In Germany, people are considerate and let you through on the left lane (their left lane is the fast lane).

Also, their roads are much nicer (very smooth and clean).
- LFO on 27/12/2018 - 23:06
  
  That is because they mainly speak German.
- Sage on 29/12/2018 - 05:17
  
  go on GerBargain then
LFO on 27/12/2018 - 23:05

-1

KEEP LEFT.

But remember, left is left of the ENTIRE motorway width, not just left of the overtaking or fast or right lane.
Left, far left.

Ain't hard.
- spaceflight on 28/12/2018 - 12:23
  
  +2
  
  The keep left unless overtaking rules only applies to the very right lane.
achew on 28/12/2018 - 03:48

+1

OP - unsafe to expect ol' matey potatey to overtake, exceed the speed limit to make the safety distance, and then race into the left hand lane to satisfy tailing-driver's anxiety issues. Also pays to bear in mind that no-one's speedometer is ever correct after the vehicle leaves the production line. Calibration occurs only once, recalibration.. never?

Better safe than sorry, better right-lane than crushed.

achew
'scuse me
swilso on 28/12/2018 - 07:22

+1

Patience is the biggest virtue for all parties. Amazing that we even have this discussion. If someone is illegally sitting in the right lane causing you such an inconvenience would it not be a better option to pull over when safe and call the local police station, as many have said it is illegal. Taking to the internet (and those intelligent folk on social media) is not going to provide a solution to your problem.
lltravel on 28/12/2018 - 09:18

+1

here come all the driving experts that think they are good drivers but in reality, they are the ones that cause traffic jams and bottlenecks.
Speed doesn't kill, idiots that don't know how to control their car at excessive speeds kill people.
- swilso on 28/12/2018 - 10:00
  
  +2
  
  “Alcohol doesn't kill, idiots that don't know how to control their bodies at excessive consumption kill people.” - not the best analogy. Speed DOES kill.
  Except…. objects, other drivers, weather, road abnormalities, fluid spills, pedestrians, children, animals, fatigue, distractions, vehicle maintenance, vehicle failure, ‘popped’ tyre and of course ego and many many others….. are all the things you have minimal control over when driving that might bite you in the arse no matter how much Gran Turismo you play.
  - lltravel on 28/12/2018 - 11:29
    
    something that impairs your ability vs driving skills? Geez that makes sense. Your logic is flawed.
    - swilso on 28/12/2018 - 18:50
      
      +1
      
      Says the user blindly stating that speed does not kill? If you believe your ‘skills’ will get you out of every situation on the road you’re kidding yourself. But hey, that worked out well for Peter Brock why not you?
- spaceflight on 28/12/2018 - 12:27
  
  +3
  
  Of course speed kills. To say it doesn't is idiotic.
  
  If speed did not kill then the need for things like crumple zones, airbags (which only deploy when the force of impact is greater than hitting a solid wall at a speed greater than 25 km/h) and seatbelts wouldn't be there
  
  Speed is the leading behavioural factor in car related death, the major contributory factor to the severity of a crash and an aggravating factor in the severity of all crashes
  
  Put simply the faster you go, the more likely you are to crash and the greater your risk of serious injury or death.
  - zathras on 28/12/2018 - 14:56
    
    -3
    
    Is is incorrect to say "speed kills". Speed alone will not kill.
    It is only a contributing factor in an accident, never a sole cause.
    
    Without another factor to cause a collision, speed alone will not kill anyone.
    I would posit that driver distraction is a LOT worse.
    
    I would rather be standing on the side of the road with a speeding driver approaching, than have a car coming at me with a non-speeding driver who is sending a text message.
    - spaceflight on 28/12/2018 - 15:07
      
      +1
      
      Is is incorrect to say "speed kills"
      
      No it isn't. Saying "only speed kills" is incorrect
      
      never a sole cause.
      
      It's the cause in around 5% of all crashes in the UK.
      If you look at fatal crashes then it is 29%
      
      speed alone will not kill anyone.
      
      No, sitting in a bubble doing a 1,000,000km/h will not kill you.
      
      But you'd have to live in a bubble to think that's what "speed kills" means.
      - zathras on 28/12/2018 - 16:33
        
        -1
        
        @spaceflight: Speed alone cannot cause one crash, let alone "5% of all crashes".
        It can only be a contributing factor.
        
        Do you also believe altitude is the cause of all aircraft crashes?
        
        spaceflight on 28/12/2018 - 16:49
        
        +1
        
        @zathras:
        
        It can only be a contributing factor.
        
        It can be the contributing factor.
        
        Sure in any car crash there is never going to be one and only one thing that caused the crash.
        
        If there are 500 crashes a year because peoples tyres fail and explode you dont say that those 500 accidents were only partially caused by the tyre exploding because the driver could have reacted differently, not run over the nail, swerved right instead of left, accelerated more, stopped faster, got new tyres last week etc.
        
        The cause of the accident is their tyre exploded.
        
        But that is all irrelevant because you're trying to use the cause of an accident to try and justify the outcome.
        Saying "speed kills" has nothing to do with the cause of an accident, it has to do with the outcome of an accident.
        
        Do you also believe altitude is the cause of all aircraft crashes?
        
        All airfract crashes? Where have I said speed causes all car crashes?
        
        zathras on 28/12/2018 - 18:08
        
        -1
        
        @spaceflight: Sorry, I think I confused you with the altitude comment.
        
        I was positing that altitude caused aircraft crashes in the same way that speed caused car crashes.
        My point was that neither altitude nor speed were the main cause of crashes, only contributing factors.
        
        I'll bypass your tyre failure comment because I doubt tyre failure (or mechanical failure in general) contribute to many crashes at all, and I'm unsure the point you are trying to make.
        
        I agree with the author of this article when he says that "a competent driver at 120 kilometres per hour is far less dangerous than an incompetent one at 80 kilometres per hour". It is notable that Sweden has the lowest international road death rate whilst having speed limits similar to Australia (but they also have very rigorous driver testing). Maybe all those Swedes are just somehow luckier than us?
        
        swilso on 28/12/2018 - 18:41
        
        @zathras: So with your logic if you’re a good driver you should be safe doing 150km/h through a 40km/h school zone….? The fact that when you take the road there are so many variables in play, a good driver would not speed because it creates much more room for human error, I think you’ve been playing too many video games.
        In saying that I bet there would be far more accidents on the road due to speeding than any simply because a person never merged left.
        
        zathras on 29/12/2018 - 00:47
        
        -1
        
        @swilso: I don't think the word logic means what you think it means.
        
        I have never advocated unsafe driving, 150 km/h in a school zone is absurd.
        A smart driver will drive at a safe speed for the conditions.
        I think even 40 km/h is unsafe when school kids are arriving or leaving school.
        25 km/h is much safer during those times of the day, when kids may unexpectedly run onto the road.
        But driving past a school at midnight is different, 50 km/h is more than slow enough to be safe at that time.
        An accident is likely to be caused by a kid not obeying the road rules, but speed would be a contributing factor during school hours.
        
        Safe driving is all about driving to the conditions.
        South Australia is ahead of the nation with our speed limits around schools.
        40 km/h school zone at all times of the day? That is silly.
        
        spaceflight on 28/12/2018 - 21:32
        
        @zathras:
        
        because I doubt tyre failure (or mechanical failure in general) contribute to many crashes at all
        
        I didn't say it did and it probably doesn't, just like altitude doesn't contribute to all plane crashes. I guess I confused you with my example too.
        
        If 30% of deaths and 5% of all crashes happened because of tyre failure would you say that "tyre failure alone cannot cause one crash"? If peoples tyre didn't fail then they wouldn't crash.
        
        As I said above speed is the cause in around 5% of all crashes in the UK and speed is the cause of 29% of fatal crashes (31% in Australia).
        
        Sure if it makes you feel better other things like rain, fog and fatigue also influenced the accidents but if one or more vehicles involved in the accident were not exceeding the speed limit/safe speed the crash would not have happened.
        
        400 people died last year on Australian due to accidents directly related to speed.
        Why don't you try telling their families that the reason their loved one is dead is not because of speed but because of the countless minor factors that contributed to but did not cause their loved one to die.
        
        TheBird on 29/12/2018 - 01:21
        
        @spaceflight:
        
        As I said above speed is the cause in around 5% of all crashes in the UK and speed is the cause of 29% of fatal crashes (31% in Australia).
        
        I submit that speed is the heart of 100% of all crashes and fatalities. If all vehicles that were involved in an accident were moving at 0km/h, all those accidents wouldn't happen. So, as stupid as the saying goes, speed does kill.
        
        But what's the point of vehicles that don't move?
        
        Wouldn't it be better to say excessive speed kills? But people still die while doing the speed limit and even if that wasn't the case, surely there's a difference between 1km/h over the limit and 50km/h over? Whatever right?
        
        400 people died last year on Australian due to accidents directly related to speed.
        Less people died in a 110 zone (or more) than anyone in a 50, 60, 70 to 90 or 100 zones. While this has nothing to do with speeding, it could be said that speed might not directly correlate to fatalities. I'm shocked by the number of fatalities in 40 zones.
        
        https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/rda/files/RDA_Dec_…
        
        "Young people are nearly twice as likely as older age groups to die in a traffic collision.
        
        People aged between 17 and 25 make up less than 13 per cent of the population but more than 26 per cent of road fatalities since 1989.
        
        The most common age to die on the roads is 18."
        
        Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-25/every-road-death-in-a…
        
        It's an interesting read. A combination of safer vehicle technology and a crack down on speeding, drink driving and other risky behavior has been responsibile for safer roads (per capita) than ever in history.
        
        spaceflight on 29/12/2018 - 16:42
        
        @TheBird:
        
        Wouldn't it be better to say excessive speed kills?
        
        Sure excessive speed (over the posted speed limit sign) kills, but increasing average speed kills more.
        
        As speed limits increase so do the number of deaths in car crashes.
        
        https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/roads-data-shows…
        
        zathras on 29/12/2018 - 01:33
        
        +1
        
        @spaceflight: A tyre failure whilst driving can be a catastrophic event, which can destabilise a vehicle to the point of causing the driver to lose control and possibly crash. Fatigue can make a driver fall asleep at the wheel and crash. Exceeding a speed limit by 10 % will not by itself cause a driver to lose control and crash. Higher speeds can contribute to a crash or increase the likelihood under some circumstances, but will not cause a crash without another contributing factor (most likely driver error).
        
        Removing bad drivers from the road would cut the road toll by a lot more than zealously policing minor speed infractions.
        In a 110 zone, if someone overtakes me doing 122 km/h in the right-hand lane of a dual-lane carriageway, I won't bat an eyelid.
        I consider that fine for the conditions.
        But I cringe when I see drivers texting, or pulling out into the path of another vehicle, or overtaking unsafely into oncoming traffic.
        Speed is not a murderer, but could be considered an accomplice.
        
        Also spacecadet, altitude does contribute to most plane crashes. Not many planes crash without leaving the ground.
        
        spaceflight on 29/12/2018 - 16:37
        
        +2
        
        @zathras:
        
        Higher speeds can contribute to a crash or increase the likelihood under some circumstances, but will not cause a crash
        
        But if it was not for speed the crash would not have occurred, speed is the cause of the crash.
        
        Your other factors like tyre failure become contributors to the crash.
        
        Removing bad drivers from the road would cut the road toll by a lot more than zealously policing minor speed infractions.
        
        Bad drivers like the ones who drive faster than they should?
        Because they are responsible for 31% of fatalities in Australia.
        
        In a 110 zone, if someone overtakes me doing 122 km/h in the right-hand lane of a dual-lane carriageway, I won't bat an eyelid.
        
        Except you should.
        
        Minor speeding has been found to be more dangerous to the community than excessive speeding. The cumulative effect of a small additional risk multiplied by a high number of drivers results in more casualty crashes, than the cumulative effect of a few drivers who speed by a large margin.
        
        Statistical modelling suggests that a 5% increase in average speed leads to an approximate 10% increase in crashes involving injury, and a 20% increase in those involving fatalities.
        
        During the 1970's energy crisis, the maximum speed limit was reduced across the USA from 70 mph (113 km/h) to 55 mph (89 m/h) and the NHTSA issued a report, pointing out that this reduction in maximum speed had resulted in 16.4 percent drop in fatalities. In 1987 the USA lifted the speed limit on rural interstates to 65mph (105 km/h), which led to 17% rise in fatalities.
        
        zathras on 02/01/2019 - 11:35
        
        -1
        
        @spaceflight: You just don't seem to understand, speed itself doesn't cause a crash without another factor.
        Yes it contributes to the severity of the crash, but it cannot be the sole cause.
        
        Read this article about road fatalities in South Australia.
        
        It mentions the causes of road fatalities over the last five years.
        Can you see what is missing? Speed. Speed does not cause crashes, it only amplifies them.
        
        spaceflight on 02/01/2019 - 14:57
        
        +1
        
        @zathras:
        
        speed itself doesn't cause a crash without another factor.
        
        As I said
        
        But if it was not for speed the crash would not have occurred, speed is the cause of the crash.
        Your other factors like tyre failure become contributors to the crash.
        
        It still doesn't change the original point that saying "Speed doesn't kill" is untrue.
        
        Speed kills, the statistics don't lie.
        
        zathras on 02/01/2019 - 21:43
        
        +1
        
        @spaceflight: You have it backwards. You obviously didn't read the RAA article I pointed out.
        A driver who falls asleep is guaranteed of crashing no matter the speed.
        A driver who speeds is not guaranteed to crash.
        
        I would rather share the roads with 100 alert drivers exceeding the speed limit by 10 km/h than 100 inattentive or fatigued drivers that are driving under the speed limit by 10 km/h.
        
        But suit yourself.
        
        nith265 on 03/01/2019 - 00:29
        
        @zathras:
        
        A driver who falls asleep is guaranteed of crashing no matter the speed.
        A driver who speeds is not guaranteed to crash.
        
        You appear to have conclusively proved that speeding isn’t the main issue
        
        Congratulations – this is the best example of circular reasoning I’ve ever ever read!
        
        nith265 on 08/01/2019 - 11:48
        
        @zathras:
        
        Can you see what is missing? Speed. Speed does not cause crashes, it only amplifies them.
        
        I’m sorry to comment late again when this thread has been dead for a few days but just reread this and it’s just such a great example misguided logic I had to chime in again.
        
        “Speed alone will not kill.” is much the same as “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people”
        
        The “logic” is that a gun (or speeding) is a morally neutral and not inherently dangerous unless in the hands of someone with evil intent (or crap at driving). Therefore why ban guns (or enforce speed limits) when the real issue is people.
        
        Furthermore if someone has evil intent (or they are a crap driver) they will always find a way to hurt people with a knife or other object (or with their poor driving skills). Therefore since there will always be a way to do harm we are wasting our time focusing on guns (or speeding)
        
        Most Australians view the US gun argument as childishly avoiding the obvious solution
        
        …Speed does not cause crashes, it only amplifies them.
        
        You are completely correct - thats the entire point and that is why there is such focus on it. You are also correct that it lacks subtly and that expert drivers with amazing skills such as your self are caught up in the wide protective net it casts.
        
        No matter the cause of an accident, add speed to the mix and you amplify the results (add guns to a populace… check out the death rate).
        
        Guns kill, Speed kills - they’re simplistic, unsophisticated propositions can be shown to be not as effective as the TAC marketing suggests. Doesn’t matter - enforcing speed limits has an amplifying safety effect across the community without having to tailor road laws to particular road conditions or driver (in)ability
Eeples on 28/12/2018 - 11:55

+5

Try and keep left is a good message; not tail gating ppl in the right hand lane is another good message.
LUTSlit on 28/12/2018 - 16:02

Be safe on the road guys
djmm on 28/12/2018 - 20:57

I drove 10k over the limit in 80kmh zone.
Still being tailgated and highbeamed. So I gave her the finger.

We're talking about 10kmh actual here.
- Eeples on 28/12/2018 - 21:20
  
  Even if the road you are on has 2 lanes you don't need to keep left unless the road is marked over 80km/hr or there is a 'keep left unless overtaking' sign. (in NSW). (Although it is polite to keep in the left lane, of course).
  
  In similar circumstances that you have described (when there is 1 lane) I slow down naturally to about 40km/hr or less (and if possible let them overtake me) because is it not safe to drive faster than 40km/hr if someone is tailgating me and highbeaming me. Then I keep my distance from them in case they decide to slam on their brakes once they pass me.
- spaceflight on 28/12/2018 - 21:46
  
  +1
  
  I drove 10k over the limit in 80kmh zone.
  
  Why?
  
  Still being tailgated and highbeamed
  
  You dont need to exceed the speed limit because someone is tailgating and highbeaming you.
  
  Slow down a little so they can overtake (or pull off/stop) and let them go past. If you are lucky you will pass them later on while they are stopped getting a speeding fine.
naniktaish on 28/12/2018 - 22:48

+1

The general rule of thumb i follow on 100 kmh roads is don't bother overtaking unless the car in front is doing 5-10 less than the posted limit. This way, even when you have to overtake, you won't need to hog the overtaking lane for minutes.

And written rule or not , only stay in the overtaking lane when, well, overtaking or if you're turning right soon (<1km away).
ScratchMaster on 29/12/2018 - 03:35

+2

I love this post. I live on the Gold Coast and driver up and back from brisbane on a daily basis. The amount of drivers who do around 80klm/ph in the far right lane pisses me off!
I’m sorry but if you suck at driving stick to the far left lane.
[Deactivated] on 30/12/2018 - 12:57

-6

i stay on the right lane if im doing the speed limit, have driven next to police cars and they havent said anything, so keep whinging while i laugh on my safe travels.
- nuno on 30/12/2018 - 15:30
  
  The troll window has been and gone. You've missed out.:(
  better luck next time
DiscoJango on 30/12/2018 - 18:04

you guys got it all wrong

the emergency lanes where its at
nuno on 30/12/2018 - 18:59

Suprising how many entrust and believe the governments limits on speeding.
Sheeple in cars drinking the government cool aid.

Drive to your ability just stay out of the right lane if you're not using it for overtaking. Simples.
- [Deactivated] on 31/12/2018 - 14:18
  
  good job, you really made a difference. keep up the good work. stay in the left lane like a good girl
SirFlibbled on 02/01/2019 - 15:29

+1

over xmas I drove from Canberra to Bundaberg.

I think the thing I realised finally was why the 3+ laned motorways are always so clogged. Almost everyone basically just uses the two right hand lanes no matter how many lanes there are.

Including little Ms "I'm too scared to drive properly" driving along at 85km in a 110 zone, not caring about the jam she's causing because most people are trying to do the right thing and overtake her. The problem is the right lane is then clogged by Mr "I set my cruise control when it was 90 zone and haven't changed it" who is slowly overtaking her.

Stick to The Left - vehicle travel.

Comments

New Forum Topics