PDA

View Full Version : Driver banned for hands off driving


Fareastdriver
6th Jan 2014, 20:17
Poor bloke. Just stretched his shoulders to relieve them and gets banned.

BBC News - Whitby driver filmed with hands behind head (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-25624978)

Most cars I have driven will follow the camber if left alone; that's why rake is designed into the steering. Lucky i wasn't caught lighting a cigarette when I was younger.

500N
6th Jan 2014, 20:23
Christ, lucky I haven't been filmed.

I use my knee all the time on long straight stretches of highway,
how the hell else do you pour a coffee, light a smoke etc.

fireflybob
6th Jan 2014, 20:31
Not to mention peeling an apple and reading the newspaper....

G-CPTN
6th Jan 2014, 20:33
One of my colleagues (when I was much younger) - in the days when hand signals were still practiced - would effect a right turn signal with outstretched right arm and then extend his left arm and grab hold of his right arm and pull it back in (whilst holding the steering wheel with his knees).

This, of course, caused alarm among following motorists - but it was funny to watch!

500N
6th Jan 2014, 20:43
"and reading the newspaper...."

Ah yes, forgot about that ! :O

Capot
6th Jan 2014, 20:56
Modern cars and gadgets make it much easier, I've noticed. You can set the cruise control to make knee steering easier, there's a cup holder to pour the coffee with one hand while you can deal with your emails with the other.

The dash cam is there to pin the blame on someone else if you hit something getting in your way.

Checkboard
6th Jan 2014, 21:00
He was given a 12-month ban and ordered to carry out 100 hours of unpaid work in the community.

He was also fined 625 and told he must pay a 60 victim surcharge.

Dave Brown, from North Yorkshire Police said: "This case demonstrates two things. One is the sheer stupidity of some people who put others in danger and the other is the ability of our safety camera to capture a range of offences."
This is an absolute travesty of justice. A man who is NOT distracted (i.e. - he's not on the phone), who DOES NOT have his hands engaged in another task (so they are immediately available to return to the wheel) gets a higher fine and longer ban than a drunk driver?? :suspect:

This country is insane not to recognise that this is not worthy of even a court appearance, much less the punishment handed out. :ugh:

500N
6th Jan 2014, 21:13
Thought of another one.

Driving down farm / paddock roads with one hand out the window on the spotlight handle, the other holding the rifle out the window on the rifle rest, cruising around looking for foxes etc.

Lucky we have knees :O

Paracab
6th Jan 2014, 21:23
Driving with excess alcohol carries a minimum 12 month disqualification. This may be reduced to 9 months if a course (at drivers expense) is taken.

He was being an arse. Had the vehicle have gone out of control then he'd be hung, drawn and quartered by some, before he'd even got out of the car.

G-CPTN
6th Jan 2014, 21:29
The judgement should have been whether the vehicle was wandering across the centreline (which it never did).

I have found that some people are capable of multitasking (such as reading a map whilst driving) whilst others have difficulty avoiding parked cars and finding the headlamp switch.

ExSp33db1rd
6th Jan 2014, 21:33
.......how the hell else do you pour a coffee, light a smoke etc.

or if female .... talk on phone, read e-mail, send text etc. ?

Didn'tAustralian long distance lorry-train drivers from Darwin to Alice tear a small hole in the centre of a newspaper, then spread it across the windscreen as if reading it, to scare the s**t out of approaching drivers ?

Or is it an Urban Myth from the Great Australian F.A.

500N
6th Jan 2014, 21:56
Tear a hole in the newspaper ?

I don't, I just spread it over the steering wheel and look up once in a while :O

I'd say the hole is an urban myth, if you are in a 3 trailer road train, you don't
worry about anyone who gets in the way as you have no hope of stopping or
avoiding them so like roos, cows, horses etc, you just plough through them :rolleyes:

robtheblade
6th Jan 2014, 22:13
Just an example of the UK mentality of "what do you think would have happened if.........".

Effluent Man
6th Jan 2014, 23:00
I'm always knee steering,Sometimes I like to do a little finger pointing dance if there is a catchy tune on the wireless just to liven up a long drive.

Checkboard
6th Jan 2014, 23:20
He was being an arse. Had the vehicle have gone out of control then he'd be hung, drawn and quartered by some, before he'd even got out of the car.
How far could the "vehicle go out of control" before he moved his hands the 30cm from head to steering wheel?

I see you have the intelligence of a UK judge.

... you probably think that's complementary.

Pappa Smurf
6th Jan 2014, 23:40
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailytelegraph.com.au%2Fpolice-arrest-erratically-driving-truckie-who-had-massive-tv-attached-to-dashboard-of-his-rig%2Fstory-e6freuy9-1226308495145&ei=t0nLUqKDGI2OiAfit4CADQ&usg=AFQjCNFEgIFi-pZ5CxJirrTn6cR4lpvBZw

Krystal n chips
7th Jan 2014, 03:58
" Poor bloke. Just stretched his shoulders to relieve them and gets banned.

Most cars I have driven will follow the camber if left alone; that's why rake is designed into the steering. Lucky i wasn't caught lighting a cigarette when I was younger

Most cars do indeed follow the camber, however, you seem to have blissfully ignored the fact the tertiary level invertebrate in question was driving along an undulating road with a series of bends and for a considerable length of time. Whilst we do not know its level of driving prowess in case of an emergency, it's not unreasonable to assume said prowess is non-existent, along with a functioning brain cell.

Hardly a travesty of justice therefore as he was a dangerous as those who still feel they can drink and then drive safely.

It's perfectly possible to keep both hands on the wheel, arch your back to relieve any muscular stresses and also flex your shoulders whilst, erm, retaining control of the vehicle....unlike said invertebrate.

Seldomfitforpurpose
7th Jan 2014, 04:49
I am now in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with K and C on this one as I cannot think of a single conceivably sensible excuse for taking both hands off the wheel in the manner this twonk was doing. Whether the punishment fit the crime when you consider

BBC News - Liverpool man with 45 points among 7,300 avoiding bans (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25626147)

is a moot point.

I also believe recent convictions for eating a sandwich whilst at the wheel are spurious at best unless we are also going to start to prosecute folk who are smoking at the wheel, chewing gum or even sipping from a coffee mug.

BDiONU
7th Jan 2014, 05:02
Poor bloke. Just stretched his shoulders to relieve them and gets banned.For over 30 seconds? Don't think so, deserves all he got for being an ass.

ExSp33db1rd
7th Jan 2014, 07:07
........or even sipping from a coffee mug.

Or a can of beer. In NZ it isn't actually illegal to drink whilst driving, just illegal to be driving whilst under the influence - not that I intend to put it to the test of course.

Ogre
7th Jan 2014, 07:13
Checkboard

On previous occassions I have presented courses on system safety, and we talk about human actions whilst using machinery. My standard story at this point is to comment on the way local drivers can't manage to keep their distance while driving, and ask how many of the class drive less that 2 seconds from the car in front? To illustrate I point out that travelling at 80 km/hour is roughly 20 metres/second, and that the average human reaction time is (for arguments sake ) a quarter of a second.

At this point I go to one side of the room and pace out five big steps. I then point out that that is roughly the distance you will travel before you can actually start to take avoiding action if the guy in front slams on the anchors.

It makes a point, so consider how long it would take the driver to react if he wandered less than a foot to one side or the other and hit the kerb or a vehicle coming the other way?

Lon More
7th Jan 2014, 08:36
I bet not many cars would follow the camber if a tyre blew.

500N
7th Jan 2014, 08:42
Really, how many cars blow tyres nowadays, except on long hot journeys ?

Captivep
7th Jan 2014, 08:58
I can't believe people are defending this bloke.

As far as I'm aware his defence wasn't that he was steering with his knees, but that he didn't see the camera van! So, not only not in full control (if you've ever steered with your knees, you'll know that it doesn't feel like you're in full control), but not aware of his surroundings either...

Lon More
7th Jan 2014, 09:04
Really, how many cars blow tyres nowadays, except on long hot journeys ?

It just takes one. Sod's Law applies. More blow than you think, ask any traffic cop.

his defence wasn't that he was steering with his knees, but that he didn't see the camera van!

as most of them are clearly marked add, "driving without due care and attention"

bingofuel
7th Jan 2014, 09:08
Dangerous driving

1. The way they drive falls far below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver; and
2. It would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

Clearly in this case the court decided the above conditions had been met and convicted accordingly.

4mastacker
7th Jan 2014, 09:12
Really, how many cars blow tyres nowadays, except on long hot journeys ?

You haven't experienced any of the soggy and wind-swept UK's pot-holed roads recently, have you? ;)


Back to thread: That bloke was a first class prat: the sentence he got wasn't stiff enough.

BDiONU
7th Jan 2014, 09:27
Really, how many cars blow tyres nowadays?At my current coordinates hundreds! And trucks/lorries/vans thousands! Motorways are often covered in tyre debris.

goudie
7th Jan 2014, 09:30
Well at least he, rightly, paid the penalty for his stupidity. Thousands get away with careless driving
BBC News - Liverpool man with 45 points among 7,300 avoiding bans (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25626147)

radeng
7th Jan 2014, 09:53
Dunno what they would have made of the taxi driver I had in Florence who was really reading the newspaper as we went along!

Lord Spandex Masher
7th Jan 2014, 09:58
What's all the fuss. I can drive the 15 miles to work using my knees to steer.

I'm not daft enough to look like that's what I'm doing though.

UniFoxOs
7th Jan 2014, 10:09
Re hands on wheel, I'm probably teaching grannies to suck eggs but if you look left or right, or glance down at a control it is easy to turn the wheel slightly in the direction you are looking. How you deal with it, either by locking your grip or taking your fingers off the wheel is up to you.

SWMBO does this, forever (every few seconds) primping hair, easing seat belt etc. Never still. Bloody frightening when driving along the side of a mountain with a 5000 foot drop at one side. I keep my eyes closed.

I was once being driven at 150 mph when the driver took both hands off the wheel to light a cig. I was a little surprised, but not that worried - the driver was Norman Dewis, Jaguar's chief test driver, and obviously knew well that the (then new) E-type would keep to the line at this speed on the test track banking. And he wasn't using his knees.

Effluent Man
7th Jan 2014, 14:29
I just calculated that I have driven more than two million miles in my life.I have had two accidents,both caused by other people.One pulled off a filling station forecourt and hit me head on,the other a 40 tonne Volvo rammed me from behind.In those two million miles,were I a poor driver,some kind of accident that was my fault would have happened.I once had to mount the path to avoid an oncoming Granada ,complete with sirens and lights who failed to keep it on his side of the road.So it is perhaps unsurprising if I am not willing to take tips on driving from these buffoons.

Craggenmore
7th Jan 2014, 15:41
I have tinted windows and a clean license.

Captivep
7th Jan 2014, 15:51
Effluent Man - that reminds me of the old joke about the really really good driver who'd never had an accident but seen lots and lots...

:)

BDiONU
7th Jan 2014, 16:04
For those in defence have a look at the video and tell me he was just 'stretching'
LiveLeak.com - Look no hands!

Molemot
7th Jan 2014, 17:39
That car seemed to be perfectly under control to me....no wandering about or any other symptom. Had it not been for the chap obviously having his hands behind his head, just observing the car would give no grounds for stopping him. Had he been in a van with no rear windows, nobody would have been any the wiser. I've driven cars, flown aeroplanes and helmed boats without having any hands on the wheel or stick, and always been in control. The only time there could be a problem is if the driver had allowed his concentration to lapse; this doesn't seem to be the case, and he would have easily been able to put his hands back on the wheel should the need have arisen.

Seldomfitforpurpose
7th Jan 2014, 17:44
The only time there could be a problem is if the driver had allowed his concentration to lapse; this doesn't seem to be the case, and he would have easily been able to put his hands back on the wheel should the need have arisen.

Now imagine if you will that he may well have been allowing his concentration to lapse.............

Saintsman
7th Jan 2014, 17:58
I think that there's more to it than meets the eye.

What you couldn't see from the video was the young lady hidden from view, otherwise occupied...:E

Loose rivets
7th Jan 2014, 18:01
I've gone miles eating and the like in the old days when there was nowt about, but where this bloke's argument might fail is the fact his fingers are interlocked. If I were prosecuting I would argue that such a clasp would mean it would take even longer to get one's hands on the wheel. In the event of hitting an object, or having a tyre/tire blow out, that delay would have made all the difference.

The sentence is just plain madness. A rap on the knuckles is appropriate, but this is totally disproportionate. Our law seems to go from absolutely nothing being done to being charged for opening a KitKat while stationary.

Krystal n chips
7th Jan 2014, 18:05
" That car seemed to be perfectly under control to me....no wandering about or any other symptom. Had it not been for the chap obviously having his hands behind his head, just observing the car would give no grounds for stopping him.

Ah, the well established driving technique instilled into every driver on the first day of learning....Astute readers will also have noticed the ever so slight contradiction between the opening statement .....and the subsequent one.


" Had he been in a van with no rear windows, nobody would have been any the wiser. I've driven cars, flown aeroplanes and helmed boats without having any hands on the wheel or stick, and always been in control..

Yes, that was rather unfortunate ....for him, not being a van that is...and the resulting ban means it's extremely fortunate for the rest of us, that we aren't, in theory, likely to encounter him on the road as a result.

As for flying, well no doubt you do trim the aircraft ..it does make life easier after all, but, how long have you actually flown the aircraft "hands free" as it were....A/P doesn't count here obviously, and in what conditions....this prior information may help the A.A.I B. in their investigations should one of those unfortunate lapses of, err, concentration occur.

AtomKraft
7th Jan 2014, 18:15
Some cars have very dark screens on the rear windows. My Audi has an electric one that rises to obscure the rear screen (cleverly, the driver can easily see out it via rear view mirror).
Also, it has two manual side screens that stop folk looking in the rear door windows.
As a habitual mobi phone user, it's saved me loads of times. :)
This man should buy an Audi A8, or use his hands in future for steering.
Either will work well.

As for the 'oh so shocked' plods....

They must have had little else to do.

Had the guy banjoed someone, I agree it would be different.

Did he?

Craggenmore
7th Jan 2014, 18:41
As for flying, well no doubt you do trim the aircraft ..it does make life easier after all, but, how long have you actually flown the aircraft "hands free" as it were....A/P doesn't count here obviously, and in what conditions
What a/c are you talking about here?

In our 380's, any jet upset is initially dealt with by the inherent stability and many others too.

Fareastdriver
7th Jan 2014, 19:20
The ban and the fine was over the top. A eprimand or a fine with points would have been enough. What you have now is a smirking patrolman, a satisfied Chief Constable and a holier than thou magistrate.
You also have somebody who has lost his licence and probably his job who is now going to claim benefits that will far exceed the fine he has paid. On top of that he, plus his closest family and close friends are now embittered enemies of the police force. It can be certain that they will give zero cooperation should the police ever ask for information after a crime.

One may presuppose that if it was an illegal immigrant or a failed asylum seeker he would have been let off with a caution and a request to get a new set of tyres, get the headlights fixed, sort out a driving licence and get the car taxed and insured as soon as possible.

goudie
7th Jan 2014, 19:39
I think the sentence was severe because this idiot was 'cocking a snook' at the traffic police and common sense driving.
Had the story been that he was driving, with hands behind head, lost control and caused a fatal accident, then would all those seeking to diminish the offence still do so?

Romeo Oscar Golf
7th Jan 2014, 20:27
Had the story been that he was driving, with hands behind head, lost control and caused a fatal accident, then would all those seeking to diminish the offence still do so?
No


I think the sentence was severe because this idiot was 'cocking a snook' at the traffic police and common sense driving

I don't.
Fareastdriver is, in my opinion far closer to the truth.
The drive was steadier than many I have the misfortune to travel behind.

Yes I reckon the driver is probably a total pain in the arse, but has been victimised.

Effluent Man
7th Jan 2014, 20:28
It's a health and safety thing..I would be happier with far more severe penalties for those at fault in accidents.I would advocate a year's automatic ban..

Blues&twos
7th Jan 2014, 21:28
Some bizarre opinions here.

Driving without holding the wheel is just bloody stupid on a public road. The bloke wasn't just creeping along in a queue was he? That he didn't have an accident on this occasion is not the best measure of whether he should be prosecuted or not - this kind of argument could be used to excuse anything at all. Reckon it's the first time he's ever done it? Or the only time he's been caught?

And why wouldn't you want to hold the wheel? Potholes (of which there are many in the UK) can pull the steering wheel violently and instantly.

I used to drive lorries for a living. I spent my working life on the road - it's risky enough without selfish morons like this upping the ante.

Effluent Man
7th Jan 2014, 21:37
He obviously did it a lot.but if you think about it that backs up the argument that it isn't especially dangerous.My experience in running a body repair shop for many years was that most of my customers were cautious drivers with low skill levels.We used to give an annual award for the best customer and most years it went to the head teacher at a local primary school.He was very H&S aware and one time when I went to his house he took me down his garden to get the car.On the way he tripped and fell in his fish pond.

goudie
7th Jan 2014, 21:52
but if you think about it that backs up the argument that it isn't especially dangerous
Effluent man Having thought about it I think it's especially dangerous as did the Law.

You're defending the indefensible, in my opinion

Hypothetical question. Would you be happy for, say, a child of yours to be driven in this manner?

waldopepper42
7th Jan 2014, 22:02
I used to do this for fun just to amuse my daughter in the car. Believe me, I would never never have done something to endanger her.

This conviction has merely served to prove that the English magistrate system encourages morons with no real appreciation of the real world of driving to be given power that they do NOT deserve.

Romeo Oscar Golf
7th Jan 2014, 23:05
Well said Waldo:ok:

Krystal n chips
8th Jan 2014, 04:44
For those who insist on trying to defend the indefensible....and there are many with a similar perception it would seem, have a read of this link please.

RoSPA Advanced Driving Test (http://www.bowkerdrivingtuition.com/advanced-driving/rospa-advanced-driving-course.html)

You will note, or there again probably choose to ignore....always the most convenient option when something is blatantly wrong after all, the section on steering.

There may, of course, be a small paragraph which supports the views of those who feel it was so jolly unfair to prosecute for such a trivial matter....not actually being in control of a vehicle being of no real consequence after all.....thus, if any of those who support said asinine cretin, or the unfortunate and discriminated against occupant of the driving seat if you insist on supporting him, please show us where it is permitted and indeed any training manual that promotes this method of steering a vehicle.

500N
8th Jan 2014, 04:55
I am not saying it is legal, permitted or any book promotes this as a method of steering - and I think most others would agree.

I just think prosecuting this with the punishment he got way way out of proportion to what he has done.

And just because something is against the law, wrong, not sensible
or whatever, doens't mean I, you or others don't do it.

We all break the law most weeks of the year in some way.

Krystal n chips
8th Jan 2014, 05:06
True up to a point......the point being we don't actually break the law in such a cavalier and indifferent to the safety of ourselves and others manner.

As any Coroners court would confirm.

500N
8th Jan 2014, 05:09
Agree, maybe in not such a cavalier way.

I can't criticize him though as I drive with my knee on certain roads,
not saying it is right.

I still think this is OTT.

ExSp33db1rd
8th Jan 2014, 06:14
Around the end of the '50's I joined the Institute of Advanced Motorists in the UK - is it still going ? - that followed more or less the guidlines of the RoSPA system above.

The test was either pass or fail, not graded Gold, Silver, Bronze, and a successful pass meant that one was accepted into the Institute and given a badge to mount on the front bumper - remember them ? which was chrome with red lettering and trim.

After awhile there were mutterings in the Newsletter from people wanting an even harder test, for which they could be granted a chrome and green badge, for instance, i.e. visual evidence that the holder was an even more superior driver than the mere Advanced Motorists with red badges.

At that point I resigned my membership.

500N
8th Jan 2014, 06:24
The person (lady) I drove past today was far worse than what this person did.

Two lanes exit the freeway near my house, I was on the inside lane,
all cars and one truck exited at 100 kmh then slowed to 80 kmh as
indicated. I was last in the series / block of cars and was taking it easy.

As we all went round the curve and up over the bridge, a red sedan in the outside lane was dawdling along at 50 or 60 kmh and the cars in the outside lane switched to the inside and everyone went past her. As I went past, there she was, head bent over with mobile phone against the shoulder, one hand on the steering wheel, going round a corner and over a bridge having partially held up the traffic exiting.

goudie
8th Jan 2014, 07:25
I used to do this for fun just to amuse my daughter in the car. Believe me, I would never never have done something to endanger her.

The mind boggles!

Captivep
8th Jan 2014, 07:34
You've got to give the posters on here defending this bloke full marks for entertainment value...

In the last ten or so posts I've read:

Someone bragging about driving while using a mobile phone;

Someone suggesting that the driver in question did have the car under full control;

Someone suggesting that the driver would have got off if he'd been an illegal immigrant;

And someone bragging he happily drove his own daughter like that!


What is it about some drivers that makes them so perfect, when the rest of us make mistakes?

And what is it about some drivers who feel that it is entirely ok to break the law (but only the ones that inconvenience them)?

pulse1
8th Jan 2014, 07:36
Don't know what all the fuss is about. A long, long, long time ago l took both hands off the wheel during my driving test. Still passed.

ExSp33db1rd
8th Jan 2014, 08:15
........head bent over with mobile phone against the shoulder,

*555 to dob-in-a-driver in NZ ??

( pull over whilst you make your call of course !! - or ask your passenger to do it )

500N
8th Jan 2014, 09:26
Captivep

You saying you never break the law, especially when driving ?

Effluent Man
8th Jan 2014, 09:42
I took both my hands off the wheel on mu test.I was driving a mini with slide windows and in those days you had to give hand signals.I had my arm out of the3 window and went to change down into 2nd.I took my hand off the wheel then realised and put itr back on.I was certain that the examiner had seen me but he pased me nevertheless.

AtomKraft
8th Jan 2014, 13:00
Oh, don't we ever have our knickers in a twist these days?

In India, people use mobile phones constantly when driving. If it's illegal it stops precisely no-one.

They also- horrors! Use phones while riding motor bikes! Nobody seems to mind.

Even seen people texting while riding motorbikes.

Isn't it terrible?

I sometimes think we Brits need to get out more.....

goudie
8th Jan 2014, 13:27
So, when standards are low... lower your standards. Problem fixed...brilliant!:rolleyes:

KBPsen
8th Jan 2014, 13:39
Isn't it terrible?It is actually. India has the highest number of traffic-related deaths of any country in the world by far.

But hey, apparently it's all good.

AtomKraft
8th Jan 2014, 13:56
KBP

Really? Is that pro rata, or just due huge population?

It's mayhem on the streets here, but I've yet to see an accident.

You need to actually be able to drive here.

Capetonian
8th Jan 2014, 14:03
Perhaps the offence is not so terrible, bit it was an offence, and the police decided to make an example of this arrogant knobhead to show others that the behaviour is not acceptable. He was deliberately flouting the law and doing something potentially dangerous.

I see no reason to defend his action.

Lon More
8th Jan 2014, 14:16
AtomKraft, from Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate)

Road Fatalities per 100000 inhabitants p.a.

India 18.9
UK 2.75

Road Fatalities per 100000 vehicles p.a.

India 100
UK 5.1


Actually Eritrea seems to be the worst with 48.4 and 4400.0.


'Nuff zed

Captivep
8th Jan 2014, 15:33
500N - I try not to; but of course I've broken the law when driving.

However, on the two times when I've been caught speeding (inadvertently but no defence) I haven't whinged about how unfair it all is, how it's only to make money, if I were an illegal immigrant etc blah blah blah...

The point I was making is that some drivers appear to believe that motoring laws (but only those) should not be enforced on them, because they are such wonderful drivers...

Effluent Man
8th Jan 2014, 15:51
There seem to be two different points of debate here.1 Should he have done it -No. 2.Having been nicked did it warrant a year's ban-No.A lot of people seem to be mixing these two things up.I think a fixed penalty would have done.

GGR155
8th Jan 2014, 16:30
Maybe the sunroof was stuck open and he was running in a new wig:}

TomJoad
8th Jan 2014, 17:16
Oh, don't we ever have our knickers in a twist these days?

In India, people use mobile phones constantly when driving. If it's illegal it stops precisely no-one. It's not about legality its about sensibility.:ugh:

They also- horrors! Use phones while riding motor bikes! Nobody seems to mind. Says it all really.:ugh:

Even seen people texting while riding motorbikes.

Isn't it terrible? More sad than terrible that Indians are not afforded the same accords of safety and respect for their lives that we enjoy to the point of apparent contempt.:=

I sometimes think we Brits need to get out more.....


http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/Fws1XkcTHys/maxresdefault.jpg

Ah India, we could learn a lot from how they do things:ugh:
Of course you will be adopting the same carefree attitude Atom now you are free from the restrictive practices of the UK. Hey you could go flying without filing a flight plan or weather check:D

TomJoad
8th Jan 2014, 17:23
Perhaps the offence is not so terrible, bit it was an offence, and the police decided to make an example of this arrogant knobhead to show others that the behaviour is not acceptable. He was deliberately flouting the law and doing something potentially dangerous.

I see no reason to defend his action.

Spot on. The guy was an arrogant idiot with contempt for others. I wonder if those defending here would do so in circumstances where such a muppet was the cause of an accident involving them or loved ones. Bravado and the anonymity of internet forums make weak minds ever so bold.:ugh:

goudie
8th Jan 2014, 17:37
.I think a fixed penalty would have done. Fortunately and correctly, the Judge disagreed with you
The roads are marginally safer, for the next 12 months, with this arrogant idiot off them! Let's hope 'lessons have been learned'.

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 18:06
I wonder if those defending here would do so in circumstances where such a muppet was the cause of an accident involving them or loved ones.
The point is that the chance of him having an accident while doing this was minute compared to other road traffic infringements which attract tiny (in proportion) sentences. :rolleyes:

The very fact his hands were off the wheel meant that he was concentrating on what he was doing.

... and that alone meant that he was safer than most tired drivers dragging their asses in to work at 5am with two hands on the wheel.

goudie
8th Jan 2014, 18:25
The very fact his hands were off the wheel meant that he was concentrating on what he was doing.Surely a supposition Checkers
He could have been nodding off!

Capetonian
8th Jan 2014, 18:28
The very fact his hands were off the wheel meant that he was concentrating on what he was doing.That's a defence? I can't believe some of utter bilge I'm reading on this thread.

Romeo Oscar Golf
8th Jan 2014, 18:35
I can't believe some of utter bilge I'm reading on this thread

Oh I'm sure you can if you try Cape.;)

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 18:40
Not a defence against what he was doing - a statement that shows that the punishment was HUGELY out of proportion for what he was doing.

Was he drink driving? Was he speeding in excess of 20mph in a school zone? Was he texting on his phone?

Was he speeding in excess of 20mph on a highway? Was he in a road rage, tailgating and cutting up traffic?

Was he changing lanes without indicating? Was he driving for a few seconds with his knee instead of his hands?

In what category does a punishment of "a 12-month ban AND 100 hours of unpaid work in the community AND a fine of 625 AND a 60 victim surcharge" (what victim?) fit? :confused:

That's the "utter bilge" :=

Under that standard 90% of drivers would be off the roads.

TomJoad
8th Jan 2014, 18:41
The point is that the chance of him having an accident while doing this was minute compared to other road traffic infringements which attract tiny (in proportion) sentences. :rolleyes:

The very fact his hands were off the wheel meant that he was concentrating on what he was doing.

... and that alone meant that he was safer than most tired drivers dragging their asses in to work at 5am with two hands on the wheel.

Really:sad: There was me thinking otherwise:ok:

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 18:45
If he was driving with his knee because he was using his hand for something else (phone, eating a burger, beating up the kids) - then yes, he would be both distracted AND slightly less in control of his vehicle.

He was looking forward, and actually showing his hands were not engaged - while driving with his knee - that's evidence he was involved in what he was doing.

500N
8th Jan 2014, 18:59
Cape

When you are going 100 kmh driving with your knee, believe me, you
tend to concentrate on what you are doing.

I would say I have "wobbled" far more times when lighting a smoke, eating a burger, pouring a cup of coffee
and other things than I have when using my knees.

419
8th Jan 2014, 19:03
By taking your hands off the wheel to eat a burger or make a phone call you are doing so for a reason. Not a legal reason maybe, but a reason none the less.
If you have a stiff arm or shoulder then you can easily take one hand off at a time but no, this pillock decided to let go of the wheel for around half a minute for no other reason than he could.

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 19:10
Anyone could - because it's pretty easy and you maintain pretty good control. Most drivers have done it.


Are you honestly saying you would rather see him eating a burger than just watching the road??? That IS insane!

500N
8th Jan 2014, 19:16
Just read this in the DM

"Short-sighted driver killed dog walker on pedestrian crossing because he wasn't wearing his glasses - then walks free with just 140 hours' community service"

Mohammed Rashid, 23, pictured hiding his face with a scarf, left, drove into journalist Laurence Gunn, 32, pictured centre bottom and far right, as he walked over a pedestrian crossing, centre top, near Hampstead Heath, north London, with his dog. Rashid admitted to police he hadn't worn his glasses for more than a year and said he did not know where they were. He denied causing death by dangerous driving but admitted the lesser charge of causing death by careless driving and was sentenced today at Blackfriars Crown Court.


Versus this for the driver with his hands off the wheel

"He was given a 12-month ban and ordered to carry out 100 hours of unpaid work in the community. He was also fined 625 and told he must pay a 60 victim surcharge."


The UK needs to get it's courts sorted out because the two sentences
are poles apart.

goudie
8th Jan 2014, 19:17
I really am quite taken aback by the attempt, by some people, to offer mitigating circumstances for this appalling piece of dangerous driving. Yes there are lots of cases we can all cite and have experienced, of equally crass driving, where the driver got away with it or was given a light penalty. However this guy was caught on film, no excuses, case closed.
Sympathy? Dictionary, sh!t and syphilis come to mind!

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 19:24
goudie - place your hands behind your head. Now put them on your knees.

... now how long did that take?


That's how much extra time it would take for him to become "Mr responsible".

It's is in no way an "appalling piece of dangerous driving". :ugh:

Have a look at some "appalling pieces of dangerous driving", so that you know the difference: :)

Russian car accidents 2013 - YouTube

Capetonian
8th Jan 2014, 19:49
goudie - place your hands behind your head. Now put them on your knees.
... now how long did that take?
A few seconds.
Not a valid comparison. 'Matey' was filmed doing it for 30 seconds.

The UK needs to get it's courts sorted out because the two sentences
are poles apart.
then walks free with just 140 hours' community service" ...........
Mohammed Rashid, 23,
Thre might be a clue in the name as to why he received a more lenient sentence. More seriously, yes. 500N is right. All types of dangerous driving should be punished with a ban and imprisonment.

500N
8th Jan 2014, 19:52
But I don't consider what the guy this thread is about is dangerous
and by a few of the responses, neither do some others.

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 19:57
A few seconds.
Not a valid comparison. 'Matey' was filmed doing it for 30 seconds.
A few seconds?? Really?? Even going sloooowwllly I can do it in less than one.

... and the point isn't how long he did it for - the point is how long, should something weird happen, it would take to stop doing it. :rolleyes:

Capetonian
8th Jan 2014, 20:01
To those who don't consider it dangerous .... did you look at the video? He was driving at 100kmh on a two lane (one in each direction) road with a couple of curves and approaching a blind rise. Oh, and there was traffic coming the other way, innocent people whose lives he's endangering just so he can act big.

I might also have taken my hands off the wheel when driving across the Karoo or Namaqualand on a road that runs straight and level for a couple of hundred kilometres and there's no approaching traffic. Somewhat different.

Some of you guys are really trying to defend the indefensible.

Checkboard
8th Jan 2014, 20:15
He was driving at 100kmh on a two lane (one in each direction) road with a couple of curves and approaching a blind rise.
They should arrest the engineer who designed the road then! :eek:

(Note that he was doing the speed limit - well 62mph in a 60 zone, within the accuracy limits of the radar.)

eticket
8th Jan 2014, 20:20
Coming towards me on a country road was a Range Rover.

The driver was talking on a mobile phone that was nestled between their neck and their shoulder. Both hands were employed in creating a ponytail.

Women can definitely multitask as she was also braking for an approaching junction!

cavortingcheetah
8th Jan 2014, 20:21
This is an aviation forum so perhaps, as an excuse for those who seek to justify such a dumb act of driving derangement, one should ask the apologists whether they'd fly drunk because they'd done it before and it was all right to do so really because one was concentrating, looking ahead and everyone else had done it anyway?

waldopepper42
8th Jan 2014, 20:24
Captivet

I feel I must reply because you mentioned my post specifically. There was no intention to "brag", rather the opposite in fact. My point was simply that it is simply not out of the ordinary to be able to control a car, and to be completely in control of said vehicle, without having both hands constantly gripping the wheel. At all times I was in a position to recover from any normal eventuality within a split second. Just as was the guy in the video.

I would expect, that for a charge of dangerous driving, there ought to be some visible danger. Preoccupied with mobile phones, maps, cups of coffee, persons of the opposite sex across your knee etc I can and do accept. But from the video (the only source of information available to me, granted) he had his eyes constantly on the road ahead, and seemed to be alert enough to react.

I still believe this was an unessary prosecution that belittles the competency of those in our society who set themselves up to judge others.

500N
8th Jan 2014, 20:35
"This is an aviation forum so perhaps, as an excuse for those who seek to justify such a dumb act of driving derangement, one should ask the apologists whether they'd fly drunk because they'd done it before and it was all right to do so really because one was concentrating, looking ahead and everyone else had done it anyway?"


Going by some of the stories on her after DIN's or heavy drinking sessions in the mess, then I would say yes, some of the RAF Pilots were not exactly sober when they flew.

cavortingcheetah
8th Jan 2014, 20:39
Ha Waldo!
My apologies!
I had not intended to single out your post for exemplary attention. The excellence of your previous screed, however much one might disagree with it, must have been so significant as to have permeated into the subconscious thus giving rise to an almost automatic response on my part.
No offence was intended to whizz across the solid white line into your path.
I haven't had the opportunity to examine the UK Highway Code in depth but can say that in South Africa, under all circumstances which I can think of, if you don't have a licence then you can ignore the road code and if you do have a licence then you don't need to follow the rules of the road.

waldopepper42
8th Jan 2014, 20:39
In what way does driving / flying/ even walking under the influence of alcohol have any relevance here? This was a guy who (as far as we know) was sober and had his eyes on the road ahead at all times.

waldopepper42
8th Jan 2014, 20:44
Cavorting cheetah.

It is, and always has been, on my bucket list to visit SA. Think I'm going to promote it higher lol

cavortingcheetah
8th Jan 2014, 20:54
Isn't that a little like mixing up flyers as in RAF and airmen as in Fleet Air Arm?

Loose rivets
8th Jan 2014, 21:04
to make an example of this arrogant knobhead

Ooooo . . . so that's why.:ooh:



I'd thought about doing the advanced driver's test. You know, just to prove to myself I hadn't become diminished beyond redemption. Might impress the insurers as well as I head towards 80. But, I can't turn enough to see behind in the old way of putting one arm on the passenger seatback etc.

My mate, a 30 year police driver and former lorry driver, never turns, he uses mirrors all the time. I doubt that would be allowed, would it?

Sustained revs during gear change? Waaasssat all about?

I always pause in neutral between gear changes. Never remember not doing it. When the cogs come together I don't want to feel a thing back up the stick. I can not get my SIL to make that pause - it's only about half a second, but my cone clutches are like new after 10 years. How about y'all?

All in all it sounded a bit like a base-check. I've had a lot of years with a tight sphincter or two due to those. Not sure I'd want that feeling again.
I took my Texas driver's license years after driving here. No one seemed to care in those days. When I did, I was quite nervous. I didn't want to spoil my first time passes for car and motorcycle. I didn't, but I almost destroyed the examination centre.

I had a brand new hire car and it had never been filled with gas - until an hour before the test. The tank had no centre seal and fuel pissed out. I tried zooooming around on wasteland with the cap off (big pipe in those days) and anything to lower the fuel, but I took the test after waiting in a queue of cars, each time I moved forward there was a big black patch of tarmac where I'd been. When the Sheriff lady came out she was covered in guns and bullets. I was scared enough when she told me to flash and honk, but I'd have run away if she'd seen a bad guy and pulled her weapon. As she got in there was a hell of a smell of fuel, but the newness of the car kept it out. Fortunately, a young mum the size of a 4 year old was having trouble putting her 21' long car into the reversing box, and it got held the attention of my examiner. First thing I did was piss through the speed limit, and she wrote something. Buggah! thinks I. Then I spotted some kids behind a parked car and did everything right. I think that saved my bacon. When I passed, the smell had gone.:\

TomJoad
8th Jan 2014, 21:52
If he was driving with his knee because he was using his hand for something else (phone, eating a burger, beating up the kids) - then yes, he would be both distracted AND slightly less in control of his vehicle.

He was looking forward, and actually showing his hands were not engaged - while driving with his knee - that's evidence he was involved in what he was doing.

Need to get that driving position into the driving test then seeing as it is an effective means of control.:rolleyes: Don't try to defend the indefensible:ugh:

Lon More
9th Jan 2014, 07:36
A question for Checkers and a couple of others. Would you consider putting your hands behind your head whilst landing an aircraft? Would you do it with a check pilot in the cockpit?

I suspect it wasn't just "cocking a snoot" at the police but something he does (hopefully did) habitually which begs the question, what else does he ignore like basic car maintenance. Does he ever look at his tyres, check his lights?

Ancient Mariner
9th Jan 2014, 08:18
So driving with both hands behind your head is no big deal because you can quickly put them back and gain, or re-gain as the case might be, control? Really?
If you travel at 100 km/h you are putting 27 meters of road behind you per second. Or roughly 80 feet.
Say that your distraction time is a superhuman 0.5 second and your reaction time an equally impressive 0.5 second , where does that leave you when the distance to the next lane, or the ditch is less than 80 feet?
Shit happens, and when it does I'd rather have my hands on the thingie that controls the direction I am heading in.
Per

Checkboard
9th Jan 2014, 10:46
I am not saying, and have never said, that what he did is a good technique, or even an acceptable technique for handling a motor vehicle.

What I AM saying, and have always said, is that it wasn't anywhere near worth:

" a 12-month ban and ordered to carry out 100 hours of unpaid work in the community. He was also fined 625 and told he must pay a 60 victim surcharge."

Ancient Mariner
9th Jan 2014, 10:50
You wrote:
the point is how long, should something weird happen, it would take to stop doing it.
Hence my comment, agree to your last posting.
Per

MagnusP
9th Jan 2014, 11:18
So, Mr Bloke chooses to remove his hands from one of the main control devices of his vehicle and is therefore not in full control of the vehicle. Mr Otherbloke gets behind the wheel after 4 pints of Old Arseburner and is therefore not in full control of the vehicle.

Why are people defending this [email protected]?

goudie
9th Jan 2014, 11:21
Checkers. I agree the penalty was severe, especially as some scrotes get away with worse. However, if you blatantly break the law without any mitigating circumstances, as he did, then he's only himself to blame.
Be interesting to see if he appeals and if so, what the result is.

Checkboard
9th Jan 2014, 12:05
MagnusP - Mr Otherbloke can't stop being drunk if there's a pothole in the road, or a vehicle ahead is slowing down. He is drunk for his entire journey - that's the difference

...and it is a prime tenant in the law that there IS a gradient in illegal actions - it's not black and white, or perfect MagnusP and **** driver.

603DX
9th Jan 2014, 12:36
This interesting thread seems to have attracted the full spectrum of posters, from "he's a total idiot/cretin/arrogant knobhead", to "what's wrong with it, I do it all the time myself". So adding my own opinions on his actions, and the consequences he now has to take, would be of very little interest. It's all been said, colourfully in some cases.

I am more interested in this technique of steering with the knees/thighs. I will not say that I have never, ever done it over more than 50 years of licensed driving. I will admit that I might have had both hands off the wheel for very brief periods to facilitate some kinds of mundane in-motion actions, involving changing CDs or quickly wiping a steamed up windscreen, while manually changing gear, for example. Yes, naughty, naughty. But I have a 100% clean license, partly perhaps because I usually have fairly good awareness of road and traffic conditions around me at the time. I don't think I have ever done that sort of thing while being observed by a clearly marked police camera van following me for a considerable distance.

Back in the 1960s the cars I drove had shiny plastic rims to their steering wheels, and either no power assistance, or very feeble systems. So trying to even hold the line, let alone positively steer, by trouser-clad thigh pressure alone was a dodgy activity to attempt, so I didn't. Simple physics, involving the poor coefficient of friction obtainable. Over the decades, more and more cars have had powerful power steering installed, and many also have leather-covered steering wheels. So the "naughty" behaviour has become more feasible, the high friction now achieved at powered leather clad steering wheel rims makes steering possible with no more than the palms of the hands lightly pressed on the rim, (but still not advisable). I'm certainly not advocating it, merely observing that modern cars make it marginally less dangerous than it used to be.

OFSO
9th Jan 2014, 13:38
Slight TD: at the Darmstadt (Germany) autobahn interchange one six lane autobahn passes over another. One summer a mighty double truck/trailer combo flew off the top one and landed on the lower road. Subsequent investigation by the Kripos revealed that (a) the driver had been reading a porno mag (b) with his trousers lowered and (c) abusing himself while (d) steering the truck with his knees.

Personally I think he should have been given a job in a circus.

Craggenmore
9th Jan 2014, 14:07
Courts primarily deal in facts.

He drove down the road and absolutely nothing happened - This is fact

It is clear that he was judged on sentiment and not the clear fact that nothing happened.

goudie
9th Jan 2014, 14:21
he was judged on sentiment


Nothing to do with driving, whilst not fully in control of his vehicle then?
That, by the way, requires at least one hand on the steering wheel.

MagnusP
9th Jan 2014, 14:32
Checkboard, the pothole is there regardless; it's about knowingly reducing your ability to manage the vehicle. I'm fairly sure that Seb Vettel would be a better driver after a gallon of beer than I am when sober. However, he'd be in the wrong. But when you hit the pothole, you're on the pavement and into the pedestrians before you can get your hands on the wheel.

And Craggenmore, same goes for the guy who gets ratarsed but drives home, presumably. He also drove down the road and absolutely nothing happened. That OK by you?

FWIW, I'm far from perfect. I KNOW I've driven in the past when one over the limit, and I can at times regard speed limits more as guidance than rules, but if I was to get busted, I'd just take the licks.

603DX
9th Jan 2014, 14:54
He drove down the road and absolutely nothing happened - This is fact


I must disagree on that point, something almost certainly did happen. I think lawyers call it "Res Ipsa Loquitur" roughly translated as "the thing speaks for itself."

The video shows a driver with both hands behind his head, for at least half a minute.
His arms in that non-driving position most probably blocked his view in his mirrors, making him quite unaware that he was being followed by the police vehicle.
His vehicle was then probably pulled over by the police, and the error of his ways pointed out to him. A classic "Fair Cop" situation.

Craggenmore
9th Jan 2014, 14:55
Magnus P and goudie.

You may wake up tomorrow and kill someone either accidentally or intentionally with both, one or no hands on the wheel.

Perhaps you should be judged tonight and be locked up to stop this 'what if scenario'..?

Pages and pages of posts here and not one person has a link to the law on this subject of having your hands off the wheel for 30 seconds.

Start dealing in facts.

MagnusP
9th Jan 2014, 14:57
Craggenmore, you make a good point there; no law cited here, just opinion. I'm about to bugga off home, but I'll take a look at the Road Traffic Act and the Highways (Scotland) Act tomorrow, and see whether they say anything definitive. :ok:

Ancient Mariner
9th Jan 2014, 15:07
You guys really need a law that explicitly states that it is forbidden to drive a car above a given speed with no hands on the steering wheel for a given number of seconds?
Per

500N
9th Jan 2014, 15:09
Wouldn't matter what the law says. It would still be done.

goudie
9th Jan 2014, 15:19
This pretty much covers it.
I would say he was guilty of all three!

Although not explicit it would be a given that anyone who has passed their test would know about steering with one's hand(s)!

8. General advice (144 to 158)

144

You MUST NOT


drive dangerously
drive without due care and attention
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.
Law RTA 1988 sects 2 & 3 as amended by RTA 1991

603DX
9th Jan 2014, 15:47
As I suspect Craggenmore is aware, the precise circumstantial details of whether two, one, or no hands on the steering wheel for a specific period of time constitutes "careless/inconsiderate driving" are almost impossible to put into cold print. Having looked up this point in the RTA, I am not at all surprised that there are apparently none.

The question as to whether a particular set of circumstances falls within the description of careless/inconsiderate behaviour is one to be discussed and decided in court, like many other situations in law. That often means that it is the opinion of the Magistrate(s), after hearing the evidence, that draws the non-existent line ...

Krystal n chips
9th Jan 2014, 16:52
Pages and pages of posts here and not one person has a link to the law on this subject of having your hands off the wheel for 30 seconds.

Start dealing in facts

I am surprised, on the basis of the above inane thinking, that you forgot to include the repeal of the RTA as well....no need for any regulations or rules, just do as you wish, when and where you wish.....death being an optional extra to this frivolity I presume.

And, just to clarify your perceptions here, can we safely assume you would be equally enthusiastic about travelling as a passenger with the "look Ma ! no hands ! " thick as pig manure and twice as dense "driver" in question ?...Likewise, entrusting your family to his idea of care.....after all, no laws to break, so what could possibly go wrong ?

Flowers or a donation.....just doing some advance preparation on your behalf here......which do you wish to specify ?

cockney steve
9th Jan 2014, 17:20
Nothing to do with driving, whilst not fully in control of his vehicle then?
That, by the way, requires at least one hand on the steering wheel.

HOGWASH! At least one disabled pilot with NO ARMS...At least one UK full-driving license holder, NO ARMS ...several Thalidomide victims with missing arms/legs etc. hold driving-licenses.

the "pothole" issue is a bit of a red-herring....were it possible to instantaneously alter the trajectory of ~1 ton of metal, significantly, in 80 feet,- CFITS would be a thing of the past.

the cops were so worried about his "dangerous" behaviour, that they hung right in there, up his arse, so when he lost control, they wouldn't be able to avoid him.....had even one vehicle, person or animal presented on the road during the period of his "stretching"....that would maybe be a different ballgame.


so it's OK for a Police driver to sod about with cameras, siren switches, flashy light selection and switches, a 2-way radio...(hand-mike?) yada yada....yet some kid taking a bite out of an apple , held with 2 fingers, gets done.........

HYPOCRITES!....not saying the guy wasn't wrong....there's a difference between prosecution and what is evident herepersecution A vindictive and abusive use of the Law....an on -the -spot fine would have been a "punishment to fit the crime" imho

But I'm not a Mason, Copper or Judge, am I. :rolleyes:

G-CPTN
9th Jan 2014, 17:37
unaware that he was being followed by the police vehicle.
His vehicle was then probably pulled over by the police, and the error of his ways pointed out to him. A classic "Fair Cop" situation.


No, he was videoed by a static 'mobile' camera vehicle - the type that operates at long-distance with a telephoto-lens camera that incorprates speed monitoring.

goudie
9th Jan 2014, 18:17
..At least one UK full-driving license holder, NO ARMS ...several Thalidomide victims with missing arms/legs etc. hold driving-licenses.

We are discussing here, an able bodied person who, despite having arms and hands chose not to use them. No comparison!

Lon More
9th Jan 2014, 18:24
Cockney Steve wrote ...At least one UK full-driving license holder, NO ARMS ...several Thalidomide victims with missing arms/legs etc. hold driving-licenses.


There is no mention, that I could find, of armless drivers in the UK apart from In some instances, where a driver has lost the use of both arms, it may be possible to adapt a vehicle for foot steering.

I'd be interested if you had more info on this

Effluent Man
9th Jan 2014, 19:13
That would pretty much be the clincher for me.If the DVLA are prepared to allow people to drive with their feet then they are admitting that it's safe,If you are prone to epileptic fits they don't allow you.On the pothole question I think you will find that the power steering system compensates for this.I tried no hands driving today and encountered no problem whatsoever on a pothole pitted B road.the car went straight as a die and only needed correction on bends.

ExSp33db1rd
9th Jan 2014, 19:48
drive dangerously
drive without due care and attention
drive without reasonable consideration for other road users.

Define: dangerously
Define: Due care and attention ?
Define: Reasonable consideration for other road users ?

As has been said, unless these "facts" are spelled out in some Law tome, then they can only be subjective, and at the whim of the individual Police Officer, Judge or Magistrate.

That, by the way, requires at least one hand on the steering wheel.Is this definitively written into the Statutes, or Highway Code ?

I'm not talking about commonsense, and most agree that this drivers' action was not A Good Thing, but was he definitively acting illegally ?

I recall a mate being summonsed for crossing the double yellow line down the centre of the road. I can't recall how he did it, but nevertheless he successfully proved that he only crossed the left hand line of the two, therefore he didn't actually cross the 'double' yellow line, and was exonerated with no stain on his character.

One does need a Law Degree to survive a lot of Life's challenges !

goudie
9th Jan 2014, 19:54
but was he definitively acting illegally ?


Well the Magistrate thought so, whether you like it or not!



From the Daily Express


He accepted he had been guilty of careless driving but denied a charge of dangerous driving.
Newton could have been jailed for six months for the offence.
Chair of the bench Nicola Dennis told him: "It is unacceptable that a person drives without his hands on the wheel.
"Your ability was significantly affected by your actions. The video evidence has been conclusive in convicting you of dangerous driving."

ExSp33db1rd
9th Jan 2014, 19:58
"It is unacceptable that a person drives without his hands on the wheel.

Unacceptable to whom ? The Bench, and most of the Adult population of course, so that wraps it up, defined or not.

QED

Effluent Man
10th Jan 2014, 08:36
It would have been interesting if this had come up before a jury.I have a feeling from the general spread of views on here that you would have had three or four not guilty votes.

Lon More
10th Jan 2014, 09:15
Interesting comment from a legal website on this case about his defence, "... a grotesque parody of relaxation. ...."

Maybe the penalty was extreme, however, if it has the effect of preventing him re-offending then it has achieved its purpose? There is no mention that I have found on the web of any previous offences but maybe it was not be first time in court and he already had 10 points? There is also no mention of him making an appeal against the judgement.

How many here who find his punishment unfair would have been outraged to have seen the video if he had ben test driving their car after having worked on it?

If the DVLA are prepared to allow people to drive with their feet then they are admitting that it's safe


Irrelevant. A very big if, and certainly not in an unadapted vehicle.

I tried no hands driving today and encountered no problem whatsoever on a pothole pitted B road.the car went straight as a die and only needed correction on bends.


By co-incidence I was at the Dutch Test Centre at Lelystad yesterday and had a few minutes on the skid pan. It's possible for the instructor to simulate a tyre blow out, which he did and with my hands behind my head the result would have been an accident.

Capetonian
10th Jan 2014, 09:32
How many here who find his punishment unfair would have been outraged to have seen the video if he had been :


the driver of a taxi they or their family were in
the driver of a bus with 40 people on board
the driver of a public service vehicle such as police or ambulance
In a car coming towards them on a narrow road
etc ............?

Effluent Man
10th Jan 2014, 09:43
A tyre blow out on a modern car is nigh on unheard of.It's a bit like a structural failure on an aircraft.Also it isn't possible to say that one would have resulted in an accident,there are too many variables,and it would have to be a front to have any effect at all.I once had a blowout at in excess of 100mph in a Jaguar 3.8.It was on a dual carriageway and it took about a quarter of a mile to stop,by which time there was not much left of the tyre.I think that was about 1973 and since then I have had about a dozen punctures,half of them caused by one lot of cowboy roofers.

Lon More
10th Jan 2014, 09:59
A tyre blow out on a modern car is nigh on unheard of

The UK motorways are littered with tyre carcasses - mostly trucks admittedly but it's still more common than you think

Deadly accident in Russia FRONT TIRE EXPLOSION / Tyre Burst FATAL CRASH - YouTube

....the traffic police have suggested that the 30-year-old driver is not steering when he lost control due to sudden tire burst the left front wheel.....

I have had about a dozen punctures,half of them caused by one lot of cowboy roofers. Must be the bottles of Jameson's they had in their pockets when you ran them over :E

Diruchurachan
10th Jan 2014, 11:08
We are all aware that most flying-unlike-driving is done hands free. But my lasting memory of someone reading a newspaper when they should have concentrating on something more important was many years ago on an air ecosse flight from Dundee to Manchester. It was a night flight and the aircraft appeared to be settled in the cruise somewhere south of Edinburgh when the curtain separating the pilot (single pilot in those days) slid open. The pilot had a copy of the Telegraph laid open in front of him covering up all before him.
He spent a large part of the flight reading his newspaper with all of the instruments hidden from view.
I wonder If he managed to complete a full flying career ?

dubbleyew eight
10th Jan 2014, 11:50
effluent man, unheard of until chinese tyres hit the market here in oz.

I'm told of a kenworth semi lost because of chinese tyres.

G-CPTN
10th Jan 2014, 12:28
Mr Watson argued against the normal ban, claiming Newton, who formerly had a clean driving licence, had only been reacting to a medical condition. But Mrs Dennis said: "We do not accept the reasons put forward amount to special reasons.
"It's unacceptable a person would drive without hands on the wheel. It can have serious consequences for road safety."

From (and more at):- 'No-hands' motorist video: Richard Newton of Whitby drove at 60mph steering with his KNEES - Mirror Online (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/no-hands-motorist-video-richard-newton-2994535)

Richard Newton is currently employed as a vehicle mechanic 24 miles away from his home. There appears to be public transport links (with a change of buses) but his travel time will be at least doubled.

Effluent Man
10th Jan 2014, 12:43
Truck tyres are a totally different issue.Due to the fact that the vehicles are multi axle what happens is that one of the tyres gets a puncture and overheats to the point that the carcass breaks down.The driver only notices when it starts to break up.The fact that there are other tyres doing the work masks the effect from a driving point of view..
You would be amazed the extent to which car tyres can degrade before anything happens.We see people coming in for MOT tests with the steel cords exposed,usually on the inside of the front wheels when tyres have not been rotated on the axles.You can get 25% extra mileage by moving them diagonally every 5000 miles.We think this is largely an effect of power steering causing tyres to wear unevenly.

MG23
10th Jan 2014, 15:37
Perhaps a few people on here need to have a front tyre blow out at more than 40 mph? It's not easy to retain/regain control with both hands on the wheel, let alone none.

I had one blow out at 70mph years ago, and I just pulled over into the next layby, wondering what the sudden thunk-thunk-thunk noise was (it was an Italian car, so sudden, random, unexplained noises weren't unusual).

But I honestly can't see why anyone would defend someone driving this way; I've been in cars before where the driver took both hands off the wheel to do something while they steered with their knee, and it always scared the heck out of me.

Effluent Man
15th Jan 2014, 06:34
From our local news this morning.: A man who was not wearing his glasses,without which he could not read a number plate at 2METRES,ran down a pedestrian on a crossing and killed him.The judge said that Mohammed Rashid had done nothing wrong.He admitted causing death by dangerous driving and was given 140 hours community service.

Craggenmore
15th Jan 2014, 09:56
Perhaps a few people on here need to have a front tyre blow out at more than 40 mph? It's not easy to retain/regain control with both hands on the wheel, let alone none.

I had one at 60mph after running over a large pothole in West Sussex. The car continued to track in a straight line but I slowed it down, pulled over, called the AA who came and replaced the tyre.

I then sued the Council for 900 which covered a new set of alloy wheels that had flat-spotted at impact with the pot-hole.

Had my hands been on my head I would have moved them to the wheel, slowed the car down, pulled over, called the AA and sued the council.

Its clear that most of the posters here haven't had a blow-out. So once again, these posts are based on sentiment and what ifs.

Hysteria, inexperience and a lack of facts - not a good mix.

bingofuel
15th Jan 2014, 10:08
Craggenmore

"Pages and pages of posts here and not one person has a link to the law on this subject of having your hands off the wheel for 30 seconds."

I refer you to my post number 28 which is the Law and is interpreted by the Courts and then guilt or innocence is decided accordingly.

Seldomfitforpurpose
15th Jan 2014, 11:02
I had one at 60mph after running over a large pothole in West Sussex. The car continued to track in a straight line but I slowed it down, pulled over, called the AA who came and replaced the tyre.

I then sued the Council for 900 which covered a new set of alloy wheels that had flat-spotted at impact with the pot-hole.

Had my hands been on my head I would have moved them to the wheel, slowed the car down, pulled over, called the AA and sued the council.

Its clear that most of the posters here haven't had a blow-out. So once again, these posts are based on sentiment and what ifs.

Hysteria, inexperience and a lack of facts - not a good mix.

Are you seriously suggesting that the above would be everyone's experience of a blow out, surely not :confused:

cockney steve
15th Jan 2014, 14:26
Were you successful and, if so, had the pothole been previously reported to them?

IIrc, it's not required by the legislation. The councilhas to prove that they could not havereasonably been aware of the hole.

If the hole is too big to have spontaneously appeared, it's pretty self-evident that it's aresult of neglect. Iseem to recollect the prudent councils have aformal fortnightly inspection, or an informal regime.....street sweepers and binmen are ideally placed to report back.

There is also an App for camera-phones that has the ability to send a time-stamped picture to the Authority with GPS co-ordinates included.

Lazy councils have the incentive ,now, to repair, rather than just keep paying increasing insurance-premiums.

I can recollect at least 3 successful claims due to" failure to maintain the highway"

BDiONU
15th Jan 2014, 15:50
Craggenmore,
Were you successful and, if so, had the pothole been previously reported to them?Website you can find if a hole has previously been reported Potholes.co.uk - Home Page (http://www.potholes.co.uk/)

Fill That Hole | FillThatHole.org.uk (http://www.fillthathole.org.uk/)

Krystal n chips
15th Jan 2014, 17:04
"I then sued the Council for 900 which covered a new set of alloy wheels that had flat-spotted at impact with the pot-hole.

Obviously ! .....perish the thought you could have contributed to the event in anyway.....you were, after all, only the driver.

"Had my hands been on my head I would have moved them to the wheel, slowed the car down, pulled over, called the AA and sued the council."

Of course you would, the little matter of not having your hands on the steering wheel in the first place being casually ignored with your faith in your self proclaimed prowess and reaction times.

"Its clear that most of the posters here haven't had a blow-out. So once again, these posts are based on sentiment and what ifs.

Hysteria, inexperience and a lack of facts - not a good mix

Quite possibly the case, certainly never happened to me. However, your summation suggests that you consider yourself somewhat better than average, allied to which is a distinct "holier than thou" arrogance in support of...yourself. You seem to have omitted this trait from your last line.

Lon More
15th Jan 2014, 17:13
Its clear that most of the posters here haven't had a blow-out

How many of those who claim one actually had a puncture and not a blow-out i.e. rapid but not instantaneous deflation.
The steering geometry is going to be radically altered, as is the braking balance. The type of car will also have a big influence, anything "sporty" is going to react differently to a sedate VW Golf.

bingofuel
15th Jan 2014, 17:32
Modern cars steering and suspension systems are designed so that a sudden tyre deflation does not cause great difficulties to the average driver, and it takes little effort to hold the steering wheel in the same position and just let the car slow gradually.
Of course Hollywood would suggest differently but they are not concerned with vehicle design and road safety.

Capetonian
15th Jan 2014, 17:44
I've only ever had one 'blow out' as opposed to a flat tyre. It was last year driving a Golf on a soft dirt/sand farm road up near Velddrif. I was doing about 30 kph travelling in a straight line, more or less, following the tracks of other vehicles as one does. Heard a loud bang, thought a stone or stick had hit the underneath of the car thrown up by one of the wheels, and just carried on, there was barely any difference in the feel of the car but I just had an intuitive feeling that it felt a bit heavier then before, so stopped. Back tyre completely flat, with a large roughly circular hole about 10-15 cm in the outer sidewall of the tyre. Newish car, less than 5k on the clock, new tyres.

When I took it back to the car rental company they thought it was odd enough to check with the tyre supplier who couldn't give a reasonable explanation other than hitting something on the road.

I suppose had it been a front tyre I would have felt it more.

goudie
15th Jan 2014, 17:46
Why is everyone going on about a possible 'blow-out'? It could just have easily been a dog, deer or fox, or God forbid, a child, running out in front of him. For whatever reason, the idiot was deliberately ill prepared for an unexpected emergency. Hence found guilty of driving dangerously and sentenced accordingly.

Lon More
15th Jan 2014, 21:16
Why is everyone going on about a possible 'blow-out'?

Because those who defend him raise it as the most probable scenario?

Checkboard
15th Jan 2014, 22:36
I would think it is those attacking him who raise it as a possible scenario :hmm:

What is the statistical chance of ANY of a blowout, dog, fox or child (on this particular road away from houses, forests and with a clear view ahead) appearing without any notice in 30 seconds of a 24 mile journey? :rolleyes:

... why are we not talking about his car being hit by a meteorite, lightning or tornado while we are at it? :ugh:

Effluent Man
16th Jan 2014, 07:57
Lon.I don't think it's those defending him is it? It's those defending the draconian sentence for something that didn't happen.That was the point of my post about the driver who killed someone getting community service.

The law really should try to be even handed and what this driver did was sillly rather than dangerous per se.But as has been pointed out modern cars with complex steering damping systems do very little after a blow out.The best illustration of this is the police use of Stinger.That causes a blow out and as yet we have not seen the police called over the coals for causing a death with it.

bingofuel
16th Jan 2014, 08:02
Stinger does not cause a blow out, it causes a controlled rapid deflation of the tyre through the hollow spikes that remain in the tyre once it has been driven over the Stinger device, which allow the rapid deflation in a controlled manner.

Ancient Mariner
16th Jan 2014, 08:27
Since tire blow out, for some unfathomable reason seems to be the key word here, may I kindly suggest you Gnoogle it.
Per

Craggenmore
16th Jan 2014, 09:36
Basil - Yes I was successful.

West Sussex Council (and many others) have a policy of replying to every claim with a rejection letter whether they are liable or not.

Councils use clever wording to scare you off and roughly 5% will only go on to pursue their claim.

You see, many high level lawyers start practicing at Councils after law school before they move on and up the corporate ladder.

As West Sussex Council didn't scare me and I know several high level lawyers, I just wrote a scarier letter back and I had a cheque through the post 3 days later.

Krystal Balls - I'm an average driver but.......Modern cars steering and suspension systems are designed so that a sudden tyre deflation does not cause great difficulties to the average driver, and it takes little effort to hold the steering wheel in the same position and just let the car slow gradually.
Of course Hollywood would suggest differently but they are not concerned with vehicle design and road safety.

bingofuel

Dangerous driving

1. The way they drive falls far below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver; and
2. It would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

Clearly in this case the court decided the above conditions had been met and convicted accordingly.

1. The car was being driven on the road, in a straight line and within the speed limit. These are the facts from the submitted evidence. What is dangerous about a car being driven on the road, in a straight line and within the speed limit?

You just cannot bring 'what if's' into this in the same way that you can't be arrested because you might crash one day!

Lord Spandex Masher
16th Jan 2014, 11:34
For whatever reason, the idiot was deliberately ill prepared for an unexpected emergency.

So are most of the drivers on the road today. Ok, not deliberately but should we lock them up for being naturally dangerous and useless?

goudie
16th Jan 2014, 12:48
So are most of the drivers on the road today. Ok, not deliberately
And therein lies the offence. Most of us have at sometime driven incompetently, but not deliberately so.
For those who defend this guy and protest at his sentence. Would you care to see him driving in this manner, towards you?
Furthermore what if we all chose to drive as such, at the same time, cars belting down roads with the driver's hands behind their heads. Thankfully we don't and probably his sentence was a deterrent to make sure we don't.

Lord Spandex Masher
16th Jan 2014, 12:55
Whilst I'm not defending his actions I find it strange that we are so accepting of drivers who are as dangerous by incompetence etc..

goudie
16th Jan 2014, 13:30
Where skills of a certain order are required, because we are human, there will always be a level of incompetence in certain conditions, at sometime or other, whether it's driving a car or piloting an aircraft. You cannot legislate for that but you can lay down sensible rules/laws (Rules Of The Road) by which, hopefully, most sensible people will abide by.

Fareastdriver
16th Jan 2014, 15:32
Wind your neck in Goody.

goudie
16th Jan 2014, 15:37
Wind your neck in Goody.

Ah! The last resort...insults!

Effluent Man
16th Jan 2014, 15:51
I was following a lady today with another car between us.We came into a village and she saw a pedestrian standing beside the road waiting to cross.Now for reasons best known to herself she decided to stop and wave the old boy across.There was no reason whatsover to do this as in five seconds all three of us would have passed and he could have crossed in safety in his own time.The car in front of me clearly didn't see the pedestrian and,presumably assuming she had just stopped went to pass her.I put my hand on the hooter and succeeded in making the driver hesitate long enough for the old boy to be clear of the first car and in a more visible position.I would argue that the lady who stopped and waved him across should be banned.

Fareastdriver
16th Jan 2014, 16:19
Having started a thread as general interest it has been taken over and used as a vehicle for the holier than thou/politically correct brigade. I am of the opinion that nobody is perfect and WILL commit some minor and serious traffic offences during their driving life.
Sometimes you get caught. Should it be deliberate, like running a red light then it's a case of holding your hands up and admitting it was a fair cop. Others are in a grey area. Being bounced for driving at 85 mph at 3 oclock in the morning on a deserted motorway would be regarded by some on this thread as reckless dangerous driving.
I posted this thead as I thought, with 57 years no-claims bonus and NEVER ever been charged with a traffic offence despite having four national licences and having driven in at least five continents, that this bloke was hard done by.

I was obviously wrong.

In my opinion, for what it is worth, the magistrate, being a women and most probably, though I may be wrong, had a focused idea that a car was to be a mode of transport from A to B. Any deviation from that role brought the operation of that vehicle outside the law. Enjoying driving in any form was a henious crime, especially experimenting with driving a car with your hands behind you head and steering with the knees. The driver may not have have had some little light in his brain that suggested an alternative way of guiding a car but if there is ever a way of discovering a diffent way of steering a car it will be because somebody has put their hands behind the head and given it a go.

As he wont be able to do that in the UK because of traffic regulations it will be left to some Far Eastern entrepenure.

Goudie. I wasn't insulting you. Everybody has their right to express themselves. I spent eighteen years during the cold war ranging from carrying buckets of sunshine to internal security ensuring that you had that right.

Others may consider that I was wasting my time.

My only bitch was that you were like a long playing record, pushing the same argument time after time.

I will back off now and let this run its course.

Effluent Man
16th Jan 2014, 16:34
All fair comment from an old timer.

G-CPTN
16th Jan 2014, 16:44
BBC News - Google Glass wearer Cecilia Abadie appears in court (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25764674)

goudie
16th Jan 2014, 16:45
Fareastdriver
I was obviously wrong.

You weren't wrong, you were expressing your opinion, as was I.

I too spent 20 years of my life ensuring the right of expression but
you are right I did 'go on a bit' (and in fact surprised myself by doing so) with the same old argument but so did the those with a counter argument.
I was joshing about the 'insult' no offence given and none taken!

Cheers

Krystal n chips
16th Jan 2014, 17:12
You see, many high level lawyers start practicing at Councils after law school before they move on and up the corporate ladder.

As West Sussex Council didn't scare me and I know several high level lawyers, I just wrote a scarier letter back and I had a cheque through the post 3 days later.

Krystal Balls - I'm an average driver but.......

one that displays all the potential for an accident based on your self promotional response. You also appear to have a visual impairment.

1. The car was being driven on the road, in a straight line and within the speed limit.

Yes it was, almost, however, what you seemingly missed was that the road in question was undulating and curved. These seemingly inconsequential details are, presumably, irrelevant ?


" These are the facts from the submitted evidence. What is dangerous about a car being driven on the road, in a straight line and within the speed limit?

Ah yes, the facts, helpfully underlined above in support of those you missed in your comment about,..... straight lines.

Now, here's a suggestion for you. Whilst you are, as you say, only an average driver....aren't we all....but are so adamant that the driving style displayed was perfectly safe, why not write to, say, the authors of "Roadcraft" for example and suggest they amend the training syllabus to include this style.

Don't forget to include your vehicle reg, along with your address, as you may find you will be requiring the services of the many lawyers you know at some point in the future should said authors not entirely share your proposal .

Checkboard
16th Jan 2014, 17:20
Yes it was, almost, however, what you seemingly missed was that the road in question was undulating and curved. These seemingly inconsequential details are, presumably, irrelevant ?
Even better - it shows the level of control that he had! ;)

but are so adamant that the driving style displayed was perfectly safe,I don't think anyone is saying that, including the driver in question who admitted "careless driving", but the conviction (and punishment) was for "dangerous driving" - that's the argument.

Effluent Man
16th Jan 2014, 17:39
Caco, That was my point .It wasn't on a crossing.

Craggenmore
17th Jan 2014, 08:06
Krystal,

If you think that road was undulating and curved you are inexperienced. Take a trip to the hills above St.Tropez, the Stelvio pass, Butte County in Northern California, Corsica or the back roads in the Black Forest. These roads are undulating and curved.

I wouldn't write to Roadcraft because we all have different skill levels so Roadcraft would never blanket 'approve' a temporary hands off scenario.

The driver in the video can clearly handle a temporary hands off situation but you probably couldn't hence your sentiment thinking that he was wrong to have done such a thing.

(BTW, I couldn't afford my lawyer friends, they're that high..!)

Effluent Man
17th Jan 2014, 08:47
That's my quip if I get flashed by an oncoming car when they consider that I have cut things a bit fine "It would have been dangerous if he had done it".Like everything you adjust to your skill level.When you have been driving for more than forty years and never seriously misjudged a situation I suppose you do become relaxed about it.It's not bravado or carelessness you are just aware of your capabilities and stay within them,

I agree regarding the road though,it isn't in any sense a tricky one being open with good visibility.Had it not been they could not have nicked him.The one you mention to St Tropez is a cracker as are many in that area.Also along the coast beyond Monaco into Italy.

When I bought Mrs EM an SLK I tried it out by driving to Monte Carlo.Late November,roof back and right over The Alps.Well I had to make sure it was safe for her to drive!

cavortingcheetah
17th Jan 2014, 14:23
Some can multi task and heaven can wait.
Speeding van driver was TEXTING at 85mph moments before he smashed into a horsebox and was killed | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541152/Speeding-van-driver-TEXTING-85mph-moments-smashed-horsebox-killed.html)

Seldomfitforpurpose
17th Jan 2014, 14:53
The driver in the video can clearly handle a temporary hands off situation but you probably couldn't hence your sentiment thinking that he was wrong to have done such a thing.



Childish and uncalled for, generally the type of response form someone whose argument is lost and is starting to look a bit silly :=

Thankfully the Law does not agree with you with regards to hands off driving and I doubt many sane and sensible folk do either :ok:

Craggenmore
17th Jan 2014, 16:03
Seldom

History has shown us that humans are often scared of things that they do not understand, hence the 'hang him' reaction of such types on this thread.

Krystal n chips
17th Jan 2014, 16:28
" Krystal,

If you think that road was undulating and curved you are inexperienced"

True, almost 40 years points / accident free driving does not begin to compare with your self-proclaimed expertise I agree....and, clearly with my evident visual impairments, I could have sworn on the video the car is seen going up a....rising gradient, otherwise known, as, erm, an undulating road...in contrast to say, a straight road for example.

I don't think it's the cost of lawyers you need to concern yourself with.....thankfully, for you, the N.H.S is free.

Seldomfitforpurpose
18th Jan 2014, 11:14
Seldom

History has shown us that humans are often scared of things that they do not understand, hence the 'hang him' reaction of such types on this thread.

History shows me that there are way too many folk about who mix ambition with ability and regularly screw it up, hence the Darwin Awards :ok:

ExSp33db1rd
18th Jan 2014, 18:40
Speeding van driver was TEXTING at 85mph moments before he smashed into a horsebox and was killed | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541152/Speeding-van-driver-TEXTING-85mph-moments-smashed-horsebox-killed.html)
IF said driver was indeed using his mobile phone, and he was the only one killed or injured, why all the fuss for him ? Swift justice.

I'm sorry for the horses.

Effluent Man
18th Jan 2014, 21:12
Why is that? Probably a good career move.I expect they got a job with Findus.

Checkboard
18th Jan 2014, 21:15
So what happens when I see a kid ride past on a bicycle with his hands off the bars - call the police and insist on his arrest?

Ancient Mariner
19th Jan 2014, 07:27
Only if his bike weights 1000 kg and he is doing 50 mph.
Per

Craggenmore
19th Jan 2014, 14:17
Ancient - I had a 46 mph reading from my Garmin GPS speedometer in Richmond Park on 'The Corkscrew' many times on my Tour de France bike. It weighed a little under 10kg (ten KG)..!

Seldom - the Darwin awards are ridiculous. Aren't they made up?

Krystal - I congratulate you on your 40 year driving record. No mean feat in this camera ridden era, but this does not mean you're experienced by any stretch of the imagination. I won't deny that you have a good understanding of road rules, procedures, etiquette, the ability to avoid other road users thus far and can ably read signs that tell you a speed camera is up ahead. I hope your good fortune continues, but this is not really driving 'experience' at all.

I would argue that you're yet to pass your PPL in driving (to describe in parallel.) All you're stating is that you have completed Effects of Controls and Straight and Level and then practiced it for 40 years. You certainly haven't reached steep turns, stalling or spinning yet if you think a clean driving license is the sum total of an experienced motorist.

Do you have a motorbike license, a truck license, have you ever towed?
Have you passed your advanced driving test (IAM)?

Done a defensive driving course perhaps? Done a protective driving course perhaps?

How many track days have you done in a performance car under instruction?
How many track days have you done on a motorbike under instruction?

Have you ever completed a skid control course? What are the skid characteristics of front wheel drive compared to rear wheel drive? Have you ever completed a drifting course? Have you mastered snow and ice control under instruction? What experience do you have in this area that kills hundreds each year?

Do you hold either a Clubman, National B, National A or International race license under tuition from the ARDS, BARS, ARKS or AHASS?

This list can go on.

I bet there are many driving abnormalities that you have no experience in whatsoever (myself included by the way!) Funny how little the driving license actually prepares you for? Really nothing.

What do you call a 30 year veteran airline pilot who has never had a live engine failure? Experienced in live engine failure management?

Finally, I have not self-proclaimed my expertise in driving. Where did you get that from? You have made this up.

Seldomfitforpurpose
19th Jan 2014, 16:03
Seldom - the Darwin awards are ridiculous. Aren't they made up?



No more ridiculous than continuing to defend or condone this twerps actions.

Some top advice at this stage would be the hole is now deep enough :ok:

Krystal n chips
19th Jan 2014, 17:49
"I congratulate you on your 40 year driving record. No mean feat in this camera ridden era, but this does not mean you're experienced by any stretch of the imagination.

So I achieved this with the help of a fairy waving a magic wand then ?

"I won't deny that you have a good understanding of road rules, procedures, etiquette, the ability to avoid other road users thus far and can ably read signs that tell you a speed camera is up ahead. I hope your good fortune continues, but this is not really driving 'experience' at all.

Other wise known as defensive driving ( c /o Aunty Betty) and speed cameras don't usually have warning signs....which would defeat the purpose now wouldn't it.

]]I would argue that you're yet to pass your PPL in driving (to describe in parallel.) All you're stating is that you have completed Effects of Controls and Straight and Level and then practiced it for 40 years. You certainly haven't reached steep turns, stalling or spinning yet if you think a clean driving license is the sum total of an experienced motorist.

Interesting albeit not even remotely relevant analogy. Never had a PPL Oh Divine God of the Air, just a bum glider pilot so my spins, steep turns, wave / ridge flying count for nowt I suppose....also done some towing however, strange that. with gliders landing in fields. And I have driven vans / 7.5 tonnes commercially.....which means for a living if you are confused here.

The other driving experiences on your list are probably equally not applicable to the vast percentage of drivers either, unless you are interested in motor sports or drive professionally or competitively. So they can be dismissed as being irrelevant as well.


" What do you call a 30 year veteran airline pilot who has never had a live engine failure? Experienced in live engine failure management?"

No more fortunate than many I worked with who never experienced an engine failure. However, there is a sub text in your posts that reminds me of a Captain I was once unfortunate to fly with...as a spanner before you ask, who, when the GPWS started screeching "terrain !" blithely dismissed the repeated warnings as "he could see the ground"... the F/O's face said it all as did his succinct "I know" comment to me when we landed and God had vacated the cockpit.

Finally, I have not self-proclaimed my expertise in driving. Where did you get that from? You have made this up.

See above and then read your posts defending the indefensible, in your opinion that is.

ShyTorque
19th Jan 2014, 19:15
The driver would have complied with the "Roadcraft" manual with regard to the recommended hand position at ten to two. Unfortunately he went past the camera at 13:49.