Road rage and general idiots out there: your experiences?

[Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 17:49

TL;DR: have you ever been on the receiving end of road rage? Or on the giving-end of it? lol

What are the most ridiculous, stupid or plain dangerous things you've witnessed on the roads?

Long version: So after a frustrating day of lengthy driving from one end of Sydney to the other, and back again twice today.. I'm seriously fed up with sharing a road with some of the people out there (in vehicles and pedestrians).

My day didn't involve road 'rage' as such, but the minor experiences have left me unsurprised that some people lose their cool on the roads.

Two incidents today in particular really pissed me off:

  1. In a small car park, wanting to turn right into an 'aisle'. Middle aged lady in a tiny hatchback is to my right in the aisle I'm turning into - I had the right of way. Anyway, as I'm turning, she starts beeping hysterically, throwing her hands up in the air, freaking out while I'm turning right and her car is past being perpendicular to mine. No-one is behind me, so I stop, wind down my window as we're driver-side to driver-side… and ask what's wrong. She points at the front corner of her car, as if to say my car is about to shear off the corner of her car. There was a 2 foot gap between the front corner of her car and the side of mine. I told her that, and she promptly stopped flailing her arms and shut up… and I continued on my merry way. The dude in a car behind her watched the whole scene and was having a good laugh. I'd hate to see that woman in a bigger car. Boggles the mind how people with no spatial awareness manage to obtain licences.

  2. I was on the North Shore, approaching a roundabout on a relatively busy street. No cars on or approaching the roundabout so I didn't plan to come to a stop. A young male wearing headphones was approaching the middle island just before the roundabout - wanting to cross the lane I'm in. He obviously wasn't paying any attention and nearly walked into the side of my car but caught himself before he made contact. He then walks behind my car, turns around and kicks the other side of my car. My blood instantly boiled. I turned left just to follow the twat down the street he was walking - pulled up to the kerb, wound down my window and yelled at him lol. Batshit crazy response, probably, but to freaking kick my car when he decides to cross a street like it's a pedestrian crossing when it's not… a part of me wishes he did get himself hit.

  3. Young driver hogging the outside lane of the M2 doing 60km/h (100km/h limit) because she's busy chatting away on her mobile phone.

aaaand breathe.

Automotive

Comments

  • Yummy on 10/09/2014 - 18:21
    +8

    Plentiful in Auburn here:

    Left lane goes straight. Middle & Right lanes goes right. I am in Mid lane, right behind a car. After lights turn green, the guy at Left lane gave a late turn right signal & cutting me off. I beep him then he gave a flip. Nice habib he is.

    Sees plenty idiots driving this area, nearly everyday!

    • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 20:26
      +1

      LOL are you talking about Rawson St, turning into St Hilliers Rd?

      • Yummy on 10/09/2014 - 23:33

        Rawson St to The Crescent, where the Auburn bridge is.

  • frewer on 10/09/2014 - 18:32
    +6

    I don't drive a car, but people cut me off all the time, just to get ahead 10-20m. Then we both end up at the same red light ( i look at them and smile/wave, i can feel the awkwardness in the air ). Or some people did a quick accelerate so that they can do a left turn which is 5m ahead. Or some just pretend to didn't "see" me.

    • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 20:38
      +7

      i look at them and smile/wave

      Gold.

  • Riczter on 10/09/2014 - 18:50
    +7

    oh mate don't get me started. I get quite road ragey. i don't confront people and get aggressive but very often ill be screaming in my car "WHAT ARE YOU DOING!?!"

    3 things:

    1: Keep left unless overtaking on main roads. Its the law. People dont know its the law coz its not taught. but it is. and it should be taught in driving tests. It eases congestion. stops road rage. The people who sit in the right hand lane on the speed limit saying "i'm not doing anything wrong, and you should be thanking me coz im stopping you from speeding and getting a ticket"… People like this need a sympathetic pat on the head… with a hammer. Theyre actually breaking 2 road rules.. Not keeping left and obstructing the path of another vehicle. Learn the rules before you try to be a hero.

    2: Elderly drivers. People say they have just as much right to be on the roads, and leave them alone they need to get from point a to point b just as much as the next person. I dont care. It comes down to competence. I dont care if you are 20 or 80, if you are not a competent driver then hand in your licence before before you kill someone. When you get older you lose your reaction speed. There should be more competence testing for elderly drivers to keep the roads safe.

    3: Unskilled drivers. Defensive driving course should be part of getting our license. The number of times ive seen videos of a person bumping into another car or pole and then totally lose their shit and panic and put the accelerator down to the floor and take out another 5 cars and end up on their roof… sigh… just… there are no words. Maybe they should teach accident management in the defensive driving course.

    It comes down to education… that and not being a total F#^kwit

    /rant.

    • nailsforlunch on 10/09/2014 - 20:28
      +18

      It's only keep left unless overtaking at 80kph or over. It doesn't apply under 80kph. Also if the other lane(s) are congested you're free to use the right lane. (Victoria)

      In your beloved WA it's only keep left unless overtaking at 90kph or greater. I really only know highways that are 90kph or greater, not these so called 'main roads'

      • Riczter on 10/09/2014 - 20:33

        Yeah its 80kmph in WA as well, but wasnt sure in other states so just said "on main roads".

        But its just common courtesy you know? If theres someone behind you who wants to go faster than you, and there's room on the left, then move over and let him pass!

        • nailsforlunch on 10/09/2014 - 20:37
          +6

          http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/licensing/LBU_DL_B…

          No it's 90kph in WA. It comes down to education. If I'm going 70kph on a 70kph road in the right lane you can get over it.

        • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 20:45
          +3

          I agree 100% about leaving the right hand lane free as common courtesy on roads where the 'keep left unless overtaking' rule doesn't apply - and I stick to it myself out of courtesy for other drivers (and drivers who simply prefer to speed as well lol). But being that it isn't the law in such circumstances, I don't really get too riled up if someone's doing well under the limit in the right lane… can't blame them, but does still rate on my annoyance scale.

          It does make me wonder if the same people are just completely oblivious to the law when it does apply though - like doing 60km/h in a 100 zone in the right lane, on a two lane motorway with trucks taking up most of the left lane. Oh well.

        • Riczter on 10/09/2014 - 21:16
          +1

          @nails
          I was told a couple of years ago it was 80 but thanks for clarifying that for me.

          However If you're going 70 in the right hand lane, and there's space in the left hand lane for you to move over without having to change your speed or impact the flow of traffic in the left hand lane, and there's a row of cars backed up behind you wanting to get past you, then you're an asshole IMO. But not breaking the low, so i guess I'll have to get over it.

          If you have a reason to be in the right hand lane then fair enough. But the number of people who are completely oblivious to the traffic around them is ridiculous and contributes to congestion and makes the journey longer for everyone. On the freeways and major roads its important, but yeah not so much a big deal on 70kmph zones. I still think its discourteous tho.

        • nailsforlunch on 10/09/2014 - 21:25
          +7

          @Riczter:

          If I'm going 70 in a 70kph zone I'm not going to move to the left just so some arsehole can speed and put other people's lives in danger. My best mate lost a family member just recently. If you want to speed, tough luck. If I'm doing the speed limit they can too.

        • FutureTech on 11/09/2014 - 07:42
          +5

          @Riczter:http://www.mac.sa.gov.au/why-is-creeping-over-the-speed-limit-dangerous

        • hellbound on 11/09/2014 - 09:39
          +8

          @nailsforlunch: If you think you're doing the speed limit when your cars speedo says 70 you're actually going anywhere from 60-70kph. Don't assume because someone is going faster than you that they're speeding, they may have a more accurate speedo than you.

        • nailsforlunch on 11/09/2014 - 11:54

          @hellbound:

          I've had my speedo tested mate. I sit on 74 because 74 = real world 70.

        • sandshrew on 11/09/2014 - 12:59
          +16

          As courtesy I usually drive in the left lane on roads 80km/h and under, but if I need to turn right soon or require the right lane I will happily sit on the speed limit.

          If someone wants to go faster than the speed limit that's their business. I refuse to make unnecessary lane changes and put myself under pressure for their benefit.

        • Riczter on 11/09/2014 - 15:35
          +3

          Yeah if you have to turn right soon or are overtaking other cars then you have every right to be in the right lane on the speed limit. The hoons behind you wanting to speed past can wait patiently until you make your turn or have passed the slow moving traffic and can safely move back over.

          When the hoons start tail gating you or acting aggressively towards you without waiting to see if you actually have a good reason to be in the right lane, well they need to pull their head in and realise they dont own the roads… just like the people who sit in the right hand lane for the hell of it need to realise they dont own the road either. Sharing is caring.

        • Krizy on 11/09/2014 - 15:46
          +1

          @nailsforlunch: Why did this person get negged? He's saying he's had his speedometer tested so he knows his actual speed. If he's doing the speed limit, of course he shouldn't need to move over and let someone overtake him.

        • Riczter on 11/09/2014 - 15:57
          +1

          @Krizy:
          Yes he should, its common courtesy to let faster moving vehicles overtake you on the right, if its safe and practical to move into the left lane. That's the whole point. I didn't neg him though, but i saved one for you :)

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 17:31
          +4

          @Riczter: I get tailgated often while in the left lane. The problem is the large number of idiots on the road, and I doubt you have the judgement to declare your speeding to be 'safe'.

        • saintmagician0 on 11/09/2014 - 18:53
          +9

          @Riczter: I don't see why it's 'common courtesy' to let a vehicle that's breaking the road rules (by driving over the speed limit) have an easier time breaking road rules.

          It may be sensible… if someone's going to break the road rules (by speeding), I'd personally rather not be stuck in front of them. Therefore I'd move to the left lane if I could. But it's not "common courtesy".

          It's only common courtesy if you are doing under the speed limit and someone wants to go faster and do the speed limit.

        • saintmagician0 on 11/09/2014 - 18:54
          +3

          @wasabinator: If it's a multi-lane road and i'm getting tail gated while doing the speed limit in the left hand lane, I normally respond by slowing down to about 20ks below the speed limit. That quickly convinces them to change lanes so they can speed, and I can go back to driving at the speed limit and feeling more comfortable.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 22:47
          -1

          @nailsforlunch:

          Fair enough to your comment, but most people here in melbs are always 5-10kph under which sh*ts me hard.

          Im constantly overtaking and swearing in the car, due to retards on the road. I don't know how people get there license here it really surprises me.

        • Kkuba on 12/09/2014 - 13:39

          @maolin95:

          "and urban crashes by about 25%"

          shouldn't that be around 50%?

          Interesting that recently (2 weeks ago), a road that I travel(ed - no longer do, since the change) on every weekday has had the limit reduced from 70 to 60. Even though cars are getting safer (passively and actively), it seems that for the last 40+ years that was considered safe. But now, If I travel on that road at 65 (I don't), it is considered outrageous by the conservatives. So in theory my risk should now be at 25% of what it was 2 weeks ago.

          Shame that the first day of the new speed limit, because of the increase traffic (was banked up FAR more than normal), I had my pride and joy rear ended.

          As mentioned above, I now no longer take that road as part of my route, as I feel, probably incorrectly, that my risk of a bingle is increased.

        • pawan1993 on 13/09/2014 - 22:23

          @saintmagician0: +1. I usually like staying at the limit and don't usually go below it and most people in the right line of a motorway end up going at the same speed as me but if another idiot is tailgating me and is wanting to overspeed then it's safer for everyone on the motorway if he doesn't.

          OP is right in his case where someone was doing about 60 in a 100 zone. But like some people here who have decided they have the right of way when speeding, they don't deserve any sympathy.

        • neil aus on 15/09/2014 - 22:13

          @bti_jet: Probably due to the traffic police booking people for going slightly over? In the ACT 1kph over can result in a ticket from memory, so people pull away from lights in both lanes and neither pass the other, through fear!

          If you've been booked a few times with fines as big as they are now, its a lot less exciting going at or near the limit. For your pocket anyway. In NSW state revenue gets heaps from drivers in fines.

      • porkandbeans on 10/09/2014 - 20:55
        +10

        I'm splitting hairs, but it's keep left unless overtaking where the speed limit is above 80 km/h.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 17:33
          +3

          The trouble is that these idiots treat a 60 zone as an 80 zone. It's not just their speed, it's their frantic weaving around and late breaking where the problem also is. Their confidence + lack of actual skill is where the real danger lies.

        • JediJan on 15/09/2014 - 09:19

          Yes, I believe that is still the case … or turning off soon. We still get those drivers that will sit in the right lane, well under the speed limit, happy to let everyone overtake in the left lane.

          With over-congested roads, highways, freeways, etc. basically the Police turn a blind eye to that "keep left unless overtaking" though … how else could you explain the standstills on freeways, with every available lane blocked?

      • goms on 11/09/2014 - 14:49

        I bet those people driving on the right lane were driving on a right hand traffic back home…

        To share my experience though, I was driving on the right hand side of the road on a moderate traffic (60kph) and I was at the speed limit. Two cars sped off, overtaking me from the left without signalling. When I was just saying to myself "Could please someone catch these guys", an unmarked police vehicle actually caught the first car and then moved on to the next one. But the first car then took off, not sure if he is allowed to do that!

        Kudos to the cops! They obviously break several road rules

        • Overtaking from left
        • Not signalling
        • Speeding
        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 15:15

          What's wrong with overtaking from the left? Isn't that legal on a multi-laned road?

        • No on 11/09/2014 - 15:28
          +5

          @waterlogged turnip: It's much better / safer to allow people to overtake you on the right. The driver is on the right so has a better view of the road. nailsforlunch has nails in his head if he thinks he is making the roads safer by blocking the right lane.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 16:03
          +2

          @daveaus: But the very (annoying) fact that the law does not enforce 'keep left unless overtaking' on all roads, means that there will be people happily doing below the limit on the right hand lanes - meaning other drivers are forced to overtake them on the left.

          Not that I'm defending it at all. Just saying that IRL, it's not illegal on all roads.

          I'm always one to stick to the left on any road strictly unless I'm overtaking. Sadly not everyone shares this view of common courtesy.

        • Woodyg22 on 11/09/2014 - 17:11

          @waterlogged turnip: funny example of these scenarios is found in Vietnam. On the freeways there the inside lanes are often set with higher limits than the outside lanes. This means on roads that are 90 one lane and 70 the other, when a car sits in the 90 lane doing 70 everyone gets stuck behind them as there is no (legal) way they can get past the slower driver who is in the fast lane.
          We got stuck in a situation where our driver just sat on the horn, for what seemed like forever, while stuck doing 70 in the 90 lane refusing to quickly speed in the 70 lane to get past the idiot in front.

          Strict road rules in the otherwise chaotic mayhem that is Vietnam traffic!

        • nailsforlunch on 13/09/2014 - 16:28

          @daveaus:

          I overtake 80% of the people on the road sitting right on the limit. I don't really block it. Normally I'm in the 3rd lane of the 4 lane M1 but if I'm sitting in the right and going at the speed limit I'll sit in the right lane until I can merge back in/isn't people for me to overtake soon.

          Nowhere did I say I intentionally sit in the right lane all day/block the right lane.

    • cpho on 10/09/2014 - 23:54
      +1

      +1 for elderlies!
      Doing 30 down a 60 road is just so annoying. Get gramps a moped, he'll get from a to b faster than he's currently driving

      • YTW on 11/09/2014 - 21:07

        Twice I have been in a situation where I thought "this is it, we're going to crash" - both times it was an elderly driver. Once was in heavy traffic on the highway, he was merging into it - had a decent gap, I give people more than most do - and then just panicked at the last minute and slammed the brakes on (in his tiny light car that could stop on nothing) and came to a sudden stop on the highway right in front of me (and my heavy old Volvo) and all the cars behind me. Thank God for the guy in the 4WD next to me who realised I was going to swerve into his lane if I was going to miss this guy and slammed his brakes on to give me just enough room. How I never hit either of them I'll never know.

        Then there was the elderly lady who pulled out into me as I was pulling in alongside her - I had to swerve back out onto the road to avoid being hit by her. She didn't even see me, even with the narrow miss, and just drove off completely unaware. I didn't even realise there was anyone in the car - no brake lights, indicator or anything. Not that it should have mattered, she is the one who should have given way. She must have just turned the key, hit the accelerator and pulled out.

        Then there was the elderly man who just drove straight into my parked car (that was perpendicular to his car?!?!?) then DENIED IT until I showed him all the damage to the front of his car and side of mine. It's as though he had blacked out or something - but he was really evasive so I never got a straight answer for anything and couldn't get anywhere with him. He seemed ok otherwise, I just figured he was trying to avoid paying me anything.

    • donedeed on 11/09/2014 - 10:00
      +1

      So are you saying, if a cop is going 80 km/hr on the left lane, you would overtake him by going over the speed limit of 80km/hr? Maybe answer to that question and think about it before you talk :)

      • Riczter on 11/09/2014 - 12:23
        +2

        I went 104-106 past a cop sitting on 100 on Roe highway last month. I was kinda nervous, but also pretty sure he wouldnt give a damn. Looks like i was right.

        • p1 ama on 12/09/2014 - 15:05
          +3

          You're really asking to get fined.

        • wackedupwacko on 13/09/2014 - 00:04
          +3

          The chances of the cops pulling you over is much bigger than 50/50 in those situations. It's only when they are busy / lazy do they not do that. I watched a cop literally bait someone into going slightly past the limit by speeding up a little bit and immediately jump onto the back of them when they matched the speed.

          Also had people getting annoyed tailgating me on a 90 kmph hightway (I was at the limit) but guess what, coppers were right ahead and not too visible. Barely 1 minute later, I saw the cops pull over the idiot that sped past me on the left when there was a gap. Tried to do him a favor but I guess he got too impatient.

    • EnALup on 11/09/2014 - 11:27
      +1

      "Keep left unless overtaking on main roads"
      Theyre actually breaking 2 road rules.. Not keeping left and obstructing the path of another vehicle. Learn the rules before you try to be a hero.

      Sorry, but they are not breaking the law if the the road has speed limit of 70KMPH. I am not sure who gave you this information of keeping left on other roads? Main roads like Hume Highway, Canterbury road and many others have 70Kmph and are called main roads, but you are not breaking the law by keeping right.
      So next time if you blow horn to a dude going 70 on the 70 main road, keep calm :)

      On roads where it is a rule and speed is over 80kmph, there are sign boards saying so every few kms and I have not seen many people doing so at least in Sydney.

      • pjetson on 11/09/2014 - 11:40
        +3

        It's pretty simple - if you have to pass someone on the left, then the person on the right is in the wrong lane.

        • EnALup on 11/09/2014 - 14:15

          "If you have to pass someone on the left" does not mean you have to break the rule to drive faster to the person on right.

          I keep finding few persons driving zig zag well around 20-30 k over the limit on the 3 lane main roads. No one is breaking the law except him and no one will give them right lane free to drive well over the limit.

        • Settero on 11/09/2014 - 14:43
          +1

          um… people like you cause their own road rage.
          if im following the law, and you get angry because you cant speed and i have every right to be in that right lane for whatever reason i have, that's on you not me.

          i bet 100s of times you get yourself worked up over someone going the speed limit in the right lane and you having to overtaken them on the left, 30 seconds later , they make a right turn.

        • pjetson on 11/09/2014 - 15:19
          +1

          I didn't say anything about speed limits, just that if you're in the right lane and people are passing you on the left, then you're in the wrong lane.

        • pjetson on 11/09/2014 - 15:22
          +1

          um… people like you cause their own road rage.
          if im following the law, and you get angry because you cant speed and i have every right to be in that right lane for whatever reason i have, that's on you not me.

          I think it's funny that I said nothing about speeding, or getting angry, or anything else.

          I also think it's sad that you think you have a right to be in the right lane. Can you please tell me where it says that in the road rules?

        • Settero on 12/09/2014 - 07:10

          @pjetson:

          please tell me where in the road rules it says you are not allowed in the right lane ever.
          the law specifically states that you must stay left on roads above 80km/h unless overtaking , therefore any road under 80km/h you have the right to stay to the right!.

          and i was meaning people with your mentality , that staying on the right is never right!.

        • pjetson on 12/09/2014 - 10:27
          +1

          Thanks for your kind comments on my mentality.

          However, you apparently didn't read my comment, which was that if people are passing you on the left, then you are in the wrong lane.

        • wackedupwacko on 13/09/2014 - 00:08
          +2

          @pjetson: So basically, I can't turn right ever because god knows I have to slow down before I turn so people are passing me on the left. In fact I have to do this 2 - 3 times everyday on a busy road because guess what, that's how I turn into my driveway most of the time.

  • p1 ama on 10/09/2014 - 19:13
    +3

    To be honest, I usually divide incidents on the road into three categories:

    1) Annoying, but not particularly dangerous nor illegal. For these things, I generally let them go, they're not harming anyone and to be honest, there are worse things in life. Your first incident with the lady in the carpark is an example of this. Nobody is breaking any laws or doing anything illegal, at least she was on the careful side and warned you rather than decided not to and risk you hitting her, I guess that's one way of looking at it.

    2) Idiots endangering themselves. Your last example illustrates this well. I think this is a moot point. Survival of the fittest I guess :P

    3) People who actually do things which endanger me or other drivers. This really annoys me - I think that if you drive unsafely and endanger other people that's really not on.

    Personally, I don't get angry at people on the road. I'm just aware of what other people are doing and try my best to not get into a situation where I'm putting myself in danger of other people's behaviour. I find that generally works well and I don't end up in a situation where I have to be angry at anybody. It's stupid either way, people get too worked up when driving because it's like the social norm.

    It's actually ridiculous. Think about it, someone scrapes you in a carpark and you're pissed off. Someone runs into you in a shopping centre and knocks you, they say sorry and you're cool with it. Neither of those are dangerous situations, but people just have this mentality of other drivers being idiots.

    • Riczter on 10/09/2014 - 19:17

      The difference being in your example, if a person bumps u in the shops, it costs you nothing, if a person scraped your car it costs you a lot of money, and the time and effort involved in resolving it. (if you have an expensive car)

      • p1 ama on 10/09/2014 - 20:10
        -1

        Let's be honest. It costs you nothing if it's not your fault and the other person has insurance, which they probably do. It's really just the time and effort involved.

        • syousef on 11/09/2014 - 06:47
          +6

          Let's be honest. It costs you nothing if it's not your fault and the other person has insurance, which they probably do. It's really just the time and effort involved.

          That's a laugh. I remember going through WEEKS of hell trying to find a new car and get access to our belongings from the old one when my wife's car was written off by some idiot who decided to check to her right but not directly in front at a roundabout.

          But we got away easy. I can only imagine what it would be like to live with having killed someone even if it's proven not your fault.

          People talk such bunk.

        • bobbified on 11/09/2014 - 10:11
          +7

          "cost" isn't always monetary - there's inconvenience and time.

    • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 20:58
      +1

      I agree about your categorisation and how my examples from today weren't a huge deal in the scheme of things. I did say they "really pissed me off" but now that I've had time to relax, in hindsight they weren't that bad lol. I was just in a bit of a mood and stressed already (received some bad news and was really late in the morning due to craploads of traffic etc etc.. so I was primed to be easily irked).

      Another point I almost included was more a general one of how many trucks there were on the motorway today cutting off cars. They'd indicate suddenly and pretty much ram their way into a small gap right in front of a car. Don't know what was so different about today - I travel this route so frequently but today it was truck after truck doing it.

      I've had plenty of cars merge in front of me and then indicate, too. That one is always fun.

      And a guy a few weeks ago RAN out from a building block, in between parked cars, and directly in front of my car. Residential street, so I was doing just below 50. Narrowly missed him. I could see the utter panic in his face once he realised how close he'd been.

      Oh and people that swerve suddenly out of their lane to miss an object in the road, and don't even check the other lane first. Clever.

      Think about it, someone scrapes you in a carpark and you're pissed off. Someone runs into you in a shopping centre and knocks you, they say sorry and you're cool with it.

      I get ragey at people in shopping centres too… don't worry about that lol. If they run over my foot with a trolley, I'm not a happy camper. Though I don't get abusive or anything - just a mean dirty look as a thank you to them. :P

      • Settero on 11/09/2014 - 14:50

        whats always fun is when you have to merge into a lane where your lane ends ( e.g. motorway entrance ) and a car which should be letting you merge into the lane gets angry for you "forcing" your way in.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 15:24

          Merging from a lane which ends with a dotted line, like a motorway entrance is a bit of a weird one. The road rules (in NSW at least) say that the person on the lane ending has to give way to any traffic on the road they're entering…

          But it's also advised (though not officially in the books) that we increase our speed while on the entrance ramp to try to match that of the traffic on the motorway, for easy, quick, safe merging. That is, don't crawl on the entrance ramp doing 60 or something and try to jump into a gap on a motorway with cars doing 100+.

          You don't really need to force your way in if you're aiming to match the other traffic's speed while aiming for a safe gap. Most drivers on the motorway should either maintain or slow to let you merge safely but that's just courtesy, I think.. since it's your responsibility to go for a safe gap amongst the traffic.

          The real problem arises when either the motorway cars speed up to prevent letting you merge, or if the merging car slows or comes to a full stop while trying to merge onto the motorway (with constant traffic but enough safe gaps) - a merger that unnecessarily stops or slows only makes it harder for themselves and the motorway traffic for a safe and quick merge.

        • pjetson on 11/09/2014 - 15:25

          whats always fun is when you have to merge into a lane where your lane ends ( e.g. motorway entrance ) and a car which should be letting you merge into the lane gets angry for you "forcing" your way in.

          The road law says in that circumstance that you have to give way. Road law does not say that the person already on the motorway has to let you merge. Where do people get these strange ideas about the road rules?

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 17:24

          @pjetson: I think it's the result of a blur between the actual rules and what people generally do out of courtesy on the roads. Courteous behaviour does happen a lot (like where regular users of a motorway will purposely move over to the middle lane as they approach a motorway entrance, to allow for easy merging of traffic - this happens clearly on 3 lane motorways I use in Sydney, the M4 being one of them).

          So I suppose people either get so used to these courteous behaviours (along with not knowing the rule book 100%), which leads them to believe they're the actual rules, and thus expect other drivers to follow them.

          Just a guess though.

        • YTW on 11/09/2014 - 21:14
          +1

          @waterlogged turnip: I have to say, that is a common practice here in Qld that really pisses me off. When you are merging into a gap and some arsehole speeds up to try and close the gap and force you to go behind them - when you are rapidly running out of room to merge and readjust everything just because they want to be a single car further ahead. It's dangerous, selfish and pisses me off as my kids are in the backseat and they'd be the ones copping the brunt of the impact if one of these morons got it wrong.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 21:24
          +1

          @YTW: Yeah. It's definitely not cool for them to speed up to block you from merging in front of them like that.

          As I've said a few times here already, I always stick to the left unless overtaking regardless of what road I'm on, purely out of courtesy for other drivers. The only time I move out of the left lane (besides when overtaking) is when I'm on a 3 lane motorway with an on-ramp coming up ahead - I merge into the middle lane well ahead of the on-ramp, to give more space for any cars wanting to merge easily.

          I'd like to think I'm not an arsehole when I drive - and expect the same from others on the road, whether it's a case of sticking religiously to the rule book or not.

          Basically it all comes down to pure defensive-driving, it seems. Driving is more about dodging bullets lol

        • pawan1993 on 13/09/2014 - 22:34
          +1

          @YTW: That is dangerous. I generally give way if it doesn't significantly hamper the traffic behind me. For example if a car is trying to merge into my lane after overtaking from the left knowing that it will end and then stopping up front then I don't give way as traffic in my lane is moving. However if he were going just a bit slower then I would gladly give way. It's people who speed up on ending lanes, stopping up ahead and forcing their way into a moving lane that end up in dangerous situations at their own fault. In your case the "arsehole" is at fault though.

        • JediJan on 15/09/2014 - 09:37

          @waterlogged turnip:
          In Victoria the merging traffic (on the left) has right of way … yes, they are expected to increase their speed in the entry ramp to match traffic they are merging into, but the freeway (etc) traffic is expected to allow room for them to merge safely. Same with two lanes merging into one; left hand lane has right of way.

          So, if you are on a freeway, etc. and it is not too busy then it is better to move into the right lane (courtesy) making it easier for the merging traffic, otherwise give way to the merging traffic.

          In case Victorian road rules have changed … Bit of a nuisance if NSW has different rules to Victoria. I am all for National road rules!

  • airzone on 10/09/2014 - 19:17
    +15

    Just wait for our fellow "pro driver" forum friend to get a car - then you'll have something real to complain about. lol!

    I subscribe to the Australian dash cam owners channel on facebook… It's shocking to see what is captured on film.

  • aggregate on 10/09/2014 - 19:19
    +2

    OP, pretty sure you are in the wrong for #2. You need to watch out for pedestrian at all time, even if the pedestrian is a numbskull.

    • Riczter on 10/09/2014 - 19:28

      Nope. Pedestrians must give way to all vehicles at roundabouts. In Victoria anyway. If the ped is already on the road then sure slow down as you lean on the horn (haha) but from what OP said he practically walked into the side of the car, so no fault lies with the driver.

      • porkandbeans on 10/09/2014 - 19:49
        +2

        That is true for Vic, but I think pedestrians always have right of way in NSW. Not sure on that, though.

        • altomic on 10/09/2014 - 21:09
          +1

          in vic if a driver is turning from a street into a smaller street and a pedestrian is crossing the smaller street then the driver must give way.

        • kwaker on 10/09/2014 - 22:19

          pedestrians don't always have right of way in nsw but you do have to avoid collision with them so essentially they do. its also illegal to j-walk but your still not allowed to hit them if they are

          Any open footpath they have right of way

        • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 22:29
          +3

          @kwaker: Hang on.

          Just because a driver has to avoid a collision, surely that doesn't equal an pedestrian "having right of way". Does it?

          I guess my question is more regarding the definition of "right of way". Doesn't the car have right of way, even if a person leaps out onto the road jay-walking, but they also have the burden of responsibility to also avoid a collision which due to circumstance, overrides the right of way bit? Or is that ridiculous logic from my brain? lol

          Genuine question. Could someone clear that up for me?

          If someone runs out onto the road without looking, and you collide with them - who is at fault in the eyes of insurance (or even police?) etc? I gotta admit I have no idea. I would've assumed the person running out onto the road… but perhaps I'm ignorant on the matter. hmm

        • kwaker on 10/09/2014 - 22:41

          @waterlogged turnip:

          well that's exactly what I am saying my good turnip,

          technically they don't but essentially they do.

          Edit: if continuing will cause a collision then you must give way.

          I think the police will usually just do the paperwork and let the courts decide (i.e charge you)

        • KBZ on 10/09/2014 - 23:16

          @waterlogged turnip:

          Even if there is no pedestrian crossing signage the driver has to give way to pedestrian to cross. If that pedestrian's line of travel is perpendicular to the road they're entering. Essentially in NSW Pedestrian always have the right of way, only exception I remember from the rule is you don't need to give way to the lane you're leaving.

          Legislation

          Jaywalking only comes into mind (reminds me of a Lifehacker article I read) if pedestrians ignore a pedestrian crossing lights or cross even if there is a crossing ~20metres within your location.

          Traffic infractions that are sometimes classed as ‘jaywalking’ include ignoring red pedestrian lights, attempting to cross when traffic lights are green, crossing a road diagonally (unless permitted) and failing to use a zebra crossing that is within 20 metres of your location.

          You can also get booked if you fail to show reasonable regard for other road users, such as walking in the middle of a breakdown lane. In areas where there are no pedestrian lights, zebra crossings or signposted instructions, a pedestrian must cross a road by the shortest and safest route possible.

          Article

          So the second part he would be in the wrong by the sounds of it in your situation (but I'm not so sure how he nearly walked into your car with only headphones on unless he was looking at a mobile phone at the same time) by not showing reasonable regard to other road users. I'd probably jumped out of my car and had a go at him as well if he kicked my car.

          EDIT

          Just read your comment:

          1. he'd only just made it to the island as I approached it, thus I didn't even consider stopping to give way to him, and 2. I'm not meant to give way to a pedestrian when there's no zebra crossing (when the pedestrian isn't even on the road yet). Pretty sure that's the case, right?

          Yeah you should have given way.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 00:24
          +4

          @kangaberries:

          Yeah you should have given way.

          For real?

          Now I don't know what makes me angrier - knowing I was wrong, or knowing that we all have to go out of our way by law to protect people that decide to walk in front of a moving car like they're a holy man parting the sea…

          I guess I won't be wasting any more of my own time whenever I need to walk across a road with cars on it again :P

        • KBZ on 11/09/2014 - 09:37
          +1

          @waterlogged turnip:

          Haha that analogy made my morning, I occasionally let cars go first when I cross roads, logically in my head a car crosses the road faster than I cross the street but the law is the law.

        • bobbified on 11/09/2014 - 10:39
          +2

          @waterlogged turnip:

          If someone runs out onto the road without looking, and you collide with them - who is at fault in the eyes of insurance (or even police?) etc?

          I used to work as a Personal Injury Claims Assessor for a CTP Insurer in NSW.

          The liability was usually determined based on what the Police Report said (except in cases where it was a Self-Reported Report). If the police apportioned blame to a particular party, then we'd also go with that.

          If there was no police report available or where blame was not apportioned in the report, then the liability was determined based on whether there was a reasonable expectation that the driver could have foreseen and done anything to avoid the accident.

          There were a lot of factors such as environment and speed, etc.

          Eg, if driving through a quiet suburban street with no parked cars and/or no trees obscuring the footpath and some kid comes running from their front yard out onto the road into the path of the car, liability would be admitted on the driver's behalf because the driver should have been paying attention to his surroundings and seen the kid coming towards the street.

          If driving and there are parked cars along the side of the road and someone steps out from between a parked truck (the driver could not see the person standing between the cars), then liability was either denied or liability was admitted with a "contributory negligence" factor that would reduce any compensation payout.

          These are just two examples - most cases are decided on a case by case basis.

          The liability that is determined by the insurance company isn't necessarily based on the law itself. It was based on the experience/outcome of previous cases that made it Court and whether or not a judge would side with the pedestrian. Apparently it was clear that the judges tended to side with the pedestrian - esp children because it's reasonable to assume their behaviour is unpredictable, so liability was admitted in some cases - even though there was no real fault of the driver's - simply because there is no chance the insurance company would win if the case ever made it to court.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 15:28

          @hv: Thanks for the info, hv.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 15:33

          @kangaberries: Yeah, same - I always wave at the driver to let them go first for the same reason. A person stopping and waiting is far less of an obstacle than a car waiting usually, and they'd be faster to move past than I would be crossing the road (even though I'm a power walker).

          Like if I was the pedestrian dude I encountered yesterday, I would've waited for the vehicle to go first especially considering there were clearly no cars behind mine - why force a car to come to a stop in the middle of the street, when there's already a safe gap after the car for me to cross the street safely?

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 17:37

          @kangaberries: Hey kanga…I re-read your post and now I'm questioning things again.

          Even if there is no pedestrian crossing signage the driver has to give way to pedestrian to cross. If that pedestrian's line of travel is perpendicular to the road they're entering. Essentially in NSW Pedestrian always have the right of way, only exception I remember from the rule is you don't need to give way to the lane you're leaving.

          He wasn't crossing a street I was entering. I was already in that street approaching the roundabout (he was on the refuge island on the street I was on before making my turn).

          Note how you say (as does the RMS) that "if the pedestrian's line of travel is perpendicular to the road they're [the driver is] entering". I know I'm probably being pedantic, but does that still apply to my situation? I'm not trying to wriggle my way out of responsibility - just genuinely curious about my scenario and want to know for sure if I was in the wrong or not.

          The pedestrian yesterday was on a refuge island exactly like this one pictured in the old RTA pamphlets. Note the description. Perhaps I'm interpreting it for my own benefit here, but doesn't that make you think they're there for pedestrians to wait safely to cross the rest of the street once there are no cars coming at them? He treated it like a crossing - expecting me to brake in the middle of a street for him to finish his cross over my half of the street.

          I'm still torn because part of me does think that him being half way through crossing a street means he should be able to complete it without me knocking him over - ie. I'm meant to give way. But that island, man. They're called refuge islands for a reason lol.

          Edit- heck, here's a screenshot of the actual street we were on lol. I'm the pink 'car' blob (I don't drive a pink car IRL!) and he's the blue blob wanting to cross over my lane. Dunno if that helps elucidate anything but I just had a sense you might have thought I was talking about turning into a street which he was in the process of crossing - in which yes, he'd have right of way.

        • KBZ on 11/09/2014 - 23:46

          @waterlogged turnip:

          Lol seems like this issue has stuck with you all day.

          Re-reading the legislation and my own comment, I may have to retract what I said.

          AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 353
          353—References to pedestrians crossing a road

          1. If a driver who is turning from a road at an intersection is required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road that the driver is entering, the driver is only required to give way to the pedestrian if the pedestrian's line of travel in crossing the road is essentially perpendicular to the edges of the road the driver is entering—the driver is not required to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing the road the driver is leaving.

          2. In these Rules, a reference to a pedestrian crossing a road includes a reference to a person who is crossing only part of a road (for example, a person walking to a safety zone or a median strip, or to the middle of a road to display a hand-held stop sign).

          As you pointed out it was the lane you were leaving so looks like you don't have to give way though others may start saying you should if you were coming to a stop/potential hazard.

          I wish the RMS would make it more clear with an example or even give a picture diagram like the rest of the rules to illustrate this but they probably don't want to make themselves culpable for any accidents.

    • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 20:22

      Of course we all need to watch out for anything on the road that shouldn't be on the road, but 1. he'd only just made it to the island as I approached it, thus I didn't even consider stopping to give way to him, and 2. I'm not meant to give way to a pedestrian when there's no zebra crossing (when the pedestrian isn't even on the road yet). Pretty sure that's the case, right?

      Had he been in the process of crossing or had already taken a step out onto the road in front of me, after the island, then I would've definitely slowed and given way to him out of courtesy.

      The fact is, he hopped out too late, when I'd already reached the island. Also probably worth noting that the island isn't AT the exact intersection of the roundabout in this case - it's at least 2 metres before it.

      But yeah, I'm more than happy to be corrected if I'm wrong… though the fact that he nearly walked into the side of my car, and walked behind it to then kick the other side, should be indicative enough that I was there first - it wouldn't have been possible for him to do that if he'd been on the road before me (ie. in the process of crossing as I was approaching).

      I'm just more annoyed at him for having the guts to kick my car as if it was my fault lol. The cheek!

      • YTW on 11/09/2014 - 21:23

        Regardless as to who was right or wrong with the situation, he was in the wrong to kick your car. If he'd done damage then you would have been able to successfully sue him for repair costs. We can't all go round kicking and damaging the property of people who 'wrong' us.

        I have to say, that also irritates me. When someone is in the wrong but carries on as though they were in the right. I had a woman gesture at me for 'going too fast' when in actual fact I was already going 10kph under the signed limit and she'd just nearly stepped out from between cars without looking if anyone was coming. I felt like reversing over her and her beehive (the hairstyle…).

        • [Deactivated] on 11/09/2014 - 21:28
          -1

          He was a pretty scrawny young guy. Had he been bigger, I would've been more pissed off about the kick. Being the string-bean he was, I'm not bothered about damage - just the act itself of having the balls to kick my car at all lol.

          I mean, I reckon I could've taken him down… and I'm 48kg.

          I hope he hurt his foot during the kick ;)

        • JediJan on 15/09/2014 - 09:47

          @waterlogged turnip:
          I would have reported him to Police; intentional act on his behalf.

    • jondave on 11/09/2014 - 11:11
      +3

      People, it's never about whether a pedestrian has right of way or not - the question is about the extent of your liability if that pedestrian gets injured (or dies). The driver is in possession of a lethal weapon (the car itself) and has to exercise duty of care under all circumstances - so in case of an accident the driver has to prove that he took all means necessary to have avoided contact with the pedestrian.

      You have to get beyond the actual event and imagine how the investigation and case resolution will pan out - you'll get docked by the police, they investigate, then either the OPP or the pedestrian's fancy ass personal injury lawyer takes you to court and makes up a credible case that you are at least PARTLY liable. You'll have to come in with your own fancy ass lawyer to prove that you have zero liability. I say good luck with the cost and inconvenience of going through all that.

      'Do pedestrians have the right of way' is actually the wrong question. The right question is 'Will you have zero liability if you hit a pedestrian?' - and that's always a NO (well, unless they're in a closed off freeway devoid of any foot paths).

  • porkandbeans on 10/09/2014 - 19:59
    +1

    My two major annoyances are:

    1. People pulling out right in front of you then going 10 kays under the speed limit when there's no one behind you.
    2. People driving old white vans.

    Actually add people travelling 10 kays under to that regardless of them pulling out in front of you. Even worse when they pass a 60 sign and still go 50. Gah!!!

    Never been involved in road rage but I have been behind two guys that got out and had a bit of a go. That said, if I'm on the bike and someone pulls a stupid move I'm not against giving them an earful of exhaust.

    • [Deactivated] on 10/09/2014 - 21:10
      +1

      You would've loved the dude driving in the Lane Cove Tunnel this afternoon, doing about 50km/h. At first he was doing 35 while entering it, which I thought was annoying but reasonable if he's timid - approaching a tunnel and all. But he pretty much continued at that speed IN the tunnel… then sped up to 50. lol

      He looked calm as a cucumber though.

      (do cucumbers look calm? whatever..)

      • kwaker on 10/09/2014 - 23:11
        +2

        Did he have an old white van? :)

  • Ughhh on 10/09/2014 - 20:05
    +2

    Idiots who hesitate all the time before making a turn or move, accelerating then braking all of a sudden cause they saw a car (that's like 20m away!) or feel the need to check again and again. They think they're being safe, but their unpredictable driving behaviour makes it the opposite! Uunfortunately, if you hit those idiots, you're most likely at fault, BS imo.

    People who drive 50km/hr in a 60km/hr zone, then wonder why all the cars cut them off, ffs. People who slam on the accelerator when there's a merging lane, but then slow back down to 55km/hr once theyre ahead of you, hogging the lane.

    Also people who tailgate, even though you're already slightly speeding at 63km/hr in a 60 zone.

    What we need are two types of honks, one is the regular honk and the other basically means "you effing idiot!".

    • p1 ama on 10/09/2014 - 20:20
      -7

      1) It's not BS at all, if you're behind someone, it's your responsibility to make sure you are a safe distance away and you are attentive enough to not hit the person in front of you. They have every right to hesitate. As with most things, it's better to be safe than sorry.

      2) Driving at 50 in a 60 zone is perfectly okay. There is nothing wrong with that at all. Don't pretend like there is. The problem is people have an obsession with going fast. Think about it, if you need to drive 100km to get to where you need to be, that will take 2 hours going at 50 km/h and 1 hr 40 min going at 60 km/h. Factor in things such as traffic lights (you need to stop for the same amount of time regardless of whether you're going 50 km/h or 60km/h) and you end up losing like 10 mins over the course of 100 km. If you're going at 50 or 60 in the first place, you're likely to be in a residential area, travelling for a couple of km. You lose like 2 minutes of your time. Big whoop.

      3) People who hog the lane…etc. Deal with it, 55 km/h in a 60 km/h zone is perfectly okay.

      4) People who tailgate are idiots, but seriously, just ignore them.

      • porkandbeans on 10/09/2014 - 20:49
        +14

        Time for bed, grandpa.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join