Tapping brakes on Tailgaters? Ethics?

Wallyt99 on 02/12/2018 - 19:07

Just wondering people's thoughts on tapping brakes on Tailgaters.

Had some young hoons come up speeding behind me. Started tailgating and waving their arms. I was in the FAR LEFT lane. Going slightly below speed limit due to heavy traffic (maintaining stopping distance / matching speed of traffic). There was a truck in the centre lane so they couldn't easily overtake.

When this occured I slowed down further.

They got more and more agressive and so I tapped the brakes. No collision - but they shit themselves and backed off.

They eventually passed - winding down their window and trying to have a go at me…. But when they saw me they decided that would be a bad idea.

I was driveing a large SUV and they were driving a small Japanese car - so I wasn't worried for my safety if they did impact me. I was more concerned that their appalling driving could cost lives…and as a motorcyclist on other days - that includes mine. Basically I hate pricks like this and wanted to teach them a lesson.

What are your thoughts on this?

Automotive

Comments

  • brendanm on 02/12/2018 - 19:12
    +30

    Fair game, I just drive slower and slower. If they don't get the picture, give the brakes a hit like you did. They have to maintain a safe braking distance.

    • abuch47 on 03/12/2018 - 15:43
      +29

      Just brake slowly while looking at them in the mirror. Also keep left if you can especially if your not on the speed limit. The road is not for teaching lessons but working together in a safe manner even when others won't.

    • [Deactivated] on 03/12/2018 - 15:51
      +52

      I would like to mention that tapping brakes that causes an accident for no reason or immediate danger will get you in serious trouble even though I believe it's their responsibility to make sure they maintain a safe braking distance.

      Just ignore them and follow the traffic or give them space to go.

      Agitators and tailgaters are 2 sides of the same problem.

      • Hybroid on 03/12/2018 - 16:50
        -7

        Completely agree and I would add putting your hazards on while maintaining speed is a better indicator for them to slow down rather than brake checking.

        • brendanm on 03/12/2018 - 17:10
          +15

          Lol great advice, you aren't at fault if someone hits you from behind in that situation, there is no way they could prove you didn't see a legitimate issue that made you brake.

          What is illegal, is driving along normally with your hazard lights on.

          Kellogg's has a lot to answer for, handing out licences in cornflakes boxes was a terrible idea.

          • mavis30551 on 03/12/2018 - 17:17
            +20

            @brendanm: In european countries they use their hazards for all kinds of things. I dont think anyone in australia would understand but I really like the things they do with their hazards, for example:

            In some countries a quick hazard flash means "thanks" like - "thanks for letting me in"

            And in other countries they use it at the back of very slow traffic, so when your flying along the freeway at 100+ and see the car in front with their hazards on, you have fair warning to slow down as they are most likely doing well below the speed limit or stopped.

            So his idea really isnt that bad, bit harsh saying he got his license from cornflakes just because you dont agree.

              • Ulysses31 on 03/12/2018 - 20:51
                +7

                @brendanm: Get out much?

                • brendanm on 04/12/2018 - 11:16
                  -7

                  @Ulysses31: A lot of butt hurt Europeans in this thread by the look of it. What does "getting out much" have to do with anything? Are we on ozbargain or eurobargain?

            • Mrbean007 on 03/12/2018 - 17:31
              +11

              @mavis30551: Lol in Europe they look out for each other and more educated on the roads
              not once did I see some one staying in the fast lane sticking to the limit and staying there.

              • brendanm on 03/12/2018 - 17:45
                -8

                @Mrbean007: I never said Australian drivers weren't idiots and that our licencing system isn't a joke. They are and it is. Still doesn't make it legal here because it is in Europe.

              • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 13:30
                +3

                @Mrbean007: Have you ever driven in Europe…. I've not driven in Germany or Scandinavia so maybe they're the exception but I certainly dont find most European drivers significantly more skilled, safe or courteous than in Australia.

                Italy for example has notoriously aggressive drivers. Love being tail gated by a van at 140kmh in a 90 zone.

                Wherever I am I assume the incompetence of everyone else on the road. Helps to better predict stupid and unsafe moves drivers will do.

                • Mrbean007 on 04/12/2018 - 14:51

                  @[Deactivated]: I actually drove 3 years ago in Turkey from the Outskirts of Istanbul to Trabzon just under 1000ks and mind you even on the double laned roads never was there a person sitting in the fast lane apart from over taking.

                  True what your saying about speed Everytime I overtook someone always check mirrors no cars jump in the fast lane as im over taking a car another car is right up the back of me mainly Germans if I was on 120 they easily would've been on 180+ mind you there are speed limits don't no how they would get a fine though as there traveling between country's.

                • Ulysses31 on 05/12/2018 - 22:36
                  +1

                  @[Deactivated]: You were doing 140 in a 90 zone?!

                  • [Deactivated] on 06/12/2018 - 14:55
                    -1

                    @Ulysses31: In that instance I wasn't driving, it was an airport pickup service in Milan. Some countries highways will have you feel extremely unsafe if you stick to the signed speed limit. Some states in the USA for example will have you tailgated, honked and shouted at if you dare do 70 in a 70 zone. Italians seem to have a pretty relaxed attitude toward speed limits on autostrada.

              • cashless on 04/12/2018 - 16:08
                +1

                @Mrbean007: Many years back I passed my motorbike road test and took a voluntary police-run safer riding course.
                Can always remember the bike cop saying "On a motorway there's no such thing as the fast lane - the speed limit is the same in all lanes".
                Seems that most drivers don't know that.

                • Mrbean007 on 04/12/2018 - 16:48

                  @cashless: True in Australia but did that same copper tell you right lane is for over taking?

                  Don't no when the last time you went on a freeway but the last time I went there are signs clearly stating stay in left lane unless over taking a lot of people don't understand this Wich is the point I'm making.

                  • cashless on 04/12/2018 - 18:40
                    +1

                    @Mrbean007: Exactly, stay left, we all know that (though some don’t). My point is, the speed limit is the same no matter which lane you’re in. No such thing as a fast lane

                    • Mrbean007 on 04/12/2018 - 19:05

                      @cashless: Last question I was referring to @polk,s question.

                      Fast lane in Europe not here they have a unlimeted lane on the Autobahn,s.

                      Australia at one stage had unlimited roads not on the freeway but outback but they ended up getting rid of them.

                      • cashless on 04/12/2018 - 19:37
                        +1

                        @Mrbean007: No fast lane in Europe either. That’s where I learnt to drive/ride.
                        There is an overtaking lane though;)

                        • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 20:54

                          @cashless: There is an overtaking lane .
                          KEEP LEFT unless overtaking.
                          There's sign's , blind fools.

            • Ulysses31 on 03/12/2018 - 20:52

              @mavis30551: By memory, certain car models do it automatically (upon sudden braking).

            • babezaves on 03/12/2018 - 22:13

              @mavis30551: I saw the hazard lights in work at Europe as well and thought it was great idea for making people slow down especially to those who are too busy paying attention to their phone while driving. If they see the hazard lights from afar its a great warning for people to know that traffic is slow or at a stand still.

            • Mr Snrub on 04/12/2018 - 21:42
              -1

              @mavis30551: Bussies and truckies here use the hazard to say thanks, three flashes is ‘thanks’

          • Hybroid on 03/12/2018 - 17:44

            @brendanm:

            What is illegal, is driving along normally with your hazard lights on.

            No one said driving along with hazard lights on. That defies the point.

            You put them on to signify a hazard (in this case the perceived close person behind you), general etiquette is 3-5 blinks to warn, then off again.

            • brendanm on 03/12/2018 - 17:56
              -2

              @Hybroid: "I would put my hazards ON while maintaining speed". My emphasis. Even still, you cannot randomly flash your hazards because some is tailgating you.

              • Hybroid on 03/12/2018 - 17:58
                +3

                @brendanm: I disagree. That's exactly what they're for, to signal a 'hazard' to other drivers. The expected natural response is for other drivers around you to slow down which is the intended effect.

                • brendanm on 03/12/2018 - 18:07
                  -2

                  @Hybroid: Lol you disagree hey? I disagree with a lot of laws as well, doesn't make them any less illegal though. Try it out in front of a cop car and let me know how you go.

      • AustriaBargain on 04/12/2018 - 00:13

        if they have a dash cam and the brake tap results in an accident, then it could be used as evidence in court

        • HighAndDry on 04/12/2018 - 11:18
          +5

          Their dashcam is going to show that they're tail-gating. And not sure what could've been in front of the car braking that might've caused them to brake.

          • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 13:37

            @HighAndDry: So they'll be in trouble, which by default they already are, but it will get you in trouble as well. Nothing for them to lose so it would come up it they have it.

            In short, don't brake check people. For some fun have a look at YouTube for the results of morons doing it.

            Don't rise to their aggression. Just continue to drive safely and stay vigilant for any further stupidity from the tail gate. Doing stuff like brake checking then is just going to get you into an accident and accomplishes nothing. The moron behind you isn't going to rethink their whole life over a flash of the brakes and it isn't going to make them drive safe, likely the opposite.

            • HighAndDry on 04/12/2018 - 13:39

              @[Deactivated]:

              but it will get you in trouble as well

              Again, not really because: And not sure show what could've been in front of the car braking that might've caused them to brake.

              You just tell them you saw what looked like a cat about to run across the road and so you braked as a precautionary measure. Unless you slammed your brakes, no way you'd be at fault for anything.

              • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 13:49
                +1

                @HighAndDry: Traffic cameras in addition to the dash cam plus brake checking looks pretty distinct from actual braking. The insurance company doesn't need beyond reasonable doubt levels of proof to not pay for your repairs. Regardless it's a stupid and unsafe thing to do and will you feel so in the right when we amputate your leg after the resulting crash?

                It's a stupid thing to do. Don't fight stupidity with more stupidity.

                • HighAndDry on 04/12/2018 - 13:54
                  +1

                  @[Deactivated]: Tail-gating is the stupid thing to do. There's no difference between brake checking when there isn't anything in front, and actually braking when there is - if the tail-gater can't stop in the first case, they won't be able to stop in time if/when the car in front actually needs to brake either.

                  • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 13:56
                    +1

                    @HighAndDry: Yes it's stupid. Don't fight stupid with stupid. Don't risk causing a crash to prove a point. Worrying if you disagree with that. Go YouTube brake checking and enjoy the compilations of the resulting crashes. I bet the people getting cleaned up by trucks feel very high and mighty that the truck shouldn't have been so close.

                  • serideth on 05/12/2018 - 20:29

                    @HighAndDry: Both are equally stupid. The difference is that the first can be deemed negligent driving and to follow your previous comments it's actually pretty easy to spot a brake check, just go on youtube and look up some examples (telltale signs are vehicles in front not braking, and you mentioned cats on the road which I doubt happens that often on the freeways).

                    And also you don't know why the other car is speeding and while most of the time it's because they just choose to there can be extenuating circumstances, and you are advocating potentially causing a fatal accident to enforce your morality and sense of justice on others.

                    Also what you have described can also fall under insurance fraud.

                    You do you, but just something to think about.

        • R4 on 04/12/2018 - 11:59

          But the driver of the car in front can say that he thought be saw a hazard in front of him and had to brake.

          Very difficult to prove otherwise.

          • AustriaBargain on 04/12/2018 - 16:05

            @R4: Unless the dash cam shows you staring him down j

      • alisso on 04/12/2018 - 09:28

        I think it depends on the state and the evidence available. 95% of the time, insurance companies will default to blaming whichever car was behind the other, regardless of other circumstances. This applies regardless of whether the car in front braked, or even was at a complete stop in the fast lane of an otherwise clear motorway, just over the crest of a hill (anecdotal experience of a friend of mine in Vic - they hit the stopped car and were blamed for the accident).

        The law generally states that it's the duty of every driver to make sure they have enough room to stop no matter what happens in front of them. About the only exception I know of is if the car in front wasn't in front of you initially, and the accident was caused by them moving in front of you (ie, someone changes lanes into your stopping distance and immediately brakes, causing you to run into them).

        I still don't think it's worth the risk to brake-check tailgaters most of the time, but unless they had dashcam footage that clearly showed that's what you were doing, rather than braking for a legitimate reason, I don't think you'd be judged to be at fault.

        • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 13:39
          +2

          Who cares who's at fault when we are amputating your leg from the resulting crash?

          The solution to people driving unsafely is not to do unsafe things.

          • furyou on 04/12/2018 - 13:54
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: I don't recommend amputating your leg for every crash. You only have 2.

            • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 13:57

              @furyou: Mix it up with an arm on occasion then?

          • brendanm on 04/12/2018 - 14:36

            @[Deactivated]: How are your legs being amputated when hit from behind? You must drive an oddly designed car.

            • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 14:46
              +2

              @brendanm: Just an example but if you are really that pedantic: you get hit, you lose control at high speed you crash into a barrier head on, front of your car absorbs the impact as best it can but your engine block pushes into the firewall and crushes your legs. The firies arrive and are unable extract you because you're pinned so the trauma team is called put to do a battlefild amputation to free you. You end up with an above knee amputation and an uncomfortable prosthetic. You end up on a disability pension. But it's ok because the other driver's insurance had to pay for your car repairs saving you a $500 excess. I guess this is OzBargain so hey $500 saved is $500 saved!

              • brendanm on 04/12/2018 - 14:51

                @[Deactivated]: That seems quite excessive, even at 100kmh, especially as you'd be doing less than that at the point of impact and still decelerating, presumably the person behind would as well. Engine blocks haven't crushed people for many many years now (unless you have a flat front van), engine mounrs are designed to sheer off, and the engine slides under the vehicle. The odds off leg amputation in a rear end collision for the car in front are quite low.

                Sorry about being pedantic, but it's quite enjoyable. Whiplash and a written off car is more likely, unenjoyable yes, but not as unenjoyable as leg amputation.

                • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 15:03

                  @brendanm: Jesus mate I shan't ever use any hyperbole to ilustrate a point around you. Mr fun of the party.

          • alisso on 04/12/2018 - 15:04

            @[Deactivated]:

            I still don't think it's worth the risk to brake-check tailgaters most of the time

            I was responding to the suggestion that you could get into trouble if doing this causes an accident. But like I said, I still don't think it's worth the risk.

            Even if the other driver's ctp would cover your medical costs ;)

            • [Deactivated] on 04/12/2018 - 15:05

              @alisso: The bargains keep coming!

              • Blitzfx on 05/12/2018 - 16:57

                @[Deactivated]: I think that was a great example. It's exactly the same as a pedestrian crossing the road at an intersection. Traffic lights might be red and crosswalk is green but if I see a rice burner doing 120K in a 40 zone, I'm not going to step onto the road and prove to him that I'm right and he's wrong.

                OP might be 100% right in the eyes of the law, but he'll be dead.

    • Wallyt99 on 05/12/2018 - 13:01

      Saw a good suggestion later in the post. Rear dashcam and send to police. Doubt they would do anything though.

      • [Deactivated] on 05/12/2018 - 15:15

        This is a better idea. Brake checking or even flashing your brake lights is absolutely illegal.

  • cruiserbruiser on 02/12/2018 - 19:14
    +93

    Don't brake check them, ignore them

    • HighAndDry on 02/12/2018 - 22:17
      -4

      Eh. Normally that's my view too, but OP has a point that if what he did might discourage them from tailgating (because it has bad results than good), it might prevent an accident in the future.

    • Mister LoLPants on 03/12/2018 - 10:02
      +6

      same, if I feel the need to do something, I just drop off another 5-10kph and they soon overtake. The risk with tapping the brakes is that, especially if it is an inexperienced driver, they panic and crash into some other poor sod

    • lddv04 on 04/12/2018 - 10:09
      +5

      Correct, someone elses bad driving is not your responsibility. Worry about the car in front of you, not the one behind you.

      • Kangal on 04/12/2018 - 15:50
        +2

        Yes, but the dilemma is that the driver behind you becomes the driver in front of you. Maybe not today, but in the future….

        People are quick to forget that a car is actually a heavy machinery. You take caution with said at work, why shouldn't you take caution outside work.

        The only thing that should be done, is that the laws (and systems) should be tough against tailgater and agitators. And not this stupid revenue system we have currently which only goes to punish the more-average citizen, and fund/incentivise the police system.

      • Pyrock on 05/12/2018 - 07:02
        +4

        as a motorbike rider i definitely have to worry about the vehicles behind me. even when not on the bike, it pays to be aware and if safe - adjust your driving to minimise the possibility of collisions. i have had too many near misses because of other drivers to not take their actions into account. yes its their responsibility to leave the safe distance but for me the ultimate priority is my own safety. i dont want to be rear ended and possibly pushed into oncoming traffic if im in my car or on my bike.

      • pookie on 06/12/2018 - 16:14
        +1

        Very true. My dad once told me that it's best to be concerned about what's in front, the stuff behind will take care of itself :)

  • steven6 on 02/12/2018 - 19:15
    +25

    Could try turning your windscreen washers on, but that only works if it's a convertible behind you lol

    • Euphemistic on 03/12/2018 - 06:51
      +11

      Works on all cars as it gets onto the windscreen and they’ll need to wash too.

    • athk on 04/12/2018 - 07:07

      Only works at 70+ trust me…. And they need a bit of distance behind you.

      • dwillia on 04/12/2018 - 22:37

        works even better if you fill your washer with XXXXXX (insert whatever)

        • Exorcist on 05/12/2018 - 13:30

          peeeee?

  • lbsyc on 02/12/2018 - 19:16
    +18

    Don't think people like them will learn anything from that, especially when they wanted to 'have a go at' you, they think you are the bad driver.

  • Ace Ventura on 02/12/2018 - 19:16
    +16

    Idiots.
    Expect I'll get a few negs for saying it, but I usually flash my spot light, they face backwards while on the road, they back off pretty quick after that. Also works good for drop kicks who sit behind you with their high beams on.
    Often wonder what they think their little sardine cans are going to do if they hit my barred up 4wd anyway.

    • SlickMick on 03/12/2018 - 12:09
      +3

      I've always wanted a spotlight… this would be the only use I have for it

  • altomic on 02/12/2018 - 19:18
    +36

    don't break check. just flick your headlights on and off so your tail lights blink. you haven't slowed down. but they think you are and will (should) slow down.

    at least that is my theory.

    • Ughhh on 02/12/2018 - 20:37
      +6

      This and also signalling to turn left (of on left lane), or right (if on right lane) then cancel as you pass the exit. Then keep doing this, they'll less likely to think you're doing this to piss them off.
      Worked for me last time I tried it.

    • RevBargain on 03/12/2018 - 23:11
      +1

      Yep, most tail gaiters aren't smart enough to realize that they are driving lights. This is the least dangerous option.

      I tend not brake check, but I don't mind just rolling the foot back off the accelerator. It quickly becomes a better option for them to find another lane

      • Kangal on 04/12/2018 - 15:56

        I've tried the "headlight trick", and trust me it doesn't work. Brake-checking does work (though I haven't done it) and shining a rear light (eg Campervans) also works.

        I guess the best solution is to get their plates, and record everything on a rear-dashcam. Drive into a police station and present the evidence.

        Trust me the police are fed up with these clowns and they will follow-up on them. And in the long-run, the idiots getting a fine/demerit points is a bigger cause for change.

  • mskeggs on 02/12/2018 - 19:29
    +36

    Don’t bluff unless you’re prepared to go big. Slam on the brakes and yell “cat”.
    Everyone gets a free lesson.

    • Well Wasted on 03/12/2018 - 08:04
      +1

      2 dollar cat vs 20 thosand dollar vehicle…?

      • mskeggs on 03/12/2018 - 12:53
        +10

        That is one of the lessons.

      • Nickels n Dimes on 03/12/2018 - 13:52
        +10

        Where can you buy a cat for $2 these days ?

        • pegaxs on 03/12/2018 - 14:02
          +5

          Where can you buy a cat for $2 these days ?

          You must be new here… Deals get posted up here from time to time offering "free cats"…

          • furyou on 04/12/2018 - 13:57

            @pegaxs: The irony.

            1. cats filling shelters because people get them w/o thinking much
            2. offer cats free so people can get them w/o thinking much
            3. ???
            4. Profit!!
            • Kangal on 04/12/2018 - 15:58

              @furyou: Can't we toss the cats out the window at other drivers like the Crazy Cat Lady from The Simpsons?

              Or will they respond by throwing roosters?

  • loropy9 on 02/12/2018 - 20:20
    +8

    I flip down my rear view mirror and continue as I was. If you can’t see that someone is tailgating you, you don’t feel compelled to do something about it. Everyone wins. That is, everyone you are aware of. Which is you basically. You get the point.

    • gromit on 04/12/2018 - 08:47
      +4

      Until of course you need to do a real emergency brake at which point you get rear ended. Personally I lightly tap the brakes to activate the brake lights but don't slow down.

      • Kangal on 04/12/2018 - 16:00
        -2

        Not "modern" cars. They're all slamming the brakes at a feather-touch. It's for "safety" reasons. And it's not just one model/brand, they're all doing it. Coming from a mid-2000's Japanese Car (or earlier)…it just feels unnatural.

        • Viper8 on 05/12/2018 - 10:53
          -1

          Dunno what cars you've been driving but that's a load of rubbish.

          • Kangal on 05/12/2018 - 15:06
            -1

            @Viper8: The new i30, Mazda6, Camry, Tuscon, X-Trail. Very touchy electronic brakes.

            Maybe I exaggerated by saying ALL of them, but the point stands. I saw the trend in post-2015, and I hate it. I prefer a smooth linear braking system (pre-2010). And tapping on it while doing highway speeds isn't the wisest idea, much less wiser than an older car where you have more manual-control and road-feel.

            Go check it out if you don't trust me.

            • Viper8 on 05/12/2018 - 15:13

              @Kangal: I guess that's a matter of opinion then. Go drive a WRX, Focus RS or any other sporty car and then you'll see what touchy brakes are like. Those cars you listed are fine. Same as any other modern car: normal. I guess its because you're coming from older cars where the pedal needs to be depressed half a foot for anything material to occur. You quickly adapt. I used to frequently drive a 70-series Landcruiser and WRX. You very quickly get used to them and don't even have to think about it. Precision braking is a non-issue after that.

              • Kangal on 05/12/2018 - 18:24

                @Viper8: Well I have a Navara and a Liberty SpecB, one is "sports" and the other is "work"… and neither start braking until you push 10% and they're fairly linear actuation.

                Haven't driven a FRS, but the new WRX isn't too bad (though soccer mums won't like it). To illustrate my point the best, test drive the new i30 it's shockingly light, to the point where it's almost dangerous. Cheap software perhaps?

        • gromit on 05/12/2018 - 18:47

          Lets see my current merc has no issues, nor did my previous VW R36 (which is one of the cars with the touchiest brakes) or my brothers X-Trail. perhaps you don't know the difference between lightly touching and depressing the pedal.

        • pookie on 06/12/2018 - 16:16
          +1

          Yep. My 2018 Mazda 3 Astina does this. It's a safety feature called Smart City Braking, or similar. I really notice the difference in braking from when I come off a main road into city traffic. I have to keep remembering that in traffic the brakes only need a slight touch. I've had a few times where i've forgot and push the pedal like normal and "whack", there goes my whiplash :/

  • Eeples on 02/12/2018 - 20:35
    +45

    Were there 3 lanes?

    Please supply MS paint pic, thanks.

  • wordplay on 02/12/2018 - 20:47
    +15

    don't tap the brakes, they will see the lights, Just throw it into second gear - will slow you down quick enough.

    • OzzyOzbourne on 03/12/2018 - 18:17
      +2

      Reverse?

      • wordplay on 03/12/2018 - 19:04

        I can't seem to do that in my car - gate seems closed.

        • Kangal on 06/12/2018 - 17:43

          Mate, I think he's talking about the one after Gear 5. It's called "R" for Racing Gear.

          • wordplay on 06/12/2018 - 20:12

            @Kangal: I can't engage reverse while car is going forward (at speed anyway). I don't have a race gear, its just a normal 4 gears forward and one reverse. I'm not a race driver and dont really care about damage to my old car if it teaches bad drivers a lesson.

            • CMH on 06/12/2018 - 20:35

              @wordplay: I drive a French car.

              It has the normal forward gear and 4 reverse gears.

            • orly on 11/12/2018 - 12:11

              @wordplay: Dude it's a joke.

              • wordplay on 11/12/2018 - 20:36

                @orly: OK, Thanks. I have tried to put the car into reverse while going 40 - 50km before, but couldn't do it.
                Must be funny if you are more into cars than me.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join