Drivers and their problems

...unless the Ponders End variation applies?  Or is that only if you're in Nidd (having taken a wrong turn during an Audax)?

chrisonatrike wrote:

...unless the Ponders End variation applies?  Or is that only if you're in Nidd (having taken a wrong turn during an Audax)?

Ah, I see - you're playing by the 1867 rules, aren't you?

David9694 wrote:

Also available in white.  

Wait. What? Nooo. What?

Gandalf was a vigilante? Ohhhhh - you are changing my perspective of LoTR.... I may have to reread and give Gandalf a gravelly Batman voice...

HoldingOn wrote:

David9694 wrote:

Also available in white.  

Wait. What? Nooo. What?

Gandalf was a vigilante? Ohhhhh - you are changing my perspective of LoTR.... I may have to reread and give Gandalf a gravelly Batman voice...

Don't you remember the balrog scene?  Gandalf deliberately obstructed the bridge - could have just reported the balrog but no, he had to confront him too.  Look where that led.

chrisonatrike wrote:

Don't you remember the balrog scene?  Gandalf deliberately obstructed the bridge - could have just reported the balrog but no, he had to confront him too.  Look where that led.

He took his evidence to the authorities, Saruman, didn't like his response, so decided to go off and sort it himself. Definite vigilante. How could I be so blind. Good guy Saruman tries to stop the villain, but his plans are ruined by that meddling vigilante! It's all so clear now.

Possibly. Certainly an argument to be made for him being a cult leader, attempting to send his followers to their demise.

That one has come up before but there is plenty of warning before you get to the the bridge

andystow wrote:

1. Put big, replaceable bumpers on the trams.
2. Legalize the trams pushing cars out of the way.

When I lived in Brussels for a spell as a child the tram drivers had no compunction about pushing cars that were in their way off the tracks, even if the occupants were still inside, and no bumpers necessary! It wasn't legalised but equally it was ignored by the police on the grounds that the car shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Pedantry: being disgusted over something very small and needing to correct it.

Better still....use this method from 1970 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaFO1xNL-IQ

David9694 wrote:

The scene of the crime (2 years ago) 

I can't get the arrows to work

David9694 wrote:

The scene of the crime (2 years ago) 

It causes him (a tattoo artist who lives alone) a problem because now he only has two parking spaces instead of three.

I guess he needs a couple of work vans to carry his heavy tattoing tools and ladders, or something.

David9694 wrote:

The 2021 article is worth a look. B1NSF comes up as a white Mercedes 2008 on DVLA. 

While you're doing DVLA checks, don't forget to check date of last V5C issue, on this reg it's 20/02/23, so nothing automatically dodgy with it being on a blue C Class in 2021. 

But but why have they put a road there if you're not meant to drive on it? How am I supposed to take in all these signs, watch out for cars, pedestrians, motorbikers and cyclists AND keep to the speed limit (while balancing my coffee, checking the sat-nav, telling the kids in the back to stop fighting and worrying about what we're going to eat this evening?

Actually - in one sense in the UK with the cultural norms we have those are valid complaints. We could bridge the gap between legal expectation and daily reality by applying something like "sustainable safety" principles. Reduce the cognitive workload for drivers, prevent some foreseeable mistakes and also improve training for better understanding of the level of attention required for this task...

Then after that nick and ban anyone still incapable.

David9694 wrote:

Mr "It's not in anyone's way" here is a new one on me, but this is a chance to revisit several "I'm prepared to go to court (prison in one case) over this" stories, many of which we've had on here. What cars do to people. 

I get that it's a crappy operating model, but drivers and their constant bullshit, try-ons and whingeing have brought this on themselves. 

 https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/gallery/holidaymakers-pu...

But the dropped kerb he's parked on forms part of the footway, not part of his driveway.  It doesn't grant right of way, even, only grants him a right of access to cross the footway to access his tarmac garden...

Funny that the headline isn't "driver pictured driving dangerously close to cyclist".

Weird situation there. Both the adults came out from the passenger side of the vehicle but it looked like the car had cut up the van and then the van had crumped the rear drivers side door.  So had he pulled up to give a peace of his mind and caused an accident, the woman then got out in a stress because of the initial actions of the driver had caused the collision, which he then compounded by deciding to commit assault.