Aggressive, Inconsiderate Driving BUT BY WHOM?!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 окт 2024
- Fuller Explanation of merge in turn:
• Who Has Right of Way W...
Conquer Driving: @ConquerDriving
• Is This Queue Jumping ...
Free £50, bonuses, and more:
share.octopus....
AND MORE:
linktr.ee/blac...
Exclusive content: www.blackbeltb...
Become a Channel member: / @blackbeltbarrister
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein. Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.
The Police will fully investigate themselves and be found not guilty of any wrongdoing.. 😂😂
The silver car was clearly behind as they approached the merge and tried to close them off. They were supposed to merge in turn. Silver car aggressive as proved by their subsequent actions and clearly at fault.
Long and short of it. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
That's how I saw it, based on the shadows under the car and their respective point on the white lines. The length of the cars wouldn't be that different, even if one was an estate: The difference is a foot or two, and the police car was further than that ahead based on the position compared to the road markings.
Something I've encountered way too often with merge lanes: People getting entitled / impatient and deciding they >have< to be ahead no matter what, rather than alternate. Happens from either lane, with little/no regard to safety, and they will close the gap to force the other vehicle to ceed way - and there's simply no benefit to doing so: Take the chill pill, relax, let the traffic flow and be nice. Then you don't get pulled over by the police car, to the loss of more time dealing with the officers, and the inevitable ticket, than the few seconds you'd have gained by being the pratt.
Car on the left has run out of road, silver should brake and allow the other vehicle in. Instead turned it into a p******g contest.
I disagree. The silver car probably didn't expect being 'undertaken' (but should've seen this coming). IMHO the police car should have slowed and slotted back in behind the silver car, similar to how you should join a motorway.
@@Yomi-san car on the left already knows the road is coming to an end and shouldn't be there in the first place. Or are they excused because they wear a Halloween costume all year round?
It's amazing what stupid things some drivers will do just to save a couple of seconds off their journey.
yh and then drive 8mph under the limit once they have overtaken you lol.
I think with incidents like these it has more to do with ego and getting one up over someone else. We are competitive creatures and we will compete over virtually anything in order to get that dopamine hit.
to most it'S not the time but the sense of control.....in my view that is of coure.....
The copper was a nob.
The other guy was an even bigger one
Egoes at play one suspects.
Nicely summed up!
@@adrianlloyd6403
Definitely. They both need to watch Active Self Protection.
@@PipeManPeep
Thank you. I'm glad I spent a long time writing out a full explanation of this avoidable situation. 🤣
So a pair of knobs 👍🏻👍🏻
Police car also used the bus lane and crossed a solid white line too...
For which, technically, they do NOT have any exemptions available to them. However, that is a rule honoured more in the breach.
You can cross a solid white line on a bus lane, if times allow.
very good instructor once told me that when you get behind the wheel you should leave your ego behind. Unfortunately many drivers seem unable to do this, including, dare I say it, police drivers!
Silver car purposefully sped up to block
So? Black car could have slowed and gone behind. This is called merging. The curved arrow in the left lane instructs the driver to merge.
My wise driving instructor said, "The better driver gives way".
good advise....🙂
I thought this was a case of two drivers being aggressively competitive and it was apparent to me that the silver car wanted to get ahead of the car in the left lane with the knowledge that the l/h lane was coming to an end. The police driver was determined to prevent the driver of the silver car from overtaking him, having observed (experienced) his aggressive driving style. It became apparent to me that this was now a battle of two egos and the police driver considered he had the opportunity to make an example of an aggressive driver, who fell into their trap. Had he not made the illegal ‘undertaking’ manoeuvre, crossing the solid white line, then it is likely (in my view) that the silver car driver would have tailgated the police vehicle and the police would still have pulled him over for his aggressive driving style (possibly reckless or dangerous driving charge territory). This to ‘teach him a lesson’ or ‘educate’ him to drive with more care and consideration for other road users and not like a race track. We could argue that the police driver, by matching the aggressive driving style of the driver of the silver car, contributed to the incident instead of doing the defensive alternative of reducing speed and filtering behind the silver car. However, the other argument is that the police driver wanted to assert the premise of filtering in turn. Given the aggressive driving style on display by the silver car driver, it is likely that, had the police driver taken the defensive alternative, they might have witnessed the silver car driver engaging in more aggressive driving with other road users from behind and then pulled him over with more damming evidence. Surely more satisfying than this rather tit for tat ego joust.
The police driver should have done better, no excuse for the other car.
But we all know that the police are a law unto themselves!
I'd question whether there was any excuse for EITHER of them. I'd say they were both dick-heads.
Yes, 'merge in turn', but that means merge one behind the other so you can take it either way, the silver car goes in front & the Police car goes behind, or the Police goes in front & the silver car goes behind. There is no hard & fast "right and wrong" as to which one should allow the other to go first, this is where courtesy & manners come in. Unfortunately, as we see more & more, manners & courtesy are becoming less & less common !!!
Like the old saying : There's NOTHING COMMON about common sense !!!!!!
A good example of poor driving on both sides. A small amount of consideration is just basic sense. The failure of both drivers is potential safety and the free flow of traffic.
True, however the cop car created the situation on purpose!
@@jackdominiak445 how?
@@jackdominiak445 I think it would be more reasonable to say the silver car deliberately created a conflict situation by not ceding priority as they ought, and the police car didn't do all they could have to avert it.
@@theshaowhy should the silver car ”cede priority”? He’s already in the correct lane. The cop should fall in behind him.
@@lesliefuller1456
That's not how "merging in turn" works. Cars *alternate* from each lane, and a car that's ahead of the car alongside it goes in front. Check your highway code, assuming you drive on the roads in the UK you're probably doing it wrong.
Clash of egos.
The country is full of wankarz.
But one is a citizen other is a police officer that is at greater scrutiny and isn't in emergency
@@treesoul00if you aren't aware you are approaching a merge in turn then you are driving without due care and attention
I think it's a perfect microcosm of the attitude that is poisoning the country.
Toxic selfish behavior breeds toxic selfish behavior.
Youre doing the Lords work BB
When people use the road right it is beautiful
It's very simple to merge in turns but people make it hard for no reason. Whoever is Infront stays in front, or if it a stand still it a one two, whoever is the lane that's not blocked he is one and one in the block lane is 2
As Ashley Neal would say, make it a non event. When presented with a space closer just let it go and smile.
I would be willing to bet money the silver car was being driven by one of our cultural enrichment buddies judging by their highly aggressive attitude 😂😂
@@SalvageMasterEssex What are "our cultural enrichment buddies"?
Ashley Neal 👍
I've watched his videos, he would speed up when his lane is running out 😂
In another video by Ashley, he suggests ignoring a sign snd using the lane which will run out just because it is empty even though this will cause MORE and unnecessary merge in turns. The correct thing to do is to form an orderly queue. Yes, there will be people jumping way ahead but only IF the road clogs up. Something you can only learn from experience is that Drivers are like sheep, and they will rarely let someone Infront they assume to be less observant and slower.
Police car failed to follow the road markings displaying the merge, had plenty of time to slow down and slot in behind into the massive space there.
Silver car tries to overtake as the other car was clearly ahead at start.
The police car had plenty of space before the silver car decided to speed up.
This absolutely boils my piss! The silver car is clearly at fault and deliberately speeds up with the sole intention of blocking the other car, a lift off the accelerator for a split second would have been enough to keep everything moving smoothly.
You're clearly one of these idiots that behaves like the cop car on a regular basis, an entitled tw.at 😡
You would think it would be that easy, it would seem not though eh
The only sensible one in this clip is the dash cam driver as he held back and let the clowns have at it, better to keep them in front!
I agree, great to see the police catching an idiot driver like that. Nothing worse than having a fool get road rage over letting people merge. Any decent driver would let the inside lane car merge there. Shame the percentage of decent drivers isn't very high.
Disagree, the left lane is merging to the right as shown by the arrow. If the silver car is “speeding” up then what is the actual speed as it’s not shown. How do you not know if the left car lifted off? As NO speed is recorded it holds no water. The police car is bullying its way in plain and simple.
You should not cause other drivers to slow down and only merge when safe to do so.
Unfortunately the silver car shouldn’t have crossed the solid lines.
Merge in turn only applies at low speeds, this looked to be around 30, the right hand car had the right of way, I know this contradicts what most people are saying, but left hand car had to give way and didn't.
The police car also entered the bus lane when getting in front of the silver car.
@@derek-press not without blues on
@@derek-press You might expect a child to say something like that. They're not 'allowed' to do anything over what regular motorists are able to do.
@@derek-press Just because noone stops them doesn't make it legal. I know it hurts your ego being wrong but be a man and accept it
@@derek-press police do not have an exemption for crossing solid white lines - at all.
@@kinkaito5433 nor with blue lights on. Police do not have any exemption that allows them to cross a solid white line.
Police car should have slowed then merged after the silver car. Silver car shouldn't have reacted to dick move by police car.
Then they wouldn't be able to dish out a ticket, they did this on purpose to get a reaction, 7/10 drivers would react the same and the coppers know it.
I got cut up by one at 70mph on a motorway.
Putting the public in danger by cutting up drivers is now a Police tactic 😡
I think this is a little more complicated at the beginning, its not as your diagram suggests. Its a bus lane, hard to make out from the sign but many can be used by taxi's. The silver car might have assumed the car on its left can legitimately use the bus lane, so did not have to drop back. The police car did not use indicators until it was along side so these would not have been seen. Of course there-after the silver car was a complete tool to try and undertake in a bus lane
@@AlfaGTA156 how is the silver car meant to see the rear of the police car?
Police car should have been indicating it's intended direction change. It could have been going into the building on the left. No indicators used, so no known intended direction. The fuzz at fault...
Indicating at a merge in turn is redundant.
'merge in turn' is not how people interpret the road markings. They are painted as if one lane ends and the other continues.
Perhaps by 'people' you meant you. My experience is that most drivers interpret it correctly and merge in turn.
Absolutely agree that the silver car should have just allowed the Police car to merge instead of trying to speed up to cut it off.
Wrong.
1. No indicators
2. Give way to the right.
3. Look at the road markings.
I wouldn't want to meet you at a roundabout.
@@adenwellsmith6908wrong, silver car overtook on approach to the merge. Markings mean merge not overtake. Bus lane ticket for silver car best outcome.
@@markdrummond7 Where's the indicator use before turning into the other lane forcing the car to slow.
The police car was ahead and the silver car sped up to block the merge
@@adenwellsmith6908I’d much prefer to meet a driver who corrects other road users’ mistakes than one who overreacts to every incident. The police could have done better, but the driver of the silver car could have made it a non-event instead of escalating.
The copper is 100% in the wrong, but the KIA driver over reacted to them pushing in
I commute with regular merge-in-turns at the ends of short dual carriage way sections. They get blocked constantly as people overtake only to not get back in at the end causing the traffic to stop and back up. Locals stay in the left hand lane and drive at the speeds that the upcoming single lane can handle. Others over take and then cause a snarl up as its goes into a single lane. Highway code is one thing, common sense another.
I agree with you on this. Very old studies have shown, keeping slow free movement of traffic causes less accidents and less congestion of the traffic. However that is not the modern intention, it is to pack as many vehicles into as little space as possible.
The police car should have given way as they were changing lanes ....
Once the lane separator lines stop before the more obvious single lane starts the road is then a single lane and the car that's there first is in the one and only lane as such at that point they are not changing lane as there is only one lane. This is why the lane separator line stop before the actual lanes merge.
How odd that when the opposite is true, the lane on the right is the lane that ends then people in that right hand lane claim the same rights.
I used to live less than a mile from where this incident took place. It's in Aylestone, Leicester. Very often drivers used to desperately try and cut you off just here. I just couldn't understand why
I keep say this that instead of one lane merging left or right bring both to a central point that way neither can claim someone cut into thier lane as both need to move over into the new lane inturn. Then move the new lane to the position on the road it needs to be. Mind due to the issues caused by merging lanes several newly painted junctions in Hull had the markings burnt back off and directional arrows at the junctions changed to remove the need for the merges right after the junction
I'm from Hawaii, the land of Aloha!
Normally, when the car that has to merge is ahead of the car in the lane to be merged, the latter car has to show road courtesy by backing off, not speeding up to block them out. That would be considered a "dick move" or road rage egotistical maneuver. I would have slammed on my brakes, not wanting to show any rage myself, but that leaves a situation of endangering all motorists behind me, having to stop all of a sudden. Our highways are so crowded as it is. Driving with Aloha or care for everyone's safety is paramount! That silver car that was behind the merging car should've backed off and allowed the merging car to enter the lane, not sped up in order to block them out so they could save a couple of seconds or show their ego/superiority in lieu of safety.
Australian drivers are taught to merge as early as possible to ensure smooth flowing if the lane ends or is blocked ahead. That's because sloe-moving vehicles changing into another lane cause the whole stream of traffic to slow. Using all of the ending lane would work well if everyone is travelling about the same speed. I'd die of shock if I saw that happening regularly. In New Zealand the system is a zip merge: if two vehicles are approaching a merge point the one in front goes first followed by the one behind, even if it's only a small distance behind.
The silver car was overtaking and the instruction for overtaking is that is should only be done when it is safe to do so. Both drivers would be aware the lanes were merging and so the silver car was unable to complete the overtake safely. The silver car could also have accelerated to complete the overtake before the lanes merged. It would appear that the silver car was specifically blocking the police car.
I've got a little story of my own when I was doing deliveries on my motorbike. I completed a delivery and on my way back I filtered through some traffic on my motorbike at a set of red traffic lights. On the right lane there was a black Volkswagen Golf and behind that was a silver car. The Golf decided for some random reason that he didn't want to wait anymore and just jumps the red light. The silver car right behind was an unmarked police car and it was the most aggressive pull over I've seen. Lights came on, sirens instantly on and the police was beeping the horn at him aggressively. about 15 seconds later the lights went green...
Please put out a video on Starmer's speech yesterday. Those put before the courts 'will be convicted'.
Has he not compromised every trial occasioned by the current disturbances?
Kangaroo courts?? I wonder how the Judiciary feel about this? He is actually saying someone is convicted and therefore guilty without due consideration of the facts.
No, because he's not in the judicial stream. You've also missed the point that the investigation provides the Magistrates evidence for arraignment, and that the gravity of offences makes the actual conviction hearing in Crown Court. In this, I'm following the Continental concept of prejudice changing at the preliminary hearing: one's innocence is presumed up until the first hearing decides there actually is a case to be answered, it then is suspended until the conviction hearing concludes one way or another (or even both, in Scotland).
For full disclosure, he's probably aware I'm a legist appointed by the Belgian Supreme Court, having worked as an investigator for one of the judges who'd been caught between a case and his personal life. I also have the residual onus of closing one of the guarantors of the ECHR, and so was recognised by the MinJust by serving on the beta test panel for the StatuteLaw DB (the back end of legislation gov uk. I'm not academically qualified, but started by supporting the former Head of BEAR Legal Services, mentoring the replacement Heads of the Gendarmerie CID in the Dutroux case, which exploded under me when a witness came to me connecting the Titze case, and thence many others, after the nasties left the door open.
Edit: Oh, wtf, I'm probably the original Weirdo and Misfit who inspired Dom Cummings search for competent Cabinet Office Staff in Jan 2020, as my father was Prince Philip's man in Engineering, after working as an outside specialist on more Parliamentary Select Committees than I can shake a stick at, Mum was SOE so I was on MI5's grid aged 11, and was recognised as a Tier One individual aged 22. I then honed my skills with an FT-100 Group HQ, until I joined the EU's CFSP State Department handling economic crises. That's how I can speak for the PM! I didn't actually take him up on the post, because I was sorting out a very similar trauma this murderer succumbed to, just my military training saw me get help from a Police therapist. I'm tidy now, considering how to contribute on the new CaseLaw DB.
5:15 amen! It’s amazing how many people claim “right of way”. I remember my first week of my degree being told “if I hear you say “right of way”, I’ll fail you!”
Highway code is clear on this, if your lane is terminating and there is someone in the lane you need to go into then you should yield to that vehicle. The vehicle occupying a lane has priority unless signage says different (rule 133, 134). The police officer is a professional driver and should have known better. They have not driven with due care and attention or consideration for other road users (CD10, CD20!). I expect the prosecution of the officer as well. See ruclips.net/video/SnClGweUvkQ/видео.html&si=4Zo4kMcFfAIvzCRw
@@waikanaebeach What rule is that?
As above, citation required if you're going to state something is clear. The general rule at lower speeds is merge in turn as BBB stated, Rule 134. Black car should have indicated early to show they needed to merge and the silver car should have let them do so rather than deliberately trying to overtake when they can see a lane closure ahead. Extremely poor by the silver car, police car could have done better but nothing egregious and I would be extremely surprised if tthey are charged with anything.
BBB’s diagram is confusing - if you watch the video you’ll see that both lanes become one at the point where the separating line disappears. Neither car had to cross a lane marker to merge in turn because by that point they were both in the same lane.
@jez5182 It is common sense and competent defensive driving.
Besides that, it matters not who is right or wrong. Being right is pointless if you are standing at the pearly gates.
why was the police car not indicating? was his bulb broken?
In my opinion the car on the right could have been speeding up so to allow the ''Police'' car to move in behind, the Police car also entered the bus lane and should have slowed down knowing there was a gap behind the other car. Both to blame.
Both drivers exhibited what is all too common on our roads i.e. a willingness to instigate a disruption to the flow of traffic.
As a policeman once asked me , " Are you aware of the principles of cause and effect ? "
It looked a lot like the car on the right braked to box the car on the left (the police car) in to the lane that was ending (I’ve experienced this a few times). This leaves the police car with little option other than either hammering on the brakes (possibly causing an accident should someone then run into him) or to accelerate into the space that had now opened up in front of the car on the right. Also, whilst moving over early may be a waste of a lane, driving to the end of the merge then causes a concertina effect which is far more likely to cause an accident with someone running into the back of someone else that has had to come to a stop to allow the merging car in. You are normally given 800yds notice on a motorway of a merge, you should use at least 400yds of that to try to identify a suitable gap for you to merge into within the last 200yds as this also keeps the traffic flowing instead of constantly stop start stop start.
Wrong, the police car could’ve drove into the bus lane as they are allowed to do but chose to force the silver car to brake.
Very poor risk assessment of the police driver.
@@David-ec2qp a marked police car may be able to do this, but it kind of defeats the purpose if an unmarked ie undercover police car does this. However, it is quite evident the silver car was deliberately antagonising the unmarked police car and his later aggressive undertaking manoeuvre through the bus lane only adds to that.
@@SpookEOD It also defeats the purpose if you're intimidating a civilian driver into making a mistake just so you can switch your blue lights ON. The Police officer in question should act in a professional manner and serve the public, "NOT" goad them. The officer had the safer option to prevent a possible accident by continuing into the bus lane and possibly deal with it safely but instead chose not to, and that would've been after them risk assessing the situation.
Tell me, how fast was the silver car going before and after it sped up? Is it illegal to accelerate to the required speed limit as we all do. I'll assume you don't know because it isn't shown. The fact is the officer had safer options but chose in the end to be the aggressor, which resulted in the silver car doing something equally stupid.
Both of them should be punished for two stupid manoeuvres.
@@David-ec2qp take your tin foil hat off. Whilst the police car could’ve and should’ve tried moving into merge lane sooner that could easily be a case of either a recent change to the road layout or being unfamiliar it’s the area and not realising until late on they were in a filter lane. The actual speed they were travelling at is irrelevant, the fact that the silver car without doubt was doing everything it could to box the police car into the bus lane, there are ignorant, arrogant idiots like that everywhere who probably thought it would be funny for them to force the car into the bus lane so they get a fine through the post. Regardless of the actions of the police car there was absolutely no justification for what the silver car did at any point when the police car got close to the point of having to merge into that lane.
The thing that always confuses me about this is that such behaviour almost always just slows every one down anyway, nobody wins.
I've only watch the beginning. I would allow the black car in. People do not always know the road layout.
Manoeuvre only if it is safe to do so; the police car failed...
NOTHING NEW MY FRIEND A LOT OF THOSE POLICE DRIVE AND PARK LIKE COMPLETE IDIOTS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT. 👍
Mirror, signal, manouver (when it is safe to do so). The copper failed. Not good enough for a basic license, let alone an advanced. driving license.
If it was a driving test both would have failed. The silver car might have got away with a driving fault (minor) for the initial bit of space closing (especially if it was a learner) but it could easily be a serious fault for 'response to other road users'. The Police car would have got that one too and then they went straight for a dangerous fault with the bus lane / force in manoeuvre. The reaction from the silver car would have an examiner ending the test and walking back to the test centre.
It wasn't a driving test of course; it was real life and that's a whole different thing. Simple solution though; the police driver should have eased off and made it a 'non event' (to quote a certain driving instructor).
The silver car accelerated making it harder for the police car to merge in turn. The police car was in front.
As a retired driving instructor I do comment with some experience and understanding of driving etiquette.
In this situation, the onus is on the driver on the left, who's lane is ending to give way as he is the one who is changing lane/ road position, and if required, to signal before hand.
Both drivers had plenty of advance notice that the road layout was about to change.
They were both inconsiderate towards each other.
By crossing the solid white line into an active bus lane to undertake was a secondary offence.
The police car gets a C, they should have realised sooner that they silver car wasn’t going to let them in and hung back. The silver car gets an F.
Go early into the clip. the police car was behind and had ample time and space to adjust speed to merge behind the silver car. The police driver elected to challenge for the road position and ultimately created the situation.
There was another probable offence in that video that wasn’t mentioned. In as part of forcing in front, the police vehicle entered the bus lane and drove a short way in it.
It was not forced to do so and could have just pulled back or stopped, but chose to continue forward instead.
I feel it was forced to do so, as the silver car didn't merge in turn. Maybe it could jam on the brakes, but what's the safe breaking distance at the speed they're going?
The lane the police car was in was ending. the outer lane was continuing, therefore the police car was merging into the outside lane and was not clearly not ahead of silver car, the silver car was not merging at all, he was continuing on in his lane. The police car should have merged behind the silver car.
It's simple the one in the lane running out road space _should_ be the one to back of and slow down etc
Give way to the right.
No indicators used.
To what degree do you think common sense and decency should matter, if at all? Does every conceivable action you take in your life need to be scripted and enshrined in law? I'm fairly certain anyone with half a brain would intuitively decide not to cut the other car off and force them to brake because it's impolite and stupid.
That's what I would have thought so too
Not if there's lane merging, or the left lane would get clogged up, while the right lane carried on. If that happens eventually nobody uses the left lane, because they know the right lane has an advantage. People can be stupid with lane merging, you don't gain much advantage by pushing past cars in the inside lane, it just makes you look stupid.
@@adenwellsmith6908 Did you even watch the rest of the video? BB even covered the myth of "give way to the right" and you're still down here commenting it. Both cars are equally at fault and if a collision had occured it almost certainly would have been joint responsibility.
From my knowledge, from being taught to drive, driving experience and how insurance companies apportion blame, the police car was wrong to force its way into the outside lane.
Whilst the police car may at one point had its nose in front of the silver car, at no time was in clearly in front and indicating its intention to move over. If there had been an accident then I’m fairly certain that the police car would have been held to be responsible as it is the responsibility of the driver making a manoeuvre to ensure it was safe to do so. There is absolutely no requirement for the silver car to adjust his position to facilitate such a manoeuvre by the police car other than good manners, consideration or whatever else you want to call it. As already mentioned in another post, for all the driver of the silver car knew, the police car may have had the right to use the bus lane. Whilst others have stated the silver car accelerated to block the police car, this is not clear from the video, as a slowing police car would make it appear the silver car accelerated, but one could also argue that by accelerating he was allowing more room for the police car to filter in behind.
What happened afterwards however is unforgivable except to ask the question was the driver of the police car purposely trying to aggravate the other driver.
This is pretty much my understanding too. The police car was changing lanes and he should have done so safely. He didn't. The silver car should really have dropped back but there was no requirement for him to do so.
I'm very lucky because in later life I only drive for fun so I have no where to be so I let everyone in all the time, none of these things ever happen to me, but when I drove to work I always left enough time so the same applies, always leave enough time so you can drive chilled.
The police car had 2 wheels in the bus lane, so obviously they were driving down the bus lane
Use all lanes and merge in turn at end of lane gives one advantage that no one talks about. It is predictable flow of traffic. Merging early has no consistency, drivers randomly dash into any gap along the queue. Sometimes one car merge at 400 yards, then the car following it driver further and merge randomly at 200 yards. This creates unpredictable disturbance to the flow. If everyone merge in turn at the same point, it becomes predictable and drivers can reserve distances to maintain best flow.
I can't understand why people just can't use an indicator when their lane wants you to merge. Honestly I think it would reduce these incidents by at least 50%
BMW?
It should be blindingly obvious that if a lane is ending vehicles in that lane will need to merge, if you need someone to use their indicator to demonstrate that to you then you need to learn to pay attention.
If you look at the initial video rather than the many still frames you can see that the car on the left is indicating although the video quality makes it difficult to see. But by that time it's unlikely that the car on the right can even see the side repeaters, if any, never mind the front or rear lights.
@@isolationstation5157 true but some people are crazy and will want to punish you for not indicating by blocking you
I can't understand how people lose the ability to read the road in front of them once they pass their test.
There is no requirement to indicate when the only action available is self-evident.
I used to be an aggressive driver until one day it dawned on me that I was subjecting myself to undue stress and I was not gaining any journey time. Now, I just go with the flow. If someone cuts me up, I slow down and let them have space because I will arrive at my destination with no loss of time.
In New Zealand, we have signs that say "Merge Like A Zipper".
I don't think (legally) this is a merge-in-turn situation. The right side is continuous and the left merges into it. I think the black (police) car should have given way as priority belongs to traffic in the continuous lane.
Imo, the police car caused this whole scenario. It seems they were arrogant enough to think they could push their way in when they could easily have just gone behind.
My understanding is that in order to make merge happen painlessly to everyone's ego is to drop in behind the car next to you. The car behind that one tends not to get triggered because you've always been in front.
From what I can see the police car was in front at the point of the merge and the lane separation markers had ended some distance before - the rule is that when crossing dotted lines you must give way to traffic on the other side of the dotted line - but when there is no line the traffic has equal priority so each must give way to the other. Although many people think that the vehicle that is in front has right of way I've not seen this codified anywhere. Ultimately they are both equally guilty. The solid white line is to demarcate a bus lane so the suitable offence would be driving in the bus lane.
The police car was wrong because it effectively performed an undertaking manouvre. The silver vehicle had no obligation to let the unmarked police car into the lane and especially since he didn't have any emergency lights on so the driver wouldn't know it was a copper going to an incident or for a coffee?
The silver car then pulled a stupid manouve. Both to blame and punish them both equally.
Right of way is given, not taken
Priority is given, not taken is the normal phrase.
There are very clear markings (the arrow and the dotted line) indicating the black car's lane is ending and they need to change. The silver car doesn't need to do anything.
The black car was the one that needing to perform a manoeuvre in order to proceed. It was possibly rude and/or ignorant for the silver car to not give way, but there was no requirement for them to do so. They were simply continuing to drive in their lane. They may not even have seen the black car. We don't know.
I just looked at the highway code and it seems all the instruction on multi-lane traffic and merging puts the responsibility upon the car that is needing to merge and not on the one that is just proceeding in their lane.
Merge-in-turn procedures are recommendations only.
Basically, the silver car had no requirement to do anything whatsoever.
Yes, they probably could/should have seen the black car and common decency would dictate they should have slowed in order to allow the black car to merge, BUT there was no legal requirement for them to do so and if they wanted to be rude/belligerent/whatever, that was totally up to them.
The black car was the one with a lane that was ending. It was obvious the silver car was not going to give way, so the black car should have slowed down so they could pull in behind them.
Of course the subsequent actions of the silver car was illegal and stupid, but I would assign some 'blame' to the black car for forcing their way in when they were the ones with the responsibility to find a way to change lanes without causing other drivers to change their speed or direction.
(_That_ is a basic rule of any move on the road. If you require another driver to change speed or direction, you are doing something wrong).
Being rude and inconsiderate on the roads is selfish and dangerous, but proceeding as if other drivers should be observant and polite is also foolish and dangerous.
If I were on my motorcycle I would never have behaved like the black car did. I would have assumed the silver car either didn't see more or didn't want to yield for whatever reason and would have dropped back to keep myself safe. Yes, I'd be cursing him under my breath, but I wouldn't have forced a possible accident.
Merge is the appropriate word.
No one did anything wrong until the silver car went into the bus lane.
Again thank you for analysis this type of behaviour so we can all learn from it.
Question : You state that effectively both drivers were "inconsiderate" to some extent during the 'merging' phase : As an officer of the law, should the driver of the Police car have "set a better example" & be held to a higher standard ????
The silver car might have been a tourist and may not know the local road system, but doing what they did after was stupid.
The annoying thing about the merging Issues you get is when you stop to let a car merge and the whole lane decides that its given them the green light to go not letting other traffic merge
It always amazes me how many people will risk life, limb or licence simply to be one place further up in the queue!! I agree though that it was poor driving initially by the Police driver, who could have easily simply dropped back and slotted in behind the aggressive silver car. Then the Police could have spoken to the silver car driver about the courtesy that should be shown on highways at points like this and maybe improved their driving for the future
I've always wondered, where the cars are a Land Rover, BMW or Audi, which car has to give way 🤔
The police car shouldn’t have been in that lane in the first place and if not, should have given way.
The police car crossed the solid white line instead of holding back. So the copper should also get a ticket for careless driving.
When its merge in turn and your car is ahead, you shouldn't need to hold back. This was all caused by the silver car accelerating, when it should be merging in turn, staying behind the police car.
I thought there had to be an available space or it's undertaking. The silver car saw the other start to undertake and sped up. Should have just let it happen. If you have to brake in the right lane, more cars behind you have to break giving greater potential for fender benders. But thing is, you just have to let it happen. Allow them in. 😊
surely the person in the lane has priority? after all the merge in, is joining the main flow of traffic.
How does the advice to motorists to give way to the vehicle on your right. It is difficult to see a vehicle on your left whereas very easy to see the vehicle to your right. This is similar to a dual carriageway entering a roundabout and exiting opposite into a single carriageway.
Though the silver car was slightly behind the police car at the point of the merge and should have held back, I think that when the driver of the police car saw the merge arrow markings further up the road HE should have slowed and allowed the silver car to pass. It was HIS lane that was closing.
Dan, I think your analysis of the vehicle positions is wrong. The black car is slightly ahead of the silver car at the merge point and the convention is that the car with the bonnet in front takes the priority. Besides, the silver car is significantly behind the black car and can see the merge point approaching and speeds up to cut off the black car's merge. The black car did everything that was expected and could have taken a discretionary approach, but given that the car was a police car then it was right and proper to follow the correct procedure, which would have given the opportunity to pull over the silver car driver to point out the error of his ways. However, the silver car driver compounded his error by using the bus lane to overtake on the inside. It was indeed righteous karma.
How has nobody mentioned 'indicating'??? Are we going to be told not using indicators is in the highway code? Maybe if the fed car indicated it might have been a different story, the indicators are on the vehicle for a reason...
Police might also be guilty of bad driving, but the incident did catch out someone who couldn't control their emotions.
Still a win for the public.
Not really, because a bad cop driver is still lose on our roads and the silver car will either get 3 points or get a course
The real problem is the bus lane, they are always empty and just cause more congestion.
The issue isn't with the bus lane, it's with the amount of empty space in the cars. Around 75% of private car journeys are single-occupant journeys, consider the space being taken up for one person vs the amount of space those people would take up on a bus.
You might be sat in your queue of traffic wondering why the bus lane looks so empty, but a single bus passing could carry more than the total of the car occupants you're queuing up with.
@@glenn1534 but nobody wants to take the bus, they are crap. Bike lanes are worse than bus lanes, millions of pounds spent and years of road works near me, you might see one bike an hour on a busy day. Anyone that drives to an office to work, should work from home. If you don’t work in an office, buses generally aren’t suitable.
@@Andy-oc3ew thousands of people use buses every day. If they didn't, you'd be in even longer queues. I work in an office in a factory, plenty of the factory workers take the bus and a few of them cycle to work. Also there are a lot more reasons to travel than just to get to work.
You complain about the congestion, but you ARE the congestion.
@@glenn1534 I am the congestion? I need to carry about 1/2 ton of tools and equipment each day, how can I use a bus? The experiment with bus lanes has failed, the theory being more people would use buses if bus lanes were installed and travel times were reduced. The same people are still using bus lanes, without a significant increase, most buses I see are nearly empty, you may know a few exceptions to the rule but that is what they are, exceptions. People using buses now would still use them if the bus lanes were removed.
The bus lane here (Aylestone Road leading away from Leicester City) is used by buses, taxis and cyclists alike and used often. The bus and cycle lanes down that road have definitively reduced congestion on that road since they went in.
Hold on a minute Daniel.
Solid line crossing and undertaking aside, you didn't mention a single word about unmarked police vehicle NOT INDICATING intention of turn or change of direction (line merging in this case) ahead of time.
Merge in turn (by forcing others to break) without indicating and then break testing them is viewed as careless and inconsiderate driving and by extention driving without due care and attention.
Unmarked police vehicle should identified start of a bus lane (right after leaving the junction) shown by blue colour, rectangular road sign which informs user of the near side line that the near side line becomes bus line that also can be used by solo motorcycles and taxis at all times (if I'm not mistaken).
Famous quote from the "Animal Farm" by George Orwell comes to mind, but why bother.
The unmarked police car, even with the road markings and signs, should have signalled his intention to move over to the other lane. The other driver in the silver car was either not paying attention to the situation or doesn't know how to be polite to other road users, for the two seconds it would have added to his journey he should have allowed space for the police car to move into. This episode is basically down to a mix of lazy and arrogant driving, I'm sick of drivers not indicating or think they should get priority because they are in a rush. Considering the changes to the driving test the standard of driving has deteriorated.
The silver car was behind most of the time and sped up to try to prevent the darker car merging in, but when it pushed its way in the silver car took his aggression another step further. Those that are arguing otherwise seem to be doing so because they're anti-police, and not because of anything that actually happened. It's shocking how many people don't understand merge-in turn, and how many will actually try to block the lane to force one long queue.
On the M1 yesterday morning a police car (BMW X1) made six lane changes in very heavy traffic without using there indicators, this was followed by an ARV not giving way to my vehicle in its hurry to enter Wakefield HQ (butties were going cold LOL), as usual one rule for them and one rule for everybody else
I would also add that at no point does the Police car indicate his intension to move over. Simple rule, mirror, signal, manoeuvre and always acknowledge when someone does give way.
I agree in theory, but to indicate at a merge in turn is technically redundant and not required, since the arrows on the floor presuppose intention.
Exactly. I've never used an indicator for a merge in turn as it's not required. All road users are made aware it is a merge in turn.@@colinsmithers6961
The police car drove across the thick white line though..which was a bus lane..both aggressive...see these behaviours all the time..no one wants to wait and be courteous anymore...everyone has to get there first 😢
2:10. They have no choice? Not the case. Just brake and merge in behind. That's what the middle pedal of the car does [left if an automatic]
The rules are give way to the right. It's all at this point, the police car is in the wrong.
Next, there's no indicators turned on.
I just wish people would be more considerate on the roads
They’re not! Sums up the Kingdom, in general!!!
The silver car driver might have been trying to get ahead a bit faster to allow the police car to merge. As you said, they were both nearly at the same level. This might be down to a bit of confusion and the silver car driver was a bit miffed that the police decided to bully him/her instead of being grateful.
Both at fault but we all know there will be no consequences for the copper.
Fancy new graphics instead of marker pen scribbles. Top job embracing tech and upgrading. Love your vids hehe
just anther highly trained policer driver showing how good they are
Sadly I have experienced this all too many times! The two memorable ones (both just merge not merge in turn) one was with an RAC van straddling both lanes to stop people which I found ironic because their website has a long article on the proper way to do it! May want to get your drivers to read your own website boys! Secondly, and this is more of frustration, is I quite often leave a space for cars to move in one by one which goes well until some numpty tries to push in two cars at once. When will they learn…?
I'm not sure how it works where you are, but where I am, the lane markings stop, so whoever is in front has priority. This usually means that the two lanes merge like a zipper. The cop car had positioned himself right on the bumper of the car in front of the offender so that he could merge between the two of them, but the silver car tailgated the car in front of them just to force themselves in one spot further ahead. Unless the road rules are different there, the silver car was 100% in the wrong, and then proved what a sausage they were by passing hte car in the bike lane. 🤷♂
The problem with the 'dont merge early' premise is that there's always some asshat who merges early, then sees cars coming up the outside lane and so pulls out to block the lane. HGV's are particularly guilty of this but i've seen this happen many many times.
Merge-in-turn could easily be a required procedure, but is presented as 'advice'.
The highway code, in my not-so-humble opinion, is gutless and fluffy in so many areas and leaves so much to interpretation as to be a cause of problems even for those that would love to follow the rules.
As a motorcyclist, several times I've looked up issues only to be left with no clear guidance one way or another (lane splitting or filtering is a classic issue with unclear or lacking guidance).
It's almost like the authorities prefer not to stick their necks out by making strict determinations, but want to provide a living to lawyers arguing in grey areas and insurance companies apportioning blame as they fancy...
Both of the vehicles drive in the bus lane to some extent by crossing the solid white line. I believe this is an offence in itself. The silver car does this in a more deliberate and blatant way.
Police really should be setting an example, not bullying other drivers, causing aggravation (their intent?) and forcing their way in a manner that could cause an accident and they were the first to drive in the bus lane.
Can Rowley be done for criminal damage to the reporters microphone he grabbed,today?
It was the responsibility of the car on the left to merge safely. He didn’t indicate. He aggressively pushed his way in, then braked.
The silver car made a d*ck move in retaliation. He ahould have allerted the black car to his presence using his horn, then braked to avoid collision.
"Give way to the right" applies to roundabouts.
Why should the officer get words of advice and not a fine? That breaks the law. Any superior officer who does that breaks the code of ethics, now incorporated into UK law.
Namely acting impartially. Not giving a colleague a break is the law.