Forming One Lane as traffic in the ACT

Alderney said :

MrLinus said :

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

He’s a hint, maybe every worrd you post is rubbish that has the intellect of a small furry bit of roadkill that got collected when someone didn’t merge properly. I’d love to see you pulled over by the cops and given a ticket….”Oh but officer, the ACT Road Rules Handbook clearly states that…..” You are like that kid at school nobody likes who always insisted on doing everything to the letter of the law and without an ounce of common sense. I’m sorry you are an idiot and thank you for accepting my apology.

Are you and iLazy the same person? Why do you feel the need to defend them? My suspicions are raised.

None of what I’ve written in this thread, that you so inelequantly critique, is rubbish. If you had half a brain you may even be able to look it up yourself.

Not the same person… It appears we are just in agreement that we are powerfully sick of some of the tripe you post on this site generally and your constant attempts to look well informed and knowledgeable on all aspects of life. Yet I’m able to say that without resorting to foul languaged name calling like you.

Alderney said :

MrLinus said :

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

He’s a hint, maybe every worrd you post is rubbish that has the intellect of a small furry bit of roadkill that got collected when someone didn’t merge properly. I’d love to see you pulled over by the cops and given a ticket….”Oh but officer, the ACT Road Rules Handbook clearly states that…..” You are like that kid at school nobody likes who always insisted on doing everything to the letter of the law and without an ounce of common sense. I’m sorry you are an idiot and thank you for accepting my apology.

Are you and iLazy the same person? Why do you feel the need to defend them? My suspicions are raised.

I’ll tell you a little about my school days. I was one of the football players who was good enough to get out of having to do Saturday detention because I was required on the field. The trade off was I got the cane instead but that wasn’t too bad as I was going out every winter weekend and belting myself up on the field anyway. Physical punishment has never been a concern to me.

None of what I’ve written in this thread, that you so inelequantly critique, is rubbish. If you had half a brain you may even be able to look it up yourself. I may just be a dumb ex footy player, but at least I’m one with post grad qualifications.

I’ll never be pulled up by the coppers for not indicating in this circumstance because I’m driving within the law. I do strive to drive within the law because I have integrity. I try to live my life beyond reproach theses days but I’ve been a very bad boy in the past. There is not much that shocks me and I’ve seen more than most. My work is governed by regulation so I know the importance of it to ensure things go smoothly. What I do not take kindly to is ignorance masquerading as intellect.

And before you attempt to try to analyse my school days dont foist your own negative treatment at school on others. That chip as weighed you down a bit over life hasn’t it.

Nobody really asked.

But hopefully it served to boost your own opion of yourself. It’s a pity you haven’t grown in to a person who could think about something logically instead of running to the rule book and then quoting them to people.

TheBusDriver said :

Ahh, the other half came to the rescue and explained how to make this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PGhy6x2yoY
Ignore the date and speed details, I have not worked them out yet. The white Bommodore pulled up beside me and seemed conent to sit there through the merge. Then he almost lost it into oncoming traffic as he gives me the finger.

This happened to me the other day on Adelaide ave. There was a guy in a Silver Honda Accord, as we approached the end of the bus lane heading to Phillip, I was in the right hand lane doing the limit about 2 car lengths behind the car in front, we were passing the cars in the left hand lane.

Old mate in the Honda was sitting in the T2 lane behind me pretty well all the way from Deakin & when we approached the merge he decided he needed to be in front of me (I was the last car in the line).

Instead of passing me completely he only went 3/4 of the way & then started to move over on me causing me to have to brake to avoid hitting the left hand corner. Arsehat.

Anyway, before we got to Caruthers St the left was clear so I moved over there & I ended up passing him again at the roundabout as he stayed in the right hand lane.

If he had just stayed behind me he would not have lost anything but instead he had to be a dick & almost cause an accident.

Ahh, the other half came to the rescue and explained how to make this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PGhy6x2yoY
Ignore the date and speed details, I have not worked them out yet. The white Bommodore pulled up beside me and seemed conent to sit there through the merge. Then he almost lost it into oncoming traffic as he gives me the finger.

chrisi said :

There’s law, and then there’s manners.

Just because here in the ACT you dont “have to” keep left unless its a road over 80km/h, and you dont “have to” indicate on a form one lane, and you dont “have to” let someone in when they are trying to merge into your lane from an on ramp, and you dont “have to” dip your highbeams for cars further than 200m in front of you travelling in same direction, it’s just GOOD MANNERS to do it.

It’s not hard to be a courteous, so I dont understand why people have so much trouble doing it. Acting like a tosser on the road to get 1 or 2 cars in front (or even 10-15 cars!) isnt going to save you hours in travel time. It’s a few seconds…. maybe a minute. Is that minute worth that much extra stress you cause yourself and others.

Just play nice kiddies. It’s not hard- try it.

Yep good points and all that is required is manners,a little common sense and consideration.The only problem however is that those qualities seem to be diminishing with time and for many agro has become the norm when peeps get frustrated with others apparent inadequacies and actions.Some of us therefore will be whinging about these scenarios,even though it will change very little,until the advent of mass produced automated vehicles.

As a bus driver in Canberra (not Action) I have to say there are some complete idiot drivers out there, and there are some good drivers out there. Some are pretty clueless, but some are very respectful.
Mind you the bad ones are really bad. I also see the merge as being like a zip, car on the left, car on the right and so on in pattern. Some dipshits just see it as a challenge to see who can overtake each other. I find it quite amusing when some one decided they want to be in front of a bus and try to overtake then realise they can’t. Plus what is it with using round abouts as overtaking lanes?
When Iam driving a big bus, I’m legally allowed to use both lanes on a dual lane round about, and occasionally I do, especially when there is some idiot up my rear end and I know there’s a short merge lane on the other side of the round about. The last thing I want is a stoush over the merge. When driving the mini buses, particuarly when they are empty, I also get idiots trying to overtake me with 50 metres of road to the merging lanes.
I now take my dash camera with me on runs and I have some footage of these idiots. Unfortunatly it is not compressed High Def 1920 by 1080 and is in Quicktime format (so Windows Movie Maker won’t import it for editing). Mr John Boy do you have a postal address I could send video files to on a DVD? It would be easier than trying to upload unedited videos to youtube. I don’t have the badwidth. Or can someone reccomend a video editor that handles mov format videos?

There’s law, and then there’s manners.

Just because here in the ACT you dont “have to” keep left unless its a road over 80km/h, and you dont “have to” indicate on a form one lane, and you dont “have to” let someone in when they are trying to merge into your lane from an on ramp, and you dont “have to” dip your highbeams for cars further than 200m in front of you travelling in same direction, it’s just GOOD MANNERS to do it.

It’s not hard to be a courteous, so I dont understand why people have so much trouble doing it. Acting like a tosser on the road to get 1 or 2 cars in front (or even 10-15 cars!) isnt going to save you hours in travel time. It’s a few seconds…. maybe a minute. Is that minute worth that much extra stress you cause yourself and others.

Just play nice kiddies. It’s not hard- try it.

milkman said :

DrKoresh said :

Felix the Cat said :

Sandman said :

Yes, there’s lots of 110 kph dual lane highways running through Amaroo so the keep left unless overtaking is more than relevant.

I believe the keep left rule/law applies to streets with a speed limit of 80km/h or more so there probably are some streets in Amaroo with this limit.

Yes, I don’t think it’s really relevant at all unless you regularly drive through Amaroo on the highway. Almost everywhere else in Canberra there is no legal requirement to keep left and the people who complain about not being able to speed past everyone in the right lane because everyone else refuses to keep left are stupid hypocrites.

Similarly, those who refuse to use the left lane are rude knobs with small lives who take pathetic pleasure in holding up the traffic.

How do you equate using right hand lane to holding up traffic, being a rude knob or have a small life(whatever that means)?

DrKoresh said :

Felix the Cat said :

Sandman said :

Yes, there’s lots of 110 kph dual lane highways running through Amaroo so the keep left unless overtaking is more than relevant.

I believe the keep left rule/law applies to streets with a speed limit of 80km/h or more so there probably are some streets in Amaroo with this limit.

Yes, I don’t think it’s really relevant at all unless you regularly drive through Amaroo on the highway. Almost everywhere else in Canberra there is no legal requirement to keep left and the people who complain about not being able to speed past everyone in the right lane because everyone else refuses to keep left are stupid hypocrites.

Not to mention self entitled assholes

DrKoresh said :

Felix the Cat said :

Sandman said :

Yes, there’s lots of 110 kph dual lane highways running through Amaroo so the keep left unless overtaking is more than relevant.

I believe the keep left rule/law applies to streets with a speed limit of 80km/h or more so there probably are some streets in Amaroo with this limit.

Yes, I don’t think it’s really relevant at all unless you regularly drive through Amaroo on the highway. Almost everywhere else in Canberra there is no legal requirement to keep left and the people who complain about not being able to speed past everyone in the right lane because everyone else refuses to keep left are stupid hypocrites.

Similarly, those who refuse to use the left lane are rude knobs with small lives who take pathetic pleasure in holding up the traffic.

DrKoresh said :

Tetranitrate said :

Mostly serious – I don’t slow down *every* time so it’s a slight exaggeration. Really depends on just how aggressive the other driver was. I’ll always respond assertively by speeding up though.

I do slow down every time I’m tailgated. Tap the break pedal a couple of times just enough to flash the lights, then just slowly drop speed. By 10km’s. If they don’t stop it I drop it another 10km’s.

The way some of the people around here drive is absolutely ridiculous, I always hug the speed limit yet it’s not unusual to have people come up and practically hover on your bumper in 60 or 80 zones where they should be leaving several car-lengths. As far as I’m concerned it’s absolutely justifiable to f*ck with people who are willfully subjecting me to the risk of whiplash and other injuries for no reason other than their sheer aggression and impatience.

Beautiful! 😀 I salute you, sir.

Please, please never get your licence………we don’t need another club lock wielding arsehat on the road.

Tetranitrate said :

magiccar9 said :

Tetranitrate said :

Whenever someone pulls this sh*t on me I just speed up until I’m through the merge, then slow down 20km/hour bellow the speed limit immediately after. If everyone engaged in a punishment strategy like this, this sort of antisocial behaviour wouldn’t occur.

Are you serious!? I’d consider that even worse. Do you consider other road users when you pull this move? Do you think about everyone else around you that has to put up with you throwing your little tanty?
I’m all for punishment on the roads, but seriously consider other people first otherwise you’re regarded as just as much of a tool.

Mostly serious – I don’t slow down *every* time so it’s a slight exaggeration. Really depends on just how aggressive the other driver was. I’ll always respond assertively by speeding up though.

I do slow down every time I’m tailgated. Tap the break pedal a couple of times just enough to flash the lights, then just slowly drop speed. By 10km’s. If they don’t stop it I drop it another 10km’s.

The way some of the people around here drive is absolutely ridiculous, I always hug the speed limit yet it’s not unusual to have people come up and practically hover on your bumper in 60 or 80 zones where they should be leaving several car-lengths. As far as I’m concerned it’s absolutely justifiable to f*ck with people who are willfully subjecting me to the risk of whiplash and other injuries for no reason other than their sheer aggression and impatience.

To since when has two wrongs made a right? No wonder why peeps are cranky behind the wheel

Felix the Cat said :

Sandman said :

Yes, there’s lots of 110 kph dual lane highways running through Amaroo so the keep left unless overtaking is more than relevant.

I believe the keep left rule/law applies to streets with a speed limit of 80km/h or more so there probably are some streets in Amaroo with this limit.

Yes, I don’t think it’s really relevant at all unless you regularly drive through Amaroo on the highway. Almost everywhere else in Canberra there is no legal requirement to keep left and the people who complain about not being able to speed past everyone in the right lane because everyone else refuses to keep left are stupid hypocrites.

Tetranitrate said :

Mostly serious – I don’t slow down *every* time so it’s a slight exaggeration. Really depends on just how aggressive the other driver was. I’ll always respond assertively by speeding up though.

I do slow down every time I’m tailgated. Tap the break pedal a couple of times just enough to flash the lights, then just slowly drop speed. By 10km’s. If they don’t stop it I drop it another 10km’s.

The way some of the people around here drive is absolutely ridiculous, I always hug the speed limit yet it’s not unusual to have people come up and practically hover on your bumper in 60 or 80 zones where they should be leaving several car-lengths. As far as I’m concerned it’s absolutely justifiable to f*ck with people who are willfully subjecting me to the risk of whiplash and other injuries for no reason other than their sheer aggression and impatience.

Beautiful! 😀 I salute you, sir.

It seems RA has acquired a few new trolls.

Felix the Cat said :

I believe the keep left rule/law applies to streets with a speed limit of 80km/h or more…

Close, but not quite.

The “keep left” law that you’re referring to applies on multi-lane roads when:
(a) the speed limit is over 80km/h; or
(b) the road is posted with “Keep left except when overtaking” signs.

So it doesn’t apply on roads with an 80km/h speed limit, unless they specifically posted.

Sandman said :

Yes, there’s lots of 110 kph dual lane highways running through Amaroo so the keep left unless overtaking is more than relevant.

I believe the keep left rule/law applies to streets with a speed limit of 80km/h or more so there probably are some streets in Amaroo with this limit.

Madam Cholet said :

bob89 said :

Madam Cholet said :

rosscoact said :

bob89 said :

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

Nice work there, that puts that little furphy to rest. Facts trump assumption and confected outrage every time

But those points talk about ‘diverging’, which means ‘To go or extend in different directions; to branch out; to deviate’. As you are only following the line of the road you are doing none of the above.

Unfortunately if you read the intention documents and case law that went with the decisions on wording, you’re incorrect. Besides, you’re not “following the line” as the line ceases to exist.

Mind you, cyclists, horse riders, motorcyclists and even small cars on some roads are technically required and can be held responsible (to some extent) for accidents caused during moving from one side to the other within a lane. All bar the car can be two abreast…

Evidence? Was the case exactly about cars merging from two lanes to one as in the diagram, crossing no unbroken lines? Or was it about one lane ending and merging across an unbroken line into another – in which case an indicator would be considered the right thing to do.

Should we therefore all start indicating when going round bends if a change in direction means continuing on essentially something that is a continuance of the same lane?

with all due respect, you may be flogging a dead horse here

bob89 said :

Madam Cholet said :

rosscoact said :

bob89 said :

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

Nice work there, that puts that little furphy to rest. Facts trump assumption and confected outrage every time

But those points talk about ‘diverging’, which means ‘To go or extend in different directions; to branch out; to deviate’. As you are only following the line of the road you are doing none of the above.

Unfortunately if you read the intention documents and case law that went with the decisions on wording, you’re incorrect. Besides, you’re not “following the line” as the line ceases to exist.

Mind you, cyclists, horse riders, motorcyclists and even small cars on some roads are technically required and can be held responsible (to some extent) for accidents caused during moving from one side to the other within a lane. All bar the car can be two abreast…

Evidence? Was the case exactly about cars merging from two lanes to one as in the diagram, crossing no unbroken lines? Or was it about one lane ending and merging across an unbroken line into another – in which case an indicator would be considered the right thing to do.

Should we therefore all start indicating when going round bends if a change in direction means continuing on essentially something that is a continuance of the same lane?

poetix said :

Solidarity said :

Yep, it’s always 4WD’s too…

Usually female though.

….

How do you tell a female 4WD? Do they have cowbars?

the male 4wd’s have a set of saggy Ram nuts hanging of the tow bar

bob89 said :

Madam Cholet said :

rosscoact said :

bob89 said :

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

Nice work there, that puts that little furphy to rest. Facts trump assumption and confected outrage every time

But those points talk about ‘diverging’, which means ‘To go or extend in different directions; to branch out; to deviate’. As you are only following the line of the road you are doing none of the above.

Unfortunately if you read the intention documents and case law that went with the decisions on wording, you’re incorrect. Besides, you’re not “following the line” as the line ceases to exist.

Since you obviously have access to the documentation of these decisions, can you please provide some references? I’d be genuinely curious to read through them.

It’s hard to see how the word, “diverge”, can possibly be interpreted that way, so I’d be fascinated to understand the reasoning.

Madam Cholet said :

rosscoact said :

bob89 said :

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

Nice work there, that puts that little furphy to rest. Facts trump assumption and confected outrage every time

But those points talk about ‘diverging’, which means ‘To go or extend in different directions; to branch out; to deviate’. As you are only following the line of the road you are doing none of the above.

Unfortunately if you read the intention documents and case law that went with the decisions on wording, you’re incorrect. Besides, you’re not “following the line” as the line ceases to exist.

Mind you, cyclists, horse riders, motorcyclists and even small cars on some roads are technically required and can be held responsible (to some extent) for accidents caused during moving from one side to the other within a lane. All bar the car can be two abreast…

rosscoact said :

bob89 said :

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

Nice work there, that puts that little furphy to rest. Facts trump assumption and confected outrage every time

But those points talk about ‘diverging’, which means ‘To go or extend in different directions; to branch out; to deviate’. As you are only following the line of the road you are doing none of the above.

bob89 said :

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

Nice work there, that puts that little furphy to rest. Facts trump assumption and confected outrage every time

I really have to mention one of the most incredibly dangerous and extraordinarily stupid incidents i have ever witnessed which occurred in the late nineties along Morshead Drive some 300 metres past the Russell roundabout airport bound.

At that time the stretch of road was dual lane until one had to merge to form one lane just before the left hand bend in the road.I was following two vehicles,some 50 metres behind,who were travelling side by side until one decided to accelerate to position himself in front of the vehicle next to him.Unfortunately the other idiot decided he was having none of that and flattened it as well.What followed was unbelievable for they were travelling side by side attempting to outrun each other while trying to occupy one lane.The idiot on the left was half on the road and half on the grass while the other idiot was positioned a metre or so on the wrong side of the road with other vehicles coming towards him who somehow miraculously avoided a head-on.Finally one gave way and the other proceeded to brake test him for hundreds of metres before he accelerated away.

If only i had a dash cam!

Section 45 (2)c and 3(c)

You indicate at Form One Lane.

Case law supports this too if you still want to dispute.

So when my car got side swiped at a form one lane by some chick in a hatch back and her not stoping after the accident is my fault because I was in a 4wd and i deserved it? that’s the vibe I’m getting here

mezza76 said :

grunge_hippy said :

tl:dr

the picture told the story. happens all the time, learner or not. no one merges properly in this town.

I agree. What the hell is it with merging in this town? My favourite game of late is to see which idiot won’t give way to a bus coming out of stop… plenty seem to want to push it and give it a go… some realise too late that they are most likely to come off second best against a large bus.

The statement that no one merges properly in Canberra is not true. Because I merge properly. It all starts with an individual being respectful and merging with due consideration of all other road users. Respectful and correct adherence to the road rules is just as infectious as bad behaviour on the roads. It’s up to you.

mezza76 said :

grunge_hippy said :

tl:dr

the picture told the story. happens all the time, learner or not. no one merges properly in this town.

I agree. What the hell is it with merging in this town? My favourite game of late is to see which idiot won’t give way to a bus coming out of stop… plenty seem to want to push it and give it a go… some realise too late that they are most likely to come off second best against a large bus.

Was on the bus the other day, heading up the hill on Bugden Av in Gowrie, little Mazda decided to try and overtake the bus after it had already left the bus stop, and ended up driving alongside us on the wrong side of the road up until the speed bump until it managed to get the speed up to get back in front. Astounding work.

magiccar9 said :

If I got booked for this sort of thing I would take it to the courts and fight tooth and nail – if for principle only.

Another “gunna”.,

You seem like the type that will just tell the coppers that you were “just”.
Guess what? The coppers and the magistrate and the law won’t give a fat rat’s clacker about what you were “just” doing.

You are “just” being a dickhead.

iLazy said :

angrymotorist1 said :

iLazy said :

Riiiight, so I should “be prepared to” but don’t actually bother with it. Genius. You do know that driving instructors teach to indicate on a form one lane? Signalling your intentions is not only courteous but sensible, but go right ahead and scream about the ARR… I’m sure that will go down well with Mr Plod.

What’s the point in indicating when merging? There is only one direction you could be going!

Well it probably assists as a gentle reminder to those arsehats who aren’t even paying attention to the fact that they have arrived at a form one lane – there’s a small chance they will see your indicator, but a chance nonetheless… Regardless, it is what is in the road rules handbook and what is taught by driving instructors (which is why the OP raised it). There are many things we do that don’t entirely make sense each and every time we do them (ever felt silly indicating in the middle of the night when there is no one around? – you still do it though).

If one cannot see the one tonne of metal in front of them the little blinking light stands no chance.

Indicating in the middle of the night, whilst turning right or left for example, is mandatory regardless of the time of day (or night) and not dependent on how many vehicles are around. Indicating whilst merging in the circumstances as outlined by the OP is not.

Just like indicating on exiting a roundabout is not mandatory. And before you climb on your horse look at the law and heed the caveat.

MrLinus said :

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

He’s a hint, maybe every worrd you post is rubbish that has the intellect of a small furry bit of roadkill that got collected when someone didn’t merge properly. I’d love to see you pulled over by the cops and given a ticket….”Oh but officer, the ACT Road Rules Handbook clearly states that…..” You are like that kid at school nobody likes who always insisted on doing everything to the letter of the law and without an ounce of common sense. I’m sorry you are an idiot and thank you for accepting my apology.

Are you and iLazy the same person? Why do you feel the need to defend them? My suspicions are raised.

I’ll tell you a little about my school days. I was one of the football players who was good enough to get out of having to do Saturday detention because I was required on the field. The trade off was I got the cane instead but that wasn’t too bad as I was going out every winter weekend and belting myself up on the field anyway. Physical punishment has never been a concern to me.

None of what I’ve written in this thread, that you so inelequantly critique, is rubbish. If you had half a brain you may even be able to look it up yourself. I may just be a dumb ex footy player, but at least I’m one with post grad qualifications.

I’ll never be pulled up by the coppers for not indicating in this circumstance because I’m driving within the law. I do strive to drive within the law because I have integrity. I try to live my life beyond reproach theses days but I’ve been a very bad boy in the past. There is not much that shocks me and I’ve seen more than most. My work is governed by regulation so I know the importance of it to ensure things go smoothly. What I do not take kindly to is ignorance masquerading as intellect.

And before you attempt to try to analyse my school days dont foist your own negative treatment at school on others. That chip as weighed you down a bit over life hasn’t it.

iLazy said :

Alderney said :

iLazy said :

Alderney said :

However, as a driving instructor you would know that there is no legal requirement to indicate in these situations as one is not diverging, and the Australian Road Rules clearly state the vehicle in front has right of way.

ACT Road Rules Handbook – have a read (hint: page 30)

Juts because you spent an hour of your work time trawling through the Australian Road Rules and couldn’t find the requirements, doesn’t mean it the requirement isn’t stated somewhere else.

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

Riiiight, so I should “be prepared to” but don’t actually bother with it. Genius. You do know that driving instructors teach to indicate on a form one lane? Signalling your intentions is not only courteous but sensible, but go right ahead and scream about the ARR… I’m sure that will go down well with Mr Plod.

Hang on a sec, let’s just get this right (a concept with which you appear unfamiliar). You have a go at me at #16, and when I point out you’re wrong, instead of admitting it you pull out your shovel and keep digging yourself into a hole by having a further go. You really are a sucker for punishment aren’t you? Learn some grace fucktard!

Then, your comment at #35. I didn’t write the road rules mate, I’m just quoting them. Talk about shooting the messenger. Your vitriol is misdirected.

You seem to be picking a lot of fights here. The common demoninator regarding misinformation in this thread is you. Have a look in the mirror and be big enough to admit it when you’ve got it wrong.

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

Yes, there’s lots of 110 kph dual lane highways running through Amaroo so the keep left unless overtaking is more than relevant.

iLazy said :

Madam Cholet said :

Why would you need to indicate? Where the bloody hell else would they be going if it’s just two straight lanes merging into one? They aren’t crossing a line – just following the natural line of the road. And if the car in front has the right of way over a car slightly behind, then why would you be surprised by them coming your way as the road gets narrower?

You’d think, wouldn’t you? But the Government felt the need to emphasise indication, head check and mirror check in their publication. Maybe they did that just to piss you and your husband off?

More than likely. However, if you need a flashing orange light to snap you out of your reverie you should not be on the road full stop.

I would hazard a guess though that the head check and the mirror check are actually risk assessments that are highly advisory, and not the law.

iLazy said :

Madam Cholet said :

Why would you need to indicate? Where the bloody hell else would they be going if it’s just two straight lanes merging into one? They aren’t crossing a line – just following the natural line of the road. And if the car in front has the right of way over a car slightly behind, then why would you be surprised by them coming your way as the road gets narrower?

You’d think, wouldn’t you? But the Government felt the need to emphasise indication, head check and mirror check in their publication. Maybe they did that just to piss you and your husband off?

I’m pissed off too. I agree with MC.

A speed camera at lane one forms would do wonders for this sort of carry on….seriously.

Also indicating not necessary….the amount of people that obsessively indicate at lane one forms but bork roundabout indicating boggles the mind.

Madam Cholet said :

Why would you need to indicate? Where the bloody hell else would they be going if it’s just two straight lanes merging into one? They aren’t crossing a line – just following the natural line of the road. And if the car in front has the right of way over a car slightly behind, then why would you be surprised by them coming your way as the road gets narrower?

You’d think, wouldn’t you? But the Government felt the need to emphasise indication, head check and mirror check in their publication. Maybe they did that just to piss you and your husband off?

angrymotorist1 said :

iLazy said :

Riiiight, so I should “be prepared to” but don’t actually bother with it. Genius. You do know that driving instructors teach to indicate on a form one lane? Signalling your intentions is not only courteous but sensible, but go right ahead and scream about the ARR… I’m sure that will go down well with Mr Plod.

What’s the point in indicating when merging? There is only one direction you could be going!

Well it probably assists as a gentle reminder to those arsehats who aren’t even paying attention to the fact that they have arrived at a form one lane – there’s a small chance they will see your indicator, but a chance nonetheless… Regardless, it is what is in the road rules handbook and what is taught by driving instructors (which is why the OP raised it). There are many things we do that don’t entirely make sense each and every time we do them (ever felt silly indicating in the middle of the night when there is no one around? – you still do it though).

Thank you #36 and #37. My sentiments exactly.

Also, I’m no lawyer, but my experience in my dealing with regulations as part of my job I have ascertained that the law talks about ‘Should’ and ‘Must’ – so ‘should be prepared to’ is not mandatory. Again, just look at the situation and you can see that there is really no need to indicate.

I always indicate before I merge we’ll because I thought it was the law and also because not everyone around you knows the road and may not realise that the road is forming into one lane. Then there are also the drivers who drive with their heads up there bottoms and the little flashing yellow/orange light snaps them out of it.

iLazy said :

Riiiight, so I should “be prepared to” but don’t actually bother with it. Genius. You do know that driving instructors teach to indicate on a form one lane? Signalling your intentions is not only courteous but sensible, but go right ahead and scream about the ARR… I’m sure that will go down well with Mr Plod.

What’s the point in indicating when merging? There is only one direction you could be going!

Why would you need to indicate? Where the bloody hell else would they be going if it’s just two straight lanes merging into one? They aren’t crossing a line – just following the natural line of the road. And if the car in front has the right of way over a car slightly behind, then why would you be surprised by them coming your way as the road gets narrower?

Alderney said :

iLazy said :

Alderney said :

However, as a driving instructor you would know that there is no legal requirement to indicate in these situations as one is not diverging, and the Australian Road Rules clearly state the vehicle in front has right of way.

ACT Road Rules Handbook – have a read (hint: page 30)

Juts because you spent an hour of your work time trawling through the Australian Road Rules and couldn’t find the requirements, doesn’t mean it the requirement isn’t stated somewhere else.

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

Riiiight, so I should “be prepared to” but don’t actually bother with it. Genius. You do know that driving instructors teach to indicate on a form one lane? Signalling your intentions is not only courteous but sensible, but go right ahead and scream about the ARR… I’m sure that will go down well with Mr Plod.

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

A learner sticks up to a bully on the roads and you’re offering is ‘shouldn’t have been in the right-hand-lane.

FFS could you stop being a wanker for just one second?

I merely said that it isn’t good practice given the attitude of many motorists towards learners so who’s the wanker?

You, obviously.

There’s a clear distinction in your post between the two items. Your precis of your post is deceptive and self-serving.

My comments were absolutely clear and unequivocal.Perhaps if you had 40 years of driving experience amassing almost 4 million kilometres then maybe you’d begin to have my level of comprehension and awareness of what occurs out there and why.Until then just pull your inflated head in.

Lol.

Pretty sure anyone with basic reading comprehension can have a look at what you wrote.

Love the “I speak with the authority of a lifetime spent on the road” schtick though, hilarious! Only problem is, now I can’t get the theme from ‘the littlest hobo’ out of my head.

Well you’re certainly right about one thing ie. you have a very basic and flawed understanding of where i was coming from there Homer.

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

He’s a hint, maybe every worrd you post is rubbish that has the intellect of a small furry bit of roadkill that got collected when someone didn’t merge properly. I’d love to see you pulled over by the cops and given a ticket….”Oh but officer, the ACT Road Rules Handbook clearly states that…..” You are like that kid at school nobody likes who always insisted on doing everything to the letter of the law and without an ounce of common sense. I’m sorry you are an idiot and thank you for accepting my apology.

magiccar9 said :

Tetranitrate said :

Whenever someone pulls this sh*t on me I just speed up until I’m through the merge, then slow down 20km/hour bellow the speed limit immediately after. If everyone engaged in a punishment strategy like this, this sort of antisocial behaviour wouldn’t occur.

Are you serious!? I’d consider that even worse. Do you consider other road users when you pull this move? Do you think about everyone else around you that has to put up with you throwing your little tanty?
I’m all for punishment on the roads, but seriously consider other people first otherwise you’re regarded as just as much of a tool.

Mostly serious – I don’t slow down *every* time so it’s a slight exaggeration. Really depends on just how aggressive the other driver was. I’ll always respond assertively by speeding up though.

I do slow down every time I’m tailgated. Tap the break pedal a couple of times just enough to flash the lights, then just slowly drop speed. By 10km’s. If they don’t stop it I drop it another 10km’s.

The way some of the people around here drive is absolutely ridiculous, I always hug the speed limit yet it’s not unusual to have people come up and practically hover on your bumper in 60 or 80 zones where they should be leaving several car-lengths. As far as I’m concerned it’s absolutely justifiable to f*ck with people who are willfully subjecting me to the risk of whiplash and other injuries for no reason other than their sheer aggression and impatience.

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

A learner sticks up to a bully on the roads and you’re offering is ‘shouldn’t have been in the right-hand-lane.

FFS could you stop being a wanker for just one second?

I merely said that it isn’t good practice given the attitude of many motorists towards learners so who’s the wanker?

You, obviously.

There’s a clear distinction in your post between the two items. Your precis of your post is deceptive and self-serving.

My comments were absolutely clear and unequivocal.Perhaps if you had 40 years of driving experience amassing almost 4 million kilometres then maybe you’d begin to have my level of comprehension and awareness of what occurs out there and why.Until then just pull your inflated head in.

Lol.

Pretty sure anyone with basic reading comprehension can have a look at what you wrote.

Love the “I speak with the authority of a lifetime spent on the road” schtick though, hilarious! Only problem is, now I can’t get the theme from ‘the littlest hobo’ out of my head.

Typical of drivers who are blissfully unaware of their surroundings.

Nice to see a constructive reminder from someone in the know, thanks.

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

A learner sticks up to a bully on the roads and you’re offering is ‘shouldn’t have been in the right-hand-lane.

FFS could you stop being a wanker for just one second?

I merely said that it isn’t good practice given the attitude of many motorists towards learners so who’s the wanker?

You, obviously.

There’s a clear distinction in your post between the two items. Your precis of your post is deceptive and self-serving.

My comments were absolutely clear and unequivocal.Perhaps if you had 40 years of driving experience amassing almost 4 million kilometres then maybe you’d begin to have my level of comprehension and awareness of what occurs out there and why.Until then just pull your inflated head in.

iLazy said :

Alderney said :

However, as a driving instructor you would know that there is no legal requirement to indicate in these situations as one is not diverging, and the Australian Road Rules clearly state the vehicle in front has right of way.

ACT Road Rules Handbook – have a read (hint: page 30)

Juts because you spent an hour of your work time trawling through the Australian Road Rules and couldn’t find the requirements, doesn’t mean it the requirement isn’t stated somewhere else.

Firstly, the ACT Road Rules Handbook isn’t the law.

Secondly, why don’t you read every worrd. He’s a hint, it says, should be prepared to.

I already knew of this publication.

I promise to accept your apology gracefully.

Tetranitrate said :

Whenever someone pulls this sh*t on me I just speed up until I’m through the merge, then slow down 20km/hour bellow the speed limit immediately after. If everyone engaged in a punishment strategy like this, this sort of antisocial behaviour wouldn’t occur.

Are you serious!? I’d consider that even worse. Do you consider other road users when you pull this move? Do you think about everyone else around you that has to put up with you throwing your little tanty?
I’m all for punishment on the roads, but seriously consider other people first otherwise you’re regarded as just as much of a tool.

bundah said :

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

A learner sticks up to a bully on the roads and you’re offering is ‘shouldn’t have been in the right-hand-lane.

FFS could you stop being a wanker for just one second?

I merely said that it isn’t good practice given the attitude of many motorists towards learners so who’s the wanker?

You, obviously.

There’s a clear distinction in your post between the two items. Your precis of your post is deceptive and self-serving.

LOL stooge merging! I love it!

I don’t know why people have such trouble at Form One Planets – it’s not hard to tell if someone’s ahead of you, even if it’s only slightly, so just slow down and let them in first, and the person behind you should do the same to you, and smooth flowing traffic is smooth.

Whenever someone pulls this sh*t on me I just speed up until I’m through the merge, then slow down 20km/hour bellow the speed limit immediately after. If everyone engaged in a punishment strategy like this, this sort of antisocial behaviour wouldn’t occur.

Jim Jones said :

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

A learner sticks up to a bully on the roads and you’re offering is ‘shouldn’t have been in the right-hand-lane.

FFS could you stop being a wanker for just one second?

I merely said that it isn’t good practice given the attitude of many motorists towards learners so who’s the wanker?

Alderney said :

I see too many bus drivers indicate a pull out in the one motion and then get testy when cars don’t give way.

I think they’d find that both partites would be fined if a collision resulted.

Total agreement with you. I’m more than happy to give the lane to a bus if the indicate sufficiently to allow me time to slow/stop to let them out. If they indicate one then pull out, or indicate after they’re already half out, then I can’t/won’t stop for them. They need to use some more common sense – if someone’s traveling at 80km/h and they’re about 2-3 car lengths from the rear of the bus, it’s not ideal to pull out in front of them, no matter if you have right of way or not.

If I got booked for this sort of thing I would take it to the courts and fight tooth and nail – if for principle only.

bundah said :

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

A learner sticks up to a bully on the roads and you’re offering is ‘shouldn’t have been in the right-hand-lane.

FFS could you stop being a wanker for just one second?

When i am fanging around in my ancient panel van i often encounter idiots like this. i like how they try to pull ahead of my s***box falcon, not realising i have a newly rebuilt gas injected 5.8 litre v8 and a tickle of my right foot will propel me fairly smartly to any legal speed – usually sufficient to keep me at least a nose in front. At which point they have to brake suddenly. This also occurs when people in small cars, with that turbo thing that goes PFFFT when they shift down, use the roundabouts as passing opportunities but just dont have the speed to carry it off.

Its fairly easy to merge. Dont get me started on people who cant merge into traffic when turning a corner. Or who dont know what an indicator is…

You say that the learner driver was in the right hand lane so while there is no law preventing him from being in that lane i would suggest that it’s not a good practice seeing how it is generally accepted by most road users that the right hand lane is the designated lane for overtaking in highway driving and tends to be associated with faster moving vehicles.That being said there is no doubt that many drivers are generally intolerant of learners and at times make hasty,poor decisions which often result in negative consequences.

magiccar9 said :

mezza76 said :

I agree. What the hell is it with merging in this town? My favourite game of late is to see which idiot won’t give way to a bus coming out of stop… plenty seem to want to push it and give it a go… some realise too late that they are most likely to come off second best against a large bus.

My favourite game is to see which buses don’t sufficiently indicate when pulling out of bus stops and then get angry at cars that don’t give way.

I think many would be blissfully unaware that the law is one must indicate for at least 5 seconds before pulling away from the curb. Buses are not exempt from this requirement.

They are however entitled to free access to the traffic lane after this.

I see too many bus drivers indicate a pull out in the one motion and then get testy when cars don’t give way.

I think they’d find that both partites would be fined if a collision resulted.

Alderney said :

However, as a driving instructor you would know that there is no legal requirement to indicate in these situations as one is not diverging, and the Australian Road Rules clearly state the vehicle in front has right of way.

ACT Road Rules Handbook – have a read (hint: page 30)

Juts because you spent an hour of your work time trawling through the Australian Road Rules and couldn’t find the requirements, doesn’t mean it the requirement isn’t stated somewhere else.

I’ts called the ‘ZIPPER’ manouver according to the traffic people.
But sadly some people have ‘buttons’ instead of common sense.

mezza76 said :

I agree. What the hell is it with merging in this town? My favourite game of late is to see which idiot won’t give way to a bus coming out of stop… plenty seem to want to push it and give it a go… some realise too late that they are most likely to come off second best against a large bus.

My favourite game is to see which buses don’t sufficiently indicate when pulling out of bus stops and then get angry at cars that don’t give way.

I agree the behaviour you have described is unacceptable, whether aimed at a learner driver or otherwise.

However, as a driving instructor you would know that there is no legal requirement to indicate in these situations as one is not diverging, and the Australian Road Rules clearly state the vehicle in front has right of way.

Good on the learner for sticking to their guns.

I hope it was a lesson learned for the 4×4 driver, but I doubt it.

grunge_hippy said :

tl:dr

the picture told the story. happens all the time, learner or not. no one merges properly in this town.

I agree. What the hell is it with merging in this town? My favourite game of late is to see which idiot won’t give way to a bus coming out of stop… plenty seem to want to push it and give it a go… some realise too late that they are most likely to come off second best against a large bus.

poetix said :

Solidarity said :

Yep, it’s always 4WD’s too…

Usually female though.

….

How do you tell a female 4WD? Do they have cowbars?

That’s what the stickers of stick family figures are for. Or frangipanis. Or “Magic Happens”.

tl:dr

the picture told the story. happens all the time, learner or not. no one merges properly in this town.

The issue with many people merging in Canberra is inability to adjust speed. In this case the guy was trying to jump in front of a learner, but i’ve also seen case where people slowed down to 20 or less to merge into 100km/h traffic on the parkway.

Also is it too hard to actually merge and not sit wide out in the blind spot of the car in front. I always move to the centre of the lane, but many people have this inherant fear they’ll hit something. Theres a lot of distrust of other drivers in Canberra. some warranted of course, but still if everyone doesn’t try to change nothing ever will.

I can’t stand all these entitled arseholes on our roads, I gotta buy a steering lock for when I start learning to drive in the coming months. Partly for security but mainly so I can defend myself from the Jake Arioli’s of the world.

poetix said :

Solidarity said :

How do you tell a female 4WD? Do they have cowbars?

They have a big pink bow on them. Boy ones are blue.

Solidarity said :

Yep, it’s always 4WD’s too…

Usually female though.

It’s weird, 4WD’s aren’t fast… or nimble, so any attempt for these stooges to get ahead is usually thwarted by stabbing the accelerator….

No its not, the last idiot to do this to me was in a Honda Accord on Adelaide Ave.

& the day before that it was a chick in a Suzuki.

Solidarity said :

Yep, it’s always 4WD’s too…

Usually female though.

….

How do you tell a female 4WD? Do they have cowbars?

I don’t have to worry about these “Bully” drivers as I drive an old Ford (older than Johnboy’s). They try and push me but change their mind when they realise my cay is all steel and theirs is not. Guess who would come out worse in a altercation as mentioned above if contact was made. As for the in-car camera, I think its a good idea for driver instructors as these cameras now record date, time, speed and GPS and as far as I know this is enough information for a charge in traffic violation and possible conviction in the courts if an incident has occurred.

Yep, it’s always 4WD’s too…

Usually female though.

It’s weird, 4WD’s aren’t fast… or nimble, so any attempt for these stooges to get ahead is usually thwarted by stabbing the accelerator….

No cyclists harmed, but the English language got a right old bashing. Take your point though and note that many drivers in this town use these areas on roads to get ahead and not just merge gracefully.

Dobbers wear nappies, haha!

Yeah nah, good on you. Full marks for the illustration too.