Should we be changing the Give Way rule? (POLL)

[Sliver]

Quick Poll on Fellow KBERs opinions.

[Badjelly]

Quick Poll on Fellow KBERs opinions.

It's a bit late.

[Sliver]

It's a bit late.

Its not like LT were gonna look on KB and be like "5 people voted no we better not change it" anyway, I just wanted some opinions.

[Waxxa]

The existing rule is easy enough to comply with. Changing to the new rule wont be a problem either, it's simple!

[oneofsix]

Its not like LT were gonna look on KB and be like "5 people voted no we better not change it" anyway, I just wanted some opinions.

At least you are being realistic. It only took over 20 years to get them to take notice of how stupid the 70k/h restriction for learners was and bikers were telling them that from day 1.

[steve_t]

Plenty of reasons for and against in the other thread about the change :yes:

[imac]

It just worries me that after 30 years most drivers still cannot get it right, especially T intersections and multi lane intersections. If their ability to understand rules that have been around for so long is so limited they shouldn’t have a license in the first place

[Sliver]

It just worries me that after 30 years most drivers still cannot get it right, especially T intersections and multi lane intersections. If their ability to understand rules that have been around for so long is so limited they shouldn’t have a license in the first place

+1 100% agree with you

[Sliver]

wow yes has passed no

[Sliver]

At least you are being realistic. It only took over 20 years to get them to take notice of how stupid the 70k/h restriction for learners was and bikers were telling them that from day 1.

urgh yeah that 70kph thing that i ignored.

[oneofsix]

urgh yeah that 70kph thing that i ignored.

you had to to survive but it still show how they wont listen

[SMOKEU]

I really don't see the point in changing it. The current system works, and changing it is only going to create confusion and a whole lot of crashes.

[Sliver]

you had to to survive but it still show how they wont listen

Yeah, Happy they didnt catch me doing 110+ tho =D

[Sliver]

I really don't see the point in changing it. The current system works, and changing it is only going to create confusion and a whole lot of crashes.

I guess its to conform us to the rest of the world....althought by that logic we should all drive on the same side of the road and have the same side driving cars.

[avgas]

Lets change it to the "First!" rule. Who ever gets there first was in the right.
I would invest in a panelbeater.

[Scuba_Steve]

Lets change it to the "First!" rule. Who ever gets there first was in the right.
I would invest in a panelbeater.

why stop there NZ loves copying overseas rules, so why we're "conforming" to the rest of the world lets add the "biggest vehicle has right of way" rule the likes of India has

[SMOKEU]

I guess its to conform us to the rest of the world....althought by that logic we should all drive on the same side of the road and have the same side driving cars.

I wouldn't be surprised if the NZ government started making us drive on the right just because the Americans do.


Lets change it to the "First!" rule. Who ever gets there first was in the right.
I would invest in a panelbeater.

That's the way it works in South Africa. At least in the small towns anyway.

[willytheekid]

............... "biggest vehicle has right of way" rule the likes of India has

:Oops:...I kinda already use this one mate...just in case the truck dosn't stop kinda thing :laugh:

[ducatilover]

I'm blind in one eye so you're all fucked if you're near me :laugh:

[Swoop]

why stop there NZ loves copying overseas rules, so why we're "conforming" to the rest of the world lets add the "biggest vehicle has right of way" rule the likes of India has
I thought it was "the cow has the right of way!".

[Sable]

I think it's bloody stupid, the existing system has been there pretty much forever and it works because you don't get people stuck as long because they can't get in, therefore people will now have to muscle their way in which will most likely lead to heightened rates of intersection accidents (in my mind anyway). Give way to your right really isn't that hard to understand.

[steve_t]

I guess the rule having been there "pretty much forever" is subjective to your age...

[Sliver]

Lets change it to the "First!" rule. Who ever gets there first was in the right.
I would invest in a panelbeater.

i 2nd that more crashes more sold cars...

[Sliver]

why stop there NZ loves copying overseas rules, so why we're "conforming" to the rest of the world lets add the "biggest vehicle has right of way" rule the likes of India has

Ehhhh...this is a bike site...

[Sliver]

I thought it was "the cow has the right of way!".

Rofl nice:pinch:

[merv]

The give way when turning left rule introduced in 1977 was illogical then and is still illogical and I'll be glad when its finally gone and the normal order can be restored.

[rastuscat]

The old law would work if everyone complied. We are changing it because people don't use it properly.

So what are we going to do when, inevitably, people don't comply with this one? Just keep changing?

Harumph.

[Sliver]

The give way when turning left rule introduced in 1977 was illogical then and is still illogical and I'll be glad when its finally gone and the normal order can be restored.


Thanks for your input merv.

[Sliver]

The old law would work if everyone complied. We are changing it because people don't use it properly.

So what are we going to do when, inevitably, people don't comply with this one? Just keep changing?

Harumph.

My answer

Different height flying hover cars and bikes.

[Sliver]

to bed honest im surpised of two things

1. how many people have voted
2. most people are saying change it

[SMOKEU]

The give way when turning left rule introduced in 1977 was illogical then and is still illogical and I'll be glad when its finally gone and the normal order can be restored.

Why do you think that?

[merv]

Well if you are as old as me you remember how simple the old give way to the right and give way when turning right rule was - you wanted to turn right you indicated your turn and waited for all oncoming vehicles and vehicles turning left in front of you, and the vehicle drivers behind you whether they could pass on your left or not knew clearly that you had to wait. The left turning driver took the turn without hesitation.

The current stupid give way when turning left rule causes so much hesitation and uncertainty. You indicate your left turn - the driver wanting to turn right in front of you has to hesitate in case the driver behind you decides there is room to pull out and pass you and must be given way to, and you have to hesitate in case the right turning driver can pull around in front of you, but then you feel pissed off when the driver behind goes on past you and you stopped unnecessarily. All a total pain in the arse and every step of uncertainty raises a a risk point when a stuff up by anyone is lilely to increase the risk of collision.

The old way (not the current way), about to become the new way (and therefore current way), is about as sensible as it gets in my view.

p.s. and it is more common internationally though as some have said is that justification? Well it is if that way works better.

The other thing I'd like to see is a "left turn on red" rule similar to the "right turn on red" rule in USA but of course mirror image. In that case you stop at a red light - look - if no traffic you then proceed to make your turn hassle free.

[merv]

I just went back and had a look at the other thread on this http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/143874-Give-Way-rule-date-changed/page9 and can see some weird comments there saying how great the current rule is that the vehicle turning left can tuck against the curb out of the flow of traffic. Well guys, if there is a flow of traffic going by then the left turner has to be extra vigilant watching mirrors and ahead at the same time because if there is a flow of traffic going by then the left turner can proceed, but lo and behold hesitate for a second and the right turners scream around in front of the left turner anyway cutting through the line of oncoming traffic. This is the extra risk of collision I talk about partly caused by uncertainty and partly by all the extra mirror time required.

[ducatilover]

So what are we going to do when, inevitably, people don't comply with this one?
More tax on petrols, higher ACC and policemen handing out pamphlets on how to correctly give way while you wear your genuine Hi Viz.


Hope you don't get a paper cut mate

[DrunkenMistake]

More tax on petrols, higher ACC and policemen handing out pamphlets on how to correctly give way while you wear your genuine Hi Viz.


Hope you don't get a paper cut mate

Police officer, as a PC country we can not gender discriminate.. :innocent:
they will probably give you those little license scratchy cards, and if you scratch it wrong, thats it no more license :shutup:

[Scuba_Steve]

The give way when turning left rule introduced in 1977 was logical then and is still logical today, I'll be sad when its finally gone.

Seen your "justification" but still going to have to correct that for you

[merv]

Seen your "justification" but still going to have to correct that for you

Haha, and bullshit to that - man you have some weird views :facepalm:.

[Scuba_Steve]

Haha, and bullshit to that - man you have some weird views :facepalm:.

no just a logical thinker :bleh:

[Usarka]

The old law would work if everyone complied. We are changing it because people don't use it properly.

So what are we going to do when, inevitably, people don't comply with this one? Just keep changing?

Harumph.

I've never seen anyone get this one wrong. What i do see people getting wrong is thinking the absolute rule is - give way to the right and fuck anything coming from the left..... Maybe this rule will help these people, but it kind of ruins my fun pulling out of uncontrolled intersections in the wagon and getting some holden driver frothing from his jizz covered lips because i didn't give way and getting even angrier when i point and laugh.... Harumph indeed!

[merv]

I'm glad you're such a logical thinker, coz I'm not :bleh:

Fixed that one for ya!

[Big Dave]

Yes it should be changed. If for no other reason than tourism is a mainstay of the NZ economy.
From a visitor's standpoint it's one of the downright stupidest and possibly one of the most dangerous things in NZ.

[Usarka]

From a visitor's standpoint it's one of the downright stupidest and possibly one of the most dangerous things in NZ.

I thought that would be the residents of turangi........

[Scuba_Steve]

Fixed that one for ya!

now your just twisting my words :angry:


Yes it should be changed. If for no other reason than tourism is a mainstay of the NZ economy.
From a visitor's standpoint it's one of the downright stupidest and possibly one of the most dangerous things in NZ.

well in that case we better start speaking their language too, god forbid they become a visitor in a country & have to do things differently :facepalm:
Your one of these people whom when they are a visitor/guest in someone else's home start going "thats not the way we do it at my place" "we don't watch that at my place" aint you???
Maybee they just need to learn the expression "when in Rome"

[merv]

How right you are Big Dave, and Scuba_Steve it seems you are too young to have experienced both the old and the current rules in this country, but have you driven/ridden regularly overseas? If you have then how come you have the view you do?

Big Dave hits the nail on the head with " it's one of the downright stupidest and possibly one of the most dangerous things in NZ".

[Scuba_Steve]

How right you are Big Dave, and Scuba_Steve it seems you are too young to have experienced both the old and the current rules in this country, but have you driven/ridden regularly overseas? If you have then how come you have the view you do?


Nope missed the old/new rules, don't do the overseas thing, just working on logic based on traffic flow & how our intersections are setup. Only thing that needed changing was unmarked intersections.

If it helps I do work with alot of older people who have experience both the overseas & old/new rule who do agree with my view, in-fact more would have the current kept then not by a large margin

[Rehab]

If it helps I do work with alot of older people who have experience both the overseas & old/new rule who do agree with my view, in-fact more would have the current kept then not by a large margin

That's unusual? Most old people don't care for the status quo and want everything changed to a new way because they are very adaptable and comfortable with change and not set in their ways at all. They are forever banging on about changing the flag, becoming a republic, and especially how music now is so much better than it was in 'their day'.

[Big Dave]

"when in Rome"

Nah. Not when it's just a bone-head,WTF, idiotic rule.

Stop your chariot so a pleb can turn in front of the gladiator in front of you?
Not likely, Sparticus.

[Scuba_Steve]

Nah. Not when it's just a bone-head,WTF, idiotic rule.


logically I call the old/new rule that, it makes little to no logical sense, and I can only see it retarding traffic flow.
But my final decision will wait till post 2nd year, after all the "I can't deal with change" fuckups should be out da way & we're just back to regular "can't drive" fuckups

[Berries]

Who cares.

It is changing. Half the people on the road can't work out the existing rule. Half won't understand the new one. Ride accordingly and you'll be sweet. Personally I'll be glad to be able to turn left and not have to wait for the dick wanting to turn right to hesitate and faff around when I've got a shorter distance to go and could get around with holding him up anyway.

Anyone who parks the bike up when the rule changes shouldn't be riding anyway.

[Sliver]

Its a land slide!

[Sliver]

Lets see if we can get 100 votes

[Trade_nancy]

To each his own and all that..but for the life of me - I just can't see why anyone biker or cager, would want to keep the stupid rule that is in place now that means we need eyes looking at our rears to see if traffic is approaching behind before we make a decision to turn left or give way to right turning traffic. How do u guys KNOW that the car behind you is not going to flick on his L indicator the very moment you avert your eyes from him..causing the cager to right turn on top of you as you assume you have the left turn right? Nah. Get rid of it.
Or,...sees you in a cage stuck behind another who wants to turn left and u want to go ahead....in a shared turn and straight ahead lane....waiting, waiting,,...

[Sliver]

To each his own and all that..but for the life of me - I just can't see why anyone biker or cager, would want to keep the stupid rule that is in place now that means we need eyes looking at our rears to see if traffic is approaching behind before we make a decision to turn left or give way to right turning traffic. How do u guys KNOW that the car behind you is not going to flick on his L indicator the very moment you avert your eyes from him..causing the cager to right turn on top of you as you assume you have the left turn right? Nah. Get rid of it.
Or,...sees you in a cage stuck behind another who wants to turn left and u want to go ahead....in a shared turn and straight ahead lane....waiting, waiting,,...

Thanks for you comment and vote.

[Swoop]

The other thing I'd like to see is a "left turn on red" rule similar to the "right turn on red" rule in USA but of course mirror image. In that case you stop at a red light - look - if no traffic you then proceed to make your turn hassle free.
Totally agree on that one Merv. On quiet days I do exactly that, Sunday morning especially, since there are quite a few sets of lights strategically positioned to stuff-up the traffic flow up this way.
Come to a complete stop, then check for traffic.

I doubt that we will ever see it happen in NZ though.

[oneofsix]

Totally agree on that one Merv. On quiet days I do exactly that, Sunday morning especially, since there are quite a few sets of lights strategically positioned to stuff-up the traffic flow up this way.
Come to a complete stop, then check for traffic.

I doubt that we will ever see it happen in NZ though.

They have discussed it but then backed away. Suspect they look at comments like those on this site on how bad NZ drivers are and figure we couldn't handle it.

[Swoop]

They have discussed it but then backed away. Suspect they look at comments like those on this site on how bad NZ drivers are and figure we couldn't handle it.

They would be correct with 99.9% of kiwi drivers.

[oneofsix]

They would be correct with 99.9% of kiwi drivers.

I understand the sentiment and know we use those sort of figures as generalizations but whilst we aren't the worlds best we are also not really that bad. There is a low percentage that stuff it up for the rest of us. As a general rule I think we could handle it.

[merv]

To each his own and all that..but for the life of me - I just can't see why anyone biker or cager, would want to keep the stupid rule that is in place now that means we need eyes looking at our rears to see if traffic is approaching behind before we make a decision to turn left or give way to right turning traffic. How do u guys KNOW that the car behind you is not going to flick on his L indicator the very moment you avert your eyes from him..causing the cager to right turn on top of you as you assume you have the left turn right? Nah. Get rid of it.
Or,...sees you in a cage stuck behind another who wants to turn left and u want to go ahead....in a shared turn and straight ahead lane....waiting, waiting,,...

Man of my own heart - good on ya :woohoo:

[Coolz]

[QUOTE=merv;1130241764

The current stupid give way when turning left rule causes so much hesitation and uncertainty. You indicate your left turn - the driver wanting to turn right in front of you has to hesitate in case the driver behind you decides there is room to pull out and pass you and must be given way to, and you have to hesitate in case the right turning driver can pull around in front of you, but then you feel pissed off when the driver behind goes on past you and you stopped unnecessarily. All a total pain in the arse and every step of uncertainty raises a a risk point when a stuff up by anyone is lilely to increase the risk of collision.

The old way (not the current way), about to become the new way (and therefore current way), is about as sensible as it gets in my view.

[/QUOTE] Couldnt have said it better. The new T intersection rule also makes alot of sense.

[scumdog]

Can't be naffed reading through all the crap on this thread but does anybody know a reason the law was changed to its present status way back??

[Scuba_Steve]

Can't be naffed reading through all the crap on this thread but does anybody know a reason the law was changed to its present status way back??

take a guess... we copied Victoria, Sound familiar???

Tho NZTA say it was for logical reasons
"New Zealand’s current give way rules were introduced in 1977, at a time when the country had many more uncontrolled intersections and rapidly increasing traffic volumes, leading to increasing conflicts between turning traffic."

[steve_t]

We copied Vic in 1977 but Vic realised it was an idiotic mistake to change it and promptly changed it back...

[Jantar]

Can't be naffed reading through all the crap on this thread but does anybody know a reason the law was changed to its present status way back??


We copied Vic in 1977 but Vic realised it was an idiotic mistake to change it and promptly changed it back...

Yep, steve_t got it in one. There was talk about changing it back about the same time Vic did, but the Minister of Transport at the time was the same minister who introduced it under Muldoon, and the government of the day didn't want to have egg on their face.

[Swoop]

I understand the sentiment and know we use those sort of figures as generalizations but whilst we aren't the worlds best we are also not really that bad.


I see it "horizontally", meaning that every driver has a percentage of good and bad skills.
An "average driver" might be 60% bad/40% good driving skills. Most are never conciously aware of their bad habits and this drives up the overall "crappy" driving reputation we deserve.




Time for a joke:
"I write the phone numbers of all of my mistresses on the cars’ rear-view mirror. She would never think of looking there!"

[Sliver]

:jerry: lol

[oneofsix]

I see it "horizontally", meaning that every driver has a percentage of good and bad skills.
An "average driver" might be 60% bad/40% good driving skills. Most are never conciously aware of their bad habits and this drives up the overall "crappy" driving reputation we deserve.



Fair call. It also covers why we nut off at one drivers bad skill, say keeping left, whilst fuking up round about indication. Of course personally I do both perfekly all the time, just like I spell.

[Big Dave]

The reason it was introduced in Melbourne was the Trams. But it didn't work there either.

They still have some intersections where you have to pull over to the left kerb and wait for the right turn arrow - to keep the tracks clear.

[Scuba_Steve]

does anyone know how many crashes currently happen??? Stumbled across the IHC dept known as the Govt claiming the retardation of the rule will mean 2560 fewer crashes a year.
I'm assuming that's as accurate as their ACC accounting, but it would be nice to have numbers to compare before/after the illogical rule becomes law

[scumdog]

does anyone know how many crashes currently happen??? Stumbled across the IHC dept known as the Govt claiming the retardation of the rule will mean 2560 fewer crashes a year.
I'm assuming that's as accurate as their ACC accounting, but it would be nice to have numbers to compare before/after the illogical rule becomes law


Dunno but if people gave way at Give Ways and stopped at Stops it might reduce the figure by shitload too...

[MVnut]

So how f**king stupid is the law we've had to obey for ages!! When Aussie adopted this rule, NZ immediately followed suit.... nine months later Aussie realised the rule was crap and changed it back, we only take a weeeeeee bit longer :woohoo:

[theseekerfinds]

Having experienced the "new" laws for many years living over in the West Island I was horrified to encounter the "current" NZ right/left turn laws upon moving to NZ. whilst some on here seem to rave on about logic this and logic that they provide zero logic in their position of why the "current" law is so correct, while others are able to present valid points on why the "current" law is potentially dangerous for those waiting to turn left and the "new" law should be introduced.
I personally support the "new" law for no other reason than to me it is a safer option for left turning traffic and as far as I am concerned if you are turning right across the flow of traffic you should wait for a clear space before you progress anyway.. for those who are averse to change I guess you will get the hang of it after a while as you observe the way it works, I mean hell what's a bit of patience now and then <_<

[Brian407]

Quick Poll on Fellow KBERs opinions.

Irrelevant question, it's a done deal, but if you'd spent any time driving in other countries, like many of us have, you wouldnt be asking.

[Sliver]

Irrelevant question, it's a done deal, but if you'd spent any time driving in other countries, like many of us have, you wouldnt be asking.


Right, Let me educate you in the word "Irrelevant"

Adjective:
Not connected with or relevant to something.

This is a Motorbike site, We ride on the road hence the road rules apply to us, Making it very relevant.


like i have said in another post, i know this isnt going to change anything, i just wanted to know what other kbers thought.

[Jantar]

....like i have said in another post, i know this isnt going to change anything, i just wanted to know what other kbers thought.
And you have been told. :yes:

[DrunkenMistake]

And you have been told. :yes:

:lol::lol: ask and you shall receive.. :shifty:

[Scuba_Steve]

Having experienced the "new" laws for many years living over in the West Island I was horrified to encounter the "current" NZ right/left turn laws upon moving to NZ. whilst some on here seem to rave on about logic this and logic that they provide zero logic in their position of why the "current" law is so correct, while others are able to present valid points on why the "current" law is potentially dangerous for those waiting to turn left and the "new" law should be introduced.
I personally support the "new" law for no other reason than to me it is a safer option for left turning traffic and as far as I am concerned if you are turning right across the flow of traffic you should wait for a clear space before you progress anyway.. for those who are averse to change I guess you will get the hang of it after a while as you observe the way it works, I mean hell what's a bit of patience now and then <_<

Well thats shit from start to finish, I have provided many times why the current law is logical & superior.

[merv]

Well thats shit from start to finish, I have provided many times why the current law is logical & superior.

No you haven't and its not haha :yawn:

[Big Dave]

I have provided many times why the current law is logical & superior.

And you've been consistently incorrect. By a margin of 2:1 according to the above poll.

[Brian407]

Right, Let me educate you in the word "Irrelevant"

Adjective:
Not connected with or relevant to something.

This is a Motorbike site, We ride on the road hence the road rules apply to us, Making it very relevant.


like i have said in another post, i know this isnt going to change anything, i just wanted to know what other kbers thought.

Play semantics as much as you like. The over question is still Irrelevant as the decision has been made and our opinions are Irrelevant to the outcome, so why waste time, space, hot air and band width debating it.

[Sliver]

Play semantics as much as you like. The over question is still Irrelevant as the decision has been made and our opinions are Irrelevant to the outcome, so why waste time, space, hot air and band width debating it.

This isn't irrelevant, like i said again i know its not going to change anything, how ever because 10 people make a law change doesn't mean everybody agrees with it, which is why i want to hear and see people opinions, not making a debate.

[Scuba_Steve]

No you haven't and its not haha :yawn:

I have (not in this thread but the many, many others round) & it is, the arguments I've heard against it however are "I can't use the current system" & "I'm too impatient" & "it'll be good for tourists"
Well, learn how to drive, get some patients, & fuck the tourists it's our country while they're here they can learn out rules

And you've been consistently incorrect. By a margin of 2:1 according to the above poll.

And we know how accurate polls & statistics are...

[Brian407]

This isn't irrelevant, like i said again i know its not going to change anything, how ever because 10 people make a law change doesn't mean everybody agrees with it, which is why i want to hear and see people opinions, not making a debate.

Whatever....:facepalm::scratch:

[Sliver]

Whatever....:facepalm::scratch:

ill agree to disagree

[Brian407]

ill agree to disagree

Done......

[DrunkenMistake]

256017

10 Char.....

[Sliver]

cmon people 99 votes!

[tigertim20]

is there an 'IDGAF' option?

[DrunkenMistake]

is there an 'IDGAF' option?

DILLIGAF Maybe?

[Sliver]

is there an 'IDGAF' option?

kinda, down the bottom.

[DrunkenMistake]

kinda, down the bottom.

This thread? or that option?
:shifty:

[Trade_nancy]

I have (not in this thread but the many, many others round) & it is, the arguments I've heard against it however are "I can't use the current system" & "I'm too impatient" & "it'll be good for tourists"
Well, learn how to drive, get some patients, & fuck the tourists it's our country while they're here they can learn out rules


And we know how accurate polls & statistics are...
What aspects of the current (old to be) system would you say are superior to the new system ScubaSteve? I'm always prepared to be swayed to the side of the opposition where their argument is better.

[Scuba_Steve]

What aspects of the current (old to be) system would you say are superior to the new system ScubaSteve? I'm always prepared to be swayed to the side of the opposition where their argument is better.

it is superior in regardless to traffic flow & thus minimising congestion.

I saw this happening this morning so I'll use that as example
a somewhat busy & narrow street, there were cars wanting to enter a parking building. The guy needing to turn right already had 10 cars behind him as there was no way to pass, the left turning cars (like pretty much always) had a space to pull into the kerb to allow straight through traffic through & them to skip round the corner allowing traffic to flow, when it came to 2-3 cars wanting to turn left the right hand turner had his chance to turn thus allowing the blocked straight through traffic behind him passage again & everyone to carry on.

Now if we were under new/old rules that right turner would of had to rely on curtsey, there is no other way he would be able to make the turn, given traffic density & the traffic would keep piling up behind him which would end up being blocked right back to the lights (50 cars back maybee) also blocking the intersection. Because his legal right to turn would not exist.

Traffic flow & minimisation of congestion is why I say the current rule is logical & superior & why the new/old is illogical.

[GingerMidget]

Can't be naffed reading through all the crap on this thread but does anybody know a reason the law was changed to its present status way back??

To justify some gubbmint officials existance

[steve_t]

If the current rule was superior, every other country in the world would have it too. Traffic flow engineers study flow and congestion as their job. I think I'll believe them on what works best... or are you secretly a traffic engineer by profession?
As previously stated, the current rule was originally implemented in Victoria to keep the centre of the road clear so trams could pass. They realised it didn't work and changed it back quickly. Our transport minister didn't want to look like he'd made a mistake so didn't change it back.
Or do you think professional traffic engineers are wrong?

[cheshirecat]

it is superior in regardless to traffic flow & thus minimising congestion.

I saw this happening this morning so I'll use that as example
a somewhat busy & narrow street, there were cars wanting to enter a parking building. The guy needing to turn right already had 10 cars behind him as there was no way to pass, the left turning cars (like pretty much always) had a space to pull into the kerb to allow straight through traffic through & them to skip round the corner allowing traffic to flow, when it came to 2-3 cars wanting to turn left the right hand turner had his chance to turn thus allowing the blocked straight through traffic behind him passage again & everyone to carry on.

Now if we were under new/old rules that right turner would of had to rely on curtsey, there is no other way he would be able to make the turn, given traffic density & the traffic would keep piling up behind him which would end up being blocked right back to the lights (50 cars back maybee) also blocking the intersection. Because his legal right to turn would not exist.

Traffic flow & minimisation of congestion is why I say the current rule is logical & superior & why the new/old is illogical.Having lived in London for most of my life which enjoys some conjestion and narrow streets this situation never happens since if oncomming drivers see the opposite lane blocked by somone turing right they pause to let them across. What they don't have is a rule giving rights to an oncoming vehicle crossing the centerline in front of you or a rule giving a minor road rights over a major road.

[Scuba_Steve]

If the current rule was superior, every other country in the world would have it too.


PAL is superior NTSC still exists, Betamax was superior VHS supplied the world, Toyota was superior until couple years back GM was #1. Being the best doesn't mean you are the most popular or guarantee success.
Using "but the rest of the world do it" as an argument is really a pathetic one, the rest of the world is run by corporations, the rest of the world is corrupt, the rest of the world have or are financially fucking themselves. We are following too, but do you think we should be??? IMO no. But hey "the rest of the world is doing it so it must be right"



Traffic flow engineers study flow and congestion as their job. I think I'll believe them on what works best... or are you secretly a traffic engineer by profession?
As previously stated, the current rule was originally implemented in Victoria to keep the centre of the road clear so trams could pass. They realised it didn't work and changed it back quickly. Our transport minister didn't want to look like he'd made a mistake so didn't change it back.
Or do you think professional traffic engineers are wrong

Looking at our roads I do think whoever is making decisions is wrong & have no idea what they are doing. I know for sure the Minister for transport & the "powers" of NZTA have no fucking clue what they are doing.
But 1stly Being in a job doesn't make you good at it, or even mean you know what you are doing.
2ndly we don't even know (& it's probably not) if what the traffic engineers are saying is anywhere near the final result, there's many layers of bullshit these suggestions go through before being implemented & if its anything like any other corporation we get a "purple monkey dishwasher" Chinese whispers translation

[Scuba_Steve]

Having lived in London for most of my life which enjoys some conjestion and narrow streets this situation never happens since if oncomming drivers see the opposite lane blocked by somone turing right they pause to let them across. What they don't have is a rule giving rights to an oncoming vehicle crossing the centerline in front of you or a rule giving a minor road rights over a major road.

But this is why it's illogical, there is no right given, you are purely reliant on the kindness of others. I'm not saying that doesn't work at times, I know before all these pretty coloured lights came about people were much more curious mainly because you kinda had to be, like your mentioning here.
As for the minor/major roads your talking here, are you meaning uncontrolled intersections??? Because that is the only thing IMO that needed changing, it should have always worked like a controlled intersection.

[oneofsix]

Can't be naffed reading through all the crap on this thread but does anybody know a reason the law was changed to its present status way back??

You embarrassed me Scumdog because I should but can't remember. I know when studying for my licence under the old old law you had to remember the 5 exceptions to the giveway, seemed to be 5 things to every rule back then, to the right rule and that when they went to the present rule it is simply giveway to the right- no exceptions. Anyways guess they were tidying up a whole lot of stuff about uncontrolled intersections and there were less pretty lights and roundabout things about at the time so it made traffic flow faster.

[cheshirecat]

The fundamental rule is that vehicles have no rights crossing the centerline unless it is clear to do so with major penalties for crossing yellow lines. They must ensure its clear. Similarly roads are catagorised. A, B, dual carriageway, motorway. etc. 'A' roads have rights over 'B' roads and so forth. Higher rates roads enjoy higher overall speed limits and are designed for safe driving at those speeds. Vehicles moving from a minor road to a major road must ensure they are clear to do so. Vehicles crossing the centerline in front of you have no rights and ensures a left turning vehicle an focus on left turning and where they are going without hesitating or wondering if vehicles possibly crossing in front of them and vehicles comming up behind both sides of the road, plus vehicles and pedestrians around the junction interpret the rules correctly.

In NZ there are no such systems. A supermarket entrance, or public gravel track has rights over a major busy state highway and the rule system places the onus on individual correcct interpretation, not clear democation of priorities keeping oncomming vehicles and faster moving and or conjested traffic flows separate.

I believe NZ is the only country where an oncoming vehicle has rights crossing the centerline in the face of oncoming traffic.

As a footnote London (and Euro) intersections are considerablty more fluid moving and relatively efficient considering the volume of traffic than experienced here.

[oneofsix]

The fundamental rule is that vehicles have no rights crossing the centerline unless it is clear to do so with major penalties for crossing yellow lines. They must ensure its clear. Similarly roads are catagorised. A, B, dual carriageway, motorway. etc. 'A' roads have rights over 'B' roads and so forth. Higher rates roads enjoy higher overall speed limits and are designed for safe driving at those speeds. Vehicles moving from a minor road to a major road must ensure they are clear to do so. Vehicles crossing the centerline in front of you have no rights and ensures a left turning vehicle an focus on left turning and where they are going without hesitating or wondering if vehicles possibly crossing in front of them and vehicles comming up behind both sides of the road, plus vehicles and pedestrians around the junction interpret the rules correctly.

In NZ there are no such systems. A supermarket entrance, or public gravel track has rights over a major busy state highway and the rule system places the onus on individual correcct interpretation, not clear democation of priorities keeping oncomming vehicles and faster moving and or conjested traffic flows separate.

I believe NZ is the only country where an oncoming vehicle has rights crossing the centerline in the face of oncoming traffic.

As a footnote London (and Euro) intersections are considerablty more fluid moving and relatively efficient considering the volume of traffic than experienced here.

Second paragraph is where they went wrong way back in the 70s but most NZ drivers don't seem to know this anyhow and give the road the right over the supermarket entrance at least, not so clear cut for the side road verses the major road T intersection.

Third paragraph might be due to preceptive. As bot hare turning neither is real "oncoming" and neither has 'rights'. The right turner, crossing the centre line was given priority on the entrance to the side road over the left turner to get them out of the middle of the road. The left turner, if done correctly, should be no more trouble to following traffic than a parked car but the right turner is an obstruction as they are in the middle of the road and not many of them know how or when to pull over to the left and wait before turning right also this means now crossing two lanes of traffic instead of one.

[steve_t]

Using "but the rest of the world do it" as an argument is really a pathetic one, the rest of the world is run by corporations, the rest of the world is corrupt, the rest of the world have or are financially fucking themselves. We are following too, but do you think we should be??? IMO no. But hey "the rest of the world is doing it so it must be right"

Shouldn't you be in a tent in Aotea Square? :Punk:



Being in a job doesn't make you good at it, or even mean you know what you are doing.


Again, I would trust a traffic engineer who deals with flow dynamics and congestion daily over a layperson, such as yourself, any day of the week... unless you have some kind of qualification or do some statistical analysis I'm not aware of :yes:

[oneofsix]

Again, I would trust a traffic engineer who deals with flow dynamics and congestion daily over a layperson, such as yourself, any day of the week... unless you have some kind of qualification or do some statistical analysis I'm not aware of :yes:

And the gentlemen that had studied at Sandhurst said to stand with your toes on the white line and to walk slowly forward when they blow the whistles because the artillery will have taken care of the enemy. And even after having surfer the worst casualty rates ever the next day they said the same thing, and the day after and the day after..... because that is what they had been taught and what they did daily.

Ok, I've had been fun. As you were.

[scumdog]

Well, learn how to drive, get some patients, ...

That's the the problem Steve - due to inept driving/riding we have too many patients. And dead people.

We don't want anybody to get some patients.

Except maybe an ambualance...:shutup:

[scumdog]

And the gentlemen that had studied at Sandhurst said to stand with your toes on the white line and to walk slowly forward when they blow the whistles because the artillery will have taken care of the enemy. And even after having surfer

Ah, there's the problem - surfer.

They're always drowning, should have left surfer behind...

Stick to soldiers.

[scumdog]

As a footnote London (and Euro) intersections are considerablty more fluid moving and relatively efficient considering the volume of traffic than experienced here.

More to do with the drivers manners and attitudes than the countrys road-rules...:shifty:

[steve_t]

And the gentlemen that had studied at Sandhurst said to stand with your toes on the white line and to walk slowly forward when they blow the whistles because the artillery will have taken care of the enemy. And even after having surfer the worst casualty rates ever the next day they said the same thing, and the day after and the day after..... because that is what they had been taught and what they did daily.

Ok, I've had been fun. As you were.

You're getting confused between a person who 'studied' and got taught to regurgitate crap and a person who has been taught to analyse data and make decisions based on that data. One person blindly does what they've been told to do (see monkey sprayed with the hose analogy) and the other uses that thing between their ears.

[merv]

Scummy this surfer didn't do too well either http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10781135

Does road need more electrified stuff like rail to deal with offenders in a way Darwin would be proud of?

As for the rule change, I'm really looking forward to the change as you can tell from my previous comments, and Steve will just have to suck it up :bleh:.

[oneofsix]

You're getting confused between a person who 'studied' and got taught to regurgitate crap and a person who has been taught to analyse data and make decisions based on that data. One person blindly does what they've been told to do (see monkey sprayed with the hose analogy) and the other uses that thing between their ears.

Nope. I was having fun. But you seem to be of the opinion that traffic engineers, if indeed the people responsible for the fucked up roads are that, are independent thinkers. More likely they are following the "present best practice" or in what is in reality, fashion. Round abouts popped up in perfusion due to this following of fashion.
BTW the great war officers did think and they initially truly thought, based on 'evidence' that what they said would work, they also truly believed that the common soldier couldn't be trusted and must be controlled hence the toeing the line and slow walk.
Current roading thinking is the common motorist can't be trusted and must be controlled.
In both cases arrogance is at play on the behalf of the 'thinker'.

[Sliver]

Well its been 8 pages and a landslide, i really thought it was going to go the other way but i guess in this case change is what the people want.

[rok-the-boat]

I hate the current set up becuae if I leave my left indicator on by mistake it could be a death sentence, which I find a bit harsh.

[TimeOut]

It'll be good, we live on a tourist route:angry: and as a result you never rely on them to give way when turning left:facepalm:

[Berries]

I hate the current set up becuae if I leave my left indicator on by mistake it could be a death sentence, which I find a bit harsh.
It still will be, if you are rolling along and there is an intersection on your left and a car wanting to turn right out of it.

[rok-the-boat]

It still will be, if you are rolling along and there is an intersection on your left and a car wanting to turn right out of it.

Not quite, as they don't have right of way, though that is how many of us do get wiped out.

[steve_t]

It still will be, if you are rolling along and there is an intersection on your left and a car wanting to turn right out of it.


Not quite, as they don't have right of way, though that is how many of us do get wiped out.

Nah, Berries is right. If you're heading straight but indicating left, a person coming from the side road on your left would think you're turning left and pull out in front of you. Keep vigilant. Cancel your indicators :niceone:

[scumdog]

Nah, Berries is right. If you're heading straight but indicating left, a person coming from the side road on your left would think you're turning left and pull out in front of you. Keep vigilant. Cancel your indicators :niceone:

See it a lot - and not just bikes.

NEVER have faith on an approaching vehicle with left-turn signal going actually turning left...even if you don't end up getting hurt you'll be in the poo for pullng out into the path of the non-turning vehicle.

[Clockwork]

To each his own and all that..but for the life of me - I just can't see why anyone biker or cager, would want to keep the stupid rule that is in place now that means we need eyes looking at our rears to see if traffic is approaching behind before we make a decision to turn left or give way to right turning traffic. How do u guys KNOW that the car behind you is not going to flick on his L indicator the very moment you avert your eyes from him..causing the cager to right turn on top of you as you assume you have the left turn right? Nah. Get rid of it.
Or,...sees you in a cage stuck behind another who wants to turn left and u want to go ahead....in a shared turn and straight ahead lane....waiting, waiting,,...



Erm... simple really, if I'm being followed, I wait (pause to the left side of the road almost inviting him to pass me) then as soon as I see him beside me passing I know its safe to complete my left hand turn legally in his shadow.

[Shadows]

Munters who forget to cancel their indicators rejoice, as it will reduce their chances of being taken out considerably.

[Berries]

But they will still look like a learner.

[steve_t]

Erm... simple really, if I'm being followed, I wait (pause to the left side of the road almost inviting him to pass me) then as soon as I see him beside me passing I know its safe to complete my left hand turn legally in his shadow.

This is exactly one of the problems with the current give way rule. If each day you've got thousands of cars turning left at an intersection pausing, possibly unnecessarily, for even half a second, you've totally screwed the flow of traffic.

[Trade_nancy]

Erm... simple really, if I'm being followed, I wait (pause to the left side of the road almost inviting him to pass me) then as soon as I see him beside me passing I know its safe to complete my left hand turn legally in his shadow.

Exactly - you are part of the problem. Along with the chumps who sit in the left lane on a dual-laner and wait for the right turners coming towards them..instead of going into their left lane and letting the oncoming assume the right lane. Can go through 2 sets of lights waiting for these bozos to move off.

[Scuba_Steve]

This is exactly one of the problems with the current give way rule. If each day you've got thousands of cars turning left at an intersection pausing, possibly unnecessarily, for even half a second, you've totally screwed the flow of traffic.

so a few half secs (out of the way) screws traffic flow, but a few minutes holding up traffic wont :facepalm:

[Clockwork]

Exactly - you are part of the problem. Along with the chumps who sit in the left lane on a dual-laner and wait for the right turners coming towards them..instead of going into their left lane and letting the oncoming assume the right lane. Can go through 2 sets of lights waiting for these bozos to move off.


No, I'm more than familiar with that rule chum. Along with the fact that the current rule says I may turn left ahead of a right turning vehicle if I can turn in the shadow of a vehicle following me.

What I'm not familiar with is how knowing and obeying that rule can make me part of any problem.

[Sliver]

Hey 118..wonder if we can get to 150:Punk:

[YellowDog]

I agree with the turn left rule being scrapped. The idea of letting someone turn right across your path is a common courtesy, which IMO won’t change (except in large cities). It happens in countries without the turn left rule, so I can't see personal courteous human instincts changing.

There will certainly be a few more accidents during the bedding in period.

Maybe a few less foreigners maimed and killed also :yes:

[tigertim20]

I agree with the turn left rule being scrapped. The idea of letting someone turn right across your path is a common courtesy, which IMO won’t change (except in large cities). It happens in countries without the turn left rule, so I can't see personal courteous human instincts changing.

There will certainly be a few more accidents during the bedding in period.

Maybe a few less foreigners maimed and killed also :yes:

whoah whoah whoah whoah whoah!
are you insinuating that NZ drivers are courteous? put down the crackpipe!!

[YellowDog]

OK - The pipe's on the table now :lol:

My experience is that most car drivers are indeed courteous to other car drivers. Not to motorcyclists though :no:

The other big plus of the new rule is that if you forget to cancel your indicator, you will be less likely to end up- as ROADKILL :Oops:

[Jantar]

Most drivers are courteous. However there are enough that aren't that its too easy to make a sweeping generalisation. I do believe that given the opportunity to think for themselves that even drivers will show some common courtesy on our roads.

My experience is that truckies are the best, cage drivers are average, bus and taxi drivers are the worst. Motorcyclist cover the whole range from very good to very bad.

[Berries]

My experience is that truckies are the best.
All truck drivers are cunts.

:corn:

[_Shrek_]

All truck drivers are cunts. :corn:

thin ice hot skates there Berries, or just trolling :whocares:

having said that there are one or two around that are, but the same could be said for cars & bikes as well,

& as for the dumb arse law they brought in 35 years ago about time they got rid of it,

pitty we can't see who voted what!!! but I'm picking most are over 40ish :facepalm: that voted yes

[mossy1200]

French go anti clockwise around roundabouts we should do that on the weekends and clockwise on week days

[Berries]

What day can we eat horse meat?

[Scuba_Steve]

What day can we eat horse meat?

Tuesday but only if the suns out & not before 1600

[Brian407]

pitty we can't see who voted what!!! but I'm picking most are over 40ish :facepalm: that voted yes

More likely to be 50 or over, and got thier licence at age 15 (as I did) and/or have experience driving in other countries where the new/old rule works perfectly well. (as I, and many others here have).

[YellowDog]

More likely to be 50 or over, and got thier licence at age 15 (as I did) and/or have experience driving in other countries where the new/old rule works perfectly well. (as I, and many others here have).

Those with "Goldfish Bowl Syndrome" might struggle with understanding anything other than what they already know :blink:

[Trade_nancy]

No, I'm more than familiar with that rule chum. Along with the fact that the current rule says I may turn left ahead of a right turning vehicle if I can turn in the shadow of a vehicle following me.

What I'm not familiar with is how knowing and obeying that rule can make me part of any problem.

We are all part of the problem "chum" for having to rely on rear vision in order to make decisions about what happpens up front! We create a safety problem - or the potential for it - by relying on our (largely) inadequate rearview mirrors to decide if we are safe to turn in front of a vehicle or not. I too have to use the method u described -a quick rear check and if it looks like the vehicle behind is coming beside me,.. I can do a left turn. But that it unsafe always was and will be if it continues. Often the following vehicles don't indicate, or they do,..but still don't turn.
Get over it - the law was a bad one that is why it is going out the window. If you are arguing that the current system is good, or can be made good - that's your right - but you are defending a dead rubbber. It is being reversed because it was a failure....and was from the outset in 1977 when I 1st saw it introduced as a biker and cager at that time. It was hugely and widely ridiculed. It was dumped everywhere else decades ago. It has come to be accepted I guess by younger people in particular who have gotten into driving/riding since 1977...or older people who just can't see past their arse...cos they always looking out back.

[theseekerfinds]

Well thats shit from start to finish, I have provided many times why the current law is logical & superior.

ha ha ha, not likely mate.. you prove nothing but your own inadequacies and poor judgement to be the basis of your opinions.. but as they are yours I will not refer to them as shit because they are yours and you are entitled to them..

[Clockwork]

We are all part of the problem "chum" for having to rely on rear vision in order to make decisions about what happpens up front! We create a safety problem - or the potential for it - by relying on our (largely) inadequate rearview mirrors to decide if we are safe to turn in front of a vehicle or not. I too have to use the method u described -a quick rear check and if it looks like the vehicle behind is coming beside me,.. I can do a left turn. But that it unsafe always was and will be if it continues. Often the following vehicles don't indicate, or they do,..but still don't turn.
Get over it - the law was a bad one that is why it is going out the window. If you are arguing that the current system is good, or can be made good - that's your right - but you are defending a dead rubbber. It is being reversed because it was a failure....and was from the outset in 1977 when I 1st saw it introduced as a biker and cager at that time. It was hugely and widely ridiculed. It was dumped everywhere else decades ago. It has come to be accepted I guess by younger people in particular who have gotten into driving/riding since 1977...or older people who just can't see past their arse...cos they always looking out back.

I've been an NZ licence holder since 1976 (although I can't remember if the rule changed before I got my licence or after). I recall when I returned to NZ after 15 Years in the UK I though it was a stupid rule but you know what? I've re-adapted to it, I can see its good points and I can see that a lot of our intersections are now designed with that ruile in mind.

Frankly, I'd be quite happy for the rule to stay as it is but I guess I'll live with the change too. I was simply pointing out that its not hat hard to give way if your turning left, you should already have a fair idea of what's behind you anyway then you just wait to see if the guy following passes you, if he does you can go, if he don't you cant, simple as that and you don't need to look in your mirror to see if he's turning behind you!!

[YellowDog]

I've been an NZ licence holder since 1976 (although I can't remember if the rule changed before I got my licence or after). I recall when I returned to NZ after 15 Years in the UK I though it was a stupid rule but you know what? I've re-adapted to it, I can see its good points and I can see that a lot of our intersections are now designed with that ruile in mind.

Frankly, I'd be quite happy for the rule to stay as it is but I guess I'll live with the change too. I was simply pointing out that its not hat hard to give way if your turning left, you should already have a fair idea of what's behind you anyway then you just wait to see if the guy following passes you, if he does you can go, if he don't you cant, simple as that and you don't need to look in your mirror to see if he's turning behind you!!

If you have been in the UK for 15 years, do you agree that courteous driver (not London) have it as an unwritten rule?

In the UK, when turning left, I would generally let the person tuening right in front of me go first: Especially if it was a hot chick :yes:

[Berries]

Nice airbags.

[Clockwork]

If you have been in the UK for 15 years, do you agree that courteous driver (not London) have it as an unwritten rule?

In the UK, when turning left, I would generally let the person tuening right in front of me go first: Especially if it was a hot chick :yes:

Yeah, definitely drivers are more courteous over there, I suspect its an extension of the culture that queues and waits to take its turn.


(But then may be they needed to be, else they'd never get to make a right turn)
:innocent:

[Jantar]

I have driven in four countries other than New Zealand. Although this is a limited sample it is my experience that the tighter the road rules, the less driver courtesy, and the more liberal the road rules the greater driver courtesy. I won't try and extrapolate that into accident rates though.

[YellowDog]

I have driven in four countries other than New Zealand. Although this is a limited sample it is my experience that the tighter the road rules, the less driver courtesy, and the more liberal the road rules the greater driver courtesy. I won't try and extrapolate that into accident rates though.

NZ is the No.1 developed country I've been to for deaths on the road. And I have been to a lot of countries.

Kids drive too young.
No requirement for insurance.
No requirement to be responsible or considerate.
Why not overtake on a blind bend? Everyone seems to.
Police seem more interested in low hanging fruit.
Road users lives appear to be less worthy of protection than they do in Europe.

These factors, plus may more contribute towards poor driving standards. It's tough being a motorcyclist in NZ however once you realise what a reletively dangerous place it is, you just need to take more care and let morons be morons.

NZ is No.1 in many other more positive respects :yes:

[Badjelly]

ha ha ha, not likely mate.. you prove nothing but your own inadequacies and poor judgement to be the basis of your opinions.. but as they are yours I will not refer to them as shit because they are yours and you are entitled to them..

What a marvellous example of what "respect for another's opinion" means in practice.

Fuck all.

[Trade_nancy]

If you have been in the UK for 15 years, do you agree that courteous driver (not London) have it as an unwritten rule?

In the UK, when turning left, I would generally let the person tuening right in front of me go first: Especially if it was a hot chick :yes:
Nice and courteous it may be..but the driver you let go could be ticketed for failure to give way if spotted by a cop.

[Sliver]

Nice and courteous it may be..but the driver you let go could be ticketed for failure to give way if spotted by a cop.

The cop would have to be having a bad day for that..

[oneofsix]

Nice and courteous it may be..but the driver you let go could be ticketed for failure to give way if spotted by a cop.

yes and they should also ticket the "courteous driver" for obstructing traffic. :bleh:

[Scuba_Steve]

Nice and courteous it may be..but the driver you let go could be ticketed for failure to give way if spotted by a cop.


yes and they should also ticket the "courteous driver" for obstructing traffic. :bleh:

Yea, after all "the law is the law" right people??? <_<

:facepalm: Still one of the more retarded sayings out there

[Trade_nancy]

The cop would have to be having a bad day for that..
Back in the 1972 I pulled out of my parent's driveway and up the road to a give way sign - on my Honda CB125...do a right turn and head for church...or the pub, I can't remember too much detail...and a car coming from straight ahead had just reached the intersection as I started to pull off to turn in front of him..so I hesitated, stopped for him in the road centre... and just as I did he waved me across. There was a cop on a bike another car behind him. Yes,..true...seems a bugger of bad luck...but there really were a lot of them out in those days...Pulled me up, waved his finger and let me off with a stern warning...told me - it's not optional or choice for you to make...you MUST give way unless the other vehicle has became disabled. There ya go...you've been warned:msn-wink:

[YellowDog]

Back in the 1972 I pulled out of my parent's driveway and up the road to a give way sign - on my Honda CB125...do a right turn and head for church...or the pub, I can't remember too much detail...and a car coming from straight ahead had just reached the intersection as I started to pull off to turn in front of him..so I hesitated, stopped for him in the road centre... and just as I did he waved me across. There was a cop on a bike another car behind him. Yes,..true...seems a bugger of bad luck...but there really were a lot of them out in those days...Pulled me up, waved his finger and let me off with a stern warning...told me - it's not optional or choice for you to make...you MUST give way unless the other vehicle has became disabled. There ya go...you've been warned:msn-wink:

But :Police: officer; the fact that he waived me on led me to believe that he had indeed become disabled, or at least partially retarded :Police:

I'd invite said :Police: to look a complete dick in front of a judge.

I guess he could always plant some drugs on me to make it worth his while :niceone:

[Sliver]

10 more please =D