Why is #15 racing into that roundabout

Trucker at #68? You're a star, mate.

#7 why are you trying to overtake there?

#118 You just encountered a bulk tipper, the Audi of the HGV world.

1:25 Nearly fell asleep watching that one, must having nothing better to do submitting that clip

@gk6018

2 күн бұрын

complete non event, why even bother recording it haha

This is the equivalent of dashcam neighbourhood watch. "I saw him spitting near a tree". " I couldn't believe it, the driver was smoking". :)

Having now driven around 2 million miles I’ve seen it all . Now I just give people plenty of space and let them get on with it .

#12 - what was wrong here?

27:15 Im so confused what that was about (idk that road) was he trying a shortcut? Is he technically running away since he made contact with the van?

I can shed some light on #142. I drive left hand drive artics in the UK as part of my work. When we approach roundabouts like that, and the lanes start to pitch around to the left, out of our right window, all we can see is the middle of the roundabout. We have to rely on a very small wide angled mirror to see what's coming over the roundabout. What we tend to do is try not to stop if possible because you have good visibility on the approach, but not when stopped and angled to pull out (if that makes sense) what it looks like this driver did was look on the approach, and then see a glimpse of you at the last second through the window. He then decided to abort the insertion and give way to you, but it was all a bit late and clunky. Better that then the alternative :)

#4 that's why the recommened speed in most car parks is 5-10mph.

9:54 #25: This is the same here in France, when there are two lanes we know will merge, people hesitate to take the second lane, expecially to avoid offending morons. As a driving instructor here, I'm gonna say the same things I say to my students: use the two bloody lanes. The second lane isn't here for a decorative purpose, it's made to avoid blocking the previous crossing/roundabout. Yes, it will trigger morons' ego, since they can't handle losing their rank in trafic, but you don't have to predict it will merge. Use it, and if a driver blocks you, ask him to show you where it's written you can't use it.

30# while correct on the statement, you seen them coming and wouldn’t move over despite the completely empty motorway. A for knowledge but F for driving

I was always taught to walk facing oncoming traffic fsr 29:56

#133 you did right for not backing down to that entitled little boy having his strop

9:32 a glitch in the matrix a Audi doing the right thing Well done, that driver

#104 - talk about rushing towards danger.....what a prick

#98 my dad has seen many crashes here on his way to work every day some people need to look at the road markings

7:21 I doubt motorway maintenance is included in Lorry Law but I cud be wrong

#79 I feel for the overtaking car somewhat. The rest of the vehicles are driving nose-to-tail and leaving no space for someone who wants to pass, meaning that, if they want to pass, they have to take risks. Of course, they shouldn't take risks, but the other drivers are preventing the overtaker from making reasonable progress.

#13 hope that went to the Police. Dangerous driving.

5:14 Is MV12 NSE WHITE FORD Zoom in

#128 The LandRover driver was an idiot, however that was not a valid pedestrian crossing. It was missing one vital ingredient to make it legal: the "give way" line "- - - - - - - -" before the crossing. This is the bit that means you must give way to a pedestrian already crossing, and are often missing on crossings on private property.

@garyboyle695

26 күн бұрын

Tell that to your gran when she's mown down by a nob head.

@WilkyTheFlyingScotsman

16 күн бұрын

its a zebra crossing and as per the highway code, "motorists 'must give way when someone has moved onto a crossing" so the Land Rover is in the wrong here

@nathanevans4731

16 күн бұрын

@@WilkyTheFlyingScotsman No, it isn't a Zebra Crossing (ZC), at least, not a valid one with all the legislated components required to be one. The “give way” markings are an essential and required component of making a ZC valid, and they are missing, You may well note that these “give way” dotted lines '- - - - - - -' are the same that are on the entry to a road junction, and mean just what you wrote, about giving way. The rules of ZCs are laid out in legislation (www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/schedule/1) and you will see that they are required: PART II - ROAD MARKINGS 6(b): the Zebra controlled areas shall be marked with GIVE-WAY lines, a line of studs and zig-zag lines, of the size and type, and generally in the manner, shown in the diagram at the end of this Part of this Schedule. And in that video, that “ZC” did not have give way lines and was not, therefore, a valid ZC under legislation. A decent solicitor would fight any action here, certainly against any “strict liability” offence, which hitting a pedestrian on a valid ZC would be. But, as I already stated, the Land Rover driver would still have a difficult time defending all his actions as (a) he probably would not have known any of this, and (b) he made no attempt at stopping once he saw (if he saw/was observing) the pedestrian.

#84 bit dramatic mate

#45 Taxi Driver should, at the very least , be sent on a Driver Awareness course - but probably be prosecuted for not stopping at the scene of an accident!

22:45 in, the bloody driver has a dog on their lap. X8MLB should be banned from driving.

#22 Biker self entitled coffin dodger

#2, you need a decent dash cam

10:23 not queue jumping

3:50 I don’t know Trucker

#144- no need to indicate when moving back into lane one a dual carriageway. Its an expected manoeuvre.

12:01 Against the law that. No good deed etc

20:16 you’re supposed To stop at a red light tho 🤔

@charlietook4842

26 күн бұрын

That red light was for the cam car. it extends further so it can be seen. if you look there is not line in front of them lights. so learn the road before commenting mate.

27:08 one of the dumbest drivers i’ve ever seen, why would you drive between two cars when you’re clearly not allowed to do that and also there’s not space to do that?

#144, the last clip. The police didn't break the law. Their manoeuvres had no effect on any another driver, so not indicating was not, in this case, dangerous. People indicate unnecessarily, at the wrong time and automatically (i.e., without really considering if it's needed) which is wrong. Some examples are: indicating at a junction when there are no other road users around, not indicating before moving into a right-turn filter lane at a junction and then starting to indicate once in the filter lane (when your presence in the filter lane is, itself, the indication).

@WilkyTheFlyingScotsman

16 күн бұрын

from my pov sometimes even if you cant see any other cars, its still best to indicate on some junctions as visibility might not be the best or there could be vehicles travelling fast and such, if its a nice open junction then yeah no indicator is really needed but more closed off ones and especially in poor weather as well i will always do it just to be on the safe side

Clip #4 drier calls the white car for reversing out of his space without paying attention, I suppose this idiot has full 360 vision when he is reversing and can see all the cars coming from all directions, one thing he NEVER learned is to give reversing drivers plenty of room due to the poor visibility you have when reversing.

Im sure number 10s well in the wrong, middle lane goes straight on as does his, and he drifts from the right lane, into the middle and calls it someone elses problem....

@dpayO2

11 күн бұрын

That's exactly what I thought.

#12 Lorry Driver should be sacked and banned from driving for life. Had plenty of time to slow with oncoming traffic and deliberately chose not to. Brings the profession into disrepute, one bad apple etc!

@RomanLT

15 күн бұрын

Cyclists and too slow drivers are the main reason for aggressive overtaking. And then cyclists and slow driving people complaining that everybody overtaking them, using horn etc.

Too many repeated clips....... waste of time watching

#35, cyclist in front or not, the practice of overtaking should be a careful process on both ends because they are unpredictable, however... You sir, went to impatiently overtake the cyclist on hard lines, that's a penalty right there.

#9 The truck hasn’t done too much wrong here. They can’t accelerate quickly to get out of junctions, so they’d be waiting a long time for a gap big enough that doesn’t slow the car behind them down. They left enough space for you to anticipate and slow down.

@kingofclouds

16 күн бұрын

Wrong! HGV is a joke! He has to wait as he is a larger vehicle, he has to judge what the speed of the road is and the distance of the vehicle. He was totally wrong!

@whywhywhydelilah9541

15 күн бұрын

@@kingofclouds That’s easier said than done when in a truck though. When you’re in a car it’s easy to judge how much space you need to pull out because you don’t need anywhere near as much. If a car is dead far away in the distance it’s harder to judge how quickly it’s moving and how long it will take to reach you. Trucks would never get out of junctions ever. It was still safe for the truck to pull out because the car and driver had plenty of time to see, react, and slow down safely.

#1 They were avoiding the cyclists.

#12 I'm sorry, if you ride a bike on a country lane you're just asking for it. Darwin award!

first?

1st... i guess

@benjamindavies7611

27 күн бұрын

i dont know what all the fuss is about, that didnt make me feel special or any euphoria, just.. well.. like om talking to my self

#5 1:36. Nothing wrong with merging at 40 mph, 70 is the limit not a target. Camera is wrong to change two lanes in one move.

@jigwaille

25 күн бұрын

The very purpose of a merging lane is to reach the trafic speed before merging to avoid impeding it. A speed differential of 30mph is dangerous, as a car doing 70 gets closer by 15 meters every second, and you need one second minimum to react. It's not illegal, but it's dangerous, and goes against logic.

@mrcellophane99

25 күн бұрын

That's assuming lane 1 is travelling at 70. More likely it is HGVs doing 50. In which case merging at 70 is more dangerous

@jigwaille

24 күн бұрын

@@mrcellophane99 Nobody said you have to reach 70, but the speed of trafic. If HGVs are doing 50, merge at 50. Your only job here is to avoid impeding trafic.