To wonder how so many people are comfortable breaking the speed limit?

😂I rest my case.

I imagine many of them are Londoners sick of being done for doing 22mph in a 20 zone.

I’ve done a couple of long motorway drives recently. There are stretches of the M6 where there will be several lorries crawling in lanes 1&2. So obviously normal law abiding car drivers have to move into lane 3.

if I’m halfway up a close together platoon of lorries I am never going to dive in between them - that’s not safe. Instead even with a bmw driver 2m behind me at 70mph I have to continue cautiously. I had moved out into a large gap and not caused sudden breaking btw.

This is a common occurrence. It’s illegal and unsafe behaviour in the side of the tailgater, and just reflects that on a very busy motorway no one can safely go over 70mph.

You mean "forcing" other vehicles who are dithering in an overtaking lane without actively overtaking at that point in time?

No, I meant trying to force drivers who are overtaking (or moving at the speed of the cars in front in their lane in the dense traffic situation) to exceed the speed limit or pull into an insufficiently large gap. Not 'dithering'.

But as you say, it's 'it's not up to the average car on a motorway to "police" how other vehicles drive.' ... presumably you agree two wrongs don't make a right, and it's not ok to police a ditherer or even a lane hog by yourself breaking a different set of rules or speeding or tailgating?

You're missing the "makes" part of the statement. In your slip road example, most sensible drivers on the motorway would create a space for vehicles entering from a slip road by adjusting their speed to create a gap or by moving into the other lane if safe to do so.

Well, I think you’re changing the terms of the examples to suit your agenda. In my slip road scenario, you’ve for some reason assumed that the other drivers are ‘sensible’ and moving over nice and early. Clearly, this doesn’t always happen, so you can be as sensible as you like on the slip road, matching speed, attempting to merge… but many drivers will grudgingly leave it to the last minute to move right. So you’re effectively ‘making’ them move.

In OP’s example, you’re again assuming that the other road users are sensible and that she’s in the wrong. But, again, the knucklehead driving at 90mph right up the back of other road users is not driving sensibly. There’s a far greater chance that OP is driving sensibly, given the evidence we have, but you’re still determined to back knucklehead-90mph-guy. You’re inventing all sorts of details about OP having pulled out unsafely. Much mire likely is that knucklehead has covered a mile in way less than a minute and is up her arse while she’s completing her safe over-taking.

Honestly, the absolute desperation of some posters to find an OP unreasonable is just madness.

She’s explained a perfectly legitimate gripe - bullying speeders who flash their lights and drive unsafely close. And out come all the far-flung reasons why OP is probably a danger. Even to the point of suggesting all those speeding BMW drivers are plain clothes police 🙄

There’s also a weird sort of boasting going on (see @CantHoldMeDown ) where we’re supposed to be impressed by how fast and clever people are behind the wheel, even though we have literally no evidence of this. It’s all very childish.

I’m always frustrated on these threads by posters who smugly brand everyone driving over 70 on a motorway as equally dangerous and irresponsible. There is a world of difference between the sort of driver who rarely drops below 80, tailgates and undertakes, and someone who is driving at, say, 75 and otherwise complying with the rules of the road.

I have to say, though, that I have definitely been in situations recently where I’m driving below 70 and yet overtaking in the third lane!

That's true as well.

You mean "forcing" other vehicles who are dithering in an overtaking lane without actively overtaking at that point in time? When they should move over without "prompting" back into middle or left hand lane until they are next in a position to do another active overtake manoevre, rather than thinking they'll just stay in the overtaking lane because they're too lazy to move over (or oblivious) as there's another vehicle on the horizon they'll probably want to overtake in half a mile or more!

It kind of defeats the object of some elements of their training if they're on blues and twos and all the traffic in front of them moves out of their way. Part of the training has to be how to deal with traffic that doesn't shift, whether on blues and twos or not, i.e. how to deal with traffic if you're deliberately driving without blues and twos, say, to follow a vehicle without wanting them to know you're police whilst waiting for backup or just for observations, or because the blues and twos aren't working, or because you're in a vehicle without blues and twos.

But that's not what we're talking about in this thread is it. I think the point is that it's not up to the average car on a motorway to "police" how other vehicles drive.

The op wasn't remotely talking about 'policing' other drivers though. No, that's really not the point of this thread.
It's the speeders and tailgaters who are trying to force behaviour on other road users, in the main.

And unless the driver in the overtaking lane is actively overtaking, then they've no need to be in an overtaking lane!

Police also do "plains clothes" mock high speed pursuits using vehicles without blues and twos activated.

So, people with specific high speed training.
Would they not even use the blue light at the front of the car thing (there's probably a proper name for it) if they're approaching traffic in front?

It's a moot point because the number of prosecutions for "obstructing" is tiny, even when "obstructing" a bloody huge emergency vehicle displaying enough blue lights to compete with Blackpool illuminations and as much siren noise as Glastonbury! It really has to be the most serious case possible for even a sniff of prosecution, usually only for deliberate prolonged obstruction rather than simple lack of observation.

But no, chances of prosecution for obstruction when the vehicle isn't on blues and twos is probably on a par with finding London buses on the moon!

But that's not what we're talking about in this thread is it. I think the point is that it's not up to the average car on a motorway to "police" how other vehicles drive. It's a matter between the police and the other driver, we really don't want to get into vigilante territory.

You're missing the "makes" part of the statement. In your slip road example, most sensible drivers on the motorway would create a space for vehicles entering from a slip road by adjusting their speed to create a gap or by moving into the other lane if safe to do so. That's exactly what IAM drivers are taught to do when they're driving on a motorway passing a junction - in fact they're trained to think about moving over to the middle lane if it's clear long before the slip road rather than waiting till you're alongside it if there seems to be traffic entering. It's all about setting and adjusting your "course" in good time, in anticipation of hazards etc.

When entering a motorway, if you get to the end of the slip road and you've not got into lane, it's probably because you've not built up to a speed matching vehicles already on the motorway and not been observant enough to aim for a gap in traffic. You certainly don't force your way in regardless. It's almost always your own fault if you get to the end of the slip road and havn't merged into lane 1 and end up having to stop on the hard shoulder! But that's highly unlikely to happen as most drivers would make space for you if you're observant and match traffic speed and "merge" safely (as long as you're not an entitled prat driving a German car speeding to the end of the slip road and pushing your way in!).

Is the implication that such a car coming up behind a car doing 70 in the outside lane would be able to prosecute for obstruction ? Even though they were not displaying any emergency lights or signals ?

Or does police training in such cases teach to circumvent any obstructions safely in order to proceed at speed ?

I live near a stretch of dual carriageway the police use for training you could set your watch by. In plain clothes cars. They seem to manage when they come up behind a car doing 40 (the limit) in the right hand lane.

Speed limit is 70 though, so if OP was already driving at 70 they've no need to be overtaking.

Police also do "plains clothes" mock high speed pursuits using vehicles without blues and twos activated.

Other emergency officers may well have to use their own personal cars without blues and twos in extreme cases, ie if officially off duty but called in for a serious incident so without an official vehicle, or even a vehicle fitted with blues and twos may have technical faults rendering them inoperable.

@taxguru

we had a fundamental rule that you should never do anything at all that makes any other road user change speed or course

I’m sorry but, in the real world, this is utterly useless advice. Pretty much everything you do on the motorway is in response to other traffic.

First example that springs to mind:
If you’re pulling onto the motorway from a slip road, other drivers move over for you (or they should, if possible). Yes, you adjust your speed appropriately, but the other traffic can’t just blithely continue, with their two-second gap, with no reference to you; otherwise, on a busy motorway, there’d be literally no way for you to merge.

I know you’ve got your special advanced rule book there, but it doesn’t seem to make much sense.

Freeman of the land ?

There is also a relevant point that not everyone in the outside lane exceeding the speed limit is doing so illegally. But that is yet another scenario people fail to consider.

Do you mean an emergency vehicle with blue lights? I'm pretty sure it literally goes without saying people wouldn't impede them.

Who else can exceed the speed limit legally?

There is also a relevant point that not everyone in the outside lane exceeding the speed limit is doing so illegally. But that is yet another scenario people fail to consider.

Tell us more, tell us more.

There is also a relevant point that not everyone in the outside lane exceeding the speed limit is doing so illegally. But that is yet another scenario people fail to consider.

I agree with your sentiments re the advanced driving test, although I think a good half way house would be to make it "recommended" for people in certain jobs such as high mileage company representatives. I'm sure it would be possible to come up with some sort of rule set that everyone who either claims for 10000 miles a year from a business or has a company car that travels over 10000 miles a year should be subject to an advanced driving test.

I think you’d also fail your test if you drove at 90mph and flashed the people doing a reasonable speed, but you seem to think that’s ok 🤷‍♀️