Forrest, you wrote;

“The integrity I imply is missing is that as to whether the primary objective of road rules enforcement is one as to maximising the safety of road users in general, or one as to maximising revenue collection not perceptibly primarily focussed upon making bad driving behaviour too expensive to sustain.”

Agreed. It has taken me a long time to reach that sordid conclusion. For years I thought that those who were adamant that road-safety policing was revenue-raising-oriented as the first priority were just expressing sour grapes. But those days are gone.

It makes it damn hard to know what to espouse when you’ve basically got what should be a highly respected part of our society turning into a mob of parasites…who are destructive to goodwill and respect for the law, law-enforcers and politicians, and just all round engenders very bad karma!

To say that I’m disgusted would be the understatement of the century!

However, I would still advocate the widespread use of technology such as speed and tailgating cameras, while at the same pushing as hard as possible for integrity in government and law enforcement.

Now for the disagreements…

I can’t agree with your expression of issues involving a spouse. If there were only two people who could have been driving at the time of an offence (or three or more in a family with teenage drivers), then the driver would be very easily determined. There wouldn’t be any need for spouse to testify against spouse, surely!

At any rate, what sort of relationship would you have if a couple couldn’t agree on who was driving or who should take the rap?

“Such a statistic is not necessarily reflective of tailgating. More likely a significant proportion of such crashes which occur with these insufficient separations between vehicles involved do so because there is a sudden and unexpected change at the front of a traffic stream. Traffic in which, although perhaps heavy, no driver could be claimed to be 'tailgating', that is, deliberately closing up on a vehicle ahead in an intimidatory manner.”

continued

Just how tailgating is defined I’m not sure. But it should include any unsafe following distance. If a following vehicle is so close that it cannot stop in time if the car in front hits the skids, then I’d call that tailgating, well and truly.

It is not just the full-on intimidatory up-your-exhaust-pipe type driving that I’m concerned about, it is any driving by the driver behind that places you under an increased risk.

So if there is a line of traffic and the lead car has to stop quickly, resulting in cars behind ploughing into each other, then there has been tailgating involved. If the lead car just slows down slightly and the effect is magnified back through a line of traffic, with each car breaking a bit more strongly, resulting a prang, then those vehicles have been following each other too closely..a la tailgating.

And in each case, it is NOT the fault of the driver in front!

Following distance is totally up to the following vehicle. The car in front has NO ability to control it…apart perhaps from indicating discontent by way flashing their brake-lights or throwing their hand out the window with a wave-back motion.

One complication is that those who follow at a safe distance in thick traffic get cut in on all the time by lane-changers. But they just have to smoothly pull back and re-establish a safe following distance.

In just about every instance, if a car hits the car in front, then it is that driver’s fault...unless perhaps he/she has just been severely cut in on, with the offender then immediately braking suddenly.

Crikey, people who drive regularly in thick traffic should know this and drive accordingly. They should know that they have to be prepared for the vehicle in front to stop very suddenly at any time!

“Lying statistics!”

No, I don’t think so.

Ludwig, yesterday I had to travel 100km along the New England Highway. On the way back, I encountered one of the prats I was talking about before. This guy's sitting on about 95 km/h in a 100 km/h zone, so I've gradually caught up to him. Knowing the road as I do, I hang back until we reach one of the overtaking lanes, which extends for about 3 km up a long, fairly steep hill.

We reach the overtaking lane, so I move into it. This idiot accelerates until we're both travelling at 120 km/h, and I'm in a 4-cylinder diesel that won't go any faster up that kind of hill, so by the time we reach the top he's still in front of me. As soon as we're over the crest and it's back to two lanes, this prick slows back to 95 km/h.

It took about another 5 km until we reached a point where it was safe to overtake him, during which I pondered what my reaction would have been if I'd been of less calm a disposition, as I read his redneck bumper stickers, one of which proudly announced 'I love beer' (I kid you not). As it was, I just gave him the finger when I eventually passed, resisting the strong temptation to run the dildo off the road.

I have no idead why that driver behaved as he did, but it's exactly the sort of thing that might lead to tailgating (or worse) from a less mature driver. You asked how I drive - safely, positively, defensively and courteously is the answer. However, I do let idiots who put my life in danger by their manner of driving know what I think of them, either by a flash of the lights or my index finger.

That clown yesterday needlessly put my life, his and other road users at risk, and no tailgating camera would pick his behaviour up.

CJ, I empathise. Of course there are going to be driving behaviours which are not detectable by tailgating cameras or any technology….or even a greatly increased police presence on our roads, and for which the public could not easily gather hard evidence even if facilitated in doing so within a community-policing regime.

Having said that, with a cam recorder or still camera, your passenger (if you had one) could have recorded the necessary evidence in your situation to have had this fool convicted. Think about it. It could easily have been achieved.

There is no excuse for stupid driving in response to stupid driving. The antics that you experienced would be no excuse for tailgating. If a driver was busted for tailgating under those circumstances, he/she’d be in the wrong, clear-cut.

A very significant part of driver-training and behaviour has got be one’s ability to handle adverse situations and to certainly not add to the risk factors.

But we will never be able to engender perfect law-abidance or road safety. However as I keep saying, we could SO EASILY make very significant improvements.

It is not just a matter of safety out there on our roads, it’s a matter of anger, stress and peace of mind…and respect for the law, blah blah. You were obviously very much bothered by this event. So I hope you can now fully appreciate my passion for this subject.

CJ, you were unlucky, I think. I can not recall ever finding one of those twits on the New England. However, when I was silly enough to take a friends advice recently, & used highway 1 from Sydney to the Gold Coast, I found one or more of them at every overtaking lane, the whole way. Never again.

[I find the truckers, on the new england really grate. As they usually drive a constant speed, about 5/7Km over the limit, I hook a mental tow rope, about 50 metres long, onto one, & drive by semi remote control behind them, & avoid getting pinged for speeding by accident.]

To be kind, I don't even think these twits are being antisocial, & trying to stay ahead of you, they are just lousy city drivers.

Our city drivers rarely get to drive at much over 60Km in a single lane. The only time they drive faster is on expressways, with the space of multilanes [or at least duel lanes] around them. I like to think they are just driving to their skill level, 90Km in a single lane, & 120Km in a multilane.

By thinking this way, it makes it easier to avoid allowing these twits to spoil my day. This way, I can feel sorry for them, rather than get annoyed.

It does get even worse, out here, just 30Km from the outer city suburbs. The tarmac on our roads is only one car wide. To pass an oncoming car, you both put your outside wheels off the tarmac, into the dirt.

I drive a small, 30 year old sports car. I used to find it amusing that our city visiters, in their bo@@dy great 4WDs would refuse to put any wheels off the tarmac, & would expect me to leave the tarmac completely, to allow their progress.

As a now cranky old bugger, I often just stop, on the tarmac, requiring them to drive around me. The look on their faces, as they have to take all 4 wheels of their off roader into the dirt is priceless.

I am all for bigger penalties, much bigger. A lousy couple of hundred bucks does nothing to pull speedsters in to line. As for a few km's over the limit. Thats just as bad as 10 or more over. If the speed limit is 100, you do not exceed that at all. How can you justify overtaking a car doing 100 km's/hr. That is hoon driving.
I say anyone caught doing over the limit is off the road straight away.
In the Northern Territory the limit is 130 km's/hr and that is still not enough for some.