On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:37:34 +0100, Norman Wells
wrote:
>A lot of people here seem to be inclined to put words into the Highway
>Code when it suits them, and to omit them when it doesn't. And you're
>one of them.
>
>Can we please stick to what it actually says, which is:
>
>"Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance
>you can see to be clear. You should leave enough space between you and
>the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely if it suddenly slows
>down or stops. The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall
>stopping distance"
If the "distance you can see to be clear" had meant to include the
vehicle in front, there would be no reason to have made a *different*
rule wrt to that, would there? It states that you should be able to
stop withing the distance you can see to be clear, but the gap between
you and the vehicle in frnt must be sufficient only to pull up safely
should it suddenly slow down or stop. Can you not see that that is
two *different* distances?
Elsewhere in the Highway Code is described the "two second rule"
Please explain how that equates with *your* interpretation of what you
have just quoted?
The only way that the two rules can *both* make sense is if the "clear
road" does not include same direction vehicles.
So it is not *I* who is interpreting the HC the way I want to, but it
is yourself who is twisting the meaning in an attempt to support an
argumenty that you surely must have realised days ago to be untenable.
--
Cynic
|