Indicators should be banned, to improve road safety.

[Arfcollins]

Here we go again.

Arfcollins decides he doesn't like the Highway Code, so he forms his own version.

That's a fair comment. There are sometimes occassions when the HC is safely ignored or re-interpreted.An example that has frequent mention in CC is filtering on the left, which is illegal:
Rule 63

Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should
<snip>

• only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so

<snip>

I recall that you posted a question on CC about filtering, and I pointed out to you that it is illegal. Does this mean that you have not filtered on the left since? This, by the way, would include filtering between lanes of traffic, as you will be to the left of the right hand lane. Now, I may be mistaken here regarding the law, and if so would appreciate your correction.

Your original post did not talk about specific circumstances, it talked about indication in general.

That's true. As I mentioned above, it was an attention grabbing tongue-in-cheek post. You are selectively quoting again, as later in the string you will have seen:
Arfcollins said: ↑

One thing I learnt that changed the way I drive for the better, was the idea that you should only indicate when there is someone to indicate to. It sounds obvious, but point is that to find out if there is someone to indicate to, you have to look for them, so the importance of being observant when manoovering (never could spell that!) isreinforced.​

Clearly not saying no indication at all.

So where are we at now? Indication should be ignored when you say so, but on other occasions - such as mini roundabouts - it shouldn't be ignored. You might want to work on the criteria for your new highway code, as it's not making much sense at the moment.You seem to think that the only options are placing complete faith in the quality and relevance of indicators or completely ignoring them. And that is where your logic falls apart. Driving is about taking care. I can see your signal, interpret it and proceed with care, so that if the signal is incorrect or misplaced, no one is in any danger. It is possible, you know.

Here we have some sort of agreement but I can give you the examples again of where indication can cause accidents. This was from another thread on signalling and is the one I referred to yesterday where you have avoided answering my questions. This is what I asked you to man up about, so do give it a go:

What you have still failed to grasp is the value of a right indication on roundabouts, even if it doesn't match your interpretation of the highway code. I can give an example, which is not unique, of a local roundabout where there have been several accidents caused by vehicles leaving the roundabout from the right hand lane into the right lane of the exit, cutting across a vehicle in the left lane that was leaving the roundabout by the following exit. I'm having to guess here as I haven't been able to ask the offending drivers, but I suspect that driver 1 thought that driver 2 was going to leave into lane 1 of the same exit. If driver 2 had been signalling right as he approached exit 1 the accident probably wouldn't happen. So the question for you in this circumstance is: which is better, making a signal that is not recommended by the highway code or having an accident?

Another example is on that same roundabout, and between the same 2 exits many drivers indicate left before exit 1 but leave at exit 2. There are some drivers entering from exit 1 that might assume that the driver on the roundabout is precisely following the signalling recommendation of the highway code and so will believe that they can safely enter the roundabout in front of the car that is exitting. The question for you here is would it be safer for the driver on the roundabout to be indicating right prior to exit 1, or would this be stupid as you have previously stated.

And no, my comment wasn't rubbish. You do have to look at the bigger picture. For example, if we reduced the speed limit to 10mph on every road in Britain, and enforced it, accident rates would fall dramatically.
Doesn't make it sensible, practical or the correct thing to do though, does it?
Perhaps you can justify your bizarre claims by doing two things:

1. Can you give us any indication (pun intended) of the number of injuries and deaths that are caused by acting on the basis of an incorrect signal?
2. Can you explain how we are to interpret your suggestion of ignoring indicators, if you tell us that your examples show situations when we should ignore indication, yet you accept there are occasions where we shouldn't ignore it?

Answers:
1. I have no idea but I have seen accidents relating directly to this, see above. I don't have any figures relating to cyclists being injured or killed when filtering illegally on the inside of traffic either, or cyclists being injured or killed when using badly designed cyclepaths, but my lack of data doesn't make those accidents any less relevant or avoidable.
2. See my roundabout examples above.

I look forward to you answers regarding my examples. You've said before this would be a waste of time, but it will only take a couple of minutes, honestly.

 

[Dan B]

That's a fair comment. There are sometimes occassions when the HC is safely ignored or re-interpreted.An example that has frequent mention in CC is filtering on the left, which is illegal

You will of course be able to quote from the relevant legislation? No, the Highway Code is not the law.

 

[dodd82]

As has been pointed out to you, arfcollins, you are wrong about the legalities of filtering.

But you missed the point (the first of many times). My point was that, not for the first time, you are advocating ignoring the highway code because you think you know better, failing to take into account the constructive criticism that you receive.

This happened with your ludicrous posts on the roundabout discussion, where four or five separate people made points as to why your comments were naive and foolish.

Did you listen? Nope.

So as I say, here we are again.

You failed to interpret my question correctly. I am asking you how you think your suggestion should be written into constructive advice for drivers.

Currently, it just seems to be that whatever you decide at the time goes.

You accept that at mini roundabouts signalling is required, yet you tell us that you do not signal when leaving other roundabouts. So what's the general advice? Can you sum it up? It might make more sense if you did.

You have admitted that you have no idea about the number of accidents, or indeed injuries, arising from this 'problem'. It's quite absurd that you would advocate a change of advice to drivers without even knowing why.

You have tunnel vision. You can see one 'problem' and one solution. Sod the consequences for everyone else. Lets hope you don't work in government.

You return to the discussion regarding right signals at roundabouts.

How mature of you to ask me to 'man up'. Are you trying to point score because you're becoming frustrated?

We have covered your examples. It was explained to you that in example one, the driver in the left hand lane is in the wrong lane. So yes, if that person has made an error and needs to move across, if they're too lazy to rectify the situation by changing route, then signalling to show their intent is the right thing to do.

But that's not remotely relevant to what we were discussing.

We discussed that if you approach a roundabout in the left lane of two and signal right because you intend to turn right, you are in the wrong lane, and your signal is a danger to other road users because it is incorrect confusing.

If you are signalling right but you're going straight on, yes, it probably removes all doubt from the cars approaching from the next junction as to whether you are leaving the roundabout. But your signal remains a danger to other road users because it is incorrect and confusing.

I could ask my wife to stand on her seat, stick her head out of the sun roof and gesture that I'm going to straight on. That would probably help too. But guess what? It's dangerous, so we don't do it.

With this and with the suggestion not to signal, you are advocating a solution to a problem that you don't know the extent of, which will have a direct affect on the safety and/or traffic flow of other road users, and which ultimately is/would be caused by the bad driving of someone else.

Do I expect you to take on board any criticism of your point?

Not a chance.

As I say, the last time this discussion came up you stuck your fingers in your ears and ignored several people giving you good reasons why your suggestion was flawed.

 

[Arfcollins]

Two points:

1.What you have quoted is not Rule 63 of the Highway Code.

Sorry, bad editting on my part, should have said rule 163.

2. It is not illegal to filter. If you insist it is, then please provide the link to the piece of legislation* which prohibits it (thus making it illegal).
Given these two glaring errors in one post, why should we give any credence to what you say?
*The Highway Code is not legislation. It is guidance.

My mistake, I thought the HC was law, and this is dodd82's opinion too. What's your take on User's post dodd82? It would probably be best if you answer this before I reply to your post.

 

[Arfcollins]

Really? Where does he say that? The only person who seems to completely misunderstand the Highway Code and be intent of making a tit of himself is you...

I had relied on my memory of an earlier post from dodd42 when I though he had said this. I checked back and found I was wrong, what he actually said was 'Here's your mistake: you are speaking as if the Highway Code is a list of don'ts. It's not. It's a list of do's, primarily.'

So, dodd42, please accept my apologies for misrepresenting what you had written.

 

[BenM]

As a way to look at the proposal from another angle... there is a trend on certain camp sites to insist that vehicles drive everywhere with their hazard warning lights (also known as park anywhere lights) on so rendering indicators useless.
In my experience (as a ped and a driver) on those same camp sites, not knowing where the vehicle is going is far more hazardous than clear indication - you have no idea where a car is going so can't take appropriate action.
Not indicating on a highway is, in effect, the same as driving everywhere with your park anywhere lights on... others can't tell where you are going or are about to go.
Arguments about only indicate when there is someone around to benefit are, imho, just about excusing lazy driving - Mirror Signal Manoeuvre is what I was taught and attempt to stick to every time I drive/ride (depending on the path I even "lifesaver" check when walking and am about to change course/side of the path!)

 

[atbman]

Not read whole thread, so apologies if someone's already said this. I signal a left turn on bike or in car if there's someone waiting to come out. If it's safe for them to do so because there's no other traffic to interfere, they can get going sooner than if they'd had to wait to see if I turned.

Not a HC rule, just simple courtesy