Dipped Headlights.

Ah, mandsatory retests every 5 years would be better?

WEll on the M11 last week visibility without Fog lights was less than 200 yards, trucks without lights on where down to 100 yards.

The day in in my anecdote was very foggy.

Nuff said.

Coordination is the key to happy driving!

That sounds more like it. Being part of a trading group (which is how the EEC was originally portrayed to us) makes sense, but I do not like all the political involvement, and being in receipt of all the EU Directives etc., even if we do play a small part in producing them.

We ought to be running our own show, independently of other states, apart from trading relationships, but co-operating with them as and when we see mutual benefit in other subject areas; and that should be the limit of our involvement.

Best wishes all, Dave.

It's too big a task; the resources aren't there, nor do I think they could be created within a reasonably short timescale.

How many driving tests are carried out annually at present? How could we cope with doing an *additional* seven million every year? It simply doesn't sound feasible to me.

I'm more attracted to the idea of getting a development of the IAM / RoSPA groups to do assessments and provide support and guidance to existing drivers, but even this would have to be done on a selective basis. I don't see them being able to cope with assessing every driver every five years.

Best wishes all, Dave.

However if you join EFTA you still have to comply with almost all of the directives, you don't get any say in them whatsoever.

Which is a condition that only ever applies to the EU, to be sure.

Er..?

Cheers,

Good job we never joined EFTA, then.

That's no good. We should get away from this business of having the EU issuing Directives (or whatever else they may care to call them) that we have to comply with, and if that means getting out of the EU, so be it.

It's all very well entering into agreements with other individuals and groups when it is felt to be mutually beneficial, and I'm all in favour of doing that. What I do not like is the notion of having our country partially governed by people in other countries, and that's what we've got.

Hells bells, our own government can be a big enough pain in the arse, but at least is is *our government* and we we must do the best we can with them, i.e. tell them to get stuffed as and when we feel it is appropriate and can organise ourselves to stand up to them en masse.

What we don't need, and should not accept, is all this externally generated crap being imposed on us.

There you go; put that in your pipe and smoke it. I have a garden that needs digging. :-)

Best wishes all, Dave.

Seems the people that are really throwing their arms up in horror at this, are the motor cyclists. They are claiming their headlamp won't be seen, if all the cars are driving with their headlights on.

tox

"Brimstone" wrote

A lot of drivers obviously thought it was very foggy that day. Here in the soft south, I haven't encountered a really decent fog for over 25 years.

"Raymond Keattch" wrote

Other vehicles are not the only things drivers have to avoid. It makes no sense to cause dazzle and block out other things that need to be seen.

If some drivers think they need to be more conspicouous why on earth did they buy a grey car?

This was in west London during the 1980s.

So you still don't actually have a reason then. Thought not.

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:24:26 -0000, Terry F. wro= te:

wro=3D

There is absolutely no need or advantage in using both hands, unless you= are driving a heavy van without power steering.

e:

WEll if you don't consider reducing the distance you deviate from your =

intended line when you drive over a sugarbeet in the fog an advantage.

They have a good point.

Graham