Motorist could be charged for puddle splashing

reply to post by loam


No, I wouldn't. But I also wouldn't be there to stop them.

Lots of people did stupid stuff as kids.

They were having fun, there's no need to get so worked up.

reply to post by Miraj


Those were ADULTS in the vehicle.

Originally posted by loam
And some of you see this as amusing?????

Yes, some of us are.

Because it is amusing and quite funny.

People like you enforce new rules and regulations on everyday living that soon enough, nothing can be done with out all the safety helmets, goggles, hi-vis jackets, gloves, pads, boots, etc. Everything becomes a chore.

Why?

To quote the preachers wife from the Simpsons.. "Think of the Children!!!"

reply to post by noonebutme


These aren't "new rules", these are rules of the road that have been in palce for years. Anyone who has done a driving test should know this, as it is in the Highway Code.

I was splashed last year while on the way back from a Fireworks display on a cold, wet Novemeber 5th. I was with my partner and two small kiddies and we got inundated by a huge wave, soaking us all, by a gang of yobs jeering at us in some BMW. My kids were crying and we were litterally freezing by the time we got home. I was far from a happy bunny.

Aside from the inconvenience of being soaked, it is dangerous. As has been highlighted, losing traction on one wheel can cause a crash, but you can hydroplane if two wheels go through the puddle and you are front or rear-wheel drive.

As for the comment about "what if they swerved to avoid the puddle or crossed a sold white line", well, if they were paying attention to the road and obeying speed limits, then they wouldn't have to "swerve" in the first place. Just slow down as you go through.

Glad they are actually prosecuting people for this as it's happened to me many times.

reply to post by stumason


Still, I watched the video and laughed. Slapstick comedy and all.

It *was* funny. Thankfully, I've not been splashed like that. On wet days or when I'm walking on the pavement I keep an eye on that sort of thing.


[edit on 15-10-2009 by noonebutme]

reply to post by willow1d


Yeah he deliberately drove into a puddle, while its slightly amusing, imagine how unamusing it wouldve been if he had aquaplaned straight into the group of kids...

Certainly an immature act by a supposed adult

reply to post by noonebutme


Well, we can't all be as vigilant and aware as you obviously are, especially if dealing with small children. Even when I have noticed a huge puddle, often there is no alternative other than taking a huge risk that some arse-head won't drench you for "giggles".

Illegal?? here in Michigan it's good sport as far as I can tell. Splash the crackheads we call it.

I was waiting at a bus stop once when a cop passed by and splashed everyone sitting there. Another student picked up a rock and threw it at the car shattering the rear windshield. The cop stopped and put him in handcuffs him. Everyone at the bus stop, including myself, was angry at the cop and told him so. While what the other kid did was wrong what he did himself was wrong as well. The street was empty and he chose to switch lanes and drive threw the puddle and splash everyone. After a while of people complaining and more cops showing up the kid was let go and the cops left as well. I was heading home already but imagine the people that were going to work and were soaked. It must have been enraging.

reply to post by whatukno


I saw this video on break.com the other day, this was hilarious. If i were him I'd make it a ritual and every time it rained I'd get em again, til i was locked up or their mom got me

reply to post by 3vilscript


Enraging isn't the word for it. When I was got last November (as stated above) with the kids, by the time we got them home, they were white, cold and shaking. I had to put on 3 convector heaters to blast them and strip them naked as soon as we got in to try and warm the little buggers up.

Had we not been so close to home, then they may well have gone into hypothermic shock, it was that cold.

I could have killed the idiots who did that to me and the kids, they're just lucky the traffic lights ahead were green as they went through.

Originally posted by noonebutme
reply to post by stumason

 

On wet days or when I'm walking on the pavement I keep an eye on that sort of thing

[edit on 15-10-2009 by noonebutme]

Yeah that's great and all but do you think the rest of us live in Blindsville or something? That we all walk around with our eyes closed? What about when you can see it coming and there's nothing you can do about it? When there's nowhere to go on pavements, or stretches of road where there can be puddles lining the street for 10, 15, 20 yards? What do you do then?

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Yeah he deliberately drove into a puddle,

OK small point (second time I've made it in this thread!)

He was a she!!!

This happened where I live in Plymouth, so we have the driving seat on the right (actually so do you in Oz land right??) any who the guys voice is the passenger filming it and egging her on, the driver is most definatly of the female persuasion...

Small point but I feel it's important - men make better drivers

What do you want to bet that the kids ask the driver to do it so that they could be late or ditch school.

Yes kids are tricky and would do just that.

Originally posted by Remixtup
And since when do you get fined for something that could have happened.

It happens every day in Texas. It's called DWI/DUI (Driving While Intoxicated/Driving Under the Influence).

You get arrested, fined, and/or imprisoned for events that could have, but didn't happen.

I'm sure there are other examples. (Driving at a speed beyond the posted limit through a construction zone while workers are present).

Originally posted by slimpickens93

Originally posted by Remixtup
And since when do you get fined for something that could have happened.

It happens every day in Texas. It's called DWI/DUI (Driving While Intoxicated/Driving Under the Influence).

You get arrested, fined, and/or imprisoned for events that could have, but didn't happen.

I'm sure there are other examples. (Driving at a speed beyond the posted limit through a construction zone while workers are present).

Just to point out something else about this illogical kind of thinking. The driver didn't get cited for something that could have happened. They got cited for something that did happen. Driving recklessly.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by Nutter]

reply to post by loam


Can't blame them for being young at heart.

I watched the video, was pretty funny

Originally posted by Nutter
I agree with chiron.

Would it be so funny if this driver (who by the videos posted was driving pretty fast) lost control and hit a kid?

There is a phenomenon called hydroplaning.

Hydroplaning or aquaplaning by the tires of a road vehicle occurs when a layer of water builds between the rubber tires of the vehicle and the road surface, leading to the loss of traction and thus preventing the vehicle from responding to control inputs such as steering, braking or accelerating.

en.wikipedia.org...(tires)

I say the guy deserves the fines.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Nutter]

So now were judging people based on "what-if's"?

We should we stop holding Nascar because what if the cars crashed into the crowd?

Should we jail you because what-if you were a terrorist?

reply to post by Tiloke


There was no "what-if". Driving at a high rate of speed through a puddle is considered by law to be "driving recklessly". The driver drove through the puddle at a high rate of speed, therefore was charged with "reckless driving". I don't see how that is considered a "what-if"? Unless you consider the whole "reckless driving" law a "what-if".



[edit on 16-10-2009 by Nutter]

reply to post by Tiloke


Don't be so daft. It is not only very dangerous, but also very unpleasant for those on the receiving end. And yes, you can be prosecuted for doing something dangerous because of what might happen. Is it not better to try and prevent things from happening, rather than "reacting" later on?

Or are you advocating letting people do what they want, regardless of the impact on others? By your logic, people should be allowed to drive at 150MPH through residential streets. After all, people only might get killed.

This has been illegal for decades, it's in the highway code and every driver should know this.