Why can horses just **** everywhere?

Pottsey · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:22

Gammawolf said:
There's no spinning anything, as demonstrated everyone is selfish so all you're doing is stating the blindingly obvious for no apparent reason. It's just a fact of life that people look after their own interests. Even you my friend are selfish.

The difference is what you do is dangerous and can kill or injury other people. Being selfish in a way you know is dangerous to other people is vastly different to those other selfish examples you gave.

You are also going against the THINK! and Highwaycode rules and law say. So if there was an accident it wouldn't be the riders fault but your fault. If someone was killed or hurt you would be the one in trouble not the rider.

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:29

wordy said:
Or you could just not be so selfish.

Surely the minority on horseback causing delays to the majority in cars are the selfish ones?

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:33

Dis86 said:
Surely the minority on horseback causing delays to the majority in cars are the selfish ones?

Right, is driving slowly for a couple of minutes (at most) such a big problem, compared to spooking a horse which could cause injury & death to not only it's rider but other road users?

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:35

Gammawolf said:
There's no spinning anything, as demonstrated everyone is selfish so all you're doing is stating the blindingly obvious for no apparent reason. It's just a fact of life that people look after their own interests. Even you my friend are selfish.

This.\/

Pottsey said:
The difference is what you do is dangerous and can kill or injury other people. Being selfish in a way you know is dangerous to other people is vastly different to those other selfish examples you gave.

You are also going against the THINK! and Highwaycode rules and law say. So if there was an accident it wouldn't be the riders fault but your fault. If someone was killed or hurt you would be the one in trouble not the rider.

I really hate using the rolleyes smiley but the length people will go to to justify their selfish & rude behaviour on these forums is pathetic.

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:42

wordy said:
Right, is driving slowly for a couple of minutes (at most) such a big problem, compared to spooking a horse which could cause injury & death to not only it's rider but other road users?

But the horse rider knows the consequences of riding on the road. So they could make the choice not to.

Pottsey · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:44

Dis86 said:
But the horse rider knows the consequences of riding on the road. So they could make the choice not to.

Make a choice not to do what? The horse rider is following the law and rules. The consequences of a horse on the road are perfectly reasonable when the horse riders follower the rules.

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:46

Dis86 said:
But the horse rider knows the consequences of riding on the road. So they could make the choice not to.

Or other road users could be less selfish and over take slow enough so as to not spook the horse?

Gammawolf · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:52

Pottsey said:
The difference is what you do is dangerous and can kill or injury other people. Being selfish in a way you know is dangerous to other people is vastly different to those other selfish examples you gave.

You are also going against the THINK! and Highwaycode rules and law say. So if there was an accident it wouldn't be the riders fault but your fault. If someone was killed or hurt you would be the one in trouble not the rider.

It's not dangerous though, because the animal is comfortable on the road with normal road conditions. If it is not comfortable then it is infact the rider that is endangering their own life and the horses. Drivers are not responsible for the horses position on the road, the rider is.

But in any case the THINK! campaign is woefully unspecific and pretty useless. Not only do they tell you specifically not to rev your engine, as in they want 0 revs in your engine (when it would be better worded to keep engine revs low if that's what they were aiming for). They don't distinguish between different engines or exhaust configurations. They'd be better off stating a dB level to account for the person in a 1.4L petrol or the ricer with a 5.0L and custom exhaust. But sure if your horse gets spooked by a 1.4L engine that needs to rev moderately in order to overtake then it must be the drivers fault for the inadequate mental state your horse.

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 11:56

wordy said:
Or other road users could be less selfish and over take slow enough so as to not spook the horse?

Again. I go back to the minority of horse riders causing problems for the vast majority of other road users.

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:00

Dis86 said:
Again. I go back to the minority of horse riders causing problems for the vast majority of other road users.

And again I go back to asking is driving slowly for a couple of minutes (at most) to overtake a horse safely such a big problem?

Pottsey · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:16

Gammawolf said:
It's not dangerous though, because the animal is comfortable on the road with normal road conditions. If it is not comfortable then it is infact the rider that is endangering their own life and the horses. Drivers are not responsible for the horses position on the road, the rider is.

But in any case the THINK! campaign is woefully unspecific and pretty useless. Not only do they tell you specifically not to rev your engine, as in they want 0 revs in your engine (when it would be better worded to keep engine revs low if that's what they were aiming for). They don't distinguish between different engines or exhaust configurations. They'd be better off stating a dB level to account for the person in a 1.4L petrol or the ricer with a 5.0L and custom exhaust. But sure if your horse gets spooked by a 1.4L engine that needs to rev moderately in order to overtake then it must be the drivers fault for the inadequate mental state your horse.

Yes the a rider is responsible for the position and shouldn’t be in the middle of the road without good reason. The driver is responsible for overtaking in a sensible safe manner. Revving you engine next to an animal is not normal road conditions. Drivers are responsible as law says “Do not scare animals by sounding your horn, revving your engine or accelerating rapidly” It doesn’t mean 0 revs.

“your horse gets spooked by a 1.4L engine that needs to rev moderately in order to overtake then it must be the drivers fault for the inadequate mental state your horse.”

Your average horse is not going to get spooked by an average vehicle overtaking at a reasonable pace with reasonable revs. Anyway a 1.4L engine that needs to rev moderately to overtake is not classed as Revving your engine. Revving your engine normally means to accelerate sharply or to have high revs: It doesn’t mean you have to run at 0 revs don’t be silly.

It doesn’t matter what mental state the horse is in as it’s the drivers responsibility to overtake in a sensible manner and if they don’t then it’s the drivers fault. Revving your engine is not sensible and treating them like other slow vehicles isn't sensible either. You should be overtaking horses a lot slower then you would other slow vehicles. That's what the law says and it there to save life's.

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:21

Gammawolf said:
But in any case the THINK! campaign is woefully unspecific and pretty useless. Not only do they tell you specifically not to rev your engine, as in they want 0 revs in your engine (when it would be better worded to keep engine revs low if that's what they were aiming for). They don't distinguish between different engines or exhaust configurations. They'd be better off stating a dB level to account for the person in a 1.4L petrol or the ricer with a 5.0L and custom exhaust. But sure if your horse gets spooked by a 1.4L engine that needs to rev moderately in order to overtake then it must be the drivers fault for the inadequate mental state your horse.

You know fine well what the are getting at. Do you honestly live your live to such a black & white, take everything literally degree?

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:26

wordy said:
And again I go back to asking is driving slowly for a couple of minutes (at most) to overtake a horse safely such a big problem?

It's causing an inconvenience so yes. We're talking about drivers being considerate. Well I'm pointing out that through the very act of being on a road, horse riders are being inconsiderate.

traveyb · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:43

Dis86 said:
It's causing an inconvenience so yes. We're talking about drivers being considerate. Well I'm pointing out that through the very act of being on a road, horse riders are being inconsiderate.

They were there well before cars

Having ridden quite a few times on the road, it's very scary having some berk in a 4x4 driving within a couple of feet of the horse considering the highway code states "Pass wide and slow when overtaking; giving the horse plenty of room".

I've heard about people driving too close and the horse either bolting or kicking the car

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:43

Dis86 said:
It's causing an inconvenience so yes. We're talking about drivers being considerate. Well I'm pointing out that through the very act of being on a road, horse riders are being inconsiderate.

Really? A couple of minutes is too much of an inconvenience for you to over take a horse & rider safely?

Again, the length people will go to to justify their selfish & rude behaviour on these forums is pathetic.

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:53

wordy said:
Really? A couple of minutes is too much of an inconvenience for you to over take a horse & rider safely?

Again, the length people will go to to justify their selfish & rude behaviour on these forums is pathetic.

So you're saying it's ok for the rider to inconvenience multiple people?

Dis86 · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:53

traveyb said:
They were there well before cars

Having ridden quite a few times on the road, it's very scary having some berk in a 4x4 driving within a couple of feet of the horse considering the highway code states "Pass wide and slow when overtaking; giving the horse plenty of room".

I've heard about people driving too close and the horse either bolting or kicking the car

Look up the word obsolete.

wordy · 28 Jul 2015 at 12:58

Dis86 said:
So you're saying it's ok for the rider to inconvenience multiple people?

Are you saving driving slowly for a couple of minutes, at the most is too much of an inconvenience to bear?

neil_g · 28 Jul 2015 at 13:03

Gammawolf said:
I just treat them as other slow vehicles and rev/go as high as I need to in order to pass them. If the horse can't handle a bit of engine noise and a car going past them at the speed limit then it's the riders fault for taking the horse somewhere where it's not comfortable.

HCW

"214
Animals. When passing animals, drive slowly. Give them plenty of room and be ready to stop. Do not scare animals by sounding your horn, revving your engine or accelerating rapidly once you have passed them. Look out for animals being led, driven or ridden on the road and take extra care. Keep your speed down at bends and on narrow country roads. If a road is blocked by a herd of animals, stop and switch off your engine until they have left the road. Watch out for animals on unfenced roads.

215
Horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles. Be particularly careful of horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles especially when overtaking. Always pass wide and slowly. Horse riders are often children, so take extra care and remember riders may ride in double file when escorting a young or inexperienced horse or rider. Look out for horse riders’ and horse drivers’ signals and heed a request to slow down or stop. Take great care and treat all horses as a potential hazard."

Amp34 · 28 Jul 2015 at 13:03

wordy said:
To be fair it's a simple wave to acknowledge courtesy isn't that difficult.

Personally I'd be wanting to keep both hands on the reigns at the point a horse is most likely to be spooked.

That may in fact be the reason many don't wave.