Sorry if I see a car with a baby onboard sign I will always leave a bigger gap before pulling back into their lane, to me a BOB sign lets other road users know I am carrying a precious load on board and to be careful when passing me etc.

To be honest I don't see why a baby is more precious than any other life you have on board. Be it yours, a partner, a parent, family or friend.

The sign as a way to let emergency services or the like know that there is/could be a small passenger on board makes sense though.

To be honest I don't see why a baby is more precious than any other life you have on board. Be it yours, a partner, a parent, family or friend.

I see your point, but babies are a lot 'A LOT' more vunrable in case of an accident or heavy braking in that matter! :eek: I take notice of 'baby on board' signs!

I must admit to speeding, but only when it is safe to do so, and not when other cars are around me! It is a crime, and I except the punishment.

Two lots of points has certainly teached me a leason and I have slowed down accordingly...

Chris

I see your point, but babies are a lot 'A LOT' more vunrable in case of an accident or heavy braking in that matter!

I understand that, but the attitude of "I'll be more careful/leave a bigger gap etc. etc. because they have a baby" is in essence saying "I'll drive less safely if they don't have a baby on board becasue if I do crash into them, they'll get hurt less".

Surely you should leave the same gap regardles of whether there's a baby on board: a safe gap. Treat each car with the same attitude you would treat a car with a BOB sticker on and you will be a safe driver. Just seems common sense to me really. Why drive closer to a car with no baby on board than one with a baby on board? Why not worry so much about cutting up a car with no BOB sticker? etc etc.?

But anyway, I digress. Probably should get back to topic.

I understand that' date=' but the attitude of "I'll be more careful/leave a bigger gap etc. etc. because they have a baby" is in essence saying "I'll drive less safely if they don't have a baby on board becasue if I [b']do [/b]crash into them, they'll get hurt less".

Surely you should leave the same gap regardles of whether there's a baby on board: a safe gap. Treat each car with the same attitude you would treat a car with a BOB sticker on and you will be a safe driver. Just seems common sense to me really. Why drive closer to a car with no baby on board than one with a baby on board? Why not worry so much about cutting up a car with no BOB sticker? etc etc.?

But anyway, I digress. Probably should get back to topic.

Do you have kids ? I suspect not so you can't really comment about driving a car with your baby. Your perceptions change when you become a parent.

And ask to the comment about driving less safe, I didn't say that, I said I leave a bigger gap before pulling back into their lane given them extra room. Don't twist my words

Just to ask

All those who use baby on board signs, do you only display them when theres a baby in the car , I guess not as I see many cars with only one person driving to work & they have the sticker displayed, it sort of lessens the effect of the sticker.

If it was only used when there was a baby in the car all drivers would respect it more & as Tom said its meant to be for the Rescue services when they attend a wreck to know theres a kid in the car

Thats like saying how many people who teach learning drivers cover their L plates up when there isn't a learner in the car driving, cause as by law you are ment to cover them up when a learning driver is not in the car.

Do you have kids ? I suspect not so you can't really comment about driving a car with your baby. Your perceptions change when you become a parent.

And ask to the comment about driving less safe' date=' I didn't say that, I said I leave a bigger gap before pulling back into their lane given them extra room. Don't twist my words [/quote']

No, I do not have children but I'm not talking about driving a car with my baby. I'm talking about driving AROUND cars with babys in them. And to be honest I don't treat them any differently to cars with Middle aged people in, with old people in, with new drivers in. Or anything else. I leave safe gaps, I drive with caution around ANY car. I don't feel that I need to make extra streps around BOB cars, as I am being safe as it is.

I'm sure I will change my opinion when I have children, as I will want other road users to be careful around my car. But if they were careful around it anyway then I wouldn't really need to worry.

I also never said that you drive less safely. I merely said that when you say you take extra care around certain cars, it can also be taken in the way of saying you take less care around the other cars. Not that you do - just that, logically, you are doing so. Why not leave that extra gap around all the other cars on the road?

I was doing more shortly after I had overtaken' date=' but I then slowed down. They said that my average speed over however they measured it was 84mph and I was lucky that it was only a fixed penalty. I know I was speeding, but it's a big bypass that's very quite and about as safe as you'd get a bypass to be.

[/quote']

Probably just ****ed at being overtaken

To be honest I thought a good telling off would have sufficed. I know they have a job to do' date=' but stopping motorists is easy pickings. It's a shame the police aren't about when some pensioner is being mugged for 50p. If they put as much resource into proper crimes I'm sure we'd be living in a much safer place.

:([/quote']

Ah but that woudl assume the people mugging old ladies have lots of money to pay for fines, like motorists do :cynic:

Thats like saying how many people who teach learning drivers cover their L plates up when there isn't a learner in the car driving, cause as by law you are ment to cover them up when a learning driver is not in the car.

Not really.

The point Stuart is making is if you leave the 'baby on board' sign on your car when there isnt a 'baby on board' then your rendering these signs pretty useless as if you had a crash the fire and rescue services would be looking for a 'baby on board' when there isnt one in there.

If you get what I mean.

I don't take any notice of BOB signs to be honest, because its more than likely that there ISNT a baby on board at all, so therefore crying wolf.

edit: Oh and I didnt think it was illegal to use L-plates when under instruction, after it was explained by my driving instructor years ago that he didnt see the point in green-L or -P plates, as someone coudl just stick the red L-plate back on if they needed some extra time learning by themselves.

Well lets just hope you never cut me up when I am carrying my little girl on board.

And and you are ment to cover the L plates when you are not using them, read the DSA book "The official DSA guide to driving the essential skills"

I don't take any notice of BOB signs to be honest' date=' because its more than likely that there ISNT a baby on board at all, so therefore crying wolf.

.[/quote']

Err,more likely there is;)

Err,more likely there is;)

Loz you understand where I am coming from

Off the top of my head I can think of three families I know who have those signs. They have them on both their vehicles each. I know for a fact that none of the dads take them [their children] to work with them which is majority use of their cars, and I also know that the mothers drive around wthout their kids sometimes, so even in these examples a majority of the time is driven without the sign.

Also, one of them in conversation at the pub one evening said they leave it on there because they believe it makes people drive better around them; their "babies" are now 3 and 5.

Be interesting to run a survey to find out the percentage of time BOB-signed cars have a baby in.

Didn't know about the L-plate thing, learn something new every day

I'm not quite sure why you think I'm going to cut you up. Do you cut people up often when they arent displaying a BOB-sign?

I'm not quite sure why you think I'm going to cut you up. Do you cut people up often when they arent displaying a BOB-sign?

My point exactly.

I'm not quite sure why you think I'm going to cut you up. Do you cut people up often when they arent displaying a BOB-sign?

The standard of driving has gone down drastically in the last 15 year since I started. "Cutting up" as you put it has become the norm, try driving down the M25 and you will see what I mean. People driving to close to each other "Tail Gating" has also become a norm, even though the highway code advise you should leave a 2 second gap between cars people continue to drive on your bumper, I have also seen this in the rain where people drive practically in your boot.

I don't think that people understand how serious an accident can be because they are encapsulated within their cars and get a false sense of security.

Also MSM (Mirror, Signal, Manover) seems to be lost in translation, if you signal it does not automatically give you the right to pull out as alot of inexperienced drivers think.

The BOB sign IMHO means I have a little baby on board and please do not take any risks and make me brake sharply, turn sharply etc etc as even though the driver might survive a crash a baby may not.

When you have young children and you drive on a busy road you tend to think alot more about other drivers, well I do anyway.

I see your point' date=' but babies are a lot 'A LOT' more vunrable in case of an accident or heavy braking in that matter! :eek: I take notice of 'baby on board' signs!

I must admit to speeding, but only when it is safe to do so, and not when other cars are around me! It is a crime, and I except the punishment.

Two lots of points has certainly teached me a leason and I have slowed down accordingly...

Chris[/quote']

Babies are in general alot LESS vulnerable in an accident, as they dont tense up, and injuries sustained are usually much less severe than any adult occupants of the same vehicle. And secured properly in a suitable and properly fitted seat, heavy braking in case of an emergency shouldnt affect them either.

Anyway, even though your quote is in this post, the following isn't directed at you.

Speeding. I love folks who make comment on the safety aspect of someone else speeding when they were tucked up at home at the time, or certainly nowhere near the offence. How can you decide that it was or wasn't safe to exceed the speed limit on that particular road, at that particular time. If you can do that, you surely posses a unique gift and perhaps could put it to better use for the good of the human race.

I agree though that if you speed and you get caught, tough poo.

Christ, I didn't realise there were so many self righteous people on this forum. Not directed at anyone in particular

For what it's worth MTPW:

1. Yes speeding is a crime in my eyes and the eyes of the law. However, imo 40 mph in a 30 zone is a henious crime whereas 84 mph on a bypass or other fast road in the correct conditions etc is much less serious and should be treated as such.

2. I often drive in excess of the speed limits because I like it and most of us on here do aswell I'm pretty certain as do the majority of road users. So get off the podium!! However, I will only do so when I think it is safe to and fully accept the consequences should I get nicked. i have 3 points btw.

3. BOB stickers are an absolute waste of time. No-one takes any notice and why should they? We should all be obeying the 2 second rule anyway!! They're only purpose is to prove to the world that the driver isn't a Jaffa and firing blanks... again just my opinion and I have 2 kids.

There are two totally different discussions going on here:D

The standard of driving has gone down drastically in the last 15 year since I started. "Cutting up" as you put it has become the norm' date=' try driving down the M25 and you will see what I mean. People driving to close to each other "Tail Gating" has also become a norm, even though the highway code advise you should leave a 2 second gap between cars people continue to drive on your bumper, I have also seen this in the rain where people drive practically in your boot.

I don't think that people understand how serious an accident can be because they are encapsulated within their cars and get a false sense of security.

Also MSM (Mirror, Signal, Manover) seems to be lost in translation, if you signal it does not automatically give you the right to pull out as alot of inexperienced drivers think.

[/quote']

Agree entirely, I came from an era when most people started on Bikes because they could not afford a car, Personally this taught me how to read a road surface, how every other driver is treated as a threat and a very valuable lesson, it might not be your fault but it still hurts.

People these days are cocuned in there nice warm box with all the airbags & feel that they are not vulnerable, perhaps they ought to all spend 6 months on a bike but I guess the carnage would be horrendous.

People think they are invincible & I think until youve actually been involved in an accident you dont quite realise how vulnerable you are.

The authorities these days have this preocupation with speed being the no 1 cause of the mayhem on the roads, its not, its poor driving but speeding is easy to enforce, anything else is subject to interpritation & therefore costly to enforce

Scenario - You drive down a 30mph road at 40mph and hit someone, chances are they are dead, now hit them at 30mph and there is more of a chance the person will survive.........

If the person is dead after the first time you hit them then they will still be dead when you drive back and hit them again, even if you are driving slower.

If the person is dead after the first time you hit them then they will still be dead when you drive back and hit them again, even if you are driving slower.

:rofl:

The authorities these days have this preocupation with speed being the no 1 cause of the mayhem on the roads, its not, its poor driving but speeding is easy to enforce, anything else is subject to interpritation & therefore costly to enforce

I'd agree and I think driving offences should start at dangerous driving and go up from there. If you've not potentially put someone in danger then what have you really done wrong? For a crime to be committed there has to be a victim, who is the victim of a bog standard speeding offence?

I'd agree and I think driving offences should start at dangerous driving and go up from there. If you've not potentially put someone in danger then what have you really done wrong? For a crime to be committed there has to be a victim, who is the victim of a bog standard speeding offence?

What a refreshing point of view mate :thumbup: