1

Topic: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Overtook at night. The beginnings on discontinuous, finished on discontinuous, but in the middle there was a contiguity with short sections continuous. It appeared that for me on overtaking were built in  (on the circuit and it is drawn).  included a chandelier only on  overtaking. On court I do not want to waste time precisely. Whether there is a chance at analysis to turn them  what they provoked/compelled me to finish overtaking, beginning the manoeuvre while I overtaking did not finish? What they broke traffic regulations without including a flasher, probably, it is not necessary to specify? With curiosity, what probability what the rights take away? If it is important, this second violation for the experience. The first time was "do not pass the pedestrian".

2

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> If it is important, this second violation for the experience. The first time was "do not pass the pedestrian". More important experience period. Suddenly it only 2 days.

3

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: whether AC> There is a chance at analysis to turn them  what they provoked/compelled me to finish overtaking, beginning the manoeuvre while I overtaking did not finish? Any. To prevent you to be built in reversely, being behind, they could not. Accordingly, any "forced" here and does not smell. , unique your chance - to rest what did not make out this piece continuous (a sign "overtaking at night it is forbidden" there not was, I hope?) also broke . If very much carries, you will get off with the penalty. AC> what they broke traffic regulations without including a flasher, probably, it is not necessary to specify? And they broke nothing. They simply went to themselves easy without a flasher, and here the infringer... AC> With curiosity, what probability what the rights take away? 99 %

4

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, Lexey, you wrote: L> And they broke nothing. They simply went to themselves easy without a flasher On  through the continuous?

5

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

L> Any. To prevent you to be built in reversely, being behind, they could not. Accordingly, any "forced" here and does not smell. We admit, I would see change of a marking and would know that in a rear-view mirror like close I would see headlights of GAI officers. I all the same would be afraid strongly to press on a brake (and it would be necessary to press strongly because the marking was close). In  the side on a band, the roadside is not asphalted. Not optimally if aim to live longer and to be more whole? L> , unique your chance - to rest what did not make out this piece continuous (a sign "overtaking at night it is forbidden" there not was, I hope?) Also broke . If very much carries, you will get off with the penalty. AC>> what they broke traffic regulations without including a flasher, probably, it is not necessary to specify? L> And they broke nothing. They simply went to themselves easy without a flasher, and here the infringer... They, without including a flasher, began overtaking while I yet did not release . Or so now it is possible? AC>> with curiosity, what probability what the rights take away? L> 99 % hope, as here you were mistaken in an estimation.

6

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

L>> And they broke nothing. They simply went to themselves easy without a flasher On  through the continuous? Yes it not dangerously and at all my business, and here that they got out while to me can it is required  to be built in reversely, it already afflicts.

7

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: If it would not be desirable to waste time on court it is necessary to search for the lawyer who works with was specific this separation  and all there knows. For a feasible bribe it organizes the penalty provided by the law. If most and under the law to avoid vessels it is possible only force of the charm and eloquence. Thus arguments be natural charges of GAI officers in what cannot or. It is possible  to any shaggy decision of the Supreme court which recognized that if left on  without violation of rules, and returned already where it was impossible - that it is not qualified as departure on  in violation. Well and it is simple on  to speak, did not see, had not time to brake etc., give better I the penalty I will pay and I will go.

8

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: If there was no similar violation earlier and do not want in court at once recognize fault that the demon , was tired, did not note a marking, and generally more so will not be. As soon as you will start to stand up for the rights dialogue ends at once also a companion the major silently sends in court. Where recognize fault that the demon , was tired, did not note a marking, and generally more so will not be. I was in a similar situation and started to justify, try to prove the innocence. Silently received the summons. After the chief quitted its assistant told to me that I not correctly selected tactics of behavior and it was necessary "to recognize at once fault that the demon , was tired, did not note a marking, and generally more so will not be." In court I recognized at once fault etc. - left with the rights and the penalty.

9

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> Overtook at night. The beginnings on discontinuous, finished on discontinuous, but in the middle there was a contiguity with short sections continuous. A pancake! Did not find a roller on a tube: in any program on  the person in shape  assorts situations. We have: all band is occupied by machines standing in cork. The frame goes round them on , including through passage, about which continuous. A question to spectators: what did it break? The answer: as it did not intersect continuous, formally violation is not present. AC> it appeared that for me on overtaking were built in  (on the circuit and it is drawn).  included a chandelier only on  overtaking. And on it .  to Overtake on | it is dangerous! Continuous there draw at all for plan performance under penalties!

10

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

AC>> It appeared that for me on overtaking were built in  (on the circuit and it is drawn).  included a chandelier only on  overtaking. B> and on it . Well, but stamp I on a brake, they would arrive to me in a luggage carrier.  there there was no place. B>  to Overtake on | it is dangerous! Continuous there draw at all for plan performance under penalties! Yes, I will be cleverer. Signs an ahtung-adjunction I will consider as overtaking  too. It is strange that in driving school once on it did not accent. Well or I for some reason forgot.

11

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote:  I to you will tell AC> Overtook at night. The beginnings on discontinuous, finished on discontinuous, but in the middle there was a contiguity with short sections continuous. AC> It appeared that for me on overtaking were built in  (on the circuit and it is drawn).  included a chandelier only on  overtaking. AC> on court I do not want to waste time precisely. And it is correct. Come on the first meeting and tell "it is guilty, I repent, take away the rights". Then 10 days go, hand over the rights and through 4 (or 6) months to you them return. Whether AC> there is a chance at analysis to turn them  what they provoked/compelled me to finish overtaking, beginning the manoeuvre while I overtaking did not finish? No. Analysis - an empty place. That at me was, I came not prepared that Vlad there with them butted 2 days. One figs - about what. AC> what they broke traffic regulations without including a flasher, probably, it is not necessary to specify? Video is? To the inspector check, and to you is not present. Generally as lawyers - photo-video advise fixing of a place of violation. A marking, signs that is visible that is not visible. In the protocol not to write (though already late) that it is guilty and you repent. It do not agree, did not break. Then already in court to show that a marking in this place discontinuous (erased, if it so), here photo-video fixing. If they removed video, all the same to court it "lose". AC> With curiosity, what probability what the rights take away? Here Lexey wrote 99 %. I would tell 100. Especially if in the protocol wrote something like "Broke, since did not see a marking"? AC> If it is important, this second violation for the experience. The first time was "do not pass the pedestrian". Well to you it at least does not refine a karma. Looking when was. If within a year goes as "aggravating" though and business does not concern at all. If later (or earlier?) Than one year ago - that does not go in any way, the karma remains is pure. If you want to "be thrown off" faster - surrender at the first meeting. If you want to pull time - appeal, you will tighten for couple of months. If you want not to give the right - address to the lawyer, it is desirable somewhere in a violation place. To transit a quest most - already two  for this year. The third you will be?

12

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, biochemist, you wrote: B>  to Overtake on | it is dangerous! Continuous there draw at all for plan performance under penalties!  by rules it is possible to overtake at a crossroads if you go on the principal. What moron invented it - I do not know, but it is the fact.

13

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> Well, but stamp I on a brake, they would arrive to me in a luggage carrier.  there there was no place. Sharply to brake without the well-founded reason it is impossible. In all other cases it is guilty back (observe a distance). AC> Yes, I will be cleverer. Signs an ahtung-adjunction I will consider as overtaking  too. It is strange that in driving school once on it did not accent. Well or I for some reason forgot. In driving school learned: to overtake at a crossroads it is possible if you go on principal and there is no solid line. And in my region it is practically everywhere. But seen enough of different situations I for itself installed a rule not to overtake at all at a crossroads. And also not to go round stopped before  in a court yard to the right (most likely it lets out someone).

14

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC>>> It appeared that for me on overtaking were built in  (on the circuit and it is drawn).  included a chandelier only on  overtaking. B>> and on it . AC> Well, but stamp I on a brake, they would arrive to me in a luggage carrier.  there there was no place. B>>  to Overtake on | it is dangerous! Continuous there draw at all for plan performance under penalties! AC> yes, I will be cleverer. Signs an ahtung-adjunction I will consider as overtaking  too. And what for a sign "contiguity"? Perpendicular (more often) strips in a red triangle? It is a crossroads. Contiguity is an adjoining territory. Hardly on a route it takes place to be. By the way! If I a sign correctly  you went on principal road and overtaking am resolved. http://ruspdd.ru/journal/181-obgon-na-perekrestke/ Then it is possible to tell in analysis group that saw a sign "crossroads" (you can take a picture of it) that by rules overtaking is forbidden at an adjustable crossroads, on nonadjustable when you go on the minor road and at a crossroads of equivalent roads. You went on principal, could overtake, made overtaking, a marking in the dark did not see, it there  is visible (can take a picture), or on it the waggon which you overtook, therefore "Rafik " called in. You can smoke on a subject of mismatch of signs and a marking. At least "at a crossroads no lanes are present". But with statements it is better to the lawyer. One wrong word and yourself you will dig.

15

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

U> But with statements it is better to the lawyer. One wrong word and yourself you will dig. Yes, a nonadjustable crossroads. Do not intend to butt. Intend in analysis group fairly  that while overtook, looked out and considered headlights ahead and behind, change of a marking did not see. Probably, it would be possible to tell that  saw, but selecting  before headlights behind and to finish manoeuvre, selected . But it at least will be a lie.

16

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: U>> But with statements it is better to the lawyer. One wrong word and yourself you will dig. AC> yes, a nonadjustable crossroads. Do not intend to butt. Intend in analysis group fairly  that while overtook, looked out and considered headlights ahead and behind, change of a marking did not see. Still the judge "scolds" you that you inattentively go AC> Probably, it would be possible to tell that  saw, but selecting  before headlights behind and to finish manoeuvre, selected . But it at least will be a lie. In general if in the protocol already wrote "is guilty" (not important for what reason) or simply did not write disagreement - the rights select. The rights are necessary to you? Then through the correct lawyers make correctly formulated explanatory. With circuits. The sign saw, the crossroads, principal road, overtook - all on traffic regulations. Therefore - DID NOT BREAK. Say lies that a marking it was not visible (it is badly put, the machine drove into it, blinded counter headlights). Prove that it there is is an error so should not be. Well it so, . The main thing - it is not guilty. And remaining lawyers tell.

17

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> Overtook at night. The beginnings on discontinuous, finished on discontinuous, but in the middle there was a contiguity with short sections continuous. In principal road the cop assorts this situation. And a situation such. A crossroads to the minor road, at a crossroads the continuous. The car, to the continuous begins overtaking on , continuous does not intersect and after the termination continuous when the discontinuous begins is returned on the place.  the cop "the driver did not break a rule  did not intersect continuous"!!!! Number of principal road I will not prompt, tomorrow to holiday I go, where that in archives lies this video, but  I will not search. If you will find it file about deprivation. I think it is possible ,  after that clarification, did not become it is soared at overtakings at the minor crossroads (though potentially they very dangerous and not because of a solid line)

18

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> It is admissible, I would see change of a marking and would know that in a rear-view mirror like close I would see headlights of GAI officers. I all the same would be afraid strongly to press on a brake (and it would be necessary to press strongly because the marking was close). In  the side on a band, the roadside is not asphalted. AC> it is not optimal if aim to live longer and to be more whole? Your fears and criteria of an optimality in court will not excite anybody. Brake and return to a band physically could - could. Means broke not forcedly. It is free. AC> they, without including a flasher, began overtaking while I yet did not release . Or so now it is possible? So it was always possible. It is impossible to overtake the overtaking. The direct prohibition of overtaking "" was not and is not present. AC> I Hope, as here you were mistaken in an estimation. Hope, but convenient footwear for the pedestrian walks prepare is better. Here was to steam  from people in whom deprivation put more low, simply attributing it  violation instead of the real. And at you and to attribute it is necessary nothing.

19

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, HoseCo, you wrote: HC> It is possible  to any shaggy decision of the Supreme court which recognized that if left on  without violation of rules, and returned already where it was impossible - that it is not qualified as departure on  in violation. Does not help. The treatment of departure on  exchanged for a long time already.

20

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, Lexey, you wrote: AC>> They, without including a flasher, began overtaking while I yet did not release . Or so now it is possible? L> so it was always possible. It is impossible to overtake the overtaking. The direct prohibition of overtaking "" was not and is not present. 11.2. The driver is forbidden to fulfill overtaking in cases if the vehicle, moving ahead, produces overtaking or a hindrance detour.

21

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

AC>> Overtook at night. The beginnings on discontinuous, finished on discontinuous, but in the middle there was a contiguity with short sections continuous. AWS> in principal road the cop assorts this situation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk64C8ydbX8 yes many such videos, but will not be I to  . Besides, while sat at them in the machine,  to me something told about that was any or the decision or still any  and something exchanged.

22

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, vsb, you wrote: L>> So it was always possible. It is impossible to overtake the overtaking. The direct prohibition of overtaking "" was not and is not present. vsb> 11.2. The driver is forbidden to fulfill overtaking in cases if the vehicle, moving ahead, produces overtaking or a hindrance detour. , and now remains is sensitive to think a head, and to understand that if this moving ahead of HARDWARE A overtakes HARDWARE B you TC B cannot physically overtake it (if you do not hang at A on a tail that anybody will not do in senses) if you do not overtake thus A, and to understand that it is a question about the prohibition of overtaking of HARDWARE A. That I also wrote above.

23

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, Lexey, you wrote: AC>> what they broke traffic regulations without including a flasher, probably, it is not necessary to specify? L> And they broke nothing. They simply went to themselves easy without a flasher, and here the infringer... Why they could not include a flasher to prevent violation? Clearly that swine as usual...

24

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, Tolyan, you wrote: T> I was in a similar situation and started to justify, try to prove the innocence. Silently received the summons. After the chief quitted its assistant told to me that I not correctly selected tactics of behavior and it was necessary "to recognize at once fault that the demon , was tired, did not note a marking, and generally more so will not be." The boot licked? Fie here that for the people... Why it is impossible normally and it is proud: "I Twirled your court,  and a marking... A propeller on the..."

25

Re: Overtaking at journey of contiguity and on a tail

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> Yes many such videos, but will not be I to  . AC> Besides, while sat at them in the machine,  to me something told about that was any or the decision or still any  and something exchanged. Exactly. On new editings if you appeared on , separated continuous - even if you did not intersect it, you broke. Well and upon - at me on a route on two-band  crossroads - and anywhere are not present a sign on principal road and everywhere before a crossroads there is a continuous. Though on like as the second road a first coat - i.e. minor turns out that often at a crossroads, and to overtake it turns out it is impossible. Though the sign Overtaking is forbidden hung up .