And you will understand. Legally on most of the planet. If condition mean you cannot proceed safely for yourself,. You are risking the life of others and are requiredno to drive. Inconvenience getting wet or being late at your destination in no way excludes you from that legal responsibility.

And as a disabled person with balance and visual impairment ho used to be able to drive. But hnded in my licence as soon as I was unsafe.

I am really getting pissed of with the number of modern drivers who seem to think driving is a right not a responsibility.

When you (for the sake of argument. I am sure you are not this dumb) choose to continue driving when you cannot see if the way ahead is safe. You are clearly indicating that anyone with stability issues of any form. Has in you opinion, no right to be out in public. In case they fall in the road and get knocked out.

Because you are saying if "weather, time of day, visibility, reaction time and all those related incident/accident elements." Mean I should legally stop driving. I consider the risk to your life. Less important then myself getting to my destination at a reasonable time.

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Anybody that has ever driven at night in the rain in a rural area would, per your judgement, not be able to have a license. People do sometimes drive off the road into fields in those circumstances, but a maintained road suddenly being non-existent is not even on the radar (and it is maintained until this point as there are resident’s driveways shortly before the bridge).

[–] HumanPenguin -1 points 1 year ago

Bull shit. They are legally expected to drive at a speed where they can safly stop within there visual range.

If your lights are not showing enough of the road for you to see within your stopping distance ce you are require to slow down. If you cannot drive slow enough to stop. You are required not to drive.

DRIVING IS NOT A FUCKING RIGHT.

Sorry caps were a accident. But I'm leaving it.