Level crossing stupidity...

[Reorte]

1 hour ago, ejstubbs said:

 

You could use the same argument about speed limits - and people do.  It's not dangerous per se to drive at 80-90mph on a deserted motorway, but it's still against the law and you can be pulled over, talked to and - depending partly on how you do in the attitude test - prosecuted for it.

 

You can and I would, I think being too rigid about speed limit enforcement is also counter-productive, that it decreases, not increases respect for the law and hence increases the chances of it being ignored where it unquestionably is dangerous to break the limit.

 

Quote

I am reminded of the oft-cited story of the Van Halen concert contract which, amongst other things, required that a bowl of M&Ms be provided in their dressing room from which all the brown ones had been removed.  Many people assumed that this was just typical diva-like behaviour from rock stars.  In fact, though, they put it in as a check that the promoter & venue had read and actioned all the requirements of the contract - which also included much more important technical details about the strength of the stage, the safety of the power supplies and so forth - issues which absolutely could be life-threatening.  If they found brown M&Ms in their bowl then that was a strong clue that they needed to double-check that all the other requirements had been met - or even pull out altogether.

 

And it's an approach that stands a chance of being counterproductive. Stick in some silly-looking requirements and you increase the chance of your more serious ones not being taken seriously, you increase the chance of "we'll do the M&Ms because they'll notice that but we can't be bothered with the rest of this nonsense." Make a daft-seeming rule and the most responsible (the ones who need the rules the least anyway) will go along, the worst, who wouldn't bother anyway, still won't, and you've pushed the ones in the middle in the wrong direction because you've reduced the chance of them thinking you're doing what you're doing for a damned good reason.

 

Quote

Similarly, if people can't be arsed to follow some fairly straightforward and (in theory - see point below) easy to police rules, just because they decide that there's no good reason to obey them, that is quite likely to be indicative of a more profoundly dismissive attitude to compliance generally.

No, that's heading far too much into "these are the rules, you must obey them, end of story" territory, which doesn't help the situation. It is not an attitude that increases general respect for the law. If the law, police, whoever, can't convince people that the law is what it is for a good reason and that people are being convicted for a good reason, not simply because "that happens to be against the rules" then they've lost. It's a two-way street, people should respect the law and the law should respect the people. Respect always has to be earned. Demanding it will never get it, the closest you'll get is a show of it while you're being watched.

 

It is the case that more responsible people are more likely to stick to the rules regardless but how do you increase the number of responsible people? By convincing them that the laws are there for a damned good reason, and the more arbitrary you get about them, the more black and white, "this is what the law says, end of" the fewer people you'll get convinced, more and more will start regarding them as existing for their own sake and be less inclined to pay attention if they think they can get away with it. You might not like it but that's how people think, and it is absolutely necessary to take that into account. If people agree most of the time they'll give the benefit of the doubt, that someone else knows better, the rest of the time. If they don't agree then they're more likely to ignore areas where the really, really should. There's a responsibility on both sides here.

 

Remember what we want is for people to not to do something dangerous, not simply to obey rules for the sake of rules. Go too far down the latter and you'll start to lose out on the former.

 

Quote

Of course, the above does presuppose that some kind of enforcement does happen...  (An opinion piece in The Guardian today used the phrase "The UK's feral roads" in its headline.)

 

 Indeed, a lack of enforcement unquestionably makes things a lot worse (and starts a vicious cycle going where you end up needing even more just to get back to where you were).

Edited May 9, 2019 by Reorte

[talisman56]

In my area the local council/police have ceased to operate the speed cameras - they're still there, but not in operation. Someone noticed the omission in the Council budget and asked a straight question to which they (unusually) got a straight answer. So, the only people who actually slow down for them are from 'out of area'.

 

The police and 'Neighbourhood Speed Watch' occasionally put in an appearance at the usual speed black spots, which nearly everyone knows, so are ready if someone comes in the other direction flashing their headlights (another offence). I passed one earlier today going in the 'other direction' and was happy to see traffic speeding past oblivious of the trap they were approaching - I don't flash them because I believe if they're speeding they will also do other things against the traffic laws so if they're off the road...

Edited May 9, 2019 by talisman56

[johnofwessex]

What I dont understand though is how anyone can think its safe to use a hand held mobile & drive

 

Never mind a driving ban, it calls for incaceration in an institution for the criminally insane

[lmsforever]

Well at least a certain well known ex footie player is now banned for six months for using his mobile whilst driving ,there is a god after all.

[Budgie]

Maybe that'll do some good. People who wouldn't react when Joe Bloggs gets banned for six months may do so when Beckham does.

[kevinlms]

12 hours ago, Budgie said:

Maybe that'll do some good. People who wouldn't react when Joe Bloggs gets banned for six months may do so when Beckham does.

If they don't like Beckham, they will probably just laugh and carry on as usual - Just like Beckham did!

[jim.snowdon]

12 hours ago, Budgie said:

Maybe that'll do some good. People who wouldn't react when Joe Bloggs gets banned for six months may do so when Beckham does.

Probably by putting it down to bad luck on his part. The chances of getting caught are still perceived as very low, low enough for people to take the risk.

It's back to the fundamental point that the strength of any law ultimately depends on the ability for it to be enforced. That depends on the availability of adequate numbers of police.

 

Jim

[Porkscratching]

The the only effective deterrent for any offence is something that inescapably impinges directly on the offender...whether that be the infliction of ...pain, incarceration, removal of some right or ability to do something, drive or whatever... And any of the above need to be present as a sure and certain consequence of said offence...

[Reorte]

Just now, jim.snowdon said:

Probably by putting it down to bad luck on his part. The chances of getting caught are still perceived as very low, low enough for people to take the risk.

It's back to the fundamental point that the strength of any law ultimately depends on the ability for it to be enforced. That depends on the availability of adequate numbers of police.

 

And respected - the real question is not "where are all the policemen?" but "why do so many not have respect for this law?" Even though this one is reasonably fairly black and white. I'm still of the opinion that my earlier points apply - respect has been lost because so much appears arbitrary and rules for the sake of rules.

[Reorte]

2 minutes ago, Porkscratching said:

The the only effective deterrent for any offence is something that inescapably impinges directly on the offender...whether that be the infliction of ...pain, incarceration, removal of some right or ability to do something, drive or whatever... And any of the above need to be present as a sure and certain consequence of said offence...

 

I've suggested this one before, and not entirely tongue-in-cheek either, that being banned from using a mobile phone would be a greater deterrent to many people than being banned from driving.

[Porkscratching]

1 minute ago, Reorte said:

 

I've suggested this one before, and not entirely tongue-in-cheek either, that being banned from using a mobile phone would be a greater deterrent to many people than being banned from driving.

Brilliant!.. and how about banned from all forms of internet access of any kind for a given term too..

[PhilJ W]

8 minutes ago, Porkscratching said:

Brilliant!.. and how about banned from all forms of internet access of any kind for a given term too..

Capital punishment has been abolished.

[kevinlms]

Not a level crossing, but definitely stupidity.

 

So what do the parents expect, when it was his friends who forced the doors open, while he attempted to board a moving train?

 

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/long-delays-for-justice-over-teen-s-train-death-20190508-p51l4u.html#comments

[jim.snowdon]

4 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

Not a level crossing, but definitely stupidity.

 

So what do the parents expect, when it was his friends who forced the doors open, while he attempted to board a moving train?

 

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/long-delays-for-justice-over-teen-s-train-death-20190508-p51l4u.html#comments

I'm inclined to think that justice was served the moment he decided to carry on getting onto a train that was already moving.

 

Jim

[lmsforever]

A level crossing incident!    Flagstaff USA crossing adjacent to station freight had to make an emergency brake application ,all cleared and the Chief (Amtrack) 2and half hours ago.Thought I put this on as we have not had much about crossings lately.

[ess1uk]

Has the Cowley branch BMW been on here yet?

[Fat Controller]

Just now, ess1uk said:

Has the Cowley branch BMW been on here yet?

I don't think so; I only just saw it in another place; it was followed later the same day, by a 66 hitting a 20' piece of raile that had been placed on the tracks.

There was also one between a van and a Freightliner on 04/05/2019 at Ashfordsby AHB; the van struck, and then went through, the closed barrier.

The real gem was someone trying to outrun a train by riding down the 4-foot on his push-bike. near Bowesfield Jct . As the train was doing 45 mph when the driver spotted the idiot, the result was predictable, though the cyclist survived.

[martin_wynne]

Anyone care to explain how this happened? Presumably crossed as the gates were closing, but how did it get past the first gate?

 

 

A451 / SVR level crossing at Stourport-on-Severn. 5th July 1955.

 

"Rail and road traffic were held up for three-quarters of an hour". How long today?

 

Martin.

Edited June 29, 2022 by martin_wynne

[The Evil Bus Driver]

The officer there seems to be having a good laugh too

[alastairq]

Do I see cycle clips as well?

[royaloak]

A sort of level crossing incident this morning at Camborne, a car decided to overtake a lorry and another car as they traversed the crossing and ploughed into one of the barrier mechanisms dislodging it and the associated barrier, long delays while the 'driver' was removed from the car and the scene was made safe.

[Kris]

1 hour ago, royaloak said:

A sort of level crossing incident this morning at Camborne, a car decided to overtake a lorry and another car as they traversed the crossing and ploughed into one of the barrier mechanisms dislodging it and the associated barrier, long delays while the 'driver' was removed from the car and the scene was made safe.

Gwinner road crossing was still closed to road traffic as I came home today due to the complete muppet of a driver. https://twitter.com/GwinearRoadStn?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1126807887412695040&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.piratefm.co.uk%2Fnews%2Flatest-news%2F2869398%2Fupdate-car-crashes-at-level-crossing-near-hayle%2F

[Kris]

1 hour ago, royaloak said:

A sort of level crossing incident this morning at Camborne, a car decided to overtake a lorry and another car as they traversed the crossing and ploughed into one of the barrier mechanisms dislodging it and the associated barrier, long delays while the 'driver' was removed from the car and the scene was made safe.

Gwinner road crossing was still closed to road traffic as I came home today due to the complete muppet of a driver. 

 

 

[PhilJ W]

3 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

Anyone care to explain how this happened? Presumably crossed as the gates were closing, but how did it get past the first gate?

 

 

A451 / SVR level crossing at Stourport-on-Severn. 5th July 1955.

 

"Rail and road traffic were held up for three-quarters of an hour". How long today?

 

Martin.

This was discussed on Facebook last year. IIRC the gate wasn't secured properly and swung into the path of the lorry.

 

[101]

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/video-deputy-injured-after-patrol-unit-collides-with-train-in-midland

 

American police obviously dont need to obey red lights!