Jump to content
 

The non-railway and non-modelling social zone. Please ensure forum rules are adhered to in this area too!

Driving standards


hayfield
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, johnofwessex said:

Rather than DRL's my prescription for better driving in to issue the Police with RPG's 

 

I've always said that instead of speed cameras etc at blackspots you have snipers, you don't know what day they're there but the threat is enough to work. Anyone that ignores that needs removing from the gene pool anyway.:D

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
58 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

I've always said that instead of speed cameras etc at blackspots you have snipers, you don't know what day they're there but the threat is enough to work. Anyone that ignores that needs removing from the gene pool anyway.:D

The problem with that is that you've then got a car going along at high speed with no driver.

 

What you really need is a big pit and a flipper like they used to have on robot wars...

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Here's one from Belgium. I suspect this lady (who survived), won't be making this stupid mistake of changing lanes suddenly and going around the rear of a truck blindly ever again.

 

Probably thought it was a safe move, BECAUSE she didn't cut in front of it.

 

 

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple way to improve everyones driving is remove airbags, seatbelts, abs, esp and everything else safety related.

Then fit the steering wheel with a large pointed metal spike. 

Driving standards would then improve dramatically, especially after the first couple of weeks!

Cheers

Mark

  • Agree 4
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Baby Deltic said:

Lucky the car was a left hooker. Had that been a UK car the driver would have been mashed.

M'yes, but a right hooker might have given the driver a chance of seeing the stationary/slow moving traffic and moving back over before hitting the queued truck.

 

More to the point - it was a good job there wasn't a passenger in the front.

 

Bottom line - too fast, too close to the vehicle in front and very, very lucky to be alive after that smash.

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, scruff said:

The simple way to improve everyones driving is remove airbags, seatbelts, abs, esp and everything else safety related.

Then fit the steering wheel with a large pointed metal spike. 

Driving standards would then improve dramatically, especially after the first couple of weeks!

 

Doubt it, the nutters would still drive like nutters which would lead to the safe drivers having accidents they wouldn't have had trying to avoid them and killing them off leaving just the nutters around... Seriously, though, that's a daft argument...

 

As an aside, what is the percentage of serious accidents per number of cars now and, say, 50 odd years ago when i started driving? Do the stats back up the argument that it is more dangerous now? Or was it as i remember, that there were still plenty of serious accidents back then?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Serious injuries much less, but that's due to crumple zones, seat belts and air bags...

 

Remember your car is my crumple zone, i've a steel chassis to crumple your car. Hence an old type landrover is the most likely to walk away from. (Also we generaly don't drive at lunatic speeds..)

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the vehicle hitting you goes over the chassis in which case you are far more vulnerable than I am, even in a head on my crumple zone and airbags will reduce my injuries as it slows the impact whereas you will have your insides trying to get out due to the sudden stop... 

 

Consensus on Pistonheads seem to be you will be ok in a head on where the chassis will take the brunt of any impact but whatever you do don't roll one!

 

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=91&t=1086020

 

Tell you what, I'll keep my modern car for day to day work, as, as you said, it reduces the chances of me getting a serious injury, you can keep your  landie, and let's both hope that neither of us has to test out the theory!! ;)

 

 

 

BTW it was a serious question, I was asking about accidents, though, not injuries... You'd have thought that with so many more vehicles around we'd have more  serious crashes but I'm not so sure that as a percentage they are as high now as they used to be?

Edited by Hobby
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 hours ago, scruff said:

The simple way to improve everyones driving is remove airbags, seatbelts, abs, esp and everything else safety related.

Then fit the steering wheel with a large pointed metal spike. 

Driving standards would then improve dramatically, especially after the first couple of weeks!

Cheers

Mark

Many of the cars driven without insurance dont have MoT's and often the drivers don't use seatbelts either so that wouldn't discourage them anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The spike in the steering wheel thing would deter (most) drivers for a while, until they got used to it being there.

 

I don't agree with the idea that extra safety equipment makes people more reckless though, although there are doubtless exceptions. I think we've all got an instinctive dislike of the idea of crashing, so most won't take deliberate risks (which is a bit different from engaging in risky behaviour you think is safe).

 

Like a lot of things the majority of problems are caused by a minority of drivers who don't follow the type of thinking most of us do, even though some accidents happen only involving the sensible (no-one's perfect). This causes problems with tackling the issues, especially where measures are concerned that are only likely to have an effect on those whose behaviour you need to alter the least. Ones that impact everyone aren't much better either, imposing stuff on all to deal with a few is a surefire way to generate resentment and contempt for the law.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well this might not be new to you, but it's something I've not seen before.  When cycling home from the shops this morning at about 8.45, I decided to vary my route so as to have a go on the usual fun and games outside the local primary school.  As expected, there were the customary 6 or 7 enormocars parked on the yellow zigzags on the school side of the road plus two on the white pedestrian crossing zigzags which start where the yellow ones finish, but strangely not one vehicle parked on the opposite zigzags.  However, what there was instead was two cars double parked alongside those on the yellow zigzags, both with their drivers holding doors open to discharge their offspring, this process stopping passing traffic on account of the double parking and open doors taking up all but a yard or so of the width of the road ...

  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wishing to be critical of the JJenny Jones article, because that could become political, but I think it could be less biased. Just one example

Quote

 The lack of priority given to road crime is demonstrated by the current reluctance of the police to prosecute drivers who injure cyclists or pedestrians, in the absence of independent witnessesiii.

 

If there is no witness, who can the police bring charges against, the driver or the pedestrian/cyclist who was not paying attention?  If there is evidence, e.g. drug or alcohol involvement that can be independently verified, then I expect the guilty party/parties would be investigated.

The following explains, (from https://www.police.uk/information-and-advice/court-service/the-process/ )

Quote

The Crown Prosecution Service advises the police on cases for possible prosecution and reviews cases submitted by the police.

They determine what defendants should be charged with in more serious or complex cases.

Their decision whether or not to prosecute is based on two tests; whether there is enough evidence to prove the case, and whether it is in the public interest to bring the case to court.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

https://www.greenparty.org.uk/files/reports/2007/London Lawless Roads Report - summer 2007.pdf

 

Interesting report by Jenny Jones MLA on road policing and safety

Think it would be more interesting if there was an updated version of the report covering the last 12 years since the original report was published to see if things have got better or worse. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...