Safe Speed Forums

So if you are shaving, how would you change gear should the need arise?

There could have been queues ahead or a need for quick braking, including that with the engine.

What about sounding the horn or doing a sudden indicate to warn of a sudden lane change if neccessary.

Presumably you would take your hand away from your face and do it!

I honestly do not believe that much, if any, of what is discussed in here has any realsitic hope of reaching the driving populace as a whole. You appear to have some very esoteric, higher plane ideas that look great on paper Paul but I have real difficulty seeing how they can be translated into real world driving practices.
We are never going to achieve the status of having a nation of advanced drivers, most don't give a stuff about their driving, lets face it! Therefore, where matters of the law are concerned, it must be applied in a way that can be understood by all and is unambiguous. If this means bringing folks to task for waving a shaver over their face whilst they are driving, so be it.
Thats the ONLY way it can be, thats the way it is in Germany for example.

Now when did I ever suggest any such thing?

But we can keep nudging the system in the right direction. A little tiny bit better each year. It's just key information and cultural influence. And it's really easy peasy.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Anyone have a better source than the BBC report?
I think the (rather inadequate) report does not just bring up shaving... it says he leaned across to take a closer look in the mirror to check on his efforts... at 70 mph while overtaking?

A lot of the argument here seems to be as to whether it is possible to shave, instead of whether we SHOULD be shaving in the car!
How many mundane tasks between waking up and setting off to work could we move into the car?
As I said earlier, he was LATE and short on time... which cannot be good for his driving if the report has most of the facts. While a few drivers might be able to carry off shaving while doing 70 in traffic, many others cannot drive well WITHOUT the distraction of doing something which is better done in the bathroom at home!

I AM making assumptions, because I dont know this part of the A9 well, but from what I remember, I dont think I would shave while driving it - especially at peak times, or put on make up which could be the next report!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I'm sorry but theres no meat on any of that, how do we achieve this in the context of the arguments being made in this thread? How do we nudge road safety in the right direction by ignoring (as in not prosecuting)drivers who are (say) shaving at the wheel but not crashing at the time?
How do we translate your belief that the mind aspect of driving is more important than the physical into real world improvements?
Help me here someone, does anyone else see the point I'm making?
I really, really don't understand.

A simple simple start is to tell the truth about road crash causation. Then run ads on TV saying 'learn from your mistakes'. Run a 'near miss' helpline...

But I've learned that many folk have the beliefs in Steve's book in use in life, but don't actually apply them to driving. We can simple 'turn them on' by pointing this out.

There's more in the manifesto

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

yup, I'm with you here but then I'm of the opinion that the chicken wingers, knob holders and all the other non-disabled, one hand plonkers should be sent back to school... and don't get me started on all the idiots who for some bizarre reason find it necessary to stick their hand through the wheel and hold the back of it in order to turn a corner.


nope, nor do I.

I have to agree with Paul here.

Provided one is not off to an event where the odd bit of stubble is of consequence, a shave can be carried out with ZERO of the conscious part of the brain in use. The last little bits of stubble may require conscious checking and dealing with. For safety's sake, thes have to wait until one is parked up.

The unconscious part of the brain has hundreds of times spare capacity to handle the first 90 - 95% of shaving (or for that matter one-handed drinking or eating) that driving will not suffer at all provided one chooses to do so when other activities requiring the shaving (/drinking/eating) hand are not required.

I found I could stroke my chin whilst driving without any impairment to safety. Sure glad I didn't get caught!

And, as he passes or otherwise observes you, how is a copper supposed to know you are only using the part of your brain that you believe can do the task without compromising your ability to drive? Does he wait until you collide with a parked vehicle before determining that you've now moved onto the phase that requires conscious checking? Whatever happens, the police in the real world have to make a judgement and act accordingly. I'm happy that the shavers, lippy applyers, readers, writers etc are being pulled.
Furthermore, how do we know these secondary activities don't cause crashes? Would YOU admit you were having a shave if you collided with a car whilst doing so and had the opportunity to dispose of the 'evidence'?
Higher level overarching aims are all well and good, but road safety still has to be enacted in the real world. What works in theory cannot always be readily applied in practice and we cannot have individual driving plans that permit certain activities when conducted by one person, but not by another. I know this doesn't sit well in our 'tailored to the individual' society, but its a best fit IMHO.
So, I'm happy that engaging in a secondary activity not directly related to the process of driving is a good enough metric for both attitude failures and potential control failures. I'm happy to let the police make the call and realise that there is an element of subjectivity involved.

I agree with RigPig that it is certainly not a call for the police to be making. It is the courts that need to guard against the misconception that "two hands safe, one hand always unsafe".

Like this radio changing nonsense thats been mooted recently. Of course someone should be castigated if they have their eyes fixed to their stereo, twiddling the knobs, oblivious to the road. On the other hand, and this is a technique we use in formation flying, mere inches from another aircraft doing 100+kts, if you glance down to put your finger on the button, then return your attention to the road as you flick through the channels, then it is really no greater danger than turning on your rear demister or whatever (my rear demister is one of three identical buttons located on the dash tucked behind the steering wheel, it requires a glance to establish the correct one).