Safe Speed Forums

I read recently that Google were going to protect their email users' by making you do a test, (some basic math’s I think), to check for sobriety in order that you don’t post in haste and repent at leisure. (Bit late for some of us )

I imagine how it works is that if you get one wrong then you don't get to use the service.

Now surely if it works, and I assume someone as big as Google would have research it, would it not be a good idea to incorporate something like it in cars?

I was also thinking the test could be questions on the Highway Code So not only does it check if you are capable to drive at that moment but you’re brushing up on the rules of the road too; something which many drivers I see could do with.

Get one wrong and the vehicle won't start for some period? If you have left the car for only a short time, (not long enough to party), the test is not activated so I can pop to the cash point without going through it again.

I know it won't stop another person doing it for them but I don't think that's a big problem.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Tone. your 6 year old has swallowed some tablets and in a state shock you get in your car to go to A&E and fail all the questions.
How would you feel?

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Oh dear Actually, that is closer to something which happened to me than you would know anton.

I had a call at work from my ex mother in law who told me that my dear Vanessa had been rushed into hospital with meningitis. Back then, in ~1988, all I knew, (all that was written and said about it), was that it was a killer.

I got in my car and drove to the hospital like, (excuse my language), a bloody idiot!! I thought it was going to be the last time I would see my only daughter alive. Other drivers were swearing and gesticulating at me as I battled with rush hour traffic. (Can't blame them but they didn't know what I was going through)

I defy anyone not to put their foot down in such circumstances! It upsets me just to think about it. In fact, I am upset now as I write this, but never mind. I think I need to talk about it in order to make a very serious point: Was it really a good idea that I had access to my car at that time?

If I can’t pass the test, whether it’s because of drink or not, I probably shouldn’t be on the road risking my life or others.

Vanessa made it through with one or two problems, hearing difficulties and more.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Big Tone,

Was it really a good idea that you had access to your car at that time?
Hmmm ...
Those who would judge by your success, of course, would say yes (you didn't crash once).
Those who would judge by the number of potential collisions would probably say no (you potentially crashed many more times than even you would normally consider acceptable, much less some other more conservative passenger).

Obviously, those who would judge by the number of potential failures are still being more subjective than those who judge by the fact that you got there safe and sound, but I am digressing.

I'd like to see some sort of data that infers a corollary between your ability to pass a written Highway Code test (what Amerikans call a Driver's Permit Test). It wouldn't surprise me if there was, mind.
That said, the amount of raw data we have, and the depth and detail of analysis we have on that raw data, regarding the subject of driving, is frankly lacking, largely because the people who determine 'road safety policy' do so simplistically, punitively, and are not only loath to allow anyone to do such an exhaustive analysis, but also to allow such analyses to be expressed in road safety policy.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Funny thing is, while at uni a bunch of us tried seeing if (quite a lot of) alcohol had rendered us incapable of mental arithmetic, and it hadn't.

It may impair your judgement and co-ordination from quite a low level, but mental arithmetic wouldn't be the best test.

Perhaps test could be a bunch of pictures of borderline attractive men/women (as appropriate), and a 'would you?' yes/no check box. A sufficiently high score would limit your pc use.

Choosing the wrong sex initially would turn your pc off for the night.



PS Written with a hangover

Good grief!

What with this control freak government, egged on by the EU, plus the stupid car manufacturers, we have enough misused technology in cars already. We certainly should not be making any more moves towards having cars tell us what we are, or are not, allowed to do. Any car manufacturer that attempts to foist this sort of nonsense onto us deserves to go bust PDQ, and one or two might be heading that way in any case - so they'd better watch it!

Best wishes all,
Dave.

When I got rushed in with meningitis I was 19 and my parents had just gone on holiday to cornwall, which is quite a treck from sunny shropshire, but mum, dad and lil' sis came back in one hit. The journey to hospital in the neighbours Trooper was horrible, it seemed to take ages and I felt every bumb. The lumbar puncture was worse though .

What are those breathaliser things that are advertised in AutoExpress like? Are they any good? I get terrible hand overs if I so much as walk past a pub, but never know if I am over the limit or not.

Given that well under 1% of drivers are in any meaningful sense "drunk", what is the point of making everyone else suffer to stop them?

More police patrols to detect the obviously impaired might seem a better idea...

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I agree we already have too much technology interfering in our lives and I certainly wouldn’t want yet more but, if it’s effective, we could be throwing the baby out with the bathwater IMO.

This may be a bad admission but because I had been used to racing, getting a move-on didn’t mean I was out of my depth. But others wouldn’t have known this and I did take liberties that day (nuff said). If, however, I had been someone with no experience of going quickly and not knowing the limits of man and machine as well as the environment, it could have been a very different matter.

If the test to get your vehicle started even only took 30 seconds of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers it’s nothing compared to waiting for a bus or taxi etc. How many 30 seconds do we loose stuck in a jam because someone is dithering; not pulling into a gap which was easy to take for instance or hitting the lights on red instead of green that day? So can we really complain that we have to loose 30 seconds at the start of a journey when we are loosing many more all the time even on the shortest trip? Are we so desperate to get somewhere that a brief moment is vital to our every mission?

If it actually works, as it does with Mail Goggles, then does it not have some worth? I agree with you Peter but the police wouldn’t detect someone twice or more over the limit if he is used to drink and happens to be doing everything correctly for the short stretch of road the driver is being followed. Back in the bad days, when I was drinking heavily, I once got a high score on my favorite game, TOCA, after drinking a bottle of 13.5 %.

I also go back to my other point about teaching people who may be clueless on the Highway Code or indeed new rules which have come into being since they passed their test thirty years ago. You could even incorporate a simple eyesight test into the same program, like something in an optician’s, which mimics an object far away. I know people who are literally driving blind but where’s the human MOT? Don't pilots have a many checks to do before take off which they could only perform when Compos Mentis?

Sorry for placing it here; It may have been better suited to brainstorming.

Edit to add: How do we know the figure "well under 1% of drivers are in any meaningful sense drunk", I'm sure many drivers get from A to B over the limit without ever being caught year after year. I've known them in fact. (Not me BTW)

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

And what about fitment to motorcycles, classic/older cars etc...

Peter E. Hammer. Nail. Head. We could use all the cash spent on cameras and camera staff to employ more traffic cops. OK, I admit it, I'm a complete looney.

Technology is not the problem, it's the interference. Whether it's my mother, or Toyota, I don't appreciate either keening when I am trying to enjoy driving.The more you sweat, the less likely you'll bleed. The fact is, the number of 'licensed' drivers who would have been / are out of their element 'getting a move-on' significantly outnumber those who find the seven rules in my signature quite sufficient.I've got no problem with the length of the test whatsoever. I often make my friends wait anywhere from 30 minutes to 1 hour and forty five minutes before I drive them home after a night of dancing and brightening our spirits with, well, liquid spirits. I won't drive until I'm good and ready.

However, not just any test will do. The ability to determine whether she is or is not a piece of crumpet has nothing to do with driving ability ... though it may very well prove you're drunk IF you're the sort who normally doesn't partake of the Brobdingnagian, and then 'prefers' Rosie O'Donnell over Natasha Bedingfield.

To be somewhat brief, the test should also have something to do with one's ability to respond to surprises in time and otherwise appropriately. I know I could drive home safely after having had eight beers in two hours, provided the route was closed to all other surprises. I can only handle one and a half beers and still negotiate a slalom course where my sober friend tells me to avoid the cone by swerving left, right, or stopping ... at the last possible moment, in English, Spanish, German, French, Italian, Russian, or Gaelic. He chooses all variables.
I'll pass out before I'll pick a woman with a BMI over 23.I'm best at 'chi sao' (aka Sticking Hands) when my BAC hovers right around .06Testing one's eyesight sounds like part of a brilliant idea. Testing the vestibular system should probably be included as well.Good ideas should be welcome anywhere, but the fruit of this tree may require the nurture of a separate subforum.

Isn't it unfortunate that two people could have the exact same B.A.C. (for argument's sake, .1), and one of them still be physically and mentally fit to drive? That, to me, means testers have the ability to take advantage of those being tested.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Thanks Rush. Insightful and well put, as always.

I think what's at the core of it for me is something which Paul was passionate about, namely education and training. But where is the education or training?

If it wasn't for the fact I like reading and keeping up with events, I needn't have picked up the Highway Code since I past my test back in 1976. Now I'm sorry but if that isn't bad, I don't know what is! (I think the good book has quadrupled in thickness since then)

Like I say, you don't have to go far to see bad drivers and driving. I'm sure it's a combination of both arrogance and ignorance. We can't do much about the one and we don't do any anything about the other.

The idea, which I stole/adapted from Google, was something which may address the problem of ingnorance and drivers unfit to drive. It was just a thought

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Alcokart (don't drink and drive)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsdExYzQyac

The Alcokart is the revolutionary and highly impressive TOP-25’s activity…It may look like a regular kart, but is in fact an educational tool very efficient to explain the risks of impaired driving. This new tool allows young drivers, and future drivers, to experiment what impaired driving feels like, by simulating the dangers of the effect of alcohol while driving. This kart is equipped with an in-board computer which, when it is activated, makes the machine react with a short time-lag so that it gives a similar result as when driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

Before entering into the vehicle, an introduction is given by the young TOP-25’s volunteers (so called “the Toptwentyfighters”). They also put an extra safety message across, asking the driver to wear a helmet as well as safety glasses, reminding also to put his seatbelt on.

An easy circuit of about 1.000 m² is build with cones. In the beginning, the drivers make a few rounds in “normal mode” at a speed between 5 and 10 km/h. A transmitter allows the Toptwentyfighters, standing in the middle of the circuit, to put the simulator in “impaired mode” and keep a control on the machine. Through this mode, the kart is reacting as if the driver would have been drunk: slower reactions, overreacting gestures, late breaking... which will obviously drive and crash the kart into the demarcating cones on the sides. At the end of the test, the volunteers explain to the driver that despite he was all the time in full control of the kart by sitting behind the wheel; he was unable to stay on the road due to the alcohol he had been drinking.

This tool is really convenient nowadays to sensitize people who still think that alcohol and/or drugs are not an obstacle to drive. As this kart is very hard to drive under the “impaired” mode, the visitors will realize, as they are sober that driving under influence is thus really difficult and very dangerous.

Frankly, I can live with the arrogance that comes from alternating between conscious competence and unconscious competence.
The arrogance borne of unconscious incompetence is an impediment to conscious incompetence.

A wonderful side effect of fixing ignorance, is that what arrogance remains takes on a richer, subtler character, often called panache.

.04 - .06
There are people who, after a drink or two, are still 'legally sober', yet already physically incapable of reacting promptly and with due measure. Thankfully, they are rare.

.07 - .10
There are a lot more people who, after two or three drinks, are 'legally drunk', yet are statistically shown to 'drive better' - with greater vigilance and less conspicuous behavior. In Amerika, many of these drivers get caught at 'checkpoints'; cops would never pull them over otherwise.

.11 - .14
There may be a few people in this group who could manage to drive home in this condition, assuming all conditions are perfect. Since that is almost impossible, wisdom and prudence would lead these people to avoid driving. Unfortunately, that wisdom and prudence are best acquired by experience. Today, in Amerika, the majority of the people in this condition wait six to twelve hours, hoping their car hasn't been towed from where they left it, awake with a hangover, and take a cab back again to 'that place' to get their car. (A generation ago, many of these were drivers in their late forties to mid fifties.)

.15 & up
These are the ones that the founder of MADD was, and still is, afraid of. Now that most of these people wear their seat belts, they have an alarming tendency to survive collisions that would kill other drivers [belted or not], while almost guaranteeing that the other road user[s] in that collision become K/SI stats. After violent felons, these are the drivers most likely to flee upon seeing lights and sirens.

The ranges above have nothing to do with the law whatsoever. Hey let's face it, the law doesn't serve us, so I won't serve the law by using their stats here.

The Drunk Kart is an over exaggerative misrepresentation of what it's like to be drunk. My educated guess: it pretended me to be .16 or worse. If I were as drunk as it pretends me to be, I wouldn't be able to make it out of the pub and into my car.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Heads Up Displays might someday do away with the driver's portion of the instrument panel, which will then be broadcast on the windshield, keeping the driver's eyes on the road where they belong.

Many younger so-called 'automotive enthusiasts' are installing PlayStations and the like into their cars.

Today, the throttle isn't even actually connected to the pedal anymore, it's a remote potentiometer. MercedesBenz are already learning from the mistakes they've made the first time out with brake-by-wire. Steering by wire isn't that farfetched anymore.

It probably won't be long before you will sit in your car, and it [either randonmly, or for whatever reason] makes you play a driving simulator, full of surprises where you could easily make yourself look stupid if you don't react in time, and with the appropriate finesse.

If you don't pass the driving simulator, the ignition stays off, but you can keep playing the simulator all you want. If you hurl, the car calls an ambulance.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

The problem with HUDs on windscreens is that your eyes still have to change focus from distance to close up to read the information displayed (aircraft HUDs use very expensive optics to focus the info at infinity)

It takes about the same time to refocus your eyes looking straight ahead as to quickly glance down at the dials,analogue dials are very easy and quick to read.

Head UP Displays in cars a bit of a gimmick ,with the disadvantage of leaving an out of focus blur in your field of view when looking into the distance.

_________________
Re vera, cara mea, mea nil refert

If one is staring at the analogue speedo when they crash up another car's rumper - I just made that word up - and that person's next car has an HUD, there's a good chance they'll fall in love with it. After all, they'd've been more likely to notice the impending backside of that car; 'out of focus', at least in this case, would've been preferable to 'out of sight'.

I also believe that certain displays should not be analog - the speedometer - but that is another story, and besides, a 'smart HUD' would call your attention to events and conditions out of the ordinary only when they became so, leaving room for more important information when all else is OK.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

dave - roughly same age as you - two things stopped us going daft on the roads/drink driving /speeding etc etc - (OH AND SELF PRESERVATION )
SAY NO MORE (I'd ask question - does Durham have this problem . If not ,perhaps someone high up in Transport SHOULD be asking WHY /WHY /WHY till some juniour clerk is sent out to look at WHY )(I said juniour clerk-as it appears that the senior ones spend more time being Senoirs THAN RESIDING IN uk)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on