Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Feb 29, 2020 04:45

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat May 15, 2004 03:36 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
An important component of the "safety culture" we keep going on about is a system of "core values". What is important and what is not? What is more important and what is less important?

For example, core values include:

* Individual responsibility
* Patience (not haste)
* Courtesy (not rude or selfish)
* Care and consideration (not selfishness)
* Calmness (not aggression)
* Ensuring time to react or ensuring a margin for error

We put individual responsibility at number 1.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 15, 2004 10:01 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
SafeSpeed wrote:
For example, core values include:

* Individual responsibility
* Patience (not haste)
* Courtesy (not rude or selfish)
* Care and consideration (not selfishness)
* Calmness (not aggression)
* Ensuring time to react or ensuring a margin for error

We put individual responsibility at number 1.


Yes, so do I. Sadly though Paul, you've created a list that (IMHO) serves as a sorry and damning requiem for of core values that are slowly ebbing away from British society in general. Perhaps addressing the wider issues of selfishness and unwillingness to accept responsiblity for own actions would see better behaviour on the roads.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 15, 2004 10:34 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Rigpig wrote:
Sadly though Paul, you've created a list that (IMHO) serves as a sorry and damning requiem for of core values that are slowly ebbing away from British society in general. Perhaps addressing the wider issues of selfishness and unwillingness to accept responsiblity for own actions would see better behaviour on the roads.


I agree, but it's probably less than it seems - it's all too easy to notice bad behaviour and not notice good behaviour. And there's huge room for benefit in emphasizing "proper" values when we giving out road safety messages.

But most important of all, I don't think the values have been much eroded in the minds of "middle england". What we see most are the effects of various social "underclasses", or so it seems to me.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 16, 2004 11:43 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
SafeSpeed wrote:

But most important of all, I don't think the values have been much eroded in the minds of "middle england". What we see most are the effects of various social "underclasses", or so it seems to me.



Or the effect of mad Magistrates - thinking of the case of the yob up before him for driving whilst disqualified, uninsured, OTT speeding offences, possession of cannabis, unpaid fines from previous offences who was told to

"Sit at the back quietly and I will let you off!"

Of course this was reported in the Dailies couple of months ago and the PHers did it to death at the time as I recall from lurking there!

(I do not indulge in my wife's activities - I only pinched her PC once and that was to put someone straight over a posting on alcohol retention in the body and blood stream on there - subject I am practically omniscient on given my professional specialisms!)

A significant part of this problem is down to "political correctness", "positive discrimination" and the fear of "upsetting" the so-called "underclass". If we move away from this phony set of ideals - may have chance of re-establishing good old-fahsioned morals and etiquette!

Mad Moggie - the lad himself! :wink: (Who is going out to play golf later and taking all keys to his den with him!) :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 12:15 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:55
Posts: 47
Surely a committment to actually drive safely is the number 1 priority?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 12:24 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
cra wrote:
Surely a committment to actually drive safely is the number 1 priority?


Isn't this misleading? What if someone's intention to drive safely leads them into a dangerous pattern? Imagine an extreme example: Old boy has little confidence and his experience reinforces his opinion that slower is safer. He drives at 45mph on the motorway as part of his committment to safety, but ends up causing a considerable increase in road dangers.

Other than that, I very much like to idea, but how do we align folks' opinions of safe driving with practical reality? I think this is the area where core values kick in. If the old boy in the example takes responsibility for all that happens around him while driving then at least he could know that he is responsible for the late braking and frantic lane changing that surrounds him.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 12:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:55
Posts: 47
SafeSpeed wrote:
cra wrote:
Surely a committment to actually drive safely is the number 1 priority?


Isn't this misleading? What if someone's intention to drive safely leads them into a dangerous pattern? Imagine an extreme example: Old boy has little confidence and his experience reinforces his opinion that slower is safer. He drives at 45mph on the motorway as part of his committment to safety, but ends up causing a considerable increase in road dangers.

Other than that, I very much like to idea, but how do we align folks' opinions of safe driving with practical reality? I think this is the area where core values kick in. If the old boy in the example takes responsibility for all that happens around him while driving then at least he could know that he is responsible for the late braking and frantic lane changing that surrounds him.


Simple. Compulsory test him regularly. If he is not competent, get him off the road.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 13:09 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
cra wrote:
Simple. Compulsory test him regularly. If he is not competent, get him off the road.


I think you missed the point of this thread. It's supposed to be about the core values that lead to safe driving. I'm really interested in:

a) knowing what those core values are and
b) delivering them to the largest possible number of drivers

This is (I suppose) a social engineering approach to road safety in as much as it involves trying to communicate the basics of the really important stuff to as many drivers as possible.

Many modern road safety messages run the risk of undermining these important core values. For example the message: "You must always stick to the speed limit" transfers responsibility away from individuals towards the state. I believe that this is a dangerous trend and the warning is contained in the core values.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 13:24 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 00:24
Posts: 2400
Location: Kendal, Cumbria
Core values are mainly pyschological ones, and the most important ones all stem I think from what we can broadly classify as "social responsibility".

A common trap people fall into is thinking that "good" driving is about physical skills, but I don't believe it is. In any case, those with a strong sense of social responsibility will seek out and learn the appropriate physical skills.

As an example, most ten year old children are perfectly capable of learning all the physical techniques required to drive a car, including advanced skid control and suchlike. So why don't we let them drive on the roads?

And by "social responsibility" I don't mean the kind of politically correct "holier than thou" approach put forward by the likes of BRAKE, but a genuine desire to visualise the true effects and consequences of our behaviour, and to moderate it accordingly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 14:12 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
JT wrote:
A common trap people fall into is thinking that "good" driving is about physical skills, but I don't believe it is. In any case, those with a strong sense of social responsibility will seek out and learn the appropriate physical skills.
Well said JT. Someone who's skilled at driving very fast round a track is certainly a good driver, but if they behaved the same way on public roads they'd be a lousy motorist. I think the difference is more one of attitude and, as SafeSpeed said, responsibility. "I know I'm a good driver, and it's not my fault if other people don't look where they're going" simply passes the buck in dangerous situations and isn't an appropriate attitude for driving on the road no matter how skilled the driver is.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2004 12:48 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:55
Posts: 47
SafeSpeed wrote:
cra wrote:
Simple. Compulsory test him regularly. If he is not competent, get him off the road.


I think you missed the point of this thread. It's supposed to be about the core values that lead to safe driving. I'm really interested in:

a) knowing what those core values are and
b) delivering them to the largest possible number of drivers

This is (I suppose) a social engineering approach to road safety in as much as it involves trying to communicate the basics of the really important stuff to as many drivers as possible.

Many modern road safety messages run the risk of undermining these important core values. For example the message: "You must always stick to the speed limit" transfers responsibility away from individuals towards the state. I believe that this is a dangerous trend and the warning is contained in the core values.


Now I understand. Sorry. I agree that individual responsibility is the key issue here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2004 23:29 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 22:40
Posts: 6
Paul

I've had a really good think about this one for some time now. There is obviously an inherent skill to be able to drive competantly and safely. Once the necessary skills have been taught and internalised to a reasonable degree, I am of the opinion that there is one key issue that makes the difference.

By this, I don't mean that there is no room for improvement once you have a certain degree of skill, it's just that once you have gained that level, something else is becomes very important.

The best way I can define it is a combination of the following:

Manners/Attitude/Culture

I know it's a huge assumption, but just imagine for a moment that the basic driving test gave everyone the necessary skill to drive - in theory it should! This would mean that there is a baseline that nobody should be below.

In the last 12 months I have driven in the UK (approx. 40k), a few k in the USA and a few days on the continent. I have done a little driving abroad in the past, but never really thought about it in the way I now do.

What has struck me is the manners/attitude/culture of different environments and countries. For example, in London it's always busy and I find myself needing to be reasonably assertive. In the North of Scotland it's a whole lot more relaxing and laid back. A taxi in Spain is like a fairground ride you want to get off.

If we could affect people's approach to driving, i.e. the manner in which they drive I think it would go a long way. I think most people are capable of competant/safe driving, but it's the way that they drive that lowers the standard. In many ways it is possibly reflective of society in general, but I beleive strongly that current law enforcement has removed police disgression, therefore this important aspect of poor driving is being neglected.

It's a bit like an undisciplined child, if they get away with bad behaviour it becomes the norm. A little prompt in the right direction at the right time could go a long way to improvements.

I'd appreciate your take on this aspect.

Regards

Robert


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 29, 2004 23:58 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
The General wrote:
Paul

I've had a really good think about this one for some time now. There is obviously an inherent skill to be able to drive competantly and safely. Once the necessary skills have been taught and internalised to a reasonable degree, I am of the opinion that there is one key issue that makes the difference.

By this, I don't mean that there is no room for improvement once you have a certain degree of skill, it's just that once you have gained that level, something else is becomes very important.

The best way I can define it is a combination of the following:

Manners/Attitude/Culture


I think it's culture (i.e. road safety culture) that makes national and regional differences. See:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/roadsafety.html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/smeed.html

I think attitude makes a difference between individuals. National culture may well set AVERAGE (arithmetic mean) attitude, and individual attitude stands a very good chance of altering that individual's accident rate.

I suppose the next question is: What are the right components for a good individual attitude? And I rather think that brings us back full circle to the first post in this thread.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2004 13:57 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 15:15
Posts: 80
Location: Kent
Gatsobait wrote:
I think the difference is more one of attitude and, as SafeSpeed said, responsibility. "I know I'm a good driver, and it's not my fault if other people don't look where they're going" simply passes the buck in dangerous situations and isn't an appropriate attitude for driving on the road no matter how skilled the driver is.


I think this is important and is called 'defensive driving'. Some explain it thus: assume everybody else on the road is an idiot and drive for them as well as for yourself. My driving instructor (Gareth in Swansea - cheers!) first told me about defensive driving.

In roadside collisions, like in love, it takes two people to make the same mistake :D This is a simple and intuitive probability argument (I think): the chances of two drivers doing something stupid in the same place at the same time and causing an accident may be remote but not insignificant. However if just one of them is anticipating the other's possible lack of judgement then any likelyhood of an accident is almost eliminated. This surely is exactly the kind of road safety cultural attitude that can help guard against SMIDSY accidents and other types of misjudgement by one of the drivers (high up in the accident causation statistics).

I think this should be one of the defining principles of safety culture, spelt out clearly rather than implied.

However, what about those inevitible drivers that will not, regardless of the prevailing safety culture, drive defensively? What happens when they meet each other at an intersection? Hopefully their politeness and consideration will prompt them to err on the side of caution.

Cheers,
arthurdent

_________________
DO NOT PANIC


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 22:32 
Offline
Camera Partnership Manager
Camera Partnership Manager

Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 18:19
Posts: 16
SafeSpeed wrote:
For example the message: "You must always stick to the speed limit" transfers responsibility away from individuals towards the state. I believe that this is a dangerous trend and the warning is contained in the core values.

This message is only coming from the anti speed enforcement lobby.
The real message is "drive safely and within the speed limits".
You have twisted this message to suit your own purposes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 23:18 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
gameboy wrote:
SafeSpeed wrote:
For example the message: "You must always stick to the speed limit" transfers responsibility away from individuals towards the state. I believe that this is a dangerous trend and the warning is contained in the core values.

This message is only coming from the anti speed enforcement lobby.
The real message is "drive safely and within the speed limits".
You have twisted this message to suit your own purposes.


Nothing wrong with the core values - part of COAST - which reminds me -- you have not tackled my little quiz elsewhere yet! :lol:

Drove down a road today - Was legally driving at 30mph. But there was a problem with actual speed limit on this road - it had red oblong sign hidden behind a tree stating the limit had changed, 40mph painted on the roadway, and 40mph repeaters :roll:

Everyone was driving safely - trouble was - several were above the speed limit because they missed a red oblong sign and everything else read 40mph!. Fortunately - no talivan .. yet!

So what would be your message under this situation? Bit confusing to "keep to speed limit" when you have red oblong saying 30mph and negligence on removal of 40mph signs. Apart form fact - layout of road - nice wide non built-up dual carriageway suggests 40mph!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 23:24 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Mad Moggie wrote:
So what would be your message under this situation? Bit confusing to "keep to speed limit" when you have red oblong saying 30mph and negligence on removal of 40mph signs. Apart form fact - layout of road - nice wide non built-up dual carriageway suggests 40mph!

I know what you mean - but "nice wide non built-up dual carriageway" suggests 70 mph to me :lol:

_________________
"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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 19:40 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:34
Posts: 603
Location: West Scotland
What does everyone think about using all available road space when possible? Not dangerously,obviously, but like going straight through a roundabout at the dead of night instead of following the left lane, is this good road practice or a bad habit I wonder?

Andrew


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2004 23:43 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
andys280176 wrote:
What does everyone think about using all available road space when possible? Not dangerously,obviously, but like going straight through a roundabout at the dead of night instead of following the left lane, is this good road practice or a bad habit I wonder?

Andrew


I think that's an excellent idea - you have better reserves of grip, less mechanical stress and a smoother ride. But there are very important cautions...

* Never sacrifice safety for vision or position
* Never sacrifice vision for position

So there's a sort of hierarchy...

Safety first
Vision second
Least stress third

You have to be aware of any confusion that might be caused to other road users. If they're confused then there's a safety hazard.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2004 00:45 
Offline
Former Police Officer
Former Police Officer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 00:27
Posts: 351
andys280176 wrote:
What does everyone think about using all available road space when possible? Not dangerously,obviously, but like going straight through a roundabout at the dead of night instead of following the left lane, is this good road practice or a bad habit I wonder?

Andrew


I am a big fan of using the road to help you.

I ride abike as regulars may have picked up. I frequently use the whole width of the road to aid visibility. For example moving well to the right opens up a very good view around a left hander. This means that i am ready and aware to over take a vehicle as soon as I have enough visibility to know its clear. Obviously something may be coming the other way but if my position is correct I have ample opportunity to move back to the left.

Another example is when following a high vehicle (4 x 4's are the worst). Normally a biker can see straight over the top of a car we are seated considerably higher than a driver but with a 4 x 4 or van this advantage is lost. A move to the left can reveal a clear view down the road to watch for hazards or overtaking opportunities, a move to the right shows that view as well. Often this is mistaken for aggresive riding by the driver but I assusre you its not it is good practice.

As for the roundabout I don't see a problem with straightening them out if you need to but please make sure I am not alongside you when you do.

The one bit of driving that is guarentted to get me following you and dragging you from your car is when you cross the white line on a right hander. This happens daily in fact a recent study by one opf the bike mags revealed that 60% of cars "cut" a blind right hand bend.

The trouble with this is that bikers are trained to be towards the middle of the road for observation reasons when going around a left hand bend and this is a major problem for bikers. We can not brake on a bend period. The bike will crash if we try so we have to stand the bike up before we can brake. Any reduction of speed on our part once we are ion the bend will cause an outwards drift, straight into the path of the car.

Now clearly if our observation & positioning is correct we should have time to respond to the car and move to the left. Well yes but we only have to fail to do that once and we are dead. Just think about it 60% of the cars that are coming in the opposite direction to us cut the corner and I can't afford one mistake.

I personally am convinced that a high number of single vehicle M/C accidents on left hand bends have this conflict as a factor. I base that on personal friends who have been killed in such a manner who were not "knobs" as the Govt would have us believe they were.

FWIW I can't do left hand bends hugging the left curb as this makes the corner too tight and forces me to drift towards the middle of the road on exit at which point I would have lost all visibilty.

If the above post doesn't make sense please find your self a quiet bend somewhere. Start on the right hand curb looking towards a left hand ben and walk towards the bend, see how much you can see move into the middle of the right hand lane, then the centre line eventually standing by the left curb. By this time the bend has become blind.

Odds are good that if you do this exercise you had a lot of confidence as you move from the right of the road to the left because you can see round the corner. Now go from the left to the right, I'll bet your ring twitches a bit.

Drive safe all


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.621s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]