Safe Speed Forums

But why was it ignored?

probably two reasons, enforcement/punishment not severe enough and that people don't see what they're doing as being dangerous.

There's no need for it. we have enough laws.

or if the driver gets the phone out of their pocket to give to the passenger to answer.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Perhaps people can see the hypocrisy of it?

Safe for emergency services etc to use, but not Joe Public? (Even though they may have been using mobiles since they were introduced and can multi-task)...

Some people can walk & think at the same time...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Thats my point.

Generally 'people' are not as stupid as we think and know what makes sense and what doesn't.

I presume some here are familiar with McGregor's theries on man's motivation to work.....'theory x & Theory y'?

I think we will probably always have two types of drivers. Those that will obey the law regardless of whether it's sensible, and those that will refuse to adhere to stupid laws...

Question is, which is better?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Define 'sensible' in this context.

There is a third....the non compliant reckless driver

the theory x and y stuff relates to the fact that most people are 'x' inso far as they try their best. Theory 'y's are lazy, slovenly, useless, etc etc.

But certainly in my industry mangers tend to assume the 'x's are actually 'y' and manage accordingly.

Speed cameras have this same in built assumption.

drivers are inherrently dangerous and must be cracked down on.

a law that has been passed purely for reasons of safety, with sound reason & judgment.

edited to add last bit...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

So then it is not sensible to obey the rules for yellow box junctions?
Or one way streets?
As both of these are for traffic management purposes rather than safety. As indeed are traffic lights, generally speaking.

Ah, I see where you're coming from now...

You did ask me to define 'sensible' in this context, i.e. mobile phones, not the whole plethora...

The examples you use may have been their original intent (apart from yellow-box junctions), but One-Way streets and Traffic Lights are routinely ignored where they are not needed and are only there to annoy road users.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Could I suggest 'logical' as a replacement for 'sensible'?

Sorry, I meant in the context of your statement taken on its own.



Would you say it was sensible to ignore them in situations where there is a real chance of being nicked?

Most definitely not to ignore them in sensible situations...

I would say it is sensible where they have been positioned only to annoy road-users.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Really? How do you know that they have been positioned only to annoy road users? As opposed to having been position for some other reason but ultimately end up annoying you that is, quite different I'm sure you'll agree.

And how can you be so certain it is sensible to ignore those things you deem worthy of ignoring? In the immediacy of the situation it may gain you an immediate advantage, but what about the micrometric influence? What about the less experienced chap who sees your actions and tries it themselves but unfortunately their assessment is not as impeccable as yours is and they screw up? How sensible are your actions now, or do you believe you operate as a nation of one individual with no responsibilities towards others who choose to mimic your behaviour? You are, in effect, helping to nudge the system in one direction whilst Paul is trying to nudge it in the other.

This argument seems to have two main strands...

1) Can a person make a decision that transcends applicable local regulations, and if he can is that something that should be encouraged?

I'd say: Yes. We can, we do, we must. And it extends all the way from pausing on a yellow line because it's practical, to killing someone to save them misery (euthanasia) or to save others (suicide bomber). We make decisions that actually or potentially transcend the law all the time. And if we didn't we wouldn't be moral creatures at all. Morality is right at the heart of humanity. Legality is not. If we can't tell right from wrong we aren't even human.

2) What's the definition of 'sensible'? Lots or words written, no proper conclusions reached. But haggling over what should and what should not be regarded as 'sensible' (or some alternative word) is really missing the point.

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

I do agree. Entirely.

If that was the case.


Firstly, I've never said I do it myself! I've maintained that I 'understand' why people do it...

In West Brom, the roads used to flow reasonably well. The LA decides to strangle traffic flow and so puts in TL's, build-outs etc. where they are not needed or wanted.

So drivers take the law into their own hands and ignore some of them.

And I can understand why people do this!

I'm not so sure I'd agree with your comments about nudging. I'm all for drivers making educated decisions and being held accountable for them.

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

And I'd agree. Just because something 'is the law' doesn't necessarily make it 'right'.

Maybe I'm just too 'moral'...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

I'd say: No.




Nice speech, all of it irrelevant and out of proportion in the context of waiting for a few seconds of our lives at a traffic light or ignoring the nagging ring of the mobile.



I know, I was just wonderig where another of these soundbite exchanges would lead us.

I'm so glad you're around. You think differently and it really helps me to understand myself. This is nothing new, btw, I've been noticing it for years.

"Rules are made for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools" - Douglas Bader

So in the kindest possible way, which are you? A wise man or a fool? Or perhaps you can tell me why Dogulas Bader was wrong?

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