Bugger of a ride - Xmess spirit? (LONG)

TimC wrote:
On 2005-12-20, Bleve (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Humbug wrote:
. Currently we are NOT, and I repeat NOT,
taught to drive - we are taught to pass the test. Two totally different
things.

Making the test harder doesn't really solve anything except keep the
trully stupid or lazy off the road. The problem is attitude.
Motorcycle licences *are* hard to get, require multiple days of
training etc, and there's plenty of dangeous idiots on motorcycles.

Why is that? The hard-to-get-license thing? Presumably to keep
motorcyclists from injuring themselves, because if it was to keep them
from injuring others, surely the tests would be for car drivers
instead of motorcyclists?

Why is it that we always care more for the welfare of the driver, and
not the people he kills?

It matters that we (society, the state ... whatever) have a presumption
of innocence.

Further, ANY collision means an automatic suspension of licence until
it's proven that it was not even a little bit your fault. If it was
even a little bit your fault you get to do the whole test after a
minimum of 6 months to brush up your skills.

Not workable, fair or just. Putting someone in a car shouldn't take
away the presumsion of innocence.

What's the difference between guns and cars? When someone messes up
with a gun, they lose their ability to join (responsible) gun clubs,

Missing word : "prove".

and hence basically their license. Isn't that infringing on their
rights? OK, so they can live without a gun. And yet the average
person needs a car about as much as they need a gun. Shouldn't they
lose their car license if they mess up?

If it makes a difference, and if we're sure they did mess up, then yes.
But not if either of the two criteria aren't met.

In aus.bicycle on Tue, 20 Dec 2005 11:35:00 +1100
TimC wrote:
On 2005-12-20, Bleve (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
trully stupid or lazy off the road. The problem is attitude.
Motorcycle licences *are* hard to get, require multiple days of
training etc, and there's plenty of dangeous idiots on motorcycles.

Why is that? The hard-to-get-license thing? Presumably to keep
motorcyclists from injuring themselves, because if it was to keep them
from injuring others, surely the tests would be for car drivers
instead of motorcyclists?

Because motorcycles are harder to control.

The problem with cars is that people don't want to be in them.

A car journey is an unavoidable waste of time that you have to undergo
to get from where you are to where you want to be. It's not fun, it's
not engaging, it is basically boring and unpleasant.

It doesn't need much skill for 99% of the journey. When things go bad
it does need skill, but people don't gain that skill because they don't
need it. And if they did gain it, they'd lose it from lack of use.

Compare that to two wheelers. The majority of motorcycle and bicycle
users are on their two wheels because they choose to be. They enjoy it,
they think the skills are worth getting, they pay a lot of attention to
what's going on.

And when they don't... well that's noticeable isn't it!

I don't think testing will help much. People will be in cars because
they have to be, you can test their traffic smarts as much as you like
but they won't improve because there's no reason for them to improve.
While the car is a necessity, then people will treat it as an unpleasant
chore to be got through with the least effort, while trying to make the
time spent doing it more pleasant.

Any road safety strategy that doesn't take account of that is doomed to
fail.

Zebee

Plodder Wrote:
Had a sod of a ride yesterday. Day off, so I thought I'd ride to join my
partner for lunch about 15km from Gosnells to Cannington.


Frank

Drop DACKS to reply
I was off the bike yesterday and in the car after work to do some
errands in preparation for a 2 week camping trip to Esperance. Drove
down Albany Highway from the City to Cannington and back.

1. Driving through intersection on ALbany Highway and lights change to
amber just as I cross the stop line. Idiot woman in shiny Honda four
wheel drive turns across the intersection in front of me. Much braking
and I manage to miss her.

2. In Bunnings car park, on the wide entrance road. Woman in small
car driving on the wrong side looking down at something on the
passenger seat. After much blowing of my horn she looks up and gets
back on the correct side of the road.

3. Waiting at a stop sign for a break in traffic to allow me to get
back out onto Albany Highway. Young woman in a soft top Jeep is right
up the back of my car, revving and when I look back, she is pounding
the steering wheel. I'm not a slow driver and the car I was in (an
Audi) is not a slow car. But I'm going to wait for a decent gap
despite her performance. When I take off, she comes with me,
tail-gates me then swerves around me and speeds off up the road. I
kept driving at the speed limit and pulled up next to her at the next
set of traffic lights.

4. I am driving in the left hand lane up Albany Highway. Idiot bloke
in Commodore turns left in front of me from right hand lane and
disappears down side road. FAAAARK.

Maybe Christmas/the warm weather/too much Christmas parting has got to
these people or maybe they are just FAAAARKING DANGEROUS all the time.

SteveA


--
SteveA

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 06:30:58 +0800, Plodder wrote:

Had a sod of a ride yesterday. Day off, so I thought I'd ride to join my
partner for lunch about 15km from Gosnells to Cannington.

big snip

Ah, Gosnells, you get some real yobs around there. I have the misfortune to
live there, in one of the nicer bits mind, but you still wake up to fresh
20 metre long burn outs marking the road. And then there's the police
helicopter that flys up the river behind us looking for fleeing crims
several times a week.

I've got that kind of abuse in that area more often than I can remember,
but I've always borne in mind that whilst many drivers would, like the ones
you encountered, cower in their car or ignore you when you respond to their
actions, there are plenty who would happily jump out and beat you to a pulp
(particularly if there's a group of them).

Graeme

Plodder Wrote:
Had a sod of a ride yesterday.

snipparge


wot cfsmtb said.

question. Ho many of these incidents did you report?
I'm gonig to make a leap of assumption here and guess you didnt.
why not?
in (almost) every case you had opportunity to record rego

to get legislation/pollies/council/individual drivers and their circle
of influence you need to report it, get them charged (if appropriate)
and (sadly) most importantly longterm it becomes a statisitic.

Every traffic strategy, council decision, govt legislation is based
(sometimes solely) on these. No report. No stat.
So, be prepared to record details, etc next time and stay safe young
plodder


--
flyingdutch

Graeme Dods Wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 06:30:58 +0800, Plodder wrote:

Had a sod of a ride yesterday. Day off, so I thought I'd ride to join
my
partner for lunch about 15km from Gosnells to Cannington.

big snip

Ah, Gosnells, you get some real yobs around there. I have the
misfortune to
live there, in one of the nicer bits mind, but you still wake up to
fresh
20 metre long burn outs marking the road. And then there's the police
helicopter that flys up the river behind us looking for fleeing crims
several times a week.

I've got that kind of abuse in that area more often than I can
remember,
but I've always borne in mind that whilst many drivers would, like the
ones
you encountered, cower in their car or ignore you when you respond to
their
actions, there are plenty who would happily jump out and beat you to a
pulp
(particularly if there's a group of them).

Graeme
I think the problem here is presuming that cars will do right by you.

Just treat them all like arseholes and trust them like you would trust
your daughters first date.


--
byron27

6'5", curly hair, bit like krusty the clown i spose

Bleve Wrote:


Making the test harder doesn't really solve anything except keep the
trully stupid or lazy off the road.


not sure he said 'make test harder'. that's just more of same

Bleve Wrote:[color=blue]

The problem is attitude.
Motorcycle licences *are* hard to get, require multiple days of
training etc, and there's plenty of dangeous idiots on motorcycles.



Yes, but 'generally' the skills base and awareness of a biker is far
superior to your average driver.

Perhaps the best solution would be to introduce compulsory redesign of
all road going vehicles so that driver is sitting on the front of the
car, like a hood ornament. no enclosing coccoon. Just some good ol'
'direct feedback' in their driving lives.


--
flyingdutch

SteveA wrote:
snip
3. Waiting at a stop sign for a break in traffic to allow me to get
back out onto Albany Highway. Young woman in a soft top Jeep is right
up the back of my car, revving and when I look back, she is pounding
the steering wheel. I'm not a slow driver and the car I was in (an
Audi) is not a slow car. But I'm going to wait for a decent gap
despite her performance. When I take off, she comes with me,
tail-gates me then swerves around me and speeds off up the road. I
kept driving at the speed limit and pulled up next to her at the next
set of traffic lights.
snip

Did you smile and wave at this one? I love smiling and waving in that
situation

Tam

On 20/12/05 at 11:02:25 Bleve somehow managed to type:

Getting (got) completely OT now...

snip


Making the test harder doesn't really solve anything except keep the
trully stupid or lazy off the road. The problem is attitude.
Motorcycle licences are hard to get, require multiple days of
training etc, and there's plenty of dangeous idiots on motorcycles.

It's NOT about making the "test" harder - it's about ensuring a much
higher degree of competance. Motorcycle licences are NOT hard to get -
sure, it's (not that much) harder than a car licence but it isn't hard.
The current testing regime ensures that basically incompetant motorists
are allowed to drive. Only AFTER you've passed the 'test' do you really
start learning to drive.

snip

And this would make no real difference, I suspect.

It would - the motoring population would be a LOT more competant and
therefore much less likely to screw up. The current licence "testing"
regime is a joke - how many drivers can do a REAL emergency stop, mid
bend on a wet road AND keep control of the car. Very, very few I'd
suggest. Why ? Because they weren't taught those skills. Why wasn't
such a fundamental skill taught ? Because you don't need to demonstrate
that to pass the licence "test".

Example. Your motorcycle "episode" the other week on a wet freeway.
Your competance saved your life and the INcompetance of a motorist
nearly killed you. A less competant rider would've died and a more
competant motorist would never have had you in that situation.

snip

Not workable, fair or just. Putting someone in a car shouldn't take
away the presumsion of innocence.

It's only "Not "workable" because of the current 'right to drive'
attitude. Replace that with a 'privilege to drive' attitude and a whole
slew of problems get solved.

It's "fair" - currently anyone who MAY be guilty of any crime where the
penalty could be imprisonment MUST show good reason for bail. We have
no problem accepting that so what's the problem ?

It's "just" - if you stuff up and cause a collision you're probably
incompetant and before you can get back behind the wheel you must prove
competance.


The problem, IMO, is that when we put people into cars, they turn into
arseholes. It's a bit like alcohol, get someone drunk, and you see
what they're really like, put them in a car and the same sort of thing
happens.


No. The problem is that generally the issues that may arise while
you're driving are NOT understood. Neither are the consequences because
you're surrounded by a nice protective metal box with all sorts of
secondary safety stuff built in. Not understanding or not worrying
about what's going around you leads to stuff-ups and most people will
get aggressively defensive when their performance is questioned because
they screwed up. Only very few people are able to say "sorry - I
stuffed up. It won't happen again." and learn from the mistake.


Most, not all but the vast majority of cyclists are much more basically
competant than motorists. Any cyclist knows that if they fall off or
get hit it's going to result in pain and probably blood and broken
bits. Lock your front wheel in the wet and you're almost instantly on
the road on your face. Do the same thing in a car and you're generally
quite safe - the car may get a bit, or even a LOT, dinged when you
spear off the road but you are generally OK. There's no real incentive
to not lock front wheels in a car. Why do modern cars have traction
control and ABS ? Basic lack of car control skills.


--
Humbug
BE A LOOF! (There has been a recent population explosion of lerts.)

Bleve Wrote:
Humbug wrote:
. Currently we are NOT, and I repeat NOT,
taught to drive - we are taught to pass the test. Two totally
different
things.

Making the test harder doesn't really solve anything except keep the
trully stupid or lazy off the road. The problem is attitude.
Motorcycle licences *are* hard to get, require multiple days of
training etc, and there's plenty of dangeous idiots on motorcycles.

My experience in Germany suggests otherwise. From this page:
http://www.german-way.com/driving.html

``
*This is understandable when you realize that a German driver’s
license costs about $1500-2000, after a minimum of 25-45 hours of
professional instruction plus 12 hours of theory, and such a license is
good for life.*


Cars marked “*Fahrschule*” (driving
school) mean a student driver may be at the wheel. However, you don't
have too much to worry about; in typical thorough German fashion,
-Fahrschule- cars are equipped with dual controls so that the
instructor can take over any time the student gets into serious
trouble. The practical, on-the-road training time has to include night
driving, autobahn experience, in-town driving, and a multitude of other
driving situations. The test for a German driver's license includes
questions about the mechanical aspects of an automobile, in addition to
the usual examination on the rules of the road. But once he or she has
passed the test, a German driver never ever has to be tested again to
keep his or her license, not even for vision!''


German drivers are far more competent and courteous than Australian
drivers; heck they're better than British drivers :-P


Sure the test is just part of the equation, personal liability is a
big deal in Germany. People visiting Germany are amazed when they see
people out the front of their houses gritting the pavements in winter;
there's good reason they do that. If someone has an accident on the
bit of pavement they're responsible for, they open themselves up to a
personal liability suit. Same thing with vehicle collisions etc. I
had liability insurance for a million Deutschmarks just to be safe.


Currently the TAC picks up the tab, a faceless non-adversarial process
with individual responsibility pretty much abdicated. I don't think
that's working.


--
EuanB