Re: Arrogant Fool

On 23 Dec 2005, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> Amazing how this arrogant fool rails on and on and on about the
> "anitsocial bastards" who are firebombing the photo radar cameras in
> the UK, but utters nary a peep about the antisocail MFFY bastards who
> block the passing lane, drive slowly, block traffic, and basically do
> whatever the *** they please without giving so much as a thought to
> the consequences to overall throughput on the roads.
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1670945,00.html

Scott should check the details before calling anyone arrogant.
Here are important parts of that article he skipped in his blame-
the-victims tirade.

"Organisations such as the Association of British Drivers or
Safe Speed - the boy racers' club masquerading as a road-safety
campaign - have spent years claiming that speeding doesn't cause
accidents."....."Well last week the Department for Transport
published the results of the study it had commissioned into the
efficacy of its speed cameras. It found that the number of
drivers speeding down the roads where fixed cameras had been
installed fell by 70%, and the number exceeding the speed limit
by more than 15mph dropped by 91%. As a result, 42% fewer people
were killed or seriously injured in those places than were
killed or injured on the same stretches before the cameras were
erected. The number of deaths fell by more than 100 a year. The
people blowing up speed cameras have blood on their hands."

If Scott could prove that slowpokes kill and wound more people
than mad rushers he might have a case for righteous indignation,
but the evidence proves otherwise. Speeder impatience has harmed
far more people than slowness, courtesy or restraint ever will.
There are worse fates in life than being made to wait a bit for
an older driver or someone who may not be as "daring" as the
great Scott. It is rarely the case that a slow driver causes
anything more than brief congestion. The root cause of traffic
jams is human overcrowding, not complex lane interactions.
People who fancy themselves sophisticated drivers are looking
too hard for the obvious.

Furthermore, a given driver's definition of a slowpoke usually
depends on how fast said driver is intent on going. Motion
studies have shown that everyone driving calmly and steadily
contributes a lot more to smooth flow than speediots trying to
gain advantage for superficial reasons; namely always having to
get ahead of the "competition."

Significant slowdowns are caused by sudden braking and
collisions due to speeders hitting a slow patch. Slow spots will
always occur and they aren't due to some conspiracy of old
folks. Speediots, in their teenage wisdom, think they deserve a
special place at the front of a line that has no clear beginning
or end. One can spend 15 miles in a 30 mile slowdown and never
get past it before reaching their exit, so why take the risk of
rear-ending someone? The rational way to maximize flow is to
remain calm and leave ample space. But instead of being mature
and waiting out congestion, speed demons try to force their way
through like a mob rushing the gates at a concert. It rarely
works to anyone's advantage.

The Scotts of the world rarely talk of LIFE and DEATH in their
zeal to promote impossibly optimistic flow in dense cities. In
heavy traffic, cars are repeatedly slowing to make exits and it
ripples into adjacent lanes. Speediots coming upon those
slowdowns make them worse by overreacting and braking hard.
Their brake lights and frequent tailgating crashes set off chain
reactions of further slowing that far exceeds the impact of a
few slowpokes.

Apparently, Scott cares more about his dream of reaching the
elusive "front of the line" than the reality of saving lives via
lower crash energies. Traffic congestion is more a function of
gross numbers than behavior, so who is the real arrogant fool?

F.W.

.