Re: NIP arrived.

In article <dd7qpf$n13$9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Mark Foster <m.e.fosterREMOVEMEFIRST@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Mon, 08 Aug 2005
> 15:28:16 +0100:
> > In article <dd7ptf$n13$4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > "David Taylor" <davidt-news@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Brimstone <brimstone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Mon, 8 Aug 2005 11:51:33 +0000
> >> (UTC):
> >> > The Reids wrote:
> >> >> Following up to Mark Foster
> >> >>
> >> >>>> All three factors contribute to accidents, I am not saying just
> >> >>>> one factor is dangerous.
> >> >>>> "you" are saying just one factor is dangerous (the driver).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> To steer things back on course a little, I am saying that it is only
> >> >>> the manner in which a road is used that makes it dangerous. The road
> >> >>> itself is not and cannot be dangerous.
> >> >>
> >> >> we will have to disagree then as it seems you will not
> >> >> acknowledge these three factors in accidents.
> >> >
> >> > The problem lies with your insistence on wanting to deflect
> >> > responsibility.
> >> > We are simply wanting people to be honest with themselves and others.
> >>
> >> So am I. It is irrelevant to the debate whether or not all accidents
> >> boil down to being driver error.
> >>
> >> The point is that the design of the road itself can contribute to
> >> the number and severity of accidents on the road. Trying to claim it
> >> can't is simply wrong, regardless of your intentions.
> >
> > Nobody said it can't. In fact it has been pointed out several times that
> > it can and does. The more difficult a road is to negotiate safely, the
> > more people are likely to *** up. That much is self-evident.
> >
> > The point is that does not mean the road is "dangerous",
>
> No, it means precisely that the road is "dangerous".

No. That is an inappropriate application of the word.

> You seem to think that the road being "dangerous" means that the road
> must be the cause of any accident on the road, or something.

Yes. For a road to fit the definition of dangerous that people so
readily quote from their dictionaries it must be "able or likely to
cause harm or injury". Barring silly examples like falling over and
cuting yourself, it is capable of no such thing. It is inanimate and is
capable of nothing whatsoever other than existing.

> Simply, the accident is the fault of a driver (almost certainly),
> but it could still occur on a dangerous road.

It could occur on a road.

> > merely that it
> > requires more skill, care effort to negotiate safely.
>
> Indeed. So for a given skill level, it is a more dangerous road...

For a given skill level, the road is harder to negotiate safely.

> Or, alternatively, without sufficient skill (on the part of _other_
> drivers) it is a danger _to me_.

It is the other drivers that are the danger to you, not the road.

--
Mark Foster, Brighton, Sussex, UK
E-mail: m.e.fosterREMOVEMEFIRST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
PGP Fingerprint: 3342 C02C 7BE8 3FE4 AAC5 8BB2 03B7 9263 DDF2 04C1
--------------------------------------------------
"There are no such useless words as, 'I didn't have a chance.'"
[Driving, HMSO]
.

Quantcast