Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Roger <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 19:00:05 +0100
The message <68agqfF2sfq3lU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@xxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:
Roger wrote:
Turning the majority of motorists into common criminals doesn't help the
situation particularly when what has been perfectly legal for years gets
criminalised for no better reason than a non driving socialist not
wanting the rich to drive any faster than the volk in their volkswagons.
Oh dear. The rant-o-meter has just broken having gone off the scale,
leading me to suspect some angry rationalisation has taken the place of
informed thought.
What's the matter Pete? Got out of bed the wrong side today?
Barbara Castle was a Stalinist of the old school resentful of anything
that was not distributed equally be it wealth, intelligence or fast
cars. She never even learned to drive which further prejudiced her
against motorists. The arbitrary 70 mph limit had no justification other
than it was the top speed of the VW Beetle which had been widely
advertised as being capable of being driven flat out all day, unlike
many of its contemporaries. Hardly surprising when the 1200 cc Beetle
engine put out only a pitiful 34 bhp at maximum, the same as a 848 cc
Mini and 5 bhp down on a 997 cc 105E Ford Anglia which could also be
driven flat out all day.
Today's motorists, should they venture onto roads where the national
speed limit has no relevance, or travel on the better roads when they
are obliged by adverse conditions to limit their speed to below the
posted limits are still expected to exercise their judgement and road
reading skills. Is it really so extreme to expect those same drivers to
be similarly responsible if given the chance on the better roads when
the conditions are less testing?
The number of deaths on British roads has been on a downward curve since
before the advent of the socialist curse and that despite the huge
increase in traffic and the higher speeds today.
Transport research has long noted a "safety in numbers" effect. The
more cars/bikes/whatever there are, the lower the accident rates. If
people are more used to other vehicles, they pay more attention to them.
Perhaps counter-intuitive, but true, and neatly sidesteps you rant
about the evils of socialism.
Ah yes, that would be why road casualties soared as the amount of motor
traffic on the roads increased in the first half of the 20th century.
Personally I put the change from ever increasing casualties to long term
decline to the post war road building program which didn't really take
off until the late 50s, the introduction of the MOT test (1960 I think)
and the continual improvement of modern vehicles.
Meanwhile deaths from hospital acquired infections didn't even register
on the public radar until the total exceeded that on the roads. Are we
to see hospital staff penalised for failures in hygiene?
Do you honestly believe they aren't?
Motorists who are convicted of causing death by dangerous driving
generally end up in jail with a criminal record. I haven't heard
anything that leads me to believe that anyone in the NHS has acquired a
criminal record because of hospital acquired infection deaths, let along
bgeen sent to jail.
You won't get drivers acting as responsible adults by treating them like
irresponsible infants.
But as the record shows, you won't get them them acting responsibly by
assuming they'll sensibly limit themselves.
See above. There is ample evidence that by and large motorists do limit
their speed when circumstances demand it. Extending the scope would give
said motorists more opportunity to practice roadcraft and as everyone
knows, practice makes perfect. :-)
--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Roger
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- References:
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Lazarus Cooke
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Simon Challands
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Roger
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Victory for green lanes
- Prev by Date: Re: Hill Walking Energy Expenditure
- Next by Date: Re: OS symbol for steep hill
- Previous by thread: Re: Victory for green lanes
- Next by thread: Re: Victory for green lanes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|