So there's this television advertisement on at the moment, for the Transport Accident Authority or whatever it's called at the moment. It's trying to educate people that driving faster than the posted speed limit decreases your ability to stop your vehicle in time if there's an emergency up ahead. Which is fair enough too. The faster you're travelling, the longer your braking distance will be.
The advertisement is all Matrix-like with lots of super slow motion of a young woman crossing the road and being struck by a car doing 65km/h (40mph). She flies up, lands hard on the road and so on. Then the dude doing the whole God-like walk around the car tells us that if the car was only travelling at 60km/h (37mph) - the posted limit on this death-trap of a road - she'd still be hit, but would only be slightly injured.
Now, that's all very well, but it ignores a number of things. The environment the accident is in is well lit (middle of the day in fact), no major obstacles to block the driver's vision of the road and surroundings ahead and his car is reasonably late-model, indicating its braking abilities shouldn't be (too badly) impaired. If the driver was watching and was alert, he would've noticed the woman absent-mindedly stepping out onto the road in front of him. Or at least, would've seen her approaching the road, and would be prepared. You know, ease off the accelerator and maybe move a little over away from the side of the road, get his hand ready on the horn if necessary.
No, he barrels on through her; she hurtles through the air, lots of little slow-mo drops of blood and stuff (but no exposed flesh or bones; have these people never seen a real accident??) and she's motionless on the ground.
If his car was well chosen when buying it, he'd possibly have ABS and would be able to swerve around her (assuming his reactions were OK, and he was looking ahead as per the previous paragraph). At would certainly assist him in pulling his car up quickly. I avoided an accident about seven or eight years ago because the car I was in had ABS. I was able to keep control of the vehicle and move around the car reversing out of a blind driveway. If I was in my normal car at the time, they'd be winching my car out of the ditch on the other side of the road.
Anyway, if he had a properly equipped car (ABS should be fucking mandatory - are you listening, new Australian Government?), was watching the environment ahead of him and knew how to prepare for an accident with a pedestrian, he could've avoided the accident all together. The woman crossing the road would be unhurt but scared shitless and we'd all live happily ever after.
Then again, if the idiot woman crossing the road stopped and looked before she crossed the road, she'd see the car coming down the road and would wait till he was clear before she crossed. None of this would've happened, she'd be none the wiser, driver would be closer to his destination and the force would be in balance once more.
I'm not saying speeding is ok. It's not. I'm guilty of it, and it's something I'm working on. But to not lay any blame whatsoever on the moron crossing the road without due care is plainly dumb. Stupid. Fucked up. You call it what you like. Some of us know how to drive, and how to keep others in mind while we're out there. I keep watch (as best I can) on the cars around me, cars on the side of the road, pulling out of side streets, cyclists and pedestrians anywhere around me, particularly ahead of me. You never know what they're likely to do or what they might have to do to avoid their own little bingle.
It's high time the authorities put their advertising money into educating people about the correct way to cross a damn road. Not on how to curtail drivers for not being able to predict some clown's lack of brain function.
Here endeth the rant.
The advertisement is all Matrix-like with lots of super slow motion of a young woman crossing the road and being struck by a car doing 65km/h (40mph). She flies up, lands hard on the road and so on. Then the dude doing the whole God-like walk around the car tells us that if the car was only travelling at 60km/h (37mph) - the posted limit on this death-trap of a road - she'd still be hit, but would only be slightly injured.
Now, that's all very well, but it ignores a number of things. The environment the accident is in is well lit (middle of the day in fact), no major obstacles to block the driver's vision of the road and surroundings ahead and his car is reasonably late-model, indicating its braking abilities shouldn't be (too badly) impaired. If the driver was watching and was alert, he would've noticed the woman absent-mindedly stepping out onto the road in front of him. Or at least, would've seen her approaching the road, and would be prepared. You know, ease off the accelerator and maybe move a little over away from the side of the road, get his hand ready on the horn if necessary.
No, he barrels on through her; she hurtles through the air, lots of little slow-mo drops of blood and stuff (but no exposed flesh or bones; have these people never seen a real accident??) and she's motionless on the ground.
If his car was well chosen when buying it, he'd possibly have ABS and would be able to swerve around her (assuming his reactions were OK, and he was looking ahead as per the previous paragraph). At would certainly assist him in pulling his car up quickly. I avoided an accident about seven or eight years ago because the car I was in had ABS. I was able to keep control of the vehicle and move around the car reversing out of a blind driveway. If I was in my normal car at the time, they'd be winching my car out of the ditch on the other side of the road.
Anyway, if he had a properly equipped car (ABS should be fucking mandatory - are you listening, new Australian Government?), was watching the environment ahead of him and knew how to prepare for an accident with a pedestrian, he could've avoided the accident all together. The woman crossing the road would be unhurt but scared shitless and we'd all live happily ever after.
Then again, if the idiot woman crossing the road stopped and looked before she crossed the road, she'd see the car coming down the road and would wait till he was clear before she crossed. None of this would've happened, she'd be none the wiser, driver would be closer to his destination and the force would be in balance once more.
I'm not saying speeding is ok. It's not. I'm guilty of it, and it's something I'm working on. But to not lay any blame whatsoever on the moron crossing the road without due care is plainly dumb. Stupid. Fucked up. You call it what you like. Some of us know how to drive, and how to keep others in mind while we're out there. I keep watch (as best I can) on the cars around me, cars on the side of the road, pulling out of side streets, cyclists and pedestrians anywhere around me, particularly ahead of me. You never know what they're likely to do or what they might have to do to avoid their own little bingle.
It's high time the authorities put their advertising money into educating people about the correct way to cross a damn road. Not on how to curtail drivers for not being able to predict some clown's lack of brain function.
Here endeth the rant.
1 comment:
I guess this goes back to the 'Speak fondly of the dead' mentality. Her death is no doubt her own fault, but society can't blame the dead. They do love to blame the evil automobile, though.
Post a Comment