woman eating cereal while driving

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Mike Sales
Posts: 7882
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: woman eating ceral while driving

Post by Mike Sales »

Flinders wrote:
axel_knutt wrote:Seatbelts are a good example of the converse: a counterproductive law that got introduced against all the evidence just because it was popular.


I'm not sure I 'get' that- what was counterproductive about it?


The seat belt law did not affect the death rate in cars, but the number of cyclists and pedestrians killed and injured increased.

http://www.john-adams.co.uk/category/seat-belts/

The evidence from states which already had a seat belt law was concealed. See Adams's website also.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by reohn2 »

axel_knutt
IMHO people know mobile use/dining/reading/personal grooming,etc,etc, at the wheel is wrong like they know speeding is wrong ie; against the law.
The problem is that they've been allowed,due to a lack of effect policing,to get away with breaking such laws and others like them,so much so that it's become normalised.
There is simply no excuse for it other than that,any parallels with the Poll tax are erroneous IMO because the laws are there and have been for years,people can't claim they're unjust or not to agree with such laws as they're there for common good and safety,and to claim otherwise is the logic of madness.
Further more mobiles of all parties involed in RTI's attended by the police should,if not already,be checked and if proven they were being used just prior(2minutes?)should be counted as being used during.Hard to prove admittedly but if an accurate time for the RTI can be ascertained then time can be worked back from it.
I don't agree there'll be an uproar if the law is applied,as I don't believe it would if some of the gross miscarriages of justice and disgustingly lenient sentencing where sorted out and put right with regard to vehicle crime.
YVMV,but I'm not for changing my mind.
The amount of dangerous road crime is generally carried out by a minority of drivers IMHO,catching them and punishing them would benefit the whole of society.
However,the government has decided the country can't afford effective and preventative policing,preferring a 'fire fighting' approach to policing,where a demoralised and undermanned police force spends it's time prioritising it's whole approach to law and order as a matter of necessity which is also the logic of madness.
If this is the effect of tax cuts,I for one would rather pay more tax and see more police bringing such people to book,and when word gets around there's every chance law breakers stand a good chance of being caught,we'll have among other things,a safer road system for all road users!
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
toomsie
Posts: 193
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:05am

Re: woman eating ceral while driving

Post by toomsie »

johncarnie wrote:Sarah Vine (wife of Michael Gove) has written a piece in the Daily Wail that is in defence of eating, applying make-up etc and calling cyclists who use head-cams "Cyclist Stasi". Although I hope her tongue was firmly in her cheek (but she did marry Michael Gove, so you have to doubt her decision making skills) the piece has elicited the usual response from the "I pay road tax and cyclists always run red lights" brigade.

For those of you with strong stomachs - here's the link

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130690/SARAH-VINE-says-real-menaces-roads-vigilantes-Lycra-filming-move.html


Shame on him, non-crunchy nutter !!!!!
bogmyrtle
Posts: 967
Joined: 5 Mar 2008, 10:29pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by bogmyrtle »

£100 fine and 3 penalty points. Seems inadequate.
A bike does more miles to the banana than a Porsche.
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: woman eating ceral while driving

Post by mercalia »

johncarnie wrote:Sarah Vine (wife of Michael Gove) has written a piece in the Daily Wail that is in defence of eating, applying make-up etc and calling cyclists who use head-cams "Cyclist Stasi". Although I hope her tongue was firmly in her cheek (but she did marry Michael Gove, so you have to doubt her decision making skills) the piece has elicited the usual response from the "I pay road tax and cyclists always run red lights" brigade.

For those of you with strong stomachs - here's the link

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3130690/SARAH-VINE-says-real-menaces-roads-vigilantes-Lycra-filming-move.html


I think it is the other way around, explains why poor michael is the way he is, but journalists like her are always playing to the gallery, they dont really believe any thing just peddle opportunistic twaddle. Poor Michael - married to a she-bitch - no wonder he dreams of the old days when women were seen and not heard
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by reohn2 »

bogmyrtle wrote:£100 fine and 3 penalty points. Seems inadequate.


Par for the course where motoring crime is concerned,ie;inadequate.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
bogmyrtle
Posts: 967
Joined: 5 Mar 2008, 10:29pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by bogmyrtle »

Oops don't think it was this one. Think it was a man using his mobile somewhere in Edinburgh.
A bike does more miles to the banana than a Porsche.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by reohn2 »

bogmyrtle wrote:Oops don't think it was this one. Think it was a man using his mobile somewhere in Edinburgh.


Same difference :wink:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Grandad
Posts: 1451
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 12:22am
Location: Kent

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by Grandad »

Postboxer
Posts: 1929
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by Postboxer »

And he's a red light jumper! You can't use that excuse for any other offence. I'm sorry I murdered him your honour but if I go to prison I'll lose my job!
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by reohn2 »

From the linked article:-
The speeding offences were: 109mph and 82mph in a 50mph limit area at Royal Artillery Way, Southend; 69mph and 59mph in a 50 mph zone on the A127 at Rayleigh; 55mph in a 40mph limit area on the A127 at Laindon and 32mph in a 20mph limit at Marine Parade, Westcliff. The seventh offence was driving through a red traffic signal on the A127 at Southend.

He was also ordered to pay fines and legal costs totalling £1,070.

I'm forced to ask,what did he know about the judge,that the judge didn't want revealing?
A gangsters paradise.....
And:-

The court heard that since the incidents McFarlane had received treatment for a nervous breakdown which had resulted in a spending spree and heavy debts.

Yeah right,I'll believe him,thousands wouldn't :?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
ambodach
Posts: 1023
Joined: 15 Mar 2011, 6:45pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by ambodach »

To go back to the diversion on seatbelts. I remember talking to a nurse from a hospital which specialised in organ transplants. She said that before the law came into force there was a plentiful supply of cadavers with potential organs "warm off the motorway" as she put it. After the law was enforced this supply sadly dried up (she said). Must do some good for somebody tho' !
axel_knutt
Posts: 2879
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:20pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by axel_knutt »

ambodach wrote:To go back to the diversion on seatbelts. I remember talking to a nurse from a hospital which specialised in organ transplants. She said that before the law came into force there was a plentiful supply of cadavers with potential organs "warm off the motorway" as she put it. After the law was enforced this supply sadly dried up (she said). Must do some good for somebody tho' !


Road deaths were falling before belts were introduced, and continued to fall after they were introduced, but there was no sudden drop that coincided with the legislation. Road deaths fell faster in countries without compulsory seatbelts than those with.

If you compare todays death toll with that of the past you will see a difference just because of the reduction over time, independent of the introduction of belts. That's why we employ statisticians to do the work and not nurses.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by 661-Pete »

The worst-ever year for road deaths in Britain was 1941, but that was of course during wartime and blackouts. The worst-ever year in peacetime was 1966 - long before seatbelt legislation and before even seatbelts were routinely fitted to cars. So this may have been a factor. But I think there were others - improved car and road design etc.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
axel_knutt
Posts: 2879
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:20pm

Re: woman eating cereal while driving

Post by axel_knutt »

reohn2 wrote:The problem is that they've been allowed,due to a lack of effect policing,to get away with breaking such laws and others like them,so much so that it's become normalised.

You're virtually making my own argument for me here. If the police aren't enforcing it, and public opinion isn't making people feel wrong, then in what sense is it wrong? Laws are generally made to formalise the proscription of a behaviour which is already seen as wrong, not the other way around, that's why \I think the issue is one of changing public opinion.
I don't agree there'll be an uproar if the law is applied

But there already was with speed cameras.
The amount of dangerous road crime is generally carried out by a minority of drivers IMHO

If that could be shown when so many were complaining about being caught by speed cameras, someone will start arguing that the speed limits are redundant.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
Post Reply