Road safety campaigns.

imp124

imp124

Buy & Sell Member
Hi

i have just seen a driving road safety advert on the TV, this made me think one, yes about how i drive but also has anyone seen one of these adverts where a woman is at the wheel of the car or are they immune to all car crashes?

No sexism intended what so ever just a thought that i havent seen them, have any of you im sure there must be must there?

cheers

steve
 
Everyone knows that men are responsible for all crashes, and men under 21 are responsible even when they're not involved! :)

Apparently men have more head ons etc, women are more likely to be involved in 'minor' incidents like clipping cyclists etc!
 
The irony of it all is, and this is coming from my driving instructor who used to be a police driver etc etc, is:

The highest risk group is actually women aged 50 up. Because they've come from an era where men did all the work. So all they've ever been is the passenger whilst their husband drove them everywhere. So they're not used to the rules and business of the roads now.
 
got a youtube link?

Ceirwan said:
Everyone knows that men are responsible for all crashes, and men under 21 are responsible even when they're not involved! :)

Apparently men have more head ons etc, women are more likely to be involved in 'minor' incidents like clipping cyclists etc!
Click to expand...

its worse than that, men are actually responsible for every bad thing that has ever happened ever!! if you don't believe me just ask a woman lol
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avBqDOf_C4c (men in advert)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-9JR2P4wWI (boy as victim woman driving)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-xK_t-A_8E (man on motorbike)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXI8-_9FrB4 (man driving car at junction)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP3NWJq4oWM (compilation of different THINK campaigns mostly involving men at the wheel)





and i have found one that will NEVER make me speed again!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhv6fSdz7vk dont watch if you dont like scary films and stuff.
 
imp124: good collation,!!!!

I hadn't seen the "fammiy by his side" one before


Yes, all are portraid as male instigators and inclusive female victims :( this is a psychological tactic (but for good reason IMO)


but DUDE! be more open minded about speed...SPEED IMO is one of the many factors that influence these outcomes.

Speed is measurable and enforcable

autopiloting /daydreaming (the list goes on...including testosterone-amplified beleif of your own individual abillity/skill/hazard awareness) is neither measurable nor enforcable but is exclusively more lethal IMO
 
yep i agree that lack of skill, and even dehydration can play a big factor in a crash, but that last video really is powerful, to me anyway, just imagine how that girl felt though she watched 2 people die straight infront of her and she couldnt get away from it

i no it was all fake like but, its the fact that it could ver easily happen as none of it is an uncommon occurence, overtaking car (COMMON) dogs running out (COMMON) swerving to avoid things (COMMON) and even flipping the car could (and has) happened before


i can see why men are mainly involved in this type of campaign though
 
thing is, its that unexpected factor that causes the crash. when something you arn't expecting turns up. no one is immune to that, it could happen to anyone at any time. thats what they should be saying, expect the unexpected.
 
its going to be a new add on to the driving test they ask you to predict something and see if it comes true and if it does you pass :D:D:D
 
Isn't that the Hazard Perception test? ;)

It is very interesting that they do use mainly men drivers for these videos, although, iirc, it is statistically correct that young male drivers are more at risk of crashing than women of the same age.
 
RoSPA Advanced Drivers and Riders train you for free as to how to observe and remain prepared (we all have a local group in the UK)....and even how to drive / ride to prevent the build-up / develop[ment of such risky situations

"suddenly" is such a common citation from people who (sadly) speak from the past tense,....but if we all gave it a go..."suddenly" would become more of a rarity as opposed to 'roitine'....fact!!!!


admitting that 'it cant be avoided' is crap!!....

....we all have the ability in us

...we just have to have the 'desire' to 'DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT' (actively change our driving / riding) to make the difference in OUR lives and the peopled lives that we could change <god forbid:mad:.
 
SammoHung said:
admitting that 'it cant be avoided' is crap!!....
Click to expand...

i don't agree, i think there is always a chance of things being out of your control no matter how good you are at driving.

(had this happen to me in portsmouth) someone drives into the back of your car?
like what if someone jumped off a bridge infront of your car?
or (seen this happen) some dodgy mecanic hadn't put the steering wheel back on properly and it came off in your hands?
or you are driving a van that gets blown over in high winds.

there are so many things that the ONLY way to avoid them happening is just not to drive at all. everything has a certain amount of risk attached to it, driving is a risk and no matter how hard you try you can always be a victim of it.
 
i think young drivers should be limited to the power they have in a car like bikers do you have to have soo much experiance before u can drive something powerful most young driver chrashes are young people with high powered cars
 
jowley said:
most young driver chrashes are young people with high powered cars
Click to expand...

i dont know, because even kids with 1.1 saxos crash as there consently ragging them! all young drivers dont have engough experiance IMO, me included! get in a car rag it, wheel spin, lock wheels, always drive over the limit regardless where they are driving etc etc. once they pass there test they think the rules of the road dont apply to them...
 
I've had my 4 months of dicking around. I've slowed down now, keeping to speed limits and making my driving as smooth as possible. Loads of my friends have had crashes within months of passing, and luckily, I haven't, so I'm hoping good practice will prolong that.

I keep meaning to sign up for a ROSPA course, but I keep forgetting.
 
yeh all young drivers should be restriced to smart cars for 2 years until they have had driving experinace on a bike you can only ride a certain horspower bike for 2 years before you can ride any bike you want
 
I agree with some points made but even people who have had years experience have accidents. You see a lot of old people making mistakes and often others who have to correct them i.e. braking or moving out of the way.

I can honestly say that I have nearly had my license for 4 years and have never felt the need to rag my car or act foolishly. I follow all road signs with a great deal of care and am considerate of other drivers. I feel that I am having to pay expensive car insurance due to similar aged drivers giving us a bad stereotype and increased risk statistic

I know insurance companies go off statistics but the key to this is not to hit everyone with the same stick. I would say that I am a safe driver and feel that I am always compensating for people's mistakes (especially in the Midlands) and it really angers me that I have to pay 3 times as much as someone who is probably more likely to have an accident :(

grrr, anyway rant over now lol
 
i think that a great idea for modern cars (the technology is available) is to have a tracker fitted and it linked into the ECU, if you are 17-24 regardless of sex your car should not be capable of any more than the posted speed limit if you break the law more than once.

so your car would be normal until you break the law where it would be limited to 33bhp (like a bike) or the posted limit for the roads being traveled via GPS, and on track days and stuff you could txt the manufacturer for a limited 1day code to turn it off. but not to "prosecute" drivers for breaking the law. simply penalising those that have flaunted it.

/\ i would quite easily want to drive one.. less of an incentive to speed. i mean who wants a car thats limited to 33bhp showing off you have been a pillock when you could not speed at all and have your full power car to accelerate up to the limit however fast you want???


god thats a good idea...

oh and heres a noodle twister for you...

now we have cars that are the "bane of modern society" and that "speed is the killer" for all road accidents...

over 100 years ago, do you think that with horse and carts no one was killed on the roads? those that were killed, do you think that speed was involved?

Human beings are naturaly clumsy creatures and to expect that anyone who can drive a car for an hour without making a mistake is capable of piloting the thing for 50+ years ALSO without making a mistake is rediculous.

has your dog ever walked into a patio door believing it to be open, even though he has lived with you for 10+ years?
what about you then? have you ever bitten the inside of your own mouth? or your tongue? was speed a factor in any of these events?

NO because this isnt a perfect world and people, believe it or not, have accidents. and to blame speed for it all is narrow minded, Dangerous and Ignorant.
 
has your dog ever walked into a patio door believing it to be open, even though he has lived with you for 10+ years?
Click to expand...

lol thats the funnyest thing i dog can do imo lol :D

i agree that the 33bhp rule is good, i made mistakes coming down to cardiff and i expect to make some on the way back, if i didnt THEN i would be worried. It would be funny watching chavs in their cars not going very fast and shouting at the car to go faster :D that would get my vote if i can see that !!!
 
The great thing about that, is if you could electronically limit cars as well, then it means that young people can drive just about anything, at about the same insurance cost. The only thing that'll make a difference is the drivetrain, and security of the car. So if you need to drive your dads 2.0 mondeo, then it won't make much difference from insuring you on a 1 litre micra.
 
the first ever person to be killed by a car was a woman, she was killed by a "boy racer" 22 years old. he was driving his car at nearly double the speed limit, and the car should never have been able to go that fast, the police claimed he had modified the car to drive faster but this was later proven to be impossible.

but here is the funny bit,

the speed limit was 4 miles per hour,
the car was supposidly travelling at 8 miles per hour.

the woman was killed because she was stunned by seen such a weird contraption coming towards her that she just stood there like in Austin powers where that guy gets hit by a steam roller lol
 
Antony said:
i think that a great idea for modern cars (the technology is available) is to have a tracker fitted and it linked into the ECU, if you are 17-24 regardless of sex your car should not be capable of any more than the posted speed limit if you break the law more than once.

so your car would be normal until you break the law where it would be limited to 33bhp (like a bike) or the posted limit for the roads being traveled via GPS, and on track days and stuff you could txt the manufacturer for a limited 1day code to turn it off. but not to "prosecute" drivers for breaking the law. simply penalising those that have flaunted it.

/\ i would quite easily want to drive one.. less of an incentive to speed. i mean who wants a car thats limited to 33bhp showing off you have been a pillock when you could not speed at all and have your full power car to accelerate up to the limit however fast you want???
Click to expand...

I hope your quoting there, not your actual opinion!
I disagree with that on so many levels its almost unreal!
I people want a police state then by all means lets go along with this rubbish.
 
Has anyone considered the fact that a lot of accidents are actually caused by pedestrians who wander across the road without even bothering to look? I've given up trying to remember the number of times myself or someone in front of me has had to take evasive action because some dozy pillock is wandering across the road completely oblivious to the approaching vehicles, sometimes only yards from a crossing! These people seem to expect the cars to stop for them. No wonder they made jaywalking illegal in the States. I rarely use my horn but I've had to several times in the past couple of weeks, and the look of shock on their faces when they turn round and see there is actually a car coming! FFS :mad:

Rant over

BTW I also agree with Ceirwan. We already live in an encroaching police state and are losing our rights to choose as it is. Not that I advocate speeding but if you are overtaking a cyclist or passing a stationary vehicle and the speed limiter kicks in, you could be in trouble.


BG
 
Antony said:
i think that a great idea for modern cars (the technology is available) is to have a tracker fitted and it linked into the ECU, if you are 17-24 regardless of sex your car should not be capable of any more than the posted speed limit if you break the law more than once.

so your car would be normal until you break the law where it would be limited to 33bhp (like a bike) or the posted limit for the roads being traveled via GPS, and on track days and stuff you could txt the manufacturer for a limited 1day code to turn it off. but not to "prosecute" drivers for breaking the law. simply penalising those that have flaunted it.
Click to expand...

There would be a possible problem with this - couldn't the prosecuted driver just sell the car which has a GPS 'tag' on it, and buy another one and break the speed limit all over again.

In theory it would be a good idea, and this world is becoming a police state, so it's probably due sooner or later lol However, maybe the 'tag' would need to be put on the person rather than the car?

I'm just talking randomness, so I may not make sense :wasntme:
 
i want a car with a self relulating speedometer. so it will never go faster than the maximum speed limit of that area. if i want to relax and just drive and not worry about speeding i can switch it on and just keep my foot flat to the floor and then i can turn it off if i want to have a bit more control back.

almost like cruize control in a way, just an option you can turn on to make things easier.
 
NeX said:
you do realise you have just said that speed isnt what causes the accident only that it changes the effect?
Click to expand...

Negative. You do realize that I said "I do recall some people saying that speed isn't what causes accidents..... foolish!"
 
Ceirwan said:
I hope your quoting there, not your actual opinion!
I disagree with that on so many levels its almost unreal!
I people want a police state then by all means lets go along with this rubbish.
Click to expand...

nope, thats my idea. the only people that would see this as a problem is those that break the law. otherwise it would be the same as driving your car now.... full bhp, full control, full acceleration. no worries. just dont break the law and your ok...
 
Antony said:
i think that a great idea for modern cars (the technology is available) is to have a tracker fitted and it linked into the ECU, if you are 17-24 regardless of sex your car should not be capable of any more than the posted speed limit if you break the law more than once.

so your car would be normal until you break the law where it would be limited to 33bhp (like a bike) or the posted limit for the roads being traveled via GPS, and on track days and stuff you could txt the manufacturer for a limited 1day code to turn it off. but not to "prosecute" drivers for breaking the law. simply penalising those that have flaunted it.

/\ i would quite easily want to drive one.. less of an incentive to speed. i mean who wants a car thats limited to 33bhp showing off you have been a pillock when you could not speed at all and have your full power car to accelerate up to the limit however fast you want???


god thats a good idea...

oh and heres a noodle twister for you...

now we have cars that are the "bane of modern society" and that "speed is the killer" for all road accidents...

over 100 years ago, do you think that with horse and carts no one was killed on the roads? those that were killed, do you think that speed was involved?

Human beings are naturaly clumsy creatures and to expect that anyone who can drive a car for an hour without making a mistake is capable of piloting the thing for 50+ years ALSO without making a mistake is rediculous.

has your dog ever walked into a patio door believing it to be open, even though he has lived with you for 10+ years?
what about you then? have you ever bitten the inside of your own mouth? or your tongue? was speed a factor in any of these events?

NO because this isnt a perfect world and people, believe it or not, have accidents. and to blame speed for it all is narrow minded, Dangerous and Ignorant.
Click to expand...

This is a bit impractical... Myself, who is a pretty clean driver, would not drive the vehicle stated.
 
i think that the car you drive should only be able to be started by swiping your driving license in a reader, this would stop all the false claims of people not driving, forcing premiums up and also possibly stop the amount of idiots with no license crashing and killing innocent people. Comments on this please?
 
Well anyone could have anyone's licence, the only way would be fingerprint/eye scanners really but thats a bit advance,
 
How could you possible install that amount of "License Readers" in the average amount of cars in the country. Also, something like this can be easily bypassed. What method would the police have to monitor each vehicle within the country? - Highly impractical.
 
Hyundai said:
Negative. You do realize that I said "I do recall some people saying that speed isn't what causes accidents..... foolish!"
Click to expand...

na i was just saying, you added foolish onto the end, as if to say that people who say speeding doesn't cause accidents are foolish, but then went on to say that it doesn't matter what caused the accident, speed has a big impact on the final outcome.

not having a go just making an observation, and i agree speed of an impact dictates alot.

Hyundai said:
something like this can be easily bypassed. What method would the police have to monitor each vehicle within the country? - Highly impractical.
Click to expand...

agreed, i have had my car in bits, i know every single part of it, it would be very easy for me to get my car running without any government fitted trackers or license readers.

tho it would be nice to have a way of proving that the driver of the car is the driver of the car.....

but then i think it would be the most awesome idea ever if someone could invent a way of making stupidity painful lol
 
NeX said:
na i was just saying, you added foolish onto the end, as if to say that people who say speeding doesn't cause accidents are foolish, but then went on to say that it doesn't matter what caused the accident, speed has a big impact on the final outcome.

not having a go just making an observation, and i agree speed of an impact dictates alot.



agreed, i have had my car in bits, i know every single part of it, it would be very easy for me to get my car running without any government fitted trackers or license readers.

tho it would be nice to have a way of proving that the driver of the car is the driver of the car.....

but then i think it would be the most awesome idea ever if someone could invent a way of making stupidity painful lol
Click to expand...

Lol I'm a little confused. What I'm saying is, people who say speed doesn't cause accidents are foolish. That speed is the main factor of the outcomes of accidents; whether the accident was caused by a dog in the road or simply speeding in itself.
 
NeX said:
na i was just saying, you added foolish onto the end, as if to say that people who say speeding doesn't cause accidents are foolish, but then went on to say that it doesn't matter what caused the accident, speed has a big impact on the final outcome.
Click to expand...

yes, this might be, but it is NOT speed that causes the majority of accidents.

its not about the fatality rate of accidents caused by speed, but the total number of accidents caused by speed is just slightly lower than 8%..... so over 92% of road accidents have NOTHING to do with excessive speed.
 
Hyundai said:
Lol I'm a little confused. What I'm saying is, people who say speed doesn't cause accidents are foolish. That speed is the main factor of the outcomes of accidents; whether the accident was caused by a dog in the road or simply speeding in itself.
Click to expand...

lol i am confused too lol,

it is true that in an accident, speed is the biggest factor, if everyone is doing 2 miles nothing bad will happen, at 100 miles everybody dies.

but it is still not speed that actually CAUSED the accident, it does have a big effect obviously but going fast doesn't make you crash or everyone on a drag strip would never make it to the other end lol
 
NeX said:
lol i am confused too lol,

it is true that in an accident, speed is the biggest factor, if everyone is doing 2 miles nothing bad will happen, at 100 miles everybody dies.

but it is still not speed that actually CAUSED the accident, it does have a big effect obviously but going fast doesn't make you crash or everyone on a drag strip would never make it to the other end lol
Click to expand...

like richard hammond..lol
 
Antony said:
like richard hammond..lol
Click to expand...

lol yea :D thats called the fail speed, it happens just before 88 miles an hour, you either travel back in time or you crash lol deloreans are the only cars that can break the fail speed without crashing lol
 
Accidents may not be caused because of speed. However, simply, speed is involved in accidents; whether you're going the limit or not. Speed is a VERY big factor in ALL accidents.

8% only caused by speeding? - Source please.
 
the national road safety partnership stated in 2006 that only 5% of all fatal road accidents are caused by excessive speed.
so i was wrong, it is less than that, its 5%!!!


taken from an article in the TIMES newspaper from a government minister.
Only one in every 20 road accidents is caused by the driver breaking the speed limit, the Government has admitted.

Critics said the research, based on official police reports, destroyed the case for speed cameras.

It came amid a separate row over the accuracy of the Government's figures for the number of people being injured or killed on the roads, which showed a three per cent fall last year.

Critics say the figures, compiled by police, do not tally with the higher toll of hospital admissions.

Ministers have justified the explosion in speed cameras - which raised £120m last year by trapping two million motorists - by insisting that 'speed kills'.

But the first published study into the causes behind road accidents yesterday found exceeding the speed limit was a factor in only five per cent of cases.

Accidents were far more likely to be caused by drivers failing to pay attention and making mistakes, or pedestrians not looking properly.

The Department for Transport attempted to inflate the figure for speeding, claiming it was a factor in 15 per cent of accidents.

But this was only achieved by adding on the ten per cent of accidents in which drivers were considered by police to be driving too fast for the conditions - but, crucially, were not breaking the speed limit.

The Safe Speed campaign group said it was now clear the Government's 'entire road safety policy has been based on dodgy data'. It has seen the number of cameras rocket to 3,300 fixed sites and 3,400 mobile devices.

Founder Paul Smith said: 'Safe Speed has been pointing out for years that the concentration on speeding was a deadly mistake. 'Speed cameras must be scrapped.

'They have focused everyone on the wrong safety factor and have proved to be a dangerous distraction. Countless opportunities for live-saving policies have been missed - because of speed cameras.'

The 'contributory factors to road accidents report', the first of its kind, showed a total of 147,509 accidents last year.

Of these five per cent, or 7,314, had breaking the speed limit as a factor. This rose to 12 per cent, or 325, for accidents which ended in a fatality.

The police deciding the driver was going too fast for the conditions was a factor in a further 10 per cent of all accidents, or 15,436, and in 14 per cent of those ending in a death, or 357.

More significant were people failing to look properly (32 per cent), drivers of pedestrians failing to judge the other person's speed properly and road conditions or layout (15 per cent).

Separate figures showed the number of people killed in accidents involving drink-driving fell by three per cent last year to 560.

A total of 3,201 people were killed overall on the roads, down one per cent. And the number of people seriously injured fell 7 per cent to 28,954.

Total casualties - deaths, serious injuries and slight injuries - fell three per cent to 271,017.

Cyclists killed or seriously injured rose by 2 per cent overall to 2,360, and the number of fatalities increased 10 per cent - from 134 to 148.

The figures appeared to put the Government on course to meet its target of reducing, by 2010, by 40 per cent the number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents compared with the average for 1994-98.

It is also aiming for other targets on the number of children killed or seriously injured - down 11 per cent last year to 3,742 - and a cut in slight injuries.

The DfT said the number of people killed or seriously injured in accidents reported to the police was already close to or below all the 1994-98 averages.

But the independent Statistics Commission said that if it based its casualty figures on hospital statistics, rather than police ones, the Dft would 'not be on track' to meet its targets.

Figures from hospitals suggest the true rate of death and serious injury could be half as many again as the number claimed by the Government.

Shadow transport secretary Chris Grayling said: 'The apparent contradiction between Government figures on road deaths and injuries and the story coming out of our hospitals is extremely worrying.

'The Government should start taking proper action to deal with the problem, and stop sheltering behind statistics about which there are very real concerns.'

Yesterday's figures also revealed 597 children were killed on journeys to and from school last year - the equivalent of 11 every week.

Of these, 471 were on foot, 56 on bicycles and 34 were in cars. Six out of ten were boys. The child pedestrian death rate is much higher than that of many other EU countries.
Click to expand...
 
One thing is certain: Speed cameras ARE a distraction. There are several roads I know where people trundle along at 26MPH with their attention fixed firmly on the speedo, or realize at the last second that they are about to pass a camera and slam the anchors on.

If you are watching your speedo, you are NOT watching the road !!! This means you are FAR more likely to hit that dozy pedestrian who is about to cross without looking, or hit the back of the vehicle which has had to hit the brakes halfway round the corner for the same reason.They are running "Stop, Look, Listen" ad campaigns on the kids' channels, perhaps they need to target adults as well?


BG
 

Similar threads

Ceirwan
Safety at Work
Replies
7
Views
882
Ceirwan
Ceirwan
R
windscreen safety grooves-opinion?
Replies
20
Views
4K
masterbiker
masterbiker
James
"Nobody loves their car like a Micra owner" - Great Micra Advert!
Replies
6
Views
2K
solarice
solarice
T
The greatest driving road in the world!!!
Replies
14
Views
2K
Robbie 733
Robbie 733
L
Wrong side on the road
Replies
5
Views
1K
K10Daz
K10Daz
Back
Top