PDA

View Full Version : Road Accidents


/Circa
April 16th, 2008, 02:41 AM
Yeah, I need someone to express my anger on day to day society. And the one thing that pisses me off, and one thing people may not notice, but alot of government ads are based off. Is car accidents, i'm not really talking just about car accidents, but people hitting each other and why it's being caused. Has anyone noticed the number of new drivers each year, and the tests they have to go through. The government is extending the ammount of time betweens license plates. (L - P) But I dont think thats the problem. The one thing that ticks me off so much, is seeing these driving instructors slacking off inside the car. Today I saw something that really got me going. I saw a driving instructor, with someone in the car. The driving instructor wasn't just slacking off, but he had his legs up on the ledge of the car. What the hell? Aren't you supposed to be watching the person driving? Not stretching your legs. But I dont think he can watch the other driver doing that.

Another thing is, when I was in a car accident. People that try to get out of accidents that they caused. I really felt like coming out and showing this person a fist or two. What happened was, Me and my dad were at the lights. It was red. Out of nowhere, some idiot smashes straight into the back of us, not slow, but probably speeding. This woman had some new car, and was probably busy with her phone, because we sought it unfolded on the seat of her car. She said that moment that she would fix everything, but then. When everything was going alright, she decided to say that we already had an accident with a car infront of us. I don't know why she would be stupid enough to say this, when the person infront of us (he was involved too) denied it. She ended up having to pay for everyones fixes. But since it cost so much, she had to fork it out for her own car. Pretty deserving eh?

I want all your comments on the things I just said, and maybe someone might want to add to some of this?

expect more rants, i've got plenty up my sleeve.

Ayano Katagiri
April 16th, 2008, 02:54 AM
Just throwing my ideas in here~ xD

Talking about Government sponsored/campaign ads, I must say some of them do turn out pretty gruesome and hits the message on the mark. But it's necessary, with the number of young drivers and then combine it with alcohol, we get reckless drivers all the time. It's about removing that sort of problem from society and if the ads help prevent people from drink-driving, then I'm all for them, seeing as there has been research to prove that people aged between I think it was 16-24 (or somewhere around that category) tend to cause the most road accidents.

And with the accident you were in, man... that must have sucked if she tried to blame your family for it. Seriously, those kinds of people are just quite a pain. And the excuse is sorta flawed as well... it doesn't explain why she still crashed into you if you were already in accident and had stopped moving.

Amachi
April 16th, 2008, 03:19 AM
I've changed the topic to something more relevant.

Also, try and include some statistics relevant to your argument, if any. Following what Kagami said. it should be noted that young drivers (below 25) are involved in the highest percentage of accidents (17% or so?), and so the government and road authorities are doing their best to reduce that number.

That instructor was setting a terrible example for the learner. It's their own fault for hiring them.

/Circa
April 17th, 2008, 01:40 AM
Just throwing my ideas in here~ xD

Talking about Government sponsored/campaign ads, I must say some of them do turn out pretty gruesome and hits the message on the mark. But it's necessary, with the number of young drivers and then combine it with alcohol, we get reckless drivers all the time. It's about removing that sort of problem from society and if the ads help prevent people from drink-driving, then I'm all for them, seeing as there has been research to prove that people aged between I think it was 16-24 (or somewhere around that category) tend to cause the most road accidents.

And with the accident you were in, man... that must have sucked if she tried to blame your family for it. Seriously, those kinds of people are just quite a pain. And the excuse is sorta flawed as well... it doesn't explain why she still crashed into you if you were already in accident and had stopped moving.


Yeah i've noticed the impact that disgusting and sad looking ads may have on people. But sometimes it still doesn't work, it takes one person being stupid to kill alot of people doing the right thing. But I dont think ads help with drink driving, because you may think of not driving before you drink, but soon enough you'll forgot whats real and whats not. (The five or so stages of drunkiness come into play).

And about the accident, me and my dad are still wondering what the hell she was thinking? Testing out how much damage she does? Ive had back problems ever since that accident, and my dad has a saw neck all the time.

I've changed the topic to something more relevant.

Also, try and include some statistics relevant to your argument, if any. Following what Kagami said. it should be noted that young drivers (below 25) are involved in the highest percentage of accidents (17% or so?), and so the government and road authorities are doing their best to reduce that number.

That instructor was setting a terrible example for the learner. It's their own fault for hiring them.

Im not the kind of person to research things, im a bit open minded. a bit too open minded..
Sorry about the title, I didnt really put any thought into it.

Jaimes
April 17th, 2008, 02:03 AM
and one thing people may not notice, but alot of government ads are based off. Is car accidents, i'm not really talking just about car accidents, but people hitting each other and why it's being caused.

I don't see what's wrong with this.. >_>

That's what a car accident is.. its getting hit. It's not nice, but it does happen and to a lot of people.

Having a graphic and memorable message is a good deterent and way of educating people. Honestly, even I wouldn't know much about driving accidents or statistic if it wasn't for goverment advertising.
If you think that removing these ad's would somehow be a good thing, then I'd have to disagree with you, because it has likely prevented thousands of casualties.

firepokemon
April 17th, 2008, 03:26 AM
I actually find television advertisements where they show the consequences of drinking and driving or traveling at speed to be rather unappealing. I can't speak for other countries but they used to be simply shock tactics. Someone has a night out, decide that well they should drink, the car crashes and then we see some of the consequences. Yeah it reminds you the first time you watch it. But I wonder if these have become so overdone that people really don't pay attention to them anymore. I'm pretty sure driving statistics are good overall here in New Zealand and they have been down for a number of years. But I sometimes wonder if they've reached their limit. Where, you're now stuck with the persistent ones, the people who are repeatedly warned or fined about their speed. The people that drive drunk and kill or seriously injure people and yet they continue to get their licenses back. I think its an issue. Advertisement and education can only do so much. Persistent and frequent repeaters simply need their license taken away.

Having a graphic and memorable message is a good deterent and way of educating people. Honestly, even I wouldn't know much about driving accidents or statistic if it wasn't for goverment advertising.
If you think that removing these ad's would somehow be a good thing, then I'd have to disagree with you, because it has likely prevented thousands of casualties.

Yes they educate those who are willing to change their ways or who will have a thought about their own driving. But often, these advertisements are repeatedly constantly that much of their potency is lost. Also it doesn't address those who are persistent speeders/drink drivers. These people need harsher penalties. I don't know about elsewhere. But here you can drink and drive and you get six months at that. And there have been a couple pieces in the news where persistent drink drivers have eventually injured or even killed someone. And there is also the major issue that many just ignore the fact that their licenses are suspended.

Also New Zealand has a lot driving age its just 15. I think thats perfectly fine. However, it takes just 6 months to get your restricted license (3 mths if you do a course). This means they can drive 6am-10/11 pm by themselves or with a person that is fully licensed. A full license can be reached after 18 months of being on your restricted (12 months if you take a course). Meaning someone who turns 15 can have their full in just One year and three months. Something that is probably too short. I don't think the age should increase. I do think it should be harder to get your restricted. And to get your restricted you should have to take mandatory lessons and a defensive driving course. Because this is really the dangerous level, as many drivers ignore the rules around a restricted license and just carry passengers anyway.


My partner had an incident where a car came up behind him. Didn't cause major damage but to fix it would have been a good 200 dollars or so. Of course my partner always too trusting of people accepted the cell phone number given, didn't think to check the number plates. And thus, had to fork out 200 dollars. Doesn't really relate that much to what you had to go through though.

Ayano Katagiri
April 17th, 2008, 03:46 AM
I actually find television advertisements where they show the consequences of drinking and driving or traveling at speed to be rather unappealing. I can't speak for other countries but they used to be simply shock tactics. Someone has a night out, decide that well they should drink, the car crashes and then we see some of the consequences. Yeah it reminds you the first time you watch it. But I wonder if these have become so overdone that people really don't pay attention to them anymore. I'm pretty sure driving statistics are good overall here in New Zealand and they have been down for a number of years. But I sometimes wonder if they've reached their limit. Where, you're now stuck with the persistent ones, the people who are repeatedly warned or fined about their speed. The people that drive drunk and kill or seriously injure people and yet they continue to get their licenses back. I think its an issue. Advertisement and education can only do so much. Persistent and frequent repeaters simply need their license taken away.
I must agree with you there. The ads done here in NZ have simply gone been overused. It's now become more annoying than the initial "shock" factor that it had presented. Sure, the ads were a good initiative by the Ministry of Transport but the repetitiveness of it has somewhat softened the image. It may have stopped some drivers doing so back then, but if it's such a common sight, it's unlikely that it'll affect the newer drivers anytime soon.
Also New Zealand has a lot driving age its just 15. I think thats perfectly fine. However, it takes just 6 months to get your restricted license (3 mths if you do a course). This means they can drive 6am-10/11 pm by themselves or with a person that is fully licensed. A full license can be reached after 18 months of being on your restricted (12 months if you take a course). Meaning someone who turns 15 can have their full in just One year and three months. Something that is probably too short. I don't think the age should increase. I do think it should be harder to get your restricted. And to get your restricted you should have to take mandatory lessons and a defensive driving course. Because this is really the dangerous level, as many drivers ignore the rules around a restricted license and just carry passengers anyway.
I thought the restricted had to be 6months after the learners, regardless of any courses. (But, hey... what do I know. I'm 16 and still haven't gone to get my learners yet.)
From what I've heard from a few classmates, they drive around pretty fiercely on the roads which leads me to support a raise in the driving age. 15 is too young in my opinion, especially with the majority of people being so immature about so many things, which will eventually in turn affect their driving skills on the road.
Sure, they may have passed and got their licence, but that doesn't necessarily meant they're a safe driver on the road. And then if you extend this situation and look at boy-racers and the carnage they've caused around the country in many areas, it's pretty bad and dangerous having drivers who don't obey the law and are pretty much out of control with a legal full licence.

Jaimes
April 17th, 2008, 01:29 PM
I must agree with you there. The ads done here in NZ have simply gone been overused. It's now become more annoying than the initial "shock" factor that it had presented. Sure, the ads were a good initiative by the Ministry of Transport but the repetitiveness of it has somewhat softened the image. It may have stopped some drivers doing so back then, but if it's such a common sight, it's unlikely that it'll affect the newer drivers anytime soon.

Though not living in the same country as you guys, I'm not sure how often those ads will pop up. But I can't really see how 'too much' of an advert will increase road accident rates as opposed to displaying fewer adverts.
I.e I can't imagine someone watching TV and when the advert comes up it will encourage then to drive more dangerously. Also the concept of 'too much' will vary between individuals, such as those who watch less TV.

To put it simply, being mildly annoyed is comparatively a small price to pay. I'd rather have too much of something that save lives instead of not having enough.

Virtual Chatot
April 17th, 2008, 01:58 PM
Though not living in the same country as you guys, I'm not sure how often those ads will pop up. But I can't really see how 'too much' of an advert will increase road accident rates as opposed to displaying fewer adverts.
I.e I can't imagine someone watching TV and when the advert comes up it will encourage then to drive more dangerously. Also the concept of 'too much' will vary between individuals, such as those who watch less TV.

To put it simply, being mildly annoyed is comparatively a small price to pay. I'd rather have too much of something that save lives instead of not having enough.

Incredibly, I have to agree with everything you've said so far in this thread. Annoyance is nothing compared to the sheer amount of lives lost in car wrecks.

Seriously though, why be against something when the only result can be good?

Ayano Katagiri
April 17th, 2008, 03:38 PM
Though not living in the same country as you guys, I'm not sure how often those ads will pop up. But I can't really see how 'too much' of an advert will increase road accident rates as opposed to displaying fewer adverts.
I.e I can't imagine someone watching TV and when the advert comes up it will encourage then to drive more dangerously. Also the concept of 'too much' will vary between individuals, such as those who watch less TV.

To put it simply, being mildly annoyed is comparatively a small price to pay. I'd rather have too much of something that save lives instead of not having enough.

Okay... I think you misinterpreted what I meant. (Or maybe I made it too ambigious, seeing as it was around midnight last night when I made that post). I'm not saying that the ads are causing an increase of accidents, what I meant was that the effect that they had on people would have somewhat decreased as it becomes more of a common sight. It's really more that they repeat exactly the same ads rather than creating new ones that makes it more annoying and repetitive.

I realise the campaign against dangerous driving is a good one, regardless of how much I may be annoyed at it. I'm for it to continue, but I really think the government here should take further measures and do as much as they can to prevent new drivers from driving dangerously. For example, offering free defence driving courses before people can receive their full licences. That way their driving skills would be improved and it'd actually encourage them to go to the lessons as they are pretty expensive.

firepokemon
April 18th, 2008, 03:25 AM
But I can't really see how 'too much' of an advert will increase road accident rates as opposed to displaying fewer adverts.



Realise you have said more but I didn't want to quote the whole thing. Its not tat we're saying road accidents will increase due to warning ads. That would be an absurd assumption, highly unlikely to show up in stats. What I am saying is that people tend to get complacent and over time the messages lose their impact. Also these ads don't exactly deal with repeated offenders and those that simply do what they want. Thus, the ads don't and can't help such people. Which, is why penalties for offences and in particular the people who repeated offend need to receive much harsher penalties.