Simply unspeakable

[Dominic M]

A friend of mine was doing research into compulsory cycle helmets. He found that in Australia, when a law was introduced making cycle helmets compulsory, cycling head injuries actually ROSE. Possible reasons include, helmets impeded vision or hearing, but also, that they made people feel safer and they thus took more risks. What has happened to road fatalities in relation to the introduction of ABS, airbags, etc etc, I wonder?

 

I recall reading a while ago that whilst fatalities on the roads had stabilised over the last decade at c.3,500 p.a., the proportion of vehicle drivers had decreased whilst others (pedestrians, cyclists etc) had increased. This reflected the increased safety of vehicles internally, but also possibly demonstrated how drivers with cars that have ABS, airbags and so on are inclined to drive faster. So perhaps a return to drum brakes, removal of soundproofing and possibly a glass bottom in every car might reverse the trend.

[Catrin]

I was interested in the idea that the attitude in Europe might be different - so I e-mailed an English friend in Germany who has lived in both France and Germany for many years, and asked what the general feeling on the continent was about personal responsibility.

 

He did a bit of asking around at work and has come up with the following (subject to usual disclaimers - no hard facts, only opinions, etc, etc):

 

"Everyone is surprised at the thought of putting barriers alongside the railway lines... This would cost too much.

 

If a child wandered onto the line and was killed, it is unfortunate... and is the responsibility of the parents to ensure that the children were trained and responsible.

 

If a child wandered onto the line with a large stone, and was killed, and killed someone else.... Then it is unfortunate and there would normally be no compensation for the person killed....

 

However, Germany is very, very, heavilly legally controlled and only a fool does not have personal 3rd party insurance (everyone I know has insurance)... thus putting all risks well out of the way (costs about 80 Euro per year)."

 

I was brought up regularly being told, "there is no such thing as an accident". Yes, I know that there is, however, the vast majority of "accidents" can be traced to people failing to think. I was made to think through what had happened and how to avoid it another time.

 

I didn't play on building sites, I was told that they were dangerous, and that I shouldn't go there - I was sufficiently in awe of my mother that doing anything else would have been unthinkable. However, I was free to roam around to many other places without constant supervision. When I failed to take sensible clothing and got wet I stayed wet, and learned to think ahead next time. When my bike broke, I pushed it home. No-one came and got me - no mobile phone, no suitable car.

 

When I didn't work for my exams I failed them. No-one constantly monitored my progress giving regular feedback, no-one rang my parents, no-one ran 'catch up' sessions, no-one even gave me an 'estimated grade'. When I failed I learned that you have to work harder - or you get crap jobs. I don't blame my teachers, even though by today's standards they would be judged as failing. Teachers today have to pick up the pieces, if your pupils don't do at least as well as the others then the Head teacher will be onto your department asking why. League tables force us to make sure that pupils don't fail. So we think for them.

 

While trying to teach my son personal responsibility some years ago I explained to him that I would remind him to get his coat, but if he didn't get it he would be cold at school. He was perhaps 10 or 11 at the time. He didn't get his coat despite two reminders and went to school without it - that lunchtime I got a very stroppy phonecall from the headteacher of his school asking why I had allowed my son to be at school without a coat.

 

We don't know the facts of this distressing case - so can make no judgement as to what really happened, but how can we possibly bring up our children to avoid serious problems if we don't let them learn from their behaviour. If you're not making mistakes, you're not learning.

 

Cath

[WJM]

"I remember in the early 1990s a safety engineer referring to this as "the Volvo syndrome""

 

Road Layouts too: There a number of instances where a 'dangerous' bend was straightened out and accidents went up! Perception of danger fell, risk-taking increased...

[Tim Lewis]

<Snip>

 

When I didn't work for my exams I failed them. No-one constantly monitored my progress giving regular feedback, no-one rang my parents, no-one ran 'catch up' sessions, no-one even gave me an 'estimated grade'. When I failed I learned that you have to work harder - or you get crap jobs. I don't blame my teachers, even though by today's standards they would be judged as failing. Teachers today have to pick up the pieces, if your pupils don't do at least as well as the others then the Head teacher will be onto your department asking why. League tables force us to make sure that pupils don't fail. So we think for them.

 

<Snip>

 

I for one think completely disagree with your statement. The time that you find out that not working hard leads to crap jobs is when you have a crap job. I now realise that I worked well below my ability at school and looking back I wish that I had been monitored/assessed much more and that my teachers were assessed on their results. As it turns out I haven't done too badly but I do know now that I could have done better.

 

Tim

[ChrisPy]

I was interested in the reversal in the Netherlands of the British 'road calming and excess road furniture' policy, where cars and pedestrians share the same space with a minimum of signs, white lines or other expensive ugly stuff. Apparently it was highly effective, because people actually started taking responsibility for looking out for their own safety and that of others again.

 

............... oh, and it's probably another load of bollocks

[Catrin]

They're called "naked roads" - there was a plan to do it around Exhibition Road in London - dunno what happened to that idea.

Cath

[alan_fincher]

"I remember in the early 1990s a safety engineer referring to this as "the Volvo syndrome""

 

Road Layouts too: There a number of instances where a 'dangerous' bend was straightened out and accidents went up! Perception of danger fell, risk-taking increased...

[rant]

 

Our home town was one of just 4 in the country selected some years back to be the subject of wide-scale road safety improvements.

 

It was to be one of 4 show-cases for what is achievable if enough money is put into it.

 

Now, almost none of those improvements, (chicanes, humps, changed priorities, etc), are retained - virtually all were fairly quickly removed after accidents or complaints by residents.

 

In a case that still survives, (four road-narrowing chicanes with enforced give-way), people regularly have near misses racing each other for the gaps. I'm sure after a fatal accident, they too will go....

 

Oh and there are some deathly pot-holes where speed-bumps and false corners have been taken out, and the frost has got at the pathetic attempts to fill the resulting hole

 

[/rant]

 

p.s.

 

I can't agree about cycle helmets though - I'd not dream of riding on the roads without one. My personal approach - always wear something to protect my skull, but continue to exercise as much caution as if I was not...... I relax that rule if lock-wheeling by bike, but even there nasty things can and do occur.

[magpie patrick]

I was interested in the reversal in the Netherlands of the British 'road calming and excess road furniture' policy, where cars and pedestrians share the same space with a minimum of signs, white lines or other expensive ugly stuff. Apparently it was highly effective, because people actually started taking responsibility for looking out for their own safety and that of others again.

 

............... oh, and it's probably another load of bollocks

 

No it's not: it happened and it worked, but it would be a mistake to think it could be readily repeated here. This was done in small dutch towns and when I had a look there were several key differences, main one being low flow that was probably over regulated by our standards in the first place. By low flows I mean 2-3000 vehicles a day when at the time I was working on traffic management for Crewkerne (hardly a seething metropolis) which had 6-7000 vehicles a day. Also, the dutch towns were new-sih (20th century) with wide streets and clear visibility etc, not medieval street patterns

[stort_mark]

I was interested in the reversal in the Netherlands of the British 'road calming and excess road furniture' policy, where cars and pedestrians share the same space with a minimum of signs, white lines or other expensive ugly stuff. Apparently it was highly effective, because people actually started taking responsibility for looking out for their own safety and that of others again.

 

In Germany, a town decided to get rid of all road signs (every last one of them) and special permission was granted to suspend many rules and regulations. Result.....fewer accidents, fewer injuries, lower speeds, less congestion......

 

The people and politicians loved it, but the civil servants were a bit miffed because it all implied that they were a complete waste of space. Which they weren't. Not completely.

[mayalld]

I can't agree about cycle helmets though - I'd not dream of riding on the roads without one. My personal approach - always wear something to protect my skull, but continue to exercise as much caution as if I was not...... I relax that rule if lock-wheeling by bike, but even there nasty things can and do occur.

 

Actually, there is evidence that whilst a cycle helmet reduces the risk of Skull injury, it INCREASES the risk of torsion injury to the neck.

 

Given that a broken neck is less survivable than a fractured skull, it ought to be a personal (and informed) decision as to whether to wear them or not, unlike the policy of my dear employers (disciplinary offence not to wear a cycle helmet)

[grahoom]

it ought to be a personal (and informed) decision as to whether to wear them or not, unlike the policy of my dear employers (disciplinary offence not to wear a cycle helmet)

 

As a regular cyclist, and who's been in an accident without a cycle helmet, I feel it should be personal choice to wear a helmet while cycling. I currently wear a cycle helmet now.

[carlt]

unlike the policy of my dear employers (disciplinary offence not to wear a cycle helmet)

When I did my stint as a postie it was just as the cycle helmets were introduced.

 

I returned mine, saying I didn't need it. They sent it back insisting I wore it.

 

I went to see my manager and explained that, as I didn't use a bike, I wouldn't be needing the helmet.

 

He explained to me that a bike was deemed necessary for my walk so why wasn't I using one.

 

I told him that I could take a short cut to my walk, along a footpath (no bikes allowed) and get there quicker than by bike, saving me time and the Royal Mail money.

 

He told me that this wasn't the approved route, to my delvery area so I wasn't to use it.

 

I said "OK".

 

Hat went to live in the locker, bike stayed locked up on the rack and life returned to normal.

[mayalld]

I for one think completely disagree with your statement. The time that you find out that not working hard leads to crap jobs is when you have a crap job. I now realise that I worked well below my ability at school and looking back I wish that I had been monitored/assessed much more and that my teachers were assessed on their results. As it turns out I haven't done too badly but I do know now that I could have done better.

 

Tim

 

No, the time that you find out that not working hard leads to a crap job is when you listen to your parents drum it into you week after week after week.

 

You say that if you had been monitored and assessed, "I could have done much better".

 

The simple truth is that there are great jobs, good jobs, average jobs, poor jobs and crap jobs out there. No amount of educational clap-trap will change the fact that somebody has to do the crap jobs.

 

To be frank, every time the system saves some kid who couldn't be arsed to learn from himself, and boosts him up a couple of points on the ladder, all that happens is that some other kid who managed, from his own efforts to get up to his full potential, ends up relegated.

 

It's a tough world out there, and we need to educate our kids that it is so.

 

Oh, and I don't speak from any "I'm alright Jack" POV. I had a good education to A-Level, and dropped out of University due to my own idleness. As a result, I've taken 20 years to climb to a reasonably senior position and level of salary that could have been mine (if I'd applied myself) within 5 years, whilst many of those who took A-Levels alongside me and did apply themselves have far better jobs (and salaries) than me.

[Chertsey]

There are so many things that you never believe when your parents tell you; you just have to find out for yourself. Better to do that early on, in a small way, where possible.

[magnetman]

Can I just check my understanding here. I think that although arguing robustly in a thread on an internet forum, you are not really saying that we don't need health and safety - are you? Or the factories act, or any of the fundamental safety legislation about mining, quarrying, handling dangerous chemicals or operating dangerous machinery?

 

 

Richard

 

If you are an employer i believe you have a duty to ensure that your employees are safe. If you are a state ruling a population I don't believe that you need to patronise them by pointing out obvious dangers or putting fences round dangerous places or 'danger keep out' which just encourages people and makes emergency access more difficult. Where does it end? walk along a pavement and look at signs saying 'don't walk here some idiot might be using their phone while driving and they could very easily kill you even if they are only doing 20mph'. or 'if you drive this vehicle you might die or be severely injured'. I have a 'sit on top' canoe which has a warning label on it, along the lines of 'participating in paddle sports may result in serious injury or death'. i think this is ridiculous, doing anything may result in serious injury or death. Being alive is the most common cause of death in the UK.

[Chris J W]

"It's at times like this, I really wish I'd listened to what my Mother told me ..."

 

"Why? What did she say?"

 

"I don't know. I wasn't listening."

[fuzzyduck]

How come we're 8 pages into this topic, and nobody has made a "leg to stand on" joke? Come on we're mostly british for gawds sake.

[carlt]

How come we're 8 pages into this topic, and nobody has made a "leg to stand on" joke? Come on we're mostly british for gawds sake.

I have used the term "Knee-jerk reaction" more than once, expecting someone to comment....Where's Maverick, when you need him?

Edited June 25, 2008 by carlt

[magnetman]

thats bad.

[Catrin]

I for one think completely disagree with your statement. The time that you find out that not working hard leads to crap jobs is when you have a crap job. I now realise that I worked well below my ability at school and looking back I wish that I had been monitored/assessed much more and that my teachers were assessed on their results. As it turns out I haven't done too badly but I do know now that I could have done better.

 

Tim

 

Granted - doubtless I would have done better at school with constant chasing. I was underperforming badly, and while I had enough intelligence and memory to get through some O levels I bombed out badly on A levels. But the result of the constant monitoring by teachers is that the teachers end up being responsible, and the pupils don't learn from the mistakes they don't get to make.

 

I'm not going to change the way that I monitor my students, I get good results and I'm proud of it, but I do also worry that I am preventing them from learning in a different way. Perhaps we need to find different ways of teaching them personal responsibility - what that is I don't know. I can at least truthfully say to my students that I know what it feels like to fail your exams, and I know what hard work it is to reverse that.

 

Cath

[mayalld]

If you are an employer i believe you have a duty to ensure that your employees are safe. If you are a state ruling a population I don't believe that you need to patronise them by pointing out obvious dangers or putting fences round dangerous places or 'danger keep out' which just encourages people and makes emergency access more difficult. Where does it end? walk along a pavement and look at signs saying 'don't walk here some idiot might be using their phone while driving and they could very easily kill you even if they are only doing 20mph'. or 'if you drive this vehicle you might die or be severely injured'. I have a 'sit on top' canoe which has a warning label on it, along the lines of 'participating in paddle sports may result in serious injury or death'. i think this is ridiculous, doing anything may result in serious injury or death. Being alive is the most common cause of death in the UK.

 

You missed the classic warning on a packet of peanuts... "May contain nuts"

 

No shit Sherlock!

[DHutch]

A friend of mine was doing research into compulsory cycle helmets. He found that in Australia, when a law was introduced making cycle helmets compulsory, cycling head injuries actually ROSE. Possible reasons include, helmets impeded vision or hearing, but also, that they made people feel safer and they thus took more risks. What has happened to road fatalities in relation to the introduction of ABS, airbags, etc etc, I wonder?

I beleave a simular study was made into the restricting of work on fixed electrical systems in the home.

- It was found simularly that when Australia imposed such restrictions the number of deaths and incidents involving mains voltage also rose.

- Although the number of deaths/incidents from fixed wiring droped slightly, there was a share rise in deaths and incidents from non-fixed and tempary wiring.

 

 

 

Daniel

[alan_fincher]

You missed the classic warning on a packet of peanuts... "May contain nuts"

Or the classic line on take-away coffees......

 

"Warning: Contents may be hot."

[grahoom]

You missed the classic warning on a packet of peanuts... "May contain nuts"

 

No shit Sherlock!

 

well, to be fair, peanuts are not nuts, but A legume....

[stort_mark]

Or the classic line on take-away coffees......

 

"Warning: Contents may be hot."

 

Which may well be quite sensible. **Many** people were seriously injured after being scalded by coffee that was put into insulated cups. One naturally expects after a few minutes for any cup of tea or coffee to have cooled down a bit, but the insulated cups retains the extremely high temperature for much longer.