
He's going to tear down...
... something beautiful and original, and replace it with something modern and anodyne.
How very American.
15 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Jul 2007
Can we all have a look at some actual facts rather than just re-iterating the same old arguments? I wasn't sure about this issue myself, so I did a bit of Googling. I couldn't find statistics for England but the reported causes of RTAs in Scotland are readily available here:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/933/0069735.xls
Tables N and O show that, in 2007, 16 accidents and 3 deaths were attributable to "Driver Using Mobile Phone". More deaths, and a great many more accidents, were attributable to "Dazzling Sun" - shall we legislate against that, too? In fact, Table M shows that "Driver Using Mobile Phone" wasn't even a secondary factor in enough cases to figure in the list - where you would expect to see a link, if the reactionary comments of some posters were to be believed, between "Driver Using Mobile Phone" and, for example, "Careless/Reckless/In a hurry" or "Failed to judge other pers. path/speed".
I know that there are lies, damn lies and statistics; but surely, these figures would suggest that the assertion that "People who drive on their phones are as bad as/worse than drink-drivers" is not only wrong (in the case, at least, of Scotland) but actively detracts from the fight against the drink-driver - something I wholeheartedly support?
1) As anyone who has been to Swindon will note, if you are in the town centre your thoughts turn to leaving the area for somewhere a bit less crap, as quickly as possible. The council should be applauded for making this task a little easier. To claim that the local boy racers will now come flocking to turn Swindon into some kind of Saxo GP circuit is grossly to underestimate the intelligence of your average Max Power reader - not to mention the fact that they already have the perfectly good Greenbridge cinema carpark for all burnout-related activities.
2) On a less frivolous note, one of the most intelligent comments made here has been:
"Come to that, you should never be unable to stop within the stretch of road that you can see to be clear."
This was drilled into me by my driving instructor, and it seems so fundamental that I have no idea why it is not displayed on all those useless dot matrix displays on motorways, instead of "helpful" advice like "Don't phone whilst driving", "Queue ahead" (whilst you're already stationary) and "Breathe in, breathe out." If everybody followed this rule, there would be a grand total of 0 fatal accidents caused by car drivers each year.
My personal view on speed cameras is that if you get caught by an obvious one - diddums. Should have been concentrating harder - it's difficult to drive quickly, and if you can't spot a bright yellow box on a pole, what chance have you got of spotting the kid whose football has just gone in the road, or the deer that's about to jump out from behind that hedge? However, I deplore the bastard unmarked Transits that sit on motorway bridges (specifically the one over the A46 between Coventry and the M40, always illegally parked). What can they claim to be achieving, other than raising cash?
Rather than this somewhat disingenuous focus on speed as the root of all evil, perhaps some "Safety Partnership" representatives should be sent to Scotland, where signs on the A9 carry advice such as "Frustration causes accidents: allow faster traffic to pass." This would have two effects: Firstly, it would allow them to witness some excellent driving (probably the best I have encountered in the UK), some well-surfaced roads and some intelligently-sited speed cameras. And secondly, once they'd got to Wick we could close the barriers, leaving the bastards stuck there just in time for winter.
In other news:
- Bear makes decision to shit in woods.
- Pontiff admits to "Catholic tendencies."
I'm not much of a smoker, but... the weed is no worse than alcohol, surely? Like a poster above said, legalise it and cream the tax revenue off the top. Then you can stop taxing my bloody petrol.
I think, in situations like this, Brown should ask himself... what would Paris do?
Is it just me or is this the least exciting news story I've read all day? "Two IT companies will talk to some journalists tomorrow about an unknown topic. In other news, mass lunch-eating is expected between 12 and 1pm this afternoon, but we are unsure of precise sarnie-filling details at this time. We'll bring you more information as soon as we get it."
Firstly, there was a golden opportunity missed here to have the girl's new phone be an iPhone - thus getting achieving Vulture Central's ultimate double-whammy. Fair enough, I doubt she had one, but since when has the truth been allowed to stand in the way of a good story?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/02/donkey_shocker/
Secondly, a better way to drop one's phone down the toilet is simply to be male. Try having a pee at 3am whilst sozzled and trying to send an SMS. It's all too easy to lose grip with one hand or another... Yes, I have done this. Pre-flush. My phone took 3 months in a drawer to dry out, but now functions perfectly again, although strangely people are reluctant to borrow it to make calls.