This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Tribute to Car Accident Kids - I'm Angry!!!

Jump to new
ThingyMajiggy said:
like if I had a gun a shot someone, but if I didn't have bullets in it, they wouldn't have died. Doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

Sam, want to have another crack at that analogy cause it came out sounding real dumb.

If I'm going to be shot, I would prefer if the gun had no bullets in it.
 
Yeah I agree with Drac. There is a reason why speed limits are different depending on terrain and location. The present road speed limits are a major contributor to the safety of everyone using the roads. Adhering to speed limits and driving to conditions (wet roads etc.) are two basic rules everyone needs to follow. Exceeding designated speed limits increases the danger to self and others. This cannot be understated.
 

Kids....make mistakes.
Its just that the potenial consequences just don't soak in and hit home.

I scared the crap out of myself when I was younger and lost control of my V8....learnt some good lessons then. Guess I was lucky..I didn't crash into anything nor injure anyone.
 
Sam, if you ever get the opportunity to do a course on TEM (Threat and Error Management) then do it.

All disasters are initiated by one element.
 
Macquack said:
If that falcon was doing 60km/h instead of 160km/h then they would have all survived.
Click to expand...

You said this correct....still with me here sunshine??

What is the point of saying this? I said its like someone that gets shot(with a bullet coming out the end of the barrel and hitting them, therefore ending their life). But then someone says but if the gun had no bullets they would be alive still.

Its just stupid.

The FACT is they were doing 140km/h, they WERE drunk, there WILL be another case like this one, no point saying "oh but IF this and IF that". You going to hope the next case is doing 60km/h? Go on the facts, this will happen again. Whats the point of the 60km/h comment, do you want 60km/h speed limits everywhere? Which would still not achieve anything, people are going to speed, especially when they are drunk, its a fact. No point doing IFs and BUTs because they never happen, train people for situations that exist.

Make sense now? or did you want me to break it down into syllables?
 
ThingyMajiggy said:
Its just stupid.
Click to expand...
Look Sam - I agree with you. Alcohol is a contibuting factor to road deaths, however look at the chain of events logically.

Alcohol is more likely to lead to an accident - fine.

But once a vehicle is in an accident, the damage/casualty is directly affected by - speed!!

It doesn't matter if someone has a stroke, falls asleep at the wheel, has been drinking and misjudges a turn - once a vehicle has left the road - only speed (or lack of it) will determine your fate. Speed will kill regardless of whether you are the local teatotaller or local pisspot.

You can have all the training, police cars on patrol, student driving courses, safety equipment in cars that you like - but once a car leaves the road at speed, your fate is sealed.

Duckman
 
Duckman#72 said:
but once a car leaves the road at speed, your fate is sealed.

Duckman
Click to expand...

This is where the skill and car comes in. Whole idea is to stay on the road. The whole reason they go off the road is because of either or as well as being drunk and not having experience/training in car control, and potentially the car itself being a factor.

But I'm over this, I'm talking to a wall. I've done the things I'm talking about, and its made an enormous difference, and seen it make an enormous difference on others that have done it too. If no one is interested in improving skills, driving a safer car, then so be it hey. Lets just blame speed.

Drive safe everyone.
 

I'd like to see high-powered vehicles taken out of the hands of the Dumb**** Idaho Bathurst mentality of the youth of Australia. Too much death and misery IMO. Too easy to die by a long long way. Forget about sending them to Gallipoli, just give them a car that allows the adrenalin to pump and the third party consequences to dwell in the lower hippo-campus. Must be a cash-cow for insurance companies and taxpayers to boot.
 
What people don't seem to realise about cars is that even a diesel van or ute today has more acceleration and a higher top speed than the average car on the road 30 or 40 years ago.

I'd certainly agree that high powered cars and inexperience are not a good combination. But I've seen quite a few horror smashes (through work) and the ones that immediately come to mind (multiple serious injuries, at least one fatality in each case, vehicle split into half etc) all involved ordinary (not high performance) cars running into stationary objects beside the road, including in the city centre. And most of them were full of young people. All were travelling at high speeds. And they were all at night, generally Friday or Saturday night.

I don't doubt that high performance cars in inexperienced hands are an issue. But nothing makes me cringe more than seeing any car carrying multiple passengers under their mid-20's and driven by an inexperienced driver. That's asking for trouble whether it's a V8 or a small 4 cylinder.

If I was going to change the law, it would be to ban P plate drivers from carrying more than one passenger under 25 after dark unless there is a legitimate need (eg driving directly to or from work / uni).
 
Driving skill tends to be forgotten when there's 4 or 5 screaming, laughing and generally carrying on teenagers packed into the car, the driver is drunk and travelling at 100 km/h through on city streets and the stereo is turned up full blast. No amount of skill will make that situation safe.
 
Any situation becomes more dangerous when the amount of energy involved is increased.

If the dam is 2 metres tall and it breaks then you're unlikely to have anything beyond a mess and lost water. If it's 200 metres tall and it breaks then literally the whole world will hear about it.

If you play with a 1.5 Volt AA battery then not much harm is likely. Play with 240V power and you could easily kill yourself. Go anywhere near 500,000 Volt equipment at a major substation and there will be nothing left of you.

Set a small amount of gas on fire and you've got a cigarette lighter. Use a bit more and it's an oven or BBQ. Setting a major gas works on fire is an entirely different situation...

Crash a car at 30 km/h and the chances of serious injury are very low. Do it at 300 km/h and the chances of survival are very low. And, of course, under typical urban conditions you're far more likely to crash at higher speeds in the first place due to sight distances etc.
 

You might get some opposition from the civ lib subscribers to this thread with those kind of arguments Smurf. I agree wholeheartedly though.

The problem remains, that young people are at high-speed wrapping themselves around trees and lightpoles.
How can it be stopped?
 
What an absolute waste of lives.

I dont know the answers but I feel for these families, and that girl. One and a half hours to get her out.

140kms in a suburban street - just crazy.

Lucky that they didnt collect another car in the process
 

The comment about being 31 and having gotten past that stikes a chord. The insurance companies have been collating data for many years to help them determine risk when approviing or declining insurance coverage for motor vehicles (drivers). Part of their determination in respect of risk is whether the drivers are:
1. male or female;
2. over or under the age of 25 years;
3. Driver history of previous driving convictions; and
4. Driver history of previous insurance claims.

You'd think the respective state governments could work out a risk assessment policy using the insurance data and identify the drivers most likely to be a danger to themselves and others before they got onto the roads. Then perhaps they could design some driver education programs that start when potential drivers are still in school, as part of the school curriculum. No pass in driver education, no drivers licence?
 
Go Nuke said:
Alot of young people feel 10 ft tall and bulletproof
Click to expand...

Thats the main problem, all the amount of teaching and warnings won't do much because of this

In humans, the frontal lobe reaches full maturity around only after the 20s
Click to expand...

The executive functions of the frontal lobes involve the ability to recognize future consequences resulting from current actions,
Click to expand...

Thats it, plain and simple. I use to drive like a goose on ocassions, think I was untouchable. I can recall a number of times driving back from my girlfriends place just out of town trying to wind my old murk off the clock (160km's) at night on a country road littered by animals. Did I care? No, it was a great rush.........Now I drive that same road a once or twice a week and don't do more then 90km (speed limit is 100) and cringe when I think of how reckless and stupid I was.
 

This is partly why I think defensive driving courses are such a good idea for kids prior to getting their license. Most kids (myself included at that age) tend to turn a deaf ear to parental lectures about road safety, speed etc as they either don't want to hear it or assume they're far more skilled than their parents. Or "it won't happen to me". Sometimes the best way to let kids learn a lesson is to let them make the mistake - a defensive driving course lets them do this safely. There's nothing like being put in a car on a wet road with an obstacle in front of you and realising that no, you can't stop in the same distance at 120km/hr that you can at 60km/hr and if that were a real person they'd be dead because you'd misjudged the effect of speed. Learning how to handle a skid is invaluable - hitting the brakes and oversteering at 100km/hr on a real road will generally end in tears - best to do it first at a defensive driving course and then learn the skills needed to keep you alive when a tyre blows out or a roo appears from nowhere.

I can sort of see where ThingyMajiggy is coming from - gaining some skills would probably help, but speed remains at the essence of most road tragedies. Getting kids to see first hand the difference speed makes to their ability to keep control of their car might just get the message through to them why "speed kills".
 

I remember teaching my son how to drive. We were in the industrial area during the weekend and his driving ability was quite advanced.

All of a sudden I started screaming and shouting gibberish and yelling that he should go faster and I tried to distract him as much as possible.

He got the shock of his life at my outburst and later laughed at the incident - but I told him that that is what it can be like with a car load of friends - luckily he saw the seriousness of the matter and took it on board.
 
Excellent idea, Dutchie. I'll remember that one for when my boys are old enough! After they've done their defensive driving courses, naturally
 
Here is what i would like to see for safety purposes for young drivers.

that is with newer vehicles going more and more towards electronic systems

imo, it would be quite easy to add a few programmable features to the electronic engine management system.

1) de-power mode..ie deactivate some cylinders, therby drastically reducing power on tap

2) rev and/or speed limiter.

3) in more advanced systems, it would be easy for sensors to detect the vehicle was being driven in a manner dangerous, and deactivate, or depower.

All this could be security programmmed by the parent.

I say all this as the parent of 3 teenage boys and the owner of many high powered vehicles.

recently taught one son to drive, with great emphasis on safety.

I always tell them to treat the car as you would pilot a plane...ie mistakes, innattention or poor procedures can lead to death.

dont know if other countries have this young driver problem, but the above ideas would be very easy and cheap to implement, easier than EST (Electronic Stability Control), which is a very good safety feature for drivers who have insufficient skills to correct a loss of control, but wont help you much if you are radically speeding.

Obviously the above measures wont help if the young person is the vehicle owner
 
Smurf1976 said:
If I was going to change the law, it would be to ban P plate drivers from carrying more than one passenger under 25 after dark unless there is a legitimate need (eg driving directly to or from work / uni).
Click to expand...
The driver of the car was one a restriction of only one passenger, and drinking too - it's not the law that caused the accident, it's stupidity.

The problem is all the restrictions in the world wont help someone who simply wont listen to reason. Education doesn't always help either - there's an immaturity to many younger drivers that education alone wont pierce.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How to totally xuck the worlds largest economy with a chainsaw
Replies
12
Views
184
basilio
Ozempic: Magic Pill or Devils Bargain?
Replies
10
Views
2K
sptrawler
R
6 Ways to Make Smarter Investment Decisions
Replies
0
Views
2K
RickyY
R
R
Find Your Edge
Replies
3
Views
2K
charlsie
C
R
When you invest, remember to commune with the dead
Replies
2
Views
3K
Wysiwyg
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...