Page 3 of 3

Re: Mother knows best . . .

Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:16 pm
by Horse
Rolyan wrote:
Horse wrote:
jont- wrote: Ah yes, the network rail approach.


'Something must be done' is a wonderful thing . . .


It's the BRAKE effect, which I can sympathise with, and understand, while knowing that it will ultimately make things worse.


That said, regarding 'speed' as a campaign issue, very few people will claim to have crashed too slowly ;)

And, more seriously, if the offender had crashed [due to using the phone] more slowly, he might not have caused so much carnage, simply because of the reduced forces involved.

Re: Mother knows best . . .

Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 4:30 pm
by TheInsanity1234
Horse wrote:
Rolyan wrote:
Horse wrote:
jont- wrote: Ah yes, the network rail approach.


'Something must be done' is a wonderful thing . . .


It's the BRAKE effect, which I can sympathise with, and understand, while knowing that it will ultimately make things worse.


That said, regarding 'speed' as a campaign issue, very few people will claim to have crashed too slowly ;)

And, more seriously, if the offender had crashed [due to using the phone] more slowly, he might not have caused so much carnage, simply because of the reduced forces involved.

However, if you argue this way, that the traffic in the other direction was allowed to drive faster, they could have cleared the site of the accident BEFORE the accident occurred.

All you can do is drive in such a way to minimise the predictable risks, such as say, a lorry in the left lane suddenly swerving to avoid some obstruction, but you can't do anything to minimise the risk of being involved in a collision that was caused by some berk bashing through the crash barriers about 20 feet in front of you!