Nuxx:9042d3b5-1876-4fe5-896b-897f63f8f53b@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <9042d3b5-1876-4fe5-896b-897f63f8f53b@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: IAM Cycle Safety presentations Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:19:22 -0700 (PDT) References:       <87zlc8t8ri.fsf@toy.config> Lines: 66 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.150.242 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1245190762 19002 127.0.0.1 (16 Jun 2009 22:19:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:19:22 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.150.242; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.11) Gecko/2009060215 Firefox/3.0.11 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 5174 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:710203

On Jun 16, 5:59=A0pm, Daniel Barlow  wrote: > > However, they do also seem to encourage some class of drivers to > overestimate their own skill and use their "advanced" badge as a > justification for driving like tits and a subconscious reinforcement of > their prejudices regarding other road users.

There's no evidence for that: it's just what you want to think. Unless of course you have some real evidence?

Someone could only pass an IAM test if they had a reasonably good attitude. (Going fast when appropriate does not count as a "bad attitude".) The people who are *genuine* menaces (i.e. those who deliberately impede other drivers by lane-hogging etc, those who go extremely slowly and flash their lights at overtakers, and those who have similar interfering, selfish attitudes), who coincidentally the "closet" car-haters never seem to criticise (could it be because they do a great job of pissing off most drivers?), could never pass an IAM test in a million years: you have to be pretty confident, observant, competent and genuinely considerate towards other drivers to get anywhere near passing an IAM test.

The willingness to automatically assume that actually any old reckless fool could pass an IAM test by "pretending", and then somehow "abuse" their "badge", typifies the "Drivers are scum" attitude which we see so often around here.

> In the end, people will > always tend to drive at the maximum speed which is commensurate with > their own standards of perceived acceptable risk

There's no evidence for that either: in fact it's plainly complete nonsense. Most drivers will drive some way below what they believe to be the absolute maximum safe speed for the conditions, to allow for error. People generally allow for error when they're measuring something out and they want to be absolutely sure that they don't get "too much". What makes you think that choosing a safe driving speed is any different (aside from the usual "Drivers are a particularly reckless group"-type prejudice that we so often get round here)?

And most drivers get very good at judging appropriate speed after enough experience...they *have* to do it correctly *all the time* when they're driving, otherwise driving would be prohibitively expensive and dangerous. The fact that some drivers get it wrong a
 * microscopically* small percentage of the time means nothing really.

So there is really nothing wrong with normal, law-abiding motorists who aren't joyriding, racing etc driving somewhere fairly near the very maximum speed which they believe is acceptable risk-wise. I know that if you don't like motorists, or are of a controlling nature, it's very easy to decide that motorists can't be trusted to judge appropriate speed because they're too "selfish" and "irresponsible", but there's really no evidence that this is the case: it's just wishful thinking, often from those who have decided that the very act of driving is selfish/irresponsible and so drivers automatically are as well (*ahem*Chapman*cough*).

I trust all that clarifies things for everyone. Let's admit that this "Drivers can't possibly be trusted to judge an appropriate speed" nonsense is purely a product of prejudice against motorists, and has no basis in road safety: in fact, road safety suffers very badly when the real facts are distorted by such rubbish, as this means that the wrong safety measures are chosen and people ultimately die as a result. Not good, is it? So if you're feeling guilty about dressing up a dislike of cars as a concern for "road safety", here's your chance to make amends.