Driving (a new can of worms)
Paul Raj Khangure
: I was wondering why we do not *all* have to have regular driving tests
: (every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure that
: we continue to have the necessary skills to drive? And why do driving tests
Purely due to political and financial reasons.
Do you want to be the politician who stands behind such a bill, and
lose your seat because of it?
There will have to be some sort of focal incident, that outrages the
public enmass, which allows the politicians to stay in favour whilst
passing such a law. (Eg the Gun Law, due to the incident in Tasmania).
: Three times
: yesterday, I had to brake sharply to avoid hitting an animal. If I had
You should park your car, then walk into the Zoo.
: missed, just once, some poor child's dog wouldn't have come home for dinner.
: How much worse would it be if it had been some poor child's father? I can
A dog can be excused, at not knowing better, but it should learn to
avoid the roads. A father should know already. Darwinism, live from our
roads.
It reminds me of that stupid speed ad on TV a while ago, with the woman
and the pram. She glares at the driver in the second clip, when he
almost runs her over. Never mind the stupid git is pushing the pram into
oncoming traffic.
Paul Raj Khangure
--
I stayed up all last night playing poker with tarot cards.
I got a full house and four people died.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Sue Smith
a newspaper) about a woman dying in the hairdressers when she was pinned to
a workbench by an out of control car. As far as I can work out, the driver
was reversing out of a car parking space across the road, lost control of
the car and it carreened backwards across the road into the salon. The
driver was 73.
Now, without condemning him personally (I'm sure nothing anyone could say
could make him feel worse than he does already), my question is this: why is
it that people are allowed to drive on our roads without regular driving
tests?
My Grandmother (after months of our begging her to stop) finally gave up
driving (at 75)when she realised she had been driving the wrong way down a
dual carriageway (four lanes) - and that wasn't the first time she had done
that! Now I know the elderly should be our most respected citizens, but I
cannot respect anyone who goes out and puts everyone in danger driving a
dangerous weapon (a car) when they know they cannot handle it anymore. My
stepfather (who is 72) had decided it is optional for him (in his 4WD) to
stop at stop signs!! One of the women at work said that she knows an
elderly lady who almost killed her husband by driving straight through the
garage wall into the living room, where he was watching telly, because she
thought she had the brake pedal, and was actually pressing the accelerator.
I was wondering why we do not *all* have to have regular driving tests
(every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure that
we continue to have the necessary skills to drive? And why do driving tests
not include some sort of stress test, to check the driver can find the brake
pedal in a stressful situation (like the one mentioned above)? Three times
yesterday, I had to brake sharply to avoid hitting an animal. If I had
missed, just once, some poor child's dog wouldn't have come home for dinner.
How much worse would it be if it had been some poor child's father? I can
hear the uproar now from the elderly, but how would they feel if they were
that poor old man who killed that lady who was only having her hair done?
Sue Smith
Kimbo
Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70u9t6$8ul$2...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>It reminds me of that stupid speed ad on TV a while ago, with the woman
>and the pram. She glares at the driver in the second clip, when he
>almost runs her over. Never mind the stupid git is pushing the pram into
>oncoming traffic.
>
the individual was preferrable to putting up with the condescending
facial expression of an idiot that didn't understand their reciprocal
responsibility as a road user, pedestrian or not.
You can't generalise on age as a problem with drivers, a lot of it
is attitudes old or young, unless their is an identified physical
or mental infirmity that precludes them from operating a vehicle.
Even then it's dodgy, would you want to be banned due to PMS,
you could well be a threat in this state.
Kim B-O
JT
>(every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60),
It must be awful to grow old losing motor control and reacting at the
speed of a falling plastic bag and the scary thing is : i'm growing
old at the same rate as everyone else.....
What sort of Driving test would you have them do? the standard
(getting ones license driving test) or some sort of safety driving
test? or Both even?
But yeah there's no way in hell older(60+) people are able to react to
situations as fast as those drivers who are much younger so i think
some sort of driving test should be in order for people who are 60+
JT
JT
<p...@opera.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>In an Age long past, an Age yet to come, Sue Smith wrote:
>
>: I was wondering why we do not *all* have to have regular driving tests
>: (every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure that
>: we continue to have the necessary skills to drive? And why do driving tests
>
>Purely due to political and financial reasons.
>
>Do you want to be the politician who stands behind such a bill, and
>lose your seat because of it?
Who's going to vote the politician out? I'm sick and tired of Gutless
Pollies, granted Pauline hanson was a stupid bitch with some of her
policies but at least she had the guts to make a stand on some
important issues. Personally i'd be FOR aged complsory Driving
tests....would you vote the POLLY out?.....financial reasons?? please
explain what financial reasons?
JT
dar...@connect.com.au
: tests....would you vote the POLLY out?.....financial reasons?? please
: explain what financial reasons?
How much do you think it would cost in administrative overhead, extra staff,
etc. etc. etc. to administer driving tests on a regular basis? Hell, when
you went for your driving test first time around, did you book for the test
'that afternoon', or did you have to book in advance? I know I had to
book a couple of weeks in advance - and that was a while ago.
The same argument has been used to stop compulsory car examinations on
re-registration (any Kiwi's out there? :). You have to put your car over
the pits regularly in NZ to ensure road worthyness - not a bad idea on the
whole, in terms of safety, but it would cost a bit to do.
KevinL
(In a particularly verbose mood tonight ;)
--------------- qne...@obsu.arg.nh ---------------
Kevin Littlejohn,
Development Engineer, Connect.com.au
----------- Oernxf guvatf sbe n yvivat -----------
Zaccary Charlesworth
70u8qf$8hb$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>I was wondering why we do not *all* have to have regular driving tests
>(every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure that
You have to be retested after 85 yearly. Maybe that should be dropped a bit
to about 55.
However, at least the older people are less likely to be doing 130 in a 60
zone (ala JDJ) :)
Zac
Jonathon Bates
JT wrote:
> On 25 Oct 1998 04:36:54 GMT, Paul Raj Khangure
> <p...@opera.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >In an Age long past, an Age yet to come, Sue Smith wrote:
> >
> >: I was wondering why we do not *all* have to have regular driving tests
> >: (every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure that
> >: we continue to have the necessary skills to drive? And why do driving tests
> >
> >Purely due to political and financial reasons.
> >
> >Do you want to be the politician who stands behind such a bill, and
> >lose your seat because of it?
>
> Who's going to vote the politician out? I'm sick and tired of Gutless
> Pollies, granted Pauline hanson was a stupid bitch with some of her
> policies but at least she had the guts to make a stand on some
> important issues. Personally i'd be FOR aged complsory Driving
> tests....would you vote the POLLY out?.....financial reasons?? please
> explain what financial reasons?
>
> JT
I agree with the gutless pollies bit. Look at our pm he is as week as piss, he
was to scared to publicly voice his opposition to Pauline Hanson. He did not want
to lose the support of the inbred grass chewing national party. Luckily for
Australia Hansonism has now passed (we hope), but where was the liberal party in
time like these, the labour party openly voiced there opposition to one nation.
If Australia is going to move to a more multicultral society we need to vote for a
stronger politicial party. We need a PM that can apologise to a generation of
people that do not have family's due to the openly racist White Australia Policy.
You can look at the past and see all liberal governments have been weak,
whereabouts the labor govt's have been revolutionary and open minded.
Getting back to the subject, i agree with driving tests since not all people are
great drivers, but i also think that the driver's record should also be held into
account.
But that would be to hard for a government that lost a great deal of it's seats in
the election, it would be to easy for them to do nothing, and that is what is wrong
with Australia at the moment.
Thanks for letting me have my whinge.
Jono
Sandgroper
Zaccary Charlesworth <sa...@zcs.net.au> wrote in article
<70uk3e$crg$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
> Sue Smith <va...@my.privacy.thanks> wrote in message
> 70u8qf$8hb$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>
> >(every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure
that
>
bit
> to about 55.
>
> However, at least the older people are less likely to be doing 130 in a
60
> zone (ala JDJ) :)
>
years and NEVER had an accident yet".
But they don't tell you ( or are aware ) that they MAY HAVE CAUSED lots
of accidents because of their outdated driving techniques.
People should have driving tests after they turn 60 years to evaluate
their reactions , their driving manner and general awareness of the faster
and more traffic you have these days .
There has been plenty of times that I have nearly been run over , hit by a
car or even run off the road on my push bike by cars driven by a
wrinklies that is quite UNAWARE of their surroundings.
Sandgroper
==========
Remove XXNOSPAMXX in reply address
Sandgroper
<70ubom$j5k$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
> is attitudes old or young, unless their is an identified physical
> or mental infirmity that precludes them from operating a vehicle.
>
> Even then it's dodgy, would you want to be banned due to PMS,
> you could well be a threat in this state.
>
Perhaps women should be made to display a sign on their cars saying that
they are currently suffering from PMS so that others can keep a safe
distance away from them.
:-)
Sue Smith
>public enmass, which allows the politicians to stay in favour whilst
>passing such a law. (Eg the Gun Law, due to the incident in Tasmania).
What, like some 73-yr old man losing control of his car and killing someone
4 lanes away?
>
>: Three times
>: yesterday, I had to brake sharply to avoid hitting an animal. If I had
>
>You should park your car, then walk into the Zoo.
You're right. That would make much more sense. <g>
>: missed, just once, some poor child's dog wouldn't have come home for
dinner.
>: How much worse would it be if it had been some poor child's father? I
can
>
>A dog can be excused, at not knowing better, but it should learn to
>avoid the roads.
Just because a dog is too stupid to know better, does that mean it deserves
to die? (and I have met a lot of *really* dumb dogs)
A father should know already. Darwinism, live from our
>roads.
>
I admit, it was just an example. I was trying to get an emotional reaction.
I meant to make you sad though, not nasty.
>It reminds me of that stupid speed ad on TV a while ago, with the woman
>and the pram. She glares at the driver in the second clip, when he
>almost runs her over. Never mind the stupid git is pushing the pram into
>oncoming traffic.
Why did they (the ad makers) think that we wouldn't notice how stupid she
was being? They must think we are as stupid as her :P
dar...@connect.com.au
: Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70u9t6$8ul$2...@news.iinet.net.au>...
: I admit, it was just an example. I was trying to get an emotional reaction.
: I meant to make you sad though, not nasty.
*blink*
I'm sorry, were you expecting prk to not be nasty?
*blink*
:>It reminds me of that stupid speed ad on TV a while ago, with the woman
:>and the pram. She glares at the driver in the second clip, when he
:>almost runs her over. Never mind the stupid git is pushing the pram into
:>oncoming traffic.
: Why did they (the ad makers) think that we wouldn't notice how stupid she
: was being? They must think we are as stupid as her :P
It's called the 'lowest common denominator' - welcome to your society ;)
KevinL
(In one of those moods again tonight - too much C-code, not enough coffee...)
Paul Raj Khangure
: Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70u9t6$8ul$2...@news.iinet.net.au>...
:>There will have to be some sort of focal incident, that outrages the
:>public enmass, which allows the politicians to stay in favour whilst
:>passing such a law. (Eg the Gun Law, due to the incident in Tasmania).
: What, like some 73-yr old man losing control of his car and killing someone
: 4 lanes away?
I doubt that would do it.
Seriously.
It would be one more road accident amongst the many.
Now, if some 73 year old person lost control of their vehicle, and
plowed through a kindegarten playground, injuring / killing several
children, that would probably spark it.
:>A dog can be excused, at not knowing better, but it should learn to
:>avoid the roads.
: Just because a dog is too stupid to know better, does that mean it deserves
: to die? (and I have met a lot of *really* dumb dogs)
No, it doesn't deserve to die. But the chances are, that unless it
learns about roads, or its owners keep better control of it, it is very
likely to be injured or die.
: A father should know already. Darwinism, live from our roads.
: I admit, it was just an example. I was trying to get an emotional reaction.
: I meant to make you sad though, not nasty.
LOL.
I guess it does appear as nasty, but it's more resigned cynicism.
Sue Smith
Sandgroper wrote in message <01be0010$c5f1fdc0$51e637cb@etorvuwg>...
>A lot of old people have the saying " I have been driving for 40 - 60
>years and NEVER had an accident yet".
>But they don't tell you ( or are aware ) that they MAY HAVE CAUSED lots
>of accidents because of their outdated driving techniques.
>
Where was it, a few months back in this NG where someone said their Mum was
always seeing accidents in their rear view mirror?
>There has been plenty of times that I have nearly been run over , hit by a
>car or even run off the road on my push bike by cars driven by a
>wrinklies that is quite UNAWARE of their surroundings.
Or my stepfather, who has no demerit points, but refuses to stop at stop
signs. Or those people who turn in front of you without even noticing how
close you actually are, then get all indignant when you give them the finger
(okay, so it's not very ladylike - who ever said I was nice?).
Sue Smith
<insert smart comment here>
Sue Smith
Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70v597$iv4$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>Now, if some 73 year old person lost control of their vehicle, and
>plowed through a kindegarten playground, injuring / killing several
>children, that would probably spark it.
That's horrible. I'm not too keen on kids, but other people seem to be.
Wouldn't prevention be better than that?
<snip>
>: I admit, it was just an example. I was trying to get an emotional
reaction.
>: I meant to make you sad though, not nasty.
>
>LOL.
>
>I guess it does appear as nasty, but it's more resigned cynicism.
Hmm.... maybe I'm still too young - there is still some idealism/optimism
left in me. <g>
Sandgroper
Sue Smith <va...@my.privacy.thanks> wrote in article
<70v6si$noc$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>
> Sandgroper wrote in message <01be0010$c5f1fdc0$51e637cb@etorvuwg>...
>
> signs. Or those people who turn in front of you without even noticing
how
> close you actually are, then get all indignant when you give them the
finger
> (okay, so it's not very ladylike - who ever said I was nice?).
>
and I am not going to change now".
These older people don't realize that the whole traffic situation has
change in 40 odd years , the traffic is a lot faster and a lot more cars
on the road now , which means that you have to be a lot more aware of the
road and it leaves little room for errors.
If someone nearly causes me an accident , I make sure that I let them know
that they have done something wrong , it might help save someone's life
next time .
By all means give these idiots the finger and also give them some verbal
abuse so they know that they have done something wrong.( even if it isn't
very ladylike )
JT
>JT <on...@opera.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>: tests....would you vote the POLLY out?.....financial reasons?? please
>: explain what financial reasons?
>
>How much do you think it would cost in administrative overhead, extra staff,
>etc. etc. etc. to administer driving tests on a regular basis?
well why have any driving tests at all?
why make efforts to make the aged safer drivers and to help save lives
in the process? and why bother creating a few jobs while you're at it?
> Hell, when
>you went for your driving test first time around, did you book for the test
>'that afternoon', or did you have to book in advance?
I learnt to Drive through a drivers Education Scheme....I personally
didn't do any booking, however i believe it was pre booked a few days
ahead.
> I know I had to
>book a couple of weeks in advance - and that was a while ago.
wow buddy Perth has like 1.5 million people. Folks must never get
their licence in places like Tokyo, London or New York.
JT
JT
>
>Hmm.... maybe I'm still too young - there is still some idealism/optimism
>left in me. <g>
That's the Spirit Sue Make PRK feel like an old Fart!!! After all he
is...probably why he's against your idea in the first place...getting
a little too personal. ;)
JT
Paul Raj Khangure
:>Now, if some 73 year old person lost control of their vehicle, and
:>plowed through a kindegarten playground, injuring / killing several
:>children, that would probably spark it.
: That's horrible. I'm not too keen on kids, but other people seem to be.
: Wouldn't prevention be better than that?
Absolutely.
But how do you
a) convince the populace
b) convince the politicians that the populace want it
c) convince the politicians that they should make it reality.
One way is with a sufficiently large supply of dollars, for advertising,
and public awareness.
But who has that money, or the time to pursue the goal?
Without the money, you need free advertising. As would happen in the
scenario with a preschool playground.
: Hmm.... maybe I'm still too young - there is still some idealism/optimism
: left in me. <g>
We all have our weaknesses.
*G,D&R*
Paul Raj Khangure
:>Hmm.... maybe I'm still too young - there is still some idealism/optimism
:>left in me. <g>
: That's the Spirit Sue Make PRK feel like an old Fart!!! After all he
: is...probably why he's against your idea in the first place...getting
Heh.
I'm all for her idea, in principle.
I just don't think it will happen without an incident to drop the spark
in the hay.
: a little too personal. ;)
It's ok, JT.
I don't mind Sue getting personal with me.
*G,D&RLH*
Paul Raj Khangure
: I'm sorry, were you expecting prk to not be nasty?
I'm not usually nasty.
Short tempered, with zero tolerance for wilful stupidity, yes. But not
nasty.
Not unless I'm provoked.
(Do not taunt the happy fun ball).
Odo F
preventive measures that the public (and hence their representatives have
rejected). The real list is quite long.
As a society we tend to stumble reluctanctly to good sense.
As far as driving goes, you have to overcome the hurdle that the vast
majority of drivers think they're better than average. That means some
proportion are dangerously wrong.
Very few people will admit that a re-test should be applicable to them.
I can dob myself in though as I haven't driven for 10 years. I keep my
licence current for use as ID but each time I pay for the renewal it seems
wrong that it's so easy. Would I support re-testing? Sure would!
The challenge then is the same as for any other social problem - convincing
people that it really is in their own interest to support it.
- Odo
Sue Smith wrote in message <70v6hs$mnv$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>
>Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70v597$iv4$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>
>>Now, if some 73 year old person lost control of their vehicle, and
>>plowed through a kindegarten playground, injuring / killing several
>>children, that would probably spark it.
>
>That's horrible. I'm not too keen on kids, but other people seem to be.
>Wouldn't prevention be better than that?
>
<<snip>>
Odo F
you're a pedestiran in a car city like Perth.
There are still a lot of roads that can be quite hard to cross.
Anyway, my point is that with all the judgement and reflexes I can muster
I've still been nearly knocked off by cars rapidly getting onto a road I was
crossing - i.e. they simply weren't there when I started.
It happens. And the critical difference is speed.
- Odo
Sue Smith wrote in message <70v485$hc2$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>
>Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70u9t6$8ul$2...@news.iinet.net.au>...
JT
>
>I don't mind Sue getting personal with me.
>
>*G,D&RLH*
Did I say Old Fart Earlier??? ooops i meant to Say Dirty Old Man ;)
JT
JT
>It happens. And the critical difference is speed.
I think Reaction Time and judgement are also Critical
Differences/Factors and I Firmy Believe both of these are lacking in
the over 60s Age Group.
JT
dar...@connect.com.au
: On 25 Oct 1998 07:58:32 GMT, dar...@connect.com.au wrote:
:>JT <on...@opera.iinet.net.au> wrote:
:>
:>: tests....would you vote the POLLY out?.....financial reasons?? please
:>: explain what financial reasons?
:>
:>How much do you think it would cost in administrative overhead, extra staff,
:>etc. etc. etc. to administer driving tests on a regular basis?
: well why have any driving tests at all?
: why make efforts to make the aged safer drivers and to help save lives
: in the process? and why bother creating a few jobs while you're at it?
Ooops. Don't get me wrong - I'm all for it, I just don't believe the
majority of people would be willing to up their taxes to fund it - especially
given the police force is underfunded already, thus the increase in what
we pay would most probably be significant.
We live in a nation where people will vote a govt. in based on "what's in
it for them". I wouldn't expect anything different in this.
KevinL
(Hey, if you're willing to pay more taxes/more for your licence, then
cool ;) I'll bet, outside the confines of this newsgroup, you're in the
minority tho :(
cough
>If someone nearly causes me an accident , I make sure that I let them know
>that they have done something wrong , it might help save someone's life
>next time .
>
>By all means give these idiots the finger and also give them some verbal
>abuse so they know that they have done something wrong.( even if it isn't
>very ladylike )
>
>
So they will drive off in a bad mood, angry but safe!
Almost everone I believes the other person is at fault in those situations.
I know I was pulling up to a set of traffic lights once, and
decellerating smoothly so I need not stop completely, and as I was almost at
the lights some Scotch college tosser in the sports car mummy brought him
screamed up the outside lane and cut in front of me causing me to break hard
to avoid hitting him. I honked my horn ( to feeble though, need air horns )
and his mate in the drivers seat stuck his finger out of the sun roof. Then
my foot 'slipped' from the brake - he didn't know what to do....<g>
Strange thing was he refused to give me his name for insurance purposes, so
we parted acrimoniously..
Rob Orlowsky
Senior citizens next year or the year after ??
Rob ;-)
jas
70uk3e$crg$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>Sue Smith <va...@my.privacy.thanks> wrote in message
>70u8qf$8hb$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>
>>I was wondering why we do not *all* have to have regular driving tests
>>(every 5 years or so, and every 2 years over the age of 60), to ensure
that
>
>You have to be retested after 85 yearly. Maybe that should be dropped a bit
>to about 55.
>
>However, at least the older people are less likely to be doing 130 in a 60
>zone (ala JDJ) :)
EH!
Screw you Hippy.
jas.
BTW - I'm Married. Thanks to everyone for the nice emails & sentiments.
Nice to see how many of you can separate newsgroup persona's from
"real-life" 8-)
Jason Norris
If we really wanted to make the roads safer we could introduce "R"
plates to indicate that Rob was driving and we should all run for our
lives ;) (just kidding....... maybe)
Jason Norris
"If I had anything else interesting to say, I would have put it up there ^ "
Anthony Shipley
>
>Paul Raj Khangure wrote in message <70v597$iv4$1...@news.iinet.net.au>...
>
>>Now, if some 73 year old person lost control of their vehicle, and
>>plowed through a kindegarten playground, injuring / killing several
>>children, that would probably spark it.
>
>That's horrible. I'm not too keen on kids, but other people seem to be.
>Wouldn't prevention be better than that?
A condom over the 73 year old's head good enough?
>Hmm.... maybe I'm still too young - there is still some idealism/optimism
>left in me. <g>
Quick John, the CynicSpray (TM).
anthony shipley
xpct th nxpctd
ray johnstone
I think your proposal re driving tests might eliminate a surprising
group of people. Borkenstein, who invented the Breathalyser and did
some of the best work on traffic accidents, found that the best
drivers were middle-aged white men who drank (alcohol) every day.
Check my home page for details and references.
J.R.Johnstone (Ray Johnstone)
r...@iinet.com.au
www.iinet.com.au/~ray
Rob Orlowsky
>plates to indicate that Rob was driving and we should all run for our
>lives ;) (just kidding....... maybe)
Oh yeah, like i can do a lot of damage in a corona. put put BANG, put put BANG.
No, actually, really, we should be issueing 'JASON NORRIS - GUY FROM THAT GREAT
VOID IN THE COUNTRY SOMEWHERE WHO DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO CHANGE LANES. BEWARE'
plates to certain people, not mentioning any names. :) (i still remember
the white faces of your passengers that time hehe). I don't think that little
picture of the skull and crossbones would be out of place either *smile*.
and thats not mentioning the 'WARNING, OLD HOLDEN PIECE OF...etc' plates.
Rob ;-)
Zaccary Charlesworth
7127g8$bei$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>drivers were middle-aged white men who drank (alcohol) every day.
Which means that it's safe to drink and drive ?
*sigh*
Zac
Martin Livings
:>drivers were middle-aged white men who drank (alcohol) every day.
: Which means that it's safe to drink and drive ?
Well, you know that one third of accidents are caused by drunk drivers.
Which means that two thirds of accidents are caused by sober drivers.
So why don't you sober bastards get off the roads and let us drunks drive
in safety?
yt MJL98 (actually a teetotaler, for those without the irony
daughterboard)
Mic Cullen
to have written:
[snips]
>yt MJL98 (actually a teetotaler, for those without the irony
>daughterboard)
Do we have any non-upgraded people on this newsgroup? Funny, I've never
noticed them...
Mic. (Teetotallers Unite!!)
Originality is the art of concealing your sources.
Jason Norris
FENCE" plates for your car Rob ;) I think we'd better stop this, we're
making each other look pretty bad here ;)
JT
<sa...@zcs.net.au> wrote:
>ray johnstone <r...@iinet.com.au> wrote in message
>7127g8$bei$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>
>>drivers were middle-aged white men who drank (alcohol) every day.
>
>Which means that it's safe to drink and drive ?
>
>*sigh*
>
>Zac
>
hey zac haven't you figured it out yet? It's unsafe to DRIVE
fullstop...
JT
ray johnstone
>ray johnstone <r...@iinet.com.au> wrote in message
>7127g8$bei$1...@news.iinet.net.au...
>>drivers were middle-aged white men who drank (alcohol) every day.
>Which means that it's safe to drink and drive ?
Yes. According to the Borkenstein data, regular drinkers at our legal
limit are nearly twice as safe as sober teetotallers.Removing them and
replacing them with TTs will make the roads more dangerous. I have
personal knowledge of two deaths that occurred when an inexperienced
sober driver took the wheel in place of a drinker.
See the link at my home page or read my book for more details.
ray johnstone
>Zaccary Charlesworth <sa...@zcs.net.au> wrote:
>:>drivers were middle-aged white men who drank (alcohol) every day.
>: Which means that it's safe to drink and drive ?
>Well, you know that one third of accidents are caused by drunk drivers.
>Which means that two thirds of accidents are caused by sober drivers.
Not according to a 1978 report from the RTA: 3.4% of accidents are
caused .by "intoxicated drivers and riders" so 96.6% are due to sober
drivers.
Paul Raj Khangure
: How about the "WARNING, CAR LIKELY TO END UP THROUGH THE NEAREST
: FENCE" plates for your car Rob ;) I think we'd better stop this, we're
: making each other look pretty bad here ;)
I put warning plates on mine, but noone seemed to impressed.
*shrug*
"If you don't like the way I drive, stay off the sidewalk."