Jump to content
 

The non-railway and non-modelling social zone. Please ensure forum rules are adhered to in this area too!

Whacky Signs.


Colin_McLeod
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
30 minutes ago, Ian Morgan said:

 

That is how it is in Germany. Most 'accidents' are caused by one or more people breaking a law. All actions on the road are prescribed by laws rather than a wishy-washy Highway Code.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by that. The Highway Code is only supposed to be a user friendly guidance document. It has never been intended to be the last word in correct road usage and should not be taken as such.

 

It says as much right at the start:

 

"Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence."

 

It lists the relevant legislation at the end:

"Annex 4 - The road user and the law

The following list can be found abbreviated throughout the Code. It is not intended to be a comprehensive guide, but a guide to some of the important points of law. For the precise wording of the law, please refer to the various Acts and Regulations (as amended) indicated in the Code. Abbreviations are listed below."

 

In then goes on to list all the applicable laws, none of which are 'wishy washy'.

 

But my main point was that most vehicular incidents whether illegal or not arise from poor decision making.

Edited by AndrueC
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
22 minutes ago, Ian Morgan said:

 

That is how it is in Germany. Most 'accidents' are caused by one or more people breaking a law. All actions on the road are prescribed by laws rather than a wishy-washy Highway Code.

 

As  all actions are prescribed by law in the UK , the highway code is just a beginner's guide..

 

As for the head line that's typical EDP, they sacked most of their journalists years ago, most articles are sent in by others. if there's a major incident their idea of sending a journalist is to pick up a phone and randomly call numbers of places nearby..

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AndrueC said:

I see the humour in it but it's actually correct. The vast majority of road crashes are caused by drivers - human error. It's why I dislike describing such incidents as 'accidents'. Most are not accidental, they are the result of poor decision making. Calling it an 'accident' implies that 'these things just happen' and absolves the driver(s) therefore reducing the incentive to modify behaviour.

 

So why did you excuse the American woman who killed a young lad on his motorcycle as being an accident?

 

Whilst berating me for calling her "names", which I didn't. I called her a coward for hiding behind her "status" and would have given her twenty years.

 

Some of us have long memories....

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, TheQ said:

As for the head line that's typical EDP, they sacked most of their journalists years ago, most articles are sent in by others. if there's a major incident their idea of sending a journalist is to pick up a phone and randomly call numbers of places nearby..

That's pretty good going by most local journalism standards these days - many of them just quote what everyone else is saying on Twitter...

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 19/09/2021 at 23:08, PhilJ W said:

242272216_10159769510389433_6993243737995030409_n.jpg.d110eb4b2725e535abdddae85a026df6.jpg

 

The most pointless argument in household affairs.

 

Who cares which way it goes? As long as there's enough paper, that's all that matters to me.

 

Stupid First World nonsense.

 

steve

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

So why did you excuse the American woman who killed a young lad on his motorcycle as being an accident?

 

Whilst berating me for calling her "names", which I didn't. I called her a coward for hiding behind her "status" and would have given her twenty years.

 

Some of us have long memories....

Ah so you didn't call her names, you just called her a coward. Is English not your first language? I guess not since you obviously failed to understand my post at the time as well.

 

That incident is entirely in accordance with what I've posted here. It's an example of a crash being caused by poor human decision making. As far as this thread is concerned that's all there is to it.

 

However since you seem to be struggling with your reading comprehension I'll try again. In that particular case I see it as an example of a poor decision resulting from human fallibility rather than malicious intent or gross negligence. There is a big difference between me (who learnt to drive on the left and have been doing for 30 years) driving on the right while in the UK and an American woman (who learnt to drive on right and had probably been doing we assume for 20 years) driving on the right while in the UK. It thus seems wrong to me to subject her to severe criminal penalties or to treat her like a criminal for the crash. Criminal penalties can't prevent humans making mistakes. I wouldn't get 20 years for doing that and she should get a lot, lot less.

 

As for her leaving the country that's an entirely separate matter as far as I'm concerned. The two offenses should not be conflated. And that's assuming that she had much choice in the matter anyway.

Edited by AndrueC
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, AndrueC said:

I see the humour in it but it's actually correct. The vast majority of road crashes are caused by drivers - human error. It's why I dislike describing such incidents as 'accidents'. Most are not accidental, they are the result of poor decision making. Calling it an 'accident' implies that 'these things just happen' and absolves the driver(s) therefore reducing the incentive to modify behaviour.

Accidental is the opposite of deliberate. Doesn't mean that poor judgement wasn't a factor. The vast majority of incidents on the road are not deliberate, even if they're the result of behaviour that falls well below acceptable levels, and are thus still accidents.

 

I find this common attempt at redefining the word irksome. It includes the unavoidable and hence blameless, but there's nothing in the definition exclusively so and no grounds for using it to imply blamelessness, or avoiding it on the assumption that it does.

 

Edited by Reorte
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
59 minutes ago, steve1 said:

 

The most pointless argument in household affairs.

 

Who cares which way it goes? As long as there's enough paper, that's all that matters to me.

 

Stupid First World nonsense.

 

steve

The question is does leaving a single sheet, mean that you aren't responsible for changing the roll? It's the next persons job!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 96701 said:

There was me thinking that this thread was for humorous things, including those things written in an ironic, flippant, or insincere way.

Hi Phil,

 

Just wait until Mercury goes retrograde on the 27th !

 

Gibbo.

  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...