Tuesday, July 01, 2008

He Drives She dies?

There's a new ad campaign out at the moment, I'm sure you've heard of it. it He drives She dies.
New research has shown that more than two-thirds of women who died in car crashes from 1997-2006 were passengers in cars driven by men.

This may well be so, but I've got to admit, I'm disturbed with the wording connected with the advert.


'The Road Safety Authority (RSA) yesterday revealed that half of all young women would accept a lift from someone they knew had been drinking.

Noel Brett, chief executive of the RSA, said that eight out of every 10 women felt unsafe as passengers in a car, with speeding cited as the main cause of concern.

"The scary stuff is eight out of 10 young women questioned said they regularly felt frightened travelling with a male driver," he said. "The big issue was speed, and when they did comment on speed the experience they inevitably found was the male driver would speed up.

"It's not reported as cool among the peer group to ask people to slow down. We're trying to empower young women to ask men to drive at an appropriate speed.

"One of the scariest findings was almost half of the respondents said they would travel with someone who has consumed alcohol, and regularly do so, and that's a frightening statistic."

Okay. If eight out fo ten women felt frightened when travelling with a male driver then those women need to NOT get in the car with that driver, they also need to NOT accept lifts with drivers who have been drinking. If a driver 'speeds up' when you ask them to slow down then DON"T travel with that driver again, because clearly he's a dick.

Another quote from the Indo is curiously dweeby, "Yesterday, the RSA and CAWT launched the 'He Drives, She Dies' campaign, which is funded by the European Union to empower females to say no to getting into a car with a man who drives dangerously."

Empower females to not do something stupid. Empowers them. Really?

This whole campaign is bogus, it talk down to men, branding them careless thoughtless idiots and makes women out to be mindless timid sheep. I'm all for less deaths on the raod, but this campaign is not going to do anything other than annoy people.
EVERYONE needs to slow down and pay more attention to their driving, nobody had the monopoly on poor driving. Blaming either gender for road deaths is not the way to solve this.

Labels:

108 Comments:

Anonymous eva said...

Amen to that.
I totally agree.

9:39 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah yeah thats a bit much now but men are worse drivers than women, I mean "it was only a little bit red" or "I only had two pints" or "I know I a belting accross a dual carriage way but I swear I have right away" can be somewhat problematic plus they cause the majority of accidents so maybe they are trying to address that. They are doing it badly though.

Nonny

9:49 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah yeah thats a bit much now but men are worse drivers than women, I mean "it was only a little bit red" or "I only had two pints" or "I know I a belting accross a dual carriage way but I swear I have right away" can be somewhat problematic plus they cause the majority of accidents so maybe they are trying to address that. They are doing it badly though.

Nonny

9:49 a.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I don't think men are worse drivers than women at all. I think they get into different types of accidents, but worse drivers? Doubt it.

9:58 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am pretty sure that if men cause more accidents than women on the road that woud deem them worse drivers ye know, "Ahh he's a great driver, only has 2 accidents" doesn't sound very promising.

See the RSA cause of road accidents. It's a fact mon ami!

http://www.rte.ie/news/features/roadsafety/roadsafetyissues.html

Nonny

10:04 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.rte.ie/news/features/roadsafety/roadsafetyissues.html

10:06 a.m.  
Blogger John Braine said...

Statistics like that can be very misleading. Think about it. Where a woman is a passenger in car, just how big a percentage do you think that car is being driven by a man? Say 8 out of 10? So if there are 100,000 or 22 women killed in that situation the stats would be the same.

If you flip it around I'd say that where a woman is driving, the statistical likelihood is that the other passenger would be a man. No matter how many crashes there are, it doesn't mean much - other than there are a lot of heterosexual couples that drive cars.

I'm not saying men aren't more dangerous drivers I'm just saying this statistic doesn't mean anything to me.

10:08 a.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

A whole lot of Hmmmm with this campaign.

Firstly, the way it's being branded as funded by the EU. Is it based on Europe-wide research or Irish research?

Secondly, if the stats are based on young drivers then the radio ad copy doesn't cite this, as far as I recall.

Thirdly, what % of men die as passengers when young men are driving? Higher than 68%? Instead of making it a gender divisive issue they could instead have focused on the 'get your mate to cop himself on' angle. It might be more productive.

10:23 a.m.  
Anonymous sheepworrier said...

"I am pretty sure that if men cause more accidents than women on the road that woud deem them worse drivers ye know"
More men than women have access to a car and tend to travel greater distances. I agree that men are probably more agressive drivers (especially when younger), but I wouldn't try and build an argument out of unqualiified statistics.

10:29 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

did you not read the link sheepy dude, that is not random statistics that is fact.

10:38 a.m.  
Blogger JL Pagano said...

To be a little bit of a devil's advocate for the RSA, their goal, apart from ofc ourse lowering the amount of road deaths, is to get us talking about the subject seriously instead of things like Euro2008, Bertie at the Tribunal and baby giraffes, and by the looks of this post/comments, over-simplifying statistics seems to have done just that.

10:50 a.m.  
Anonymous dinogirl said...

I agree the wording is bloody stupid FMC but when you say "they get into different types of accidents" the whole point is that they are FATAL accidents. Women get into fender-benders. So fine, nobody's a 'worse' driver but men are far, far more likely to get themselves and others killed.

Adjusting for distances drived is all well and good for statistics and all, but the basic fact is that if you are a young male driver, you are far far more likely than anybody else is to kill yourselves and others. So surely it makes sense for campaigns to target them?

And, fine: probably the chief reason that women are mostly killed in accidents when they're being driven by men IS because, sexist society that we live in, when a man and woman are in a car together, most of the time, the man will be driving. That's fine. But the point is, people are still dying in this situation and surely it makes sense to address IT, not just say 'ah, well, adjusting for factors, men are statisticaly not much more dangerous'. Sod the factors. The reality is, men drive cars and women get killed in them.

As to the women being very stupid.... I was nodding my head and agreeing, and trying to think who I know that use hearing this, and then I realised, shamefacedly - I have done this. I have totally done this.

Not with the dinoboy - he's a safer, slower driver than I am - or my parents, or my brother - they're all great drivers. But one male friend, who would never drink and drive or run red lights, but he is a speed demon. Seriously. And he's a good driver - he's always in control of the car. But OTHER people might not have as fast reactions as he does, and he is a danger.

We hate getting in a car with him. We've said we wish he wouldn't drive so fast. He's a nice guy and starts off driving slow - then we hit the motorway and he's bombing along again. So I guess my (female) best friend and I are exactly the girls this is aimed at. It's not going to make much difference though. I'm trying to think what possibly would.

I mean, we only get in the car with him for long distances - going away for the weekend or whatever. We don't have a car, and until recently didn't have a license either. So we're relying on friends who do - who are all boys, apart from one girl who despite being an excellent driver isn't confident enough to drive long distances. If eight of us are going away, we pack into two cars, and in the group, it'll always be two lads who drive. But seriously, what are we to do? Not go away? We go to a friend's house down the country - no public transport to get there. But every time we go, and it's a bank holiday and they talk about the road deaths statistics, I get a shiver.

Sorry for writing a book!

10:57 a.m.  
Anonymous sheepworrier said...

Nonny: I did read the article and was saying your statement is based on statistics which were not qualified. I'm just saying it's dangerous to make assumptions like that.

Dinogirl: I completely agree. The real question is how to get through to them. Graphic, hard-hitting campaigns don't seem to work, or if they do, they lose their impact very quickly.

The current slew of anti-speed adverts up here makes for uncomfortable viewing but it has little effect on the teen / young adult psyche.

11:12 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are missing an important point here as Dinogirl and JL pointed out you are making light of statistics, statistics that are entirely accurate. The way the RSA get their statistics is quite simple, the look at the number of men and women on the roads, then they look at the number of accidents that occurred, obtaining this information is very easy, insurance companies for example can provide accurate information about accidents as can the number of licenses issued. When they calculate how likely an individual is have an accident it is all done in proportion, they look at the number of both men and women drivers. That is not what I think that is a fact. Men are more likely to cause accidents. Therefore they are worse drivers. The campaign is a bit much but the point in entirely appropriate.

Nonny

11:31 a.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I think by an large a lack of mortal fear is the cause of many crashes, and when you're young you never think you're going to die. Certainly I drove much faster and with less regard for others when I was twenty-two compared to say even five years later. Of course I'm not sure what you can do to combat youthful stupidity, hard hitting adverts don't seem to have made much of an impact.

Dinogirl, we've all done it. I have a good friend down the country, a woman, who I steadfastly refuse to travel with. She drives her car like a rally driver and after one trip with her I said NEVER again. She's a 'good driver' too, but if a sheep or a cat or anything at all happened across the road before her she wouldn't have a hope in hell of reacting in time

11:38 a.m.  
Anonymous sheepworrier said...

Nonny: I'm not making light of statistics and im not doubting their authenticity. Again, I said they were "not qualified".

But you obviously have an insight into the inner workings of the RSA and what methods they used to create these statistics, so if you say so...

12:03 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fucking Romanian drunk drivers

12:23 p.m.  
Blogger PI said...

I was married to a statistician for many, many years and he reckoned you could make statistics say anything.
Just sayin'!

12:31 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

how very balanced of you FMC.

I reckon that the whole divide is going to balance up soon enough.

Women generally didn't used to binge drink stupidly like men until say 10-15 years ago (i'd guess), so i'd say they're be doing similarly stupid things on the road soon too.

From my experience men are only slightly worse for dangerous driving than women.

Huzzah for equality :)

12:37 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

The RSA are a bunch of lying cocksuckers. I wouldn't believe a word they say about anything.

12:51 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

Lies, damned lies and statistics, Pat proves it!

Morgor in general I do try a balanced approach-except when it comes to woo- and in this instance I feel it might be more beneficial than finger pointing.

1:03 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is not lies it is the truth, if you were that intent on confirming it's accuracy you could find out easy enough. The RSA are trying to save lives for God sake! Branding them liars is preposterous and a ridiculous statement to make. Logically what is the alternative? Dissolve the RSA perhaps? Ignore carnage on the road? Let people carry on with reckless disregard for other road users? The adverts are the only way of showing people the consequences of dangerous driving. The add is a bit mad but as I said last week the bad driving kills people and I commend the RSA for their work, it is an ignorant person who doesn’t.

Nonny

1:21 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

Statistics are scientific woo of the lowest order. Methodology is a fancy word for getting the answers you want your data to give you....

1:42 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I dunno Twenty, the RSA have some fine ideas, seatbelts for buses for example and their anti drink driving campaigns are pretty bloomin' gruesome.

1:43 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

The RSA are trying to save lives for God sake!

The RSA Is a waste of fucking time, energy and money.

1:59 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

And it's got Gay Byrne. Case closed.

1:59 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Ignore carnage on the road? Let people carry on with reckless disregard for other road users?

And yes, that's exactly what they should do.

1:59 p.m.  
Anonymous sheepworrier said...

F**king South African do-gooders...

2:04 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

I'm inclined to agree with Twenty. The RSA is like the HSE, a quango carved out of a government department in order to distance a set of issues from political accountability.

2:04 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very good and then innocent people like me and my aunt can suffer the consequences. You are a bastard. Your parents should be ashamed of themselves.

Nonny.

2:07 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

What have my parents got to do with anything?

The point is that pretty much the same amount of people die on the roads each year no matter how much money you spend/waste on awareness or advertising or pamphlets or booklets or anything else.

People will always die on the road. If you need somebody to tell you that dangerous driving is bad then you're a fucking mong and fucking mongs will driving like fucking mongs anyway.

So save the money and spend it on something you can make a difference with.

2:12 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

well their latest step of forcing people to actually learn how to drive before going on the road should help more than all the rest of their efforts i reckon.

The previous method of learning how to drive (slapping an L plate on and just giving it a lash) probably wasn't the safest.

2:28 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

Can't hurt, although I wonder what the stats are on the amount of drivers who crashed while holding full driver's licences. Passing a test doesn't quell the stupid need to drive like lunatics in some folk.

2:31 p.m.  
Blogger gimme a minute said...

The real danger is the growing number of drivers who just can't turn left.

The parents of these motoring Derek Zoolanders should be also be ashamed.

2:33 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

I suspect the number of serious accidents involving learner drivers is probably quite low.

And simply having a driver with a full licence is going to do exactly what to prevent an accident?

'There's a mad bastard coming down our side of the road right for us'

'Don't worry, I'll wave my full licence at it. That'll save us!'

'Hurrah!'

2:35 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I've heard about those weirdos, Gimmie.

Twenty, of course waving a full licence will help, everyone knows that. As will being able to turn left and recognise the colour red.

2:39 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I swear to God Twenty Major you are the most ignorant person I have ever come across. Nothing you say is realistic or based on fact. Do fellow bloggers a favor and research before you pass comments or even just use your cop on. A full licensed driver is in a better position to anticipate the road and advise a learner accordingly.

And Gimmie Sir, sure we'll take advice from you cause obviously you have a full license right?


Nonny

2:44 p.m.  
Anonymous sheepworrier said...

I'd agree that "fucking mongs will driving like fucking mongs anyway" and there is precious little that can be done about it, but the requirement for a license will hopefully weed-out some of the mongs before they get a chance to legally drive.

I'd also wonder how many of those statistical injuries/deaths were joyrider related.

Also a demongifying machine would be useful.

2:45 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

YOUNG FEMALE DRIVERS WITH PROVISIONAL LICENCES, WHERE A LICENCE CATEGORY WAS SPECIFIED, WERE HELD TO BE TO A LARGE EXTENT RESPONSIBLE IN 38% OF ACCIDENTS, COMPARED WITH 58% FOR YOUNG MALE DRIVERS WITH PROVISIONAL LICENCES. YOUNG FEMALE DRIVERS WITH FULL LICENCES WERE HELD TO BE TO A LARGE EXTENT RESPONSIBLE IN 32% OF ACCIDENTS, COMPARED WITH 48% FOR YOUNG MALE DRIVERS WITH FULL LICENCES.

from nra.ie

2:47 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

A full licensed driver is in a better position to anticipate the road and advise a learner accordingly.

Ah yes, the bestowing of the gift of anticipation when one receives one full licence is something I completely overlooked, you septic anus.

2:47 p.m.  
Anonymous problemchildbride said...

What a bloody stupid, ill-thought out campaign.

2:50 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

It is Sam-by the way missus, check your inbox.
Thanks for that link Morgor, v interesting.

2:55 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

Great quote, Morgor.

1. Are the percentages those relating to all accidents or just those involving young drivers?

2. In what percentage of cases was driving license status actually noted?

Margins of extrapolated error and overstatement must be huge: one instance is 50% of two cases, for instance.

Nonny, a driving license is a legal sanction. It is no guarantee of driving competence, especially since we gave 'em out to thousands of untested people years ago.

My driving on a full license was no better or worse than it was before my test (when I was driving on a provisional) or in the period after my test but before I bought the license.

3:04 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right Morgor men fall down signifigantly.

Major, tell me something you bright spark, how do you learn to drive? Would a body not sit in the passenger seat and instruct you as to what to do? Would they not say slow down here? Break now etc etc? So how dear would one be able to listen to an instructor when they are learning to drive and not when they are on the actual road? As soon as you grasp the basics of driving does your hearing diminish? Plus giving that a provisional driver may have never sat behind the wheel of a car before I can see the benefits of having someone with two years driving experience sitting along side them. Bring on the fines.

Nonny

3:04 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

I'll answer that when you start to make some kind of sense.

3:10 p.m.  
Blogger Medbh said...

It's purely anecdotal, but I can't say that I've ever viewed men behind the wheel as more dangerous than women. Maybe that's just because I'm a shitty driver.
But I never get behind the wheel with drink taken.

3:13 p.m.  
Blogger Dr. James McInerney said...

@sheepie: great comment about South Africa - made me laugh.

Otherwise on the subject of safe driving. If the males of Ireland drive 4 billion kilometres in a year and cause 500 accidents and if the females drive only 1 billion kilometres but cause 300 accidents, then the females are worse drivers on average, in a statistical sense...probably.

I don't get a sense that this is the point this new campaign is making. The raw figure of just numbers of casualties smacks of being an effort to just come up with a new angle to present the situation...and cause a rift among the sexes...which indeed it seems to have caused.

We were happier before the RSA. :(

3:15 p.m.  
Blogger gimme a minute said...

It's Sir Gimme, Nonny, not Gimme Sir.

3:19 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

Here's the exact spot i got it from.

http://www.nra.ie/News/PressReleases/2000/htmltext,2564,en.html

the description of the report is
Comparisons between young drivers (aged 17 - 24) with older drivers (over 24 years)

A couple of points.

1. it's fairly old by now (from 97)
2. I would imagine the percentage of female drivers will have increased by then
3. I reckon those statistics are quite easily skewable to prove whatever you like.

3:20 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everything I have said I have backed up and the reasoning I just gave for a driver accompanying a person is the reason the RSA are insisting on it. READ Twenty, read the RSA website, READ the the critical reviews of the RSA rules and regulations. Then my dear you will have some inkling into the reasoning behind the new laws. The biggest critic of blogging is the misinformed shite people try to peddle. Were you to research you will see that there has been a dramatic reduction in road fatalities as a direct result of RSA initiatives.

Nonny

3:20 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Were you to research you will see that there has been a dramatic reduction in road fatalities as a direct result of RSA initiatives.

Road fatalities in June 2007 - 29

Road fatalities in June 2008 - 28

Even a drama queen like you would have a hard time convincing anyone that was dramatic.

3:27 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pardon me but I would prefer not to take advice from an uneducated stoner thank you.

Also, can I just point out how things changed from last week, when I didn't add my name the overwhelming majority of commenter's agreed with me and today on the same issue (the accompanied driver one), when I add my name people disagree with me.Quite the little bullies aren't we boys and girls.

Nonny

3:29 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Didn't see your last comment 20 hold on now!!

3:31 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Oh, was that you last week? We'd never have known.

3:33 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

Docky, it's a peculiar campaign and no mistake, the photo is quite odd. I genuinely think there should be more of a focus on the standard of driving as opposed to the gender of the drivers.

3:35 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look at this, seriously no slagging, http://www.rsa.ie/NEWS/News/RSA_Year_End_07.html

Over ten year baring in mind this ten year period was when we experienced our biggest increase in the number of motorist on the road, do you really not think the RSA have made a positive impact? Come on now you are crushing my faith in humanity here?

Nonny

3:40 p.m.  
Blogger gimme a minute said...

Am I the uneducated stoner, Nonny?

I don't recall offering you advice.

3:41 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

Like I said last week, maybe driver's ed in schools, like the states. Although who pays for that? Sigh, I don't know what might work. But these campaigns clearly don't make a whit of difference.

3:42 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

someone had a good article on how ridiculous all this hype on road deaths is.

i think it was rob the alleged comedian but i can't find it now.

It had good stats on deaths which i have bothered to look up myself from cso.ie

deaths for 2006
=====================
Road : 285
Diseases of the Circulatory System (heart attacks etc): 9,662
Diseases of Respiratory System (pneumonia): 3,978
Malignant Neoplasms (cancer) : 7,868

I think the figures speak for themselves no?

3:42 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

Damn it everyone is typing so fast. Nonny I'll have to take a look at that link before I reply.

3:43 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

It's all bollocks Nonny. There was a 20%+ drop between 2001 and 2003 which had nothing to do with the RSA.

The figures will fluctuate but you'll always have more or less the same amount of people dying on the roads each year. Either that or the RSA will fudge the stats to make it look like they're doing a good job.

3:43 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I'd say greatly improved roads and better vehicular safety features might have helped too.

3:44 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Stats a bit off, Morgor but the point is bang on. Road deaths:

2004 - 374
2005 - 396
2006 - 365
2007 - 338

3:45 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

I'd say greatly improved roads and better vehicular safety features might have helped too.

Quite so.

3:45 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

just in case you lazy bastards need help finding it : http://www.cso.ie/statistics/principalcausesofdeath.htm

3:46 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor the researcher said...

Stats a bit off, Morgor

Where are you getting better statistics than the central statistics office?
Although that said, it does have some qualifier at the end of the page.

3:50 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

Will someone please think of the publicans!

They're having to advertise with a phoney country song on the radio to get people back into their cars and out to the pubs to drink (sensibly, wink wink).

ps, Twenty, don't forget some of those road deaths are actually suicides, and they include instances where the driver, of whatever license status, is not responsible.

3:51 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Garda website, Morgor.

3:53 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Road death stats

3:53 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor the politically correct said...

apparently road deaths are the principal causes of deaths among travellers, and (trying to stay PC here) they're mad bastards who don't usually bother with licences or tax, let alone lessons.

3:55 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Come on now Twenty considering the dramatic rise is the number of cars on the road 38 lives spared is a lot, 38 people dude, 38! The RSA have made lots of positive changes penalty points, child car seats, ensuring everybody wears a seat belt to name but a few.

Nonny

3:56 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

child car seats, ensuring everybody wears a seat belt

Those things are just common sense. And the chances are that we could have another decrease this year but we'll have an increase the year after.

The RSA have done fuck all.

4:01 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I agree, some of the proposals were good, the child seats were a good idea, and like ai said earlier, the seat belts for buses. Jesus, remember as kids boinging around the back seat of the car.

4:01 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

It's interesting to notice that MOST people wear a belt these days where as a few years ago that didn't appear to be the case.

4:02 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

Nonny, the RSA does nothing. It makes recommendations and the government brings in legislation, or it doesn't.
The RSA is there to take the flak for road deaths, just like the HSE is there to take the flak for cancer deaths. It was making politicians uncomfortable to have to account to the Dail for these aspects of their portfolios. So they farmed them out to quangos that they can blame for 'systemic' and other sorts of failures.

4:04 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well how come before the RSA insisted on people wearing seat belts and putting your child in a car seat nobody did? Don't be a liar into the bargain if you even attempt to tell me that your parents made you wear a seat belt when you where a child you are lying. Nobody wore seat belts until the RSA brought in the new laws. Now everybody wears seat belts. Is that not a good thing?
You are just being disagreeable for the sake of it.

I swear to jesus you can put me in terrible form.

Nonny

4:08 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

Child seats? I do believe child seats weren't invented by the RSA. Nor were seat belts. Nor were penalty points. Now if they invented a proper public transport network we'd be less dependent on cars... oh wait, buses kill people too. Let's ban buses then...

4:10 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

The laws about seatbelts and child seats were brought in before the existence of the RSA, nonny.

4:10 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I thought the RSA was behind the booster seat? No? Humm, okay, going to the gym.

4:12 p.m.  
Blogger Conan Drumm said...

"The Road Safety Authority Bill was recently enacted and signed into law by the President on the 31st of May 2006. The Department of Transport will now commence the process to formally establish the Road Safety Authority (RSA). The RSA will assume responsibility for all road safety related activities such as formulating strategies, the testing of drivers and vehicles, road safety research and data collection, driver education and the promotion and awareness of road safety in general."

4:16 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

rob very kindly re-posted his original : http://allegedcomedian.blogspot.com/2008/07/musing-repost.html

Nobody wore seat belts until the RSA brought in the new laws.

Not trying to be contrary just for the sake of it but the RSA doesn't make or enforce the laws.

The penalty points system came in in 2002 but between 2002-2005, only 19 people have been disqualified from driving because they hold 12 penalty points.

Which seems very low to me.

4:23 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes they are, it is only since their establishment and continued petitioning of the government that the traffic Gards have began to enforce the seatbelt laws and indeed that children are restrained in a car seat (http://www.rsa.ie/NEWS/News/Check_it_Fits_Child_seats_are_imporperly_installed.html).

Your arguments are ridiculous. They are trying to save lives.

Nonny

4:24 p.m.  
Anonymous sheepworrier said...

Nonny that's an article from the RSA site! Seriously, how reliable do you think that would be? They need to justify their existance.

4:30 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

They need to justify their existance.

Exactly. Nonny, if you can't see that it's just a money making scam for the government and to keep some cunts in cushy well paid job then I feel sorry for you.

4:33 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We will have to agree to dissagree darling but by all means have the last word young man....

Nonny

4:37 p.m.  
Blogger Twenty Major said...

Why would I agree to disagree? That's stupid.

I disagree entirely.

4:40 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok, well I accept that you are not in agreement with me and that I am pissing aginst the wind by arguing with you. I won't hold it agaist you even though I think you quite the mentalist.

Nonny

4:42 p.m.  
Blogger Alleged Comedian said...

Nonny, I can agree with a lot of what you're saying. I don't think we should confuse the RSA running a badly thought out campaign (this one) with the various other initiatives that have doubtless saved lives.

To me this initiative, in addition to being breathtakingly obtuse, is like an incredible amount of safety, public responsibility campaigns. Like the "I've had enough" drinking awareness ads, the people who being targeted are the last people who would take heed of the posters, films etc.

I have never, in 14 years of driving, in Dublin and latterly in Wexford, being breathylised, ever. That may be where the problem lies, in that the RSA or anyone else can come up with whatever they want, but until they enforce the rules we already have (instead of standing outside UCD and cathing people doing 55 kph) then the farce continues

4:43 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

rob, i was random breathalysed and i've been on the road less than a year.

I was stopped on the N3 around 6pm on a sunday, a bean-garda gave me the thing to blow into, i did so and then she said "have you been drinking?".

erm, no, you just breathalysed me you twat.

4:54 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been breathalysed about 3 times, I don't mind, catch all them drunkards and I be happy. I'd never let them open the bag thingy and take the mouth piece out, gloves or not you would know where those dirty buggars had their hands.

Nonny

6:02 p.m.  
Anonymous AM in Brussels said...

A few points... Seatbelt laws were introduced years before the RSA was set up.

Childseats also. Someone mentioned the booster seats, but that is actually EU legislation, and therefore nothing to do with the RSA.

The RSA can do nothing except make recommmendations and spent money.

Money that would be better spent on equipment for the guards to enforce the laws that are actually there.

I've been driving for almost 20 years - about half of that outside of Ireland, but I am back very regularly either with my own car, or I rent one.

Never in Ireland have I been breathalised, seen a "good" speed check with radar, laser, whatever.

Whereas throughout the rest of Europe, I have been breathalised at all times of the day and night. Stopped for speeding (in Norway, doing 105kmh on a motorway where the limit is 90kmh), and in Romania where I was the only car stopped in a long line of traffic going though a village (because I was the only foreign car).

The rules pertaining to provisional licence holders make sense. It's a step in the right direction, but the reforms should not end there. Driving is a privilage, and all aspects of it should be controlled properly. Irish driving is of an appalling standard. The best would be Germany. In Germany it can cost a good 2000 euros to get your licence, but the end result is someone who can drive properly and in all conditions.

Anyway, to end this rambling comment. Nonny, some of your comments go from reasonable one moment to being crazy as a bag of monkeys the next, and some people might take issue with your rather extreme views, but the whole world is not out to get you.

6:24 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What are you talking about, I don’t think anyone is against me I stand with the overwhelming majority of the Ireland, all I am doing is appreciating the RSA and welcoming the reforms. As I said the safer they make the road the happier I am. If people put as much thought into driving as they did into moaning about the RSA the might pass their tests, they might even make the roads a safer place.

Nonny

6:45 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor the confused said...

I'd never let them open the bag thingy and take the mouth piece out, gloves or not you would know where those dirty buggars had their hands.

the gardai?

full body cavity search anyone?

7:14 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I've never been stopped either and I used to be the designated driver a fair bit back in the day. My brother on the other hand has been stopped at least four times, twice in the last year and ordered to breath into the bag. He was also stopped for speeding by a guard who wanted to know had he 'missed the runway'.
There were two guards hauling car in at the crossroads after Bushy park earlier, I think they were looking for tax disks but I wonder how many L drivers the caught driving alone.

7:25 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

Actually, never been stopped for drink driving, I was stopped for speeding through the Phoenix park once, but that was mid day and I genuinely hadn't a clue what speed I was doing because along with most other things on the fiesta, the speedo didn't work. That was a long time ago, and I WAS that stupid.

7:28 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have never been seached by the gardai nor anyone else for that matter. I am a bit of a clean freak and if you ever see a copper stopping anyone you will see them with their "hygienic" rubber gloves touching the car and everything else before removing that tube from the bag and expecting you to blow into it, no thank you I'll open the bag myself you dirt bird.

Incidently, my good provisional pal got stopped today and what you think the gal did when asked where she a full license holder she gave my farking name, mine!! Now I have to go down and produce my license within 10 working days. Knowing my deep dislike for the boys in blue and since I have been harping on about how right I think the new law is my pals think this is hillarious. I ask ye what do you say to that?

Nonny

10:23 p.m.  
Blogger fatmammycat said...

I would say 'I'm not going.'

10:32 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that would be a bit mean.

Nonny

10:52 p.m.  
Anonymous eva said...

Jesus Christ Super Star.
I've been following this debate all day.
Very Entertaining.
Especially the Twenty/Nonny fight :)
At the end of the day though, for me (and this is why I said amen to it in the beginning) is that I think drivers should be responsible for their own driving. Period.
Having said that, we all have different means of "achieving a licence" etc etc.
I never understood the "L level driving" in Ireland or anywhere else - what the f*ck is that all about? - so in that I'm all with you Nonny!
On the other hand I totally agree with you FMC and a lot of others that a "proper" licence does not necessarily constitute secure driving.
So where the f*ck does it leave us?
Actually of all the responses to your post today, FMC, I mostly agree with "am in brussels" - she/he summed it all up for me. Although I don't know anything about the so called facts in her/his post.

11:35 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I never understood the "L level driving" in Ireland or anywhere else - what the f*ck is that all about? - so in that I'm all with you Nonny!"

Me and my chest infection can go to bed happy!!

(Ahem Lori darling I think you might owe me some ching!!)

Nonny.

11:49 p.m.  
Anonymous morgor said...

Incidently, my good provisional pal got stopped today and what you think the gal did when asked where she a full license holder she gave my farking name, mine!!

So she was driving with a provisional licence on her own?
Surely that breaks the law?
I thought it was a 1000 euro fine and 5 penalty points for that.

9:00 a.m.  
OpenID bendersbetterbrother said...

Eva said
"Nonny ... the whole world is not out to get you."

But if think they are then they are, your perception becomes your reality. Nonny, your condescending tone to other commenters with different views to your own is provocative in itself. But you seem unable to help yourself there.

I missed all this yesterday. My tuppen'worth. Driving around on provisional licences is a joke. Someone learning doesn't have the same awareness and road-sense your average experienced driver has. I'm sure that leads to more accidents. Consequently there's a whole generation of bad drivers out there who adopted, and practised, bad habits, free from correction. It'll take a generation to correct this as those doing the accompanying from now on probably went through the same process themselves and so are not ideal tutors for the learners. Much better than none though.

Most accidents are caused by stupidity however and I don't know how you can legislate to reduce that. More cars, and more powerful ones at that, year on year on our roads has to mean that keeping the status quo is good in itself. Expecting a reduction is probably unrealistic.
What's often forgotten too is that a large number of the deaths on our roads, and therefore included in the statistics, are pedestrians, the accident being caused by them, not the driver. And I can't remember ever hearing of a pedestrian being fined for causing or nearly causing an accident through their actions. A large proportion of the rest are at 2 in the morning on a bend on a deserted country road. Short of straightening all the roads I can't see how legislation, or for that matter, enforcement will reduce their contribution to the statistics.

Up north we have the same howls from politicians eager to justify their positions or garner media attention. One such wingnut, an Assembly member for Ards was driving round the town last Christmas in his Shogun, one handed, deep in conversation with his mobile pressed firmly to his ear with the other.

One 8 mile stretch of road has 32 speed cameras recording number plates and calculating average speed. The only deaths I've been aware of have been after midnight when the road was relatively empty and on a stretch just outside of that now covered by the cameras. Of course, they'll justify the cameras next year if we have no deaths, conveniently forgetting that there were none on that camera covered stretch anyway.

The bottom line is that most accidents are caused by people being stupid in some way or other. Every week I imagine most drivers avert an accident due to the stupidity of someone else, a pedestrian walking out, a driver pulling out. It's not surprising that if there are a million drivers and therefore a million near accidents every week that some serious ones DO actually happen. That there are so few deaths as there are at present is quite amazingly fortuitous and unlikely to be bettered by legislation or untargeted enforcement.

12:20 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eve did not say that, Am did!

Plus you just reiterated the point I was trying to make.


Nonny

12:27 p.m.  
Anonymous AM in Brussels said...

Nonny, yesterday you said "Bring on the fines" in relation to provisional drivers not having a licenced driver with them.

Yet, a friend of yours gave your name when stopped (offence number 1), and you are going to back her up on this and show your licence (offence number 2).

Nice double standards there! Well done.

12:50 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it quite funny in fairness but I didn't do it nor will I be doing it, I am bit scared though.

Also, in the calm light of day I have a sneaky suspicion I am being wound up

12:59 p.m.  
OpenID bendersbetterbrother said...

Nonny, apologies to Am for the incorrect attribution of the quote. The paragraph immediately below the quote is perhaps a more important piece of text for you to focus on.

1:05 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nonny, first of all, serious back-pedal on your principles there helping your mate like that, and "i didn't do it" isn't really a good excuse if your helping them get away with it, if you got caught you'd be in as much trouble as them (with good reason)
It seems MUCH more likely that you just like being argumentative,
"I think it quite funny in fairness" is quite a jump from: "Plus giving that a provisional driver may have never sat behind the wheel of a car before I can see the benefits of having someone with two years driving experience sitting along side them. Bring on the fines."
also, "you are right morgor, men fall down sginificantly" (wasn't your friend female?)
(i don't mean to pick on ya but c'mon)

and as for the rest of you who like to quote stastistics, well...

Statistics are often used to substantiate comparative claims – for example, "88% of those surveyed prefer QRS brand potato chips." But this statistic fails to mention the sample size. Think about it – we all know that there’s a 50% chance that a tossed coin will come up heads. But if you flip a coin six times in a row you might get one head and five tails. Does this mean that the original statistic is wrong and in fact, a coin will come up heads 16% of the time? Of course not – it’s just that we didn’t conduct the experiment with a large enough sample size. If we don’t know what the sample size is, we have no way of evaluating the accuracy of the statement. So maybe 8 out of 9 people questioned preferred QRS chips, but is this really the kind of information on which you want to base an investment decision?
Another example of an incomplete statistic is a claim such as "ABC ink jet printers use 22% less ink." Is that 22% less ink than other ink jet printers, other printers in general, or printers developed 10 years ago? Without a basis of comparison, this claim is essentially worthless.(there's more>>>)
http://www.effectivemeetings.com/productivity/communication/statmanipulation.asp

now that that's out of my system, the point is, this ad campaign is very sexist, (much like the rest of the rsa ad campaigns) the MAN was going to drink drive, before the WOMAN used her magical soul-cleansing powers to stop him, or the YOUNG MALE DRIVER swerves out crippling the pedestrians, and now "HE DRIVES, SHE DIES" i mean gimme a fuckin' break, ya couldn't possibly get more sexist than that., in fact i'd safely bet my house on it that NONE of the rsa ads have EVER had a woman driver at fault in their ads, bacause if they did, it would be "extremely sexist" and "anti-feminist"

hope you enjoyed the book, Peejus!!

1:45 p.m.  
Blogger Taibai Li said...

qihang0616michael kors outlet online
burberry scarf
tory burch handbags
prada outlet
gucci outlet online
burberry handbags
cheap jerseys
burberry sale
tory burch outlet
ralph lauren
nike air max
oakley sunglasses
ralph lauren uk
rolex watches
michael kors handbag
pandora jewelry
ray ban sunglass
coach factory outlet
michael kors
michael kors bag
jordan shoes
toms shoes
fitflops sale clearance
pandora outlet
coach factory outlet
michael kors outlet
tory burch outlet online
ray ban sunglasses
ray ban sunglasses
cheap jordans
toms outlet
ray ban sunglasses
oakley sunglasses
abercrombie
gucci outlet
q

9:49 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home