A driving "mindset" quiz.

1/ Yes - IMHO
2/ No
3/ Absolutely Yes
4/ No
5/ Yes unfortunately
6/ No

You should do some research into poll design, polling and poll interpretation before you attempt to do something like this

The way your poll has been designed, any answer will obviously result in your agenda being supported. (absence of neutral language, scale of responses, ability to “shade” answers etc)

If you supply the result of the poll to any MP or lobby group the first thing they will ask for is a copy of the questions; as it stands with these questions any answers would ensure immediate WPB filing.

I don’t have problems with what you’re doing, but for God’s sake do it right.

Do it properly and the results may influence community discussion and legislative change

Do it wrong and it becomes an exercise in onanism

I think one of the major unaddressed problems is the lack of regard for others in our society.

There are many who have a totally self centered view of the world and that they are the only person who is at all important.

You see this when they push through to get one car length in front on a crowded road or overtake dangerously to get past a slower driver.

The mindset seems to be "I need to get to where I am going and everyone else should get out of my way"

It is as if they have never developed past the age of a toddler and still do not recognize that there are other human beings in the world.



The same thing is involved in speed and breaking the laws "I know it is wrong but I should be allowed to do whatever I like"

If we could train people to show more courtesy and to take more responsibility for their actions there would be less accidents IMHO anyway :-) .

1. No (assuming you mean EXCESSIVE speed - ie. crash can't occur with NO speed)
2. No (generally - but would depend on context/traffic/etc.)
3. No (school curriculum is jammed as it is - should be parents' role)
4. No
5. Yes (the driver is not expected to think for themselves or make reasoned judgements anymore)
6. No, DEFINITELY not.

This poll is all about what you believe.

Question 2 is very ambiguous...I could answer YES it is speeding, or NO not simply building momentum.

DO a little research first I believe.

And Q4 is your thoughts and you are saying that NO ONE used to speed in the old days ???

Weirdorama OzTroopy

1/.. No/yes - IMHO

2/.. No (if speed limit is 110kph), Yes (if speed limit 100kph or less)

3/.. Yes

4/.. Yes

5/.. No

6/.. No (but don't tell Mr Plodd)

So the questions are .......

1/ Yes

2/ Yes

3/ Yes

4/ Yes (showing my age?)

5/ No

6/ Yes

I’ll echo the sentiments of others that the questions are to generalised and open to far too much interpretation – so to qualify these answers……

1/ ‘Excessive’ speed for the conditions is often either the major contributing or a contributing factor in motor vehicle accidents.

2/ Your responsibility as a driver is to obey all road rules. The drivers of vehicles that may be inconvenienced must drive to the conditions prevailing, and if that means taking account of a slower vehicle going up a hill, then so be it.

3/ In many instances it is. But no argument from me.

4/ Drive to the conditions within the limitations that are specified. That could mean at a speed well less than the posted speed limit.

5/ Not for me, I want to arrive safely every time, that isn’t to say I ignore road signs. Getting there safely means I must be aware of everything, including directives (whatever they might be).

6/ It could be argued (successfully) that if you need to exceed the speed limit to pass another vehicle then there is no need to pass, if you are obeying the speed directive. I get your point, but I don’t accept it. You're asking people to use their own judgement. The reason we have speed signs is because they don't want this happening (see my comment just below).

The most important thing that is overlooked in many speed discussions is that speed directives are specifying a maximum speed limit, not a minimum limit. Being licensed to drive on the road implies that you will do so in a safe manner and to the conditions you are presented with.

We can debate whether speed limits should be higher or lower, whether we should be fined or not fined for breaking them.

In a perfect world where everyone was responsible and where everyone’s interpretation of what a ‘safe speed is’ was consistently the same we could do away with speed signs…..until then I guess we are stuck with them.

Break the limit, get fined, don’t whinge – you knew the conditions that were imposed on you before you drove down the road.

Phew…that turned into a bit of a rant…….

Good weekend to all.

1. Yes, in the sense that crashes can't occur without some speed.
2. Depends on the circumstances. Eg. If conditions, visibility, driver ability, mental state, etc is poor, yes.
3. Yes
4. No, but there were far fewer vehicles and signs 'back in the day'.
5. Often, but certainly not always. There are many very good drivers on our roads who drive with the latter approach
6. No.

1. The primary cause is usually driver error, one of which can be speeding.
IMHO.
2. As they say, there's no such thing as "safe speeding" on public roads. IMHO

3. No. The License testing, driver training, and learner driver mental aptitude
evaluation need to be more strict. We all know you can't educate an idiot,
of which there are plenty on our roads. Too broad a subject for the schools
also to many variances with public & private schools, school of the air,
correspondence education etc. IMHO

4. Yes. The multitude of advertising hoardings on our roadsides these
days can certainly be distracting.

5. Yes. Generally these days if your driving at the speed limit, whatever speed
zone you are in, you are holding up traffic. IMHO

6. Badly worded Question. If the speed limit is 100kph, what is the need to
overtake, unless the vehicle in front is travelling considerably slower, and
then as the law states, you must do so safely, and that would include
not exceeding the speed limit to do so. If you can't overtake safely, then
have the patience to wait until the right opportunity presents itself. IMHO

There is only one possible way to have a head on collision with another vehicle, and that is for one vehicle to be on the incorrect side of the carriageway. That's not MHO that's a fact.

Fred.

1) sort of - most accidents caused by speed seen on the news involve vehicles going 150kph pluss. This is much different to exceeding the limmit by less than 10kph

2) No, see above

3) yes

4) yes but the road toll was alot higher then for many factors

5) depends on the individual

6) no

1/ No
2/ No
3/ Yes
4/ Yes
5/ No
6/ No

OzTroopy, your "Poll" questions could well be paraphrased as follows:

1. I don't think excessive speed is the primary cause in vehicle accidents. I think many other factors are the "primary" cause. Do you agree with me?

2. I think it is OK to exceed the statutory speed limit whilst going down hill in order to maintain a higher-than-otherwise speed up the other side. Do you agree with me?

3. Driver education should be part of the school curriculum. Do you agree with me?

4. The Government is wasting a lot of money on unnecessary speed zoning and attendant signs when really we all know what speed is appropriate at all times. Do you agree with me?

5. I don't think we need signs to direct our driving conduct. We all know how to travel safely. Agree?

6. I should legally be able to exceed the statutory speed limit by as much as 30kph in order to pass a vehicle that is driving at less than the speed limit. Do you agree with me?

OzTroopy, Your agenda is patently clear and hopelessly disguised as a poll.
As Nargun51 has responded, "its an exercise in onanism" (whatever that is! lol)

But then, as any politician will attest, never ask a question unless you already know the answer.

1. No/Yes
2. No
3. Yes
4. Yes
5. Yes
6. No.

Jim.

1/.. Is speed the PRIMARY "cause" in vehicle accidents or a component of many factors ?..Yes....:

2/.. Is 120kph down a highway hill "speeding" (as in the govt, dangerous driving guise) or simply a building up of momentum to ensure other road users are not inconvenienced going up the next section ? ......Sometimes........Yes..................................:

3/.. Should driver education be part of the school curriculum ? ..........YES........Definately...................:

4/.. Does anybody on this forum remember when billions of dollars of speed zone signs werent nescessary because you either drove at highway speed or built up area speed and slowed down to negotiate things like sharp corners or school areas ? ..........yes....................:

5/.. Has "driving" become .... Just ricochetting from one signposted directive to another, compared to travelling safely and assuredly from journeys start to journeys end ? .......Yes............:

6/.. Is spending large amounts of time in the oncoming lane, overtaking at 100kph safer than spending a lesser amount of time, overtaking at 100kph-130kph speeds ? ...no.............:

Hi Oz Troopy, Good on you mate for at least having a go,you must care or you wouldnt bother.Perhaps your "poll"may have been worded better,perhaps the knockers can put it together better.If no one tries to solve the road carnage we will continue to bury or road users.For those out there who have been lucky enough to miss trying to tell someone with horrific injuries that they will be okay and knowing they wont please think about what it may be like,not nice at all and something that stays with you forever.Again Oz Troopy good on you for having a go.Cheers Snake & Josie

…Just as an aside, frequently I’ve seen the comment posted in here “Common sense is not so common”.

Many of the responses I’ve read are based on a common sense approach to driving, and nothing wrong with that, and if we all exercised common sense on the road, we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion…..but as it has been uttered many times. Common sense is not so common.

I guess that is why we have rules imposed on us……

Beer o’clock..good weekend to all!

You can always rely on a discussion about road safety to generate a bit of emotion.

And no wonder.

Some of us take our driving very seriously, and derive a lot of pleasure from doing it. Others with whom we share the road couldn't give a rodents and spend time behind the wheel chatting, texting, sleeping, and doing anything but concentrating on being a considerate road user.

Sadly, there are elderly people who are driving cars who can't even control their bowels, let alone their car. Keep an eye out for one of these coming the wrong way along a freeway, or turning right against the traffic at a roundabout.

There are a range of vehicles sharing the same roads. From supercars worth several hundred thousand, to rusted hulks with no brakes and bald tyres.

We drive to 'road rules' that in many instances are set up to raise revenue for cynical state governments (which all should be abolished BTW). Cynical exploitation of road safety for revenue raising makes roads less safe (Victoria).

Road rules are enforced by police that can vary from highly professional, to crazed aggressive cowboys who use their position to bully and intimidate whoever they choose.

Do you know anyone who has been refused a license because they were too stupid?

Can you imagine the range driving skills demonstrated on our roads being reflected in, say, pilots flying passenger aircraft?

Until we get really serious about road safety, and get professional advice on rules licensing enforcement etc without the interference of the vested interest groups like police and state governments, we can expect that such debates will stir emotions, and there will be needless fatalities.

Question 7

You've spent al your life in the bush driving roads of all conditions thru cyclones bushfires floods etc etc - often with a coach full of school kids for many many years, more than 30 and never had a serious injury or accident in all that time.

There are no traffic lights within 100 miles of you.

There are few "advisory signs" on your roads, many are single lane still, in some of the steepest terrain in the country and others are still all gravel.

So

You go to the city for a trip, arriving at 4 am modweek when the roads are virtually totally deserted.

You pull up at a traffic light, on the outskirts of the city on a 4 lane intersection (going each way) thats red.

The traffic lights obviously switched to computer controlled on a timer, in a control room in the coty manned by a 16 year old kid for cheap wages who obviously is too young to hold a drivers license.

You sit there - with the radio off - window down and theres not a sound - just you - the empty dark silent road......and the red light!

After 15 minutes witing and nothings changed you get to wondering if maybe you didn;t drive over the magnetic strip in the road properly - you back up and go forward over it again hoping that will trigger a green light so you can be on your way again.

It doesnt.

You give it another 5 mins.

Its still red.

Its still silent - not a vehicle light or sound anywhere other than your own.

You look up and realise that you've been conditioned to surrender your own eyes and brain to a machine that MAY or MAY NOT be actually functioning!

You take a GOOD look at the lights and notice their is no "red light camera box" on the poles.

A) Do you still wait now that half an hours passed?

or

B) Do you trust the "approaching vehicle detection devices" God gave you in your forehead, curse the stupid city folk, and just go anyway straight thru the stoopid red light!

Cheers