h a l f b a k e r yThunk.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Local US TV news thrives on violence and voyeurism. Why not use the rubbernecking impulse to help discourage bad driving? Every evening, show a 5 minute segment of the day's bad accidents, including graphic shots of twisted wreckage, and helicopter footage of the resulting massive traffic jams. The twist
here: have the reporter explain the (suspected) cause of the accident. Since this will typically be aggressive or careless driving (or poor vehicle maintainance), hopefully this will raise awareness of poor driving habits. Perhaps someday tailgating will be as uncool as smoking.
When security cameras become more widespread, the segments could show accidents *as they actually happened.* The culprits (if there was one) would then be publically shamed, and everyone would drive more carefully if they knew that their bad behavior could potentially be seen by millions.
[link]
|
| |
If this goes through, eventually someone's going to stick cameras into a situation YOU aren't very good at. Then we'll see how you like it. |
|
| |
Automobile accidents, the weather and local sports are pretty much *all* the local TV news covers in Washington D.C. Has been since I moved here six years ago. |
|
| |
Despite this, we have the AAA-certified second-worst drivers in America, behind Boston. Which is why I don't drive, even though I used to have a CDL until I let it lapse. |
|
| |
Folks are missing the point here. Aggressive driving isn't some lack of talent -- it's a choice. I can't choose to be good at everything, but anyone can choose to be considerate behind the wheel.
Why is it that most tailgaters and lane-swervers wouldn't shove their way through a crowd or into the front of a queue? I believe their cars give them the anonymity to do it without social stigma. I propose using cameras to restore the personal identifiability that influences our behavior in public. |
|
| |
If we were all forced to drive the same speed, that would much reduce agressive driving. The truth is that law enforcement wants us to speed so they can stop us and get revenue through high fines. If they really didn't want us to speed, they'd just require manufacturers to put seers in cars so that they couldn't go over a top speed of 65... or if they wanted to really use technology, they could put those easy-pass transponders in cars and a corresponding gizmo on speed limit signs so that the cars can't go over the limit. |
|
| |
This won't deter aggressive drivers, just make passive drivers (who cause their share of accidents, too) a lot more worried about driving. Well, this might be a good thing, but not the desired one. Agressive drivers will just see those things and say "Well, if you're going to drive fast and loose, you need to be a better driver - like me." |
|
| |
I found out my grandmother was dead when I watched the 5:00 news and saw live footage of the accident my grandparents had been in as they pulled into the hotel parking lot after having driven 500 miles out of their way to surprise me. And though I later saw the accident scene and the skid marks from the other driver's car and KNOW that he was doing at least 60 in a 30 mile per hour zone when he slammed into my family, I've lived the past seven years knowing that nothing I can say can convince my grandpa that HE wasn't the one at fault. |
|
| |
I doubt photographic evidence of that would be much of a comfort to him either. Count me in among those who think we should stop showing car accident footage altogether. |
|
| |
Oh,and sorry to interpose a note or three of personal tragedy into the thread - I thought that if I was going to vote against the idea, I ought to post the reason why. Maybe THAT will get some people to slow down...who knows? |
|
| |
[shkspr] I'm sorry that happened to you. Journalistic ethics INSIST that you anonymize victims (as well as perps at least until formally charged). My post implicitly assumed that, but I guess these days that's not to be taken for granted. Whatever "news" you watched is negligent, and IANAL but liable for your emotional distress. |
|
| |