Direct Line Surveys Finds ...
Discussion
...the obvious!
Per a little snippet in today's "Mail":
(page 6)
Ray Massey (Transport Editor) reports that Direct Line has publiched some "new"
research today:
Namely that
Drunken pedestrians are a menace!"
In fact - Direct Line go as far as claimng that 2 million accidents are caused each year by drunken pedestrians - and are costing car drivers £335 million in repairs and increased insurance costs!
Direct Line have warned the governement that the dangers from inebriated, aggressive and inattentive pedestrians is likely to get much worse when 24 hour drinking is introduced.
Apaprently the insurance company claims 25% of drunken adults cross roads without looking, and more than 80% of drivers questioned in this survey say they have been forced to brake hard to avoid someone just staggering into the road in front of them.
Yhe survey reveals that a staggering 78% of pedestrains have a "cavalier" attitude to crossing the road - darting across the roads, weaving through queing traffic - and are engrossed in walkmans, mobile phone chats and thus fail to look for cars!
Direct Line calculates that pedestrians have cause 1,994 * (edited) accidents at a cost of £335 million to the 33 million car drivers in the UK.
Direct Line notes that UK road deaths are increasing - with a 6% rise in 2003 over 2002 - and says these pedestrians are adding £10 to price of premiums!
and that's not counting any dopey cyclists out there either)
Direct Line concludes that motorists are going to have to be more vigilant than ever as licensing laws are relaxed.
The finding turn the tables on road safety orthodoxy that it is always the motorist to blame for the crashes!
And surely I read somewhere that Direct Line supports speed cameras and the myth that speeding driver is the culprit ....
>>> Edited by Mad Moggie on Saturday 29th January 09:44
Per a little snippet in today's "Mail":
(page 6) Ray Massey (Transport Editor) reports that Direct Line has publiched some "new"
research today: Namely that
Drunken pedestrians are a menace!"
In fact - Direct Line go as far as claimng that 2 million accidents are caused each year by drunken pedestrians - and are costing car drivers £335 million in repairs and increased insurance costs!
Direct Line have warned the governement that the dangers from inebriated, aggressive and inattentive pedestrians is likely to get much worse when 24 hour drinking is introduced.
Apaprently the insurance company claims 25% of drunken adults cross roads without looking, and more than 80% of drivers questioned in this survey say they have been forced to brake hard to avoid someone just staggering into the road in front of them.
Yhe survey reveals that a staggering 78% of pedestrains have a "cavalier" attitude to crossing the road - darting across the roads, weaving through queing traffic - and are engrossed in walkmans, mobile phone chats and thus fail to look for cars!
Direct Line calculates that pedestrians have cause 1,994 * (edited
) accidents at a cost of £335 million to the 33 million car drivers in the UK. Direct Line notes that UK road deaths are increasing - with a 6% rise in 2003 over 2002 - and says these pedestrians are adding £10 to price of premiums!
and that's not counting any dopey cyclists out there either
) Direct Line concludes that motorists are going to have to be more vigilant than ever as licensing laws are relaxed.
The finding turn the tables on road safety orthodoxy that it is always the motorist to blame for the crashes!
And surely I read somewhere that Direct Line supports speed cameras and the myth that speeding driver is the culprit .... >>> Edited by Mad Moggie on Saturday 29th January 09:44
Recent RAC foundation information:
New figures reveal that more than seven out of ten of young adult pedestrians (aged between 16 -34) killed on the UK’s roads and included in the study had been drinking.
And the incidence of pedestrian fatalities with more than two and a half times the legal limit of alcohol for drivers in their systems has risen by 50 per cent in the past 15 years.
A TRL study looked at the results of blood alcohol tests obtained from Coroners in England and Wales and Procurators Fiscal in Scotland for the five year period between 1995 -1999 and analysed them to examine the extent to which alcohol plays a part in pedestrian fatalities and compared them with an earlier study undertaken of the period ten years earlier - from 1985 -1989…it found that:
* The proportion of all adult pedestrian fatalities (from 16-85) that had consumed any alcohol, however, had increased from 40 per cent to 48 per cent.
* More than 50 per cent of those pedestrian fatalities through the age range from 16-60 had been drinking – but for most ages it was over 60 per cent.
* Over 70 per cent of those aged from 16 – 34 had consumed some alcohol.
* The younger age groups showed the biggest changes in alcohol consumption over the decade – the proportion of male pedestrian fatalities aged 16 -19 who had been drinking increased from 59 per cent to 78 per cent. For females in the same age group the increase was from 38 per cent to 50 per cent – an increase of around one third in each group.
* Since 1979 there has been a 50 per cent increase in the number of pedestrians killed who had a BAC above 2.5 times the drink drive limit (80mgs/100ml).
* The figure for those pedestrians with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) in excess of the drink drive limit (80mgs/100ml) in 1989 was 31 per cent - by 1999 this had increased to 39 per cent.
* Young women appear to be drinking more. The proportion of fatally injured female pedestrians under 30 who had consumed any alcohol rose from 44 to 49 per cent, but the increase was more marked in those with higher readings. The number of young women pedestrian fatalities with a blood alcohol concentration of between 201 and 300mg/100ml. rose from 8.1 per cent to 14.9 per cent and those with a BAC in excess of 300mg/100ml climbed from 1.5 per cent to 4.1 per cent.
"The most worrying aspect are the rising numbers of young pedestrians killed after drinking and the rises in fatalities who had consumed excessive amounts of alcohol - over 300 mg/100ml. Those levels would usually lead to heavy intoxication and be a contributory factor to any accident."
So there you have it folks, the government / local authorities are effectively saying "...we have lost control of law and order with pedestrians, so we'll clamp down on the driver..."
New figures reveal that more than seven out of ten of young adult pedestrians (aged between 16 -34) killed on the UK’s roads and included in the study had been drinking.
And the incidence of pedestrian fatalities with more than two and a half times the legal limit of alcohol for drivers in their systems has risen by 50 per cent in the past 15 years.
A TRL study looked at the results of blood alcohol tests obtained from Coroners in England and Wales and Procurators Fiscal in Scotland for the five year period between 1995 -1999 and analysed them to examine the extent to which alcohol plays a part in pedestrian fatalities and compared them with an earlier study undertaken of the period ten years earlier - from 1985 -1989…it found that:
* The proportion of all adult pedestrian fatalities (from 16-85) that had consumed any alcohol, however, had increased from 40 per cent to 48 per cent.
* More than 50 per cent of those pedestrian fatalities through the age range from 16-60 had been drinking – but for most ages it was over 60 per cent.
* Over 70 per cent of those aged from 16 – 34 had consumed some alcohol.
* The younger age groups showed the biggest changes in alcohol consumption over the decade – the proportion of male pedestrian fatalities aged 16 -19 who had been drinking increased from 59 per cent to 78 per cent. For females in the same age group the increase was from 38 per cent to 50 per cent – an increase of around one third in each group.
* Since 1979 there has been a 50 per cent increase in the number of pedestrians killed who had a BAC above 2.5 times the drink drive limit (80mgs/100ml).
* The figure for those pedestrians with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) in excess of the drink drive limit (80mgs/100ml) in 1989 was 31 per cent - by 1999 this had increased to 39 per cent.
* Young women appear to be drinking more. The proportion of fatally injured female pedestrians under 30 who had consumed any alcohol rose from 44 to 49 per cent, but the increase was more marked in those with higher readings. The number of young women pedestrian fatalities with a blood alcohol concentration of between 201 and 300mg/100ml. rose from 8.1 per cent to 14.9 per cent and those with a BAC in excess of 300mg/100ml climbed from 1.5 per cent to 4.1 per cent.
"The most worrying aspect are the rising numbers of young pedestrians killed after drinking and the rises in fatalities who had consumed excessive amounts of alcohol - over 300 mg/100ml. Those levels would usually lead to heavy intoxication and be a contributory factor to any accident."
So there you have it folks, the government / local authorities are effectively saying "...we have lost control of law and order with pedestrians, so we'll clamp down on the driver..."
The justification for the single-minded (if there was a mind involved anywhere) focus on speed was that it was the largest single cause of accidents.
Now we have figures that show that the largest single cause of accidents involving pedestrians is the alcohol consumed by those pedestrians.
Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the gov't will say, "Gosh! thanks for telling us that. We must change our approach to reduce the amount of alcohol drunk by pedestrians, and then make sure we keep them segregated from traffic. This will reduce the number of accidents caused by the single greatest cause".
Instead, we'll see increased opportunities for drinking, reduced segregation (roads without distinct pavements, etc), and 20mph speed limits. I guess this is because the drunk pedestrians are more likely to vote Labour than the sober drivers.
On that point, did anyone notice that the gov't is planning to reduce the age limit for MPs down to 18? This is so that young people get more interested in politics. Now call me old fashioned, but I don't think an 18-year-old is quite ready to run the country. And I think that there are safer ways to get people interested in politics than to allow them the opportunity to run the country. But what do I know? I guess anyone with a brain doesn't become an MP now anyway because they would be very conspicuous in the voting lobbies.
Now we have figures that show that the largest single cause of accidents involving pedestrians is the alcohol consumed by those pedestrians.
Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the gov't will say, "Gosh! thanks for telling us that. We must change our approach to reduce the amount of alcohol drunk by pedestrians, and then make sure we keep them segregated from traffic. This will reduce the number of accidents caused by the single greatest cause".
Instead, we'll see increased opportunities for drinking, reduced segregation (roads without distinct pavements, etc), and 20mph speed limits. I guess this is because the drunk pedestrians are more likely to vote Labour than the sober drivers.
On that point, did anyone notice that the gov't is planning to reduce the age limit for MPs down to 18? This is so that young people get more interested in politics. Now call me old fashioned, but I don't think an 18-year-old is quite ready to run the country. And I think that there are safer ways to get people interested in politics than to allow them the opportunity to run the country. But what do I know? I guess anyone with a brain doesn't become an MP now anyway because they would be very conspicuous in the voting lobbies.
if not a pistonheadI am not so sure that 24hr drinking will increase the number of drunk pedestrians, I think it is more likely to reduce the number. I think this because if you do not have a set closing time people are less likely to sink 2 or 3 pints just before leaving, they may well spread the same number of drinks over a longer time period thus becoming less drunk.
Well, I can but hope so. It would be interesting to compare figures with a country that already has 24 hour drinking?
Well, I can but hope so. It would be interesting to compare figures with a country that already has 24 hour drinking?
The trouble ist - the culture...
We were brought up mit wine at table und as small children we had a little wine mixed mit water.
Thus we grew up in culture where it was not considered in-thing to get totally bladdered.
My kittens have been brought up the same way und understand that a little ist OK. But also know danger of too much.
We were brought up mit wine at table und as small children we had a little wine mixed mit water.
Thus we grew up in culture where it was not considered in-thing to get totally bladdered.
My kittens have been brought up the same way und understand that a little ist OK. But also know danger of too much.
WildCat said:
The trouble ist - the culture...
We were brought up mit wine at table und as small children we had a little wine mixed mit water.
Thus we grew up in culture where it was not considered in-thing to get totally bladdered.
My kittens have been brought up the same way und understand that a little ist OK. But also know danger of too much.
Absolutely on the nail Wildy.
I started my serious accident research in the early nineties, and the single largest fatality group were drunken pedestrians, not drivers.
The drivers didn't stand a chance.
It is the same to this day only enhanced even further by the erroneous concentration on speeding and the culture of binge drinking.
The police and the authorities are doing absolutely nothing to tackle the problem.
I have never found a single prosecution for jaywalking in this country, despite the fact that it is singularly the worst country in Europe for this.
I have never found a single case of a pedestrian being prosecuted or even held civily responsible for the cause of an accident, despite the fact that it occurs on a daily basis.
You're oh so right! IOLAIRE, it's not so bad where I live, but I frequently have to pass through ( when on call at night) our local town.
Drunken yobs, unaware of your presence, deciding suddenly to run across the road too close for comfort.
I've had some yob throw a bottle, plastic, thankfully, from a car in front, which hit my windscreen.
It's in us!! The "British" I mean. We don't have to be drunk to do it, Nation wide, we're morons.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Monday 31st January 00:10
Drunken yobs, unaware of your presence, deciding suddenly to run across the road too close for comfort.
I've had some yob throw a bottle, plastic, thankfully, from a car in front, which hit my windscreen.
It's in us!! The "British" I mean. We don't have to be drunk to do it, Nation wide, we're morons.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Monday 31st January 00:10
Sorry to wee on the fireworks, but as far as the road "SAFETY AT ALL COSTS" lobby see this, it don't change a thing.
Just because someone has lagered themselves into a footie-shirted, leering, swearing, fighting mess and then staggered off the pavement into your car - it's still your fault for going too fast.
They will still reduce the limits. They will still slap in more "calming". They will still stop you driving. In fact, they will probably introduce a law that says in any ped-car accident that the driver is automatically at fault - that's how they'll deal with it. Believe me.
What do you mean; the pedestrian is at fault? Of course he's not - it's the driver's fault. Everything is.
Just because someone has lagered themselves into a footie-shirted, leering, swearing, fighting mess and then staggered off the pavement into your car - it's still your fault for going too fast.
They will still reduce the limits. They will still slap in more "calming". They will still stop you driving. In fact, they will probably introduce a law that says in any ped-car accident that the driver is automatically at fault - that's how they'll deal with it. Believe me.
What do you mean; the pedestrian is at fault? Of course he's not - it's the driver's fault. Everything is.
[DailyMailMode:]
The only solution to this is to ban alcohol. Entirely.
It's a total disgrace how young people can go around drinking and causing accidents and getting themselves injured and killed... they've been getting away with it for far too long!
Signed,
Disgusted of Royal Tunbridge Wells
[/DailyMailMode]
The only solution to this is to ban alcohol. Entirely.
It's a total disgrace how young people can go around drinking and causing accidents and getting themselves injured and killed... they've been getting away with it for far too long!
Signed,
Disgusted of Royal Tunbridge Wells
[/DailyMailMode]
corozin said:
[DailyMailMode:]
The only solution to this is to ban alcohol. Entirely.
It's a total disgrace how young people can go around drinking and causing accidents and getting themselves injured and killed... they've been getting away with it for far too long!
Signed,
Disgusted of Royal Tunbridge Wells
[/DailyMailMode]
Pedestrians can kill themselves if they wish.
and if they're drunk etc and are at fault, just don't blame the driver.
MMC said:
Sorry to wee on the fireworks, but as far as the road "SAFETY AT ALL COSTS" lobby see this, it don't change a thing.
Just because someone has lagered themselves into a footie-shirted, leering, swearing, fighting mess and then staggered off the pavement into your car - it's still your fault for going too fast.
They will still reduce the limits. They will still slap in more "calming". They will still stop you driving. In fact, they will probably introduce a law that says in any ped-car accident that the driver is automatically at fault - that's how they'll deal with it. Believe me.
What do you mean; the pedestrian is at fault? Of course he's not - it's the driver's fault. Everything is.
Sad but true. In today's fluffy inclusive Britain we're not allowed to be anti-anybodything, but we all have to be anti-car.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff