RE: Third Party Perception
Discussion
Mike - you seem to have the wrong end of the stick..
Julian's business is based around teaching people to drive quickly, safely and effectively without drawing the attention of numpties in the above manner. As said above he speaks from experience as a Police Driver and is evidently keen to see us enthusiasts not get caught out like many a numpty is.
Pragmatism, in a nutshell.
Julian's business is based around teaching people to drive quickly, safely and effectively without drawing the attention of numpties in the above manner. As said above he speaks from experience as a Police Driver and is evidently keen to see us enthusiasts not get caught out like many a numpty is.
Pragmatism, in a nutshell.
You Never Know Who's Watching
Paul likes fast cars, but has never been able to afford one, until now. Having received a promotion and pay raise the week before, he is finally in a position to pursue his dream. This morning, he's driving back from the dealership behind the wheel of his brand new TVR. As the engine needs bedding, he's keeping the revs down, and all he wants to do right now is get his baby home to show the family and friends. But it is not to be.
As Paul passes the local Convention Center, he is unaware that a meeting of a prominent anti-car group is releasing after a long day of reviewing emissions studies calling for a ban on petrol engines. 5 numpty ladies emerge from the center and, distracted by their conversations of traffic congestion and 'think of the children' activism, forget to look before crossing the road.
Paul never has a chance to avoid the ladies, and strikes one with his car, killing her. When police arrive, the women offer testimony of the reckless speed and wonton abandon displayed by Paul. Their perceptions swayed by their anti-car vitriol.
One year later, Paul is in jail, his life ruined. TVR enters bankruptcy, after a lawsuit brought by the women results in a 1.3 Billion dollar award. The company is wiped out. The sensationalised reports during the case embolden poiliticians to triple the number of scameras and increase fines and introduce jail terms for more common speeding offenses.
Think of that, the next time you buy a TVR.
Mike - Of course, this is total rubbish, but it's pretty much the same shock journalism employed as the other article. And I nothing better to do
No more of these, please, Ted. Please stick to actual journalism with future selections. That's IMO of course. Great job with everything else tho !!!
Edited to add: While I typed this some of you posted. Not slagging off Julian, or other contributions. Just this article. Fine, he has lots of experience, so use actual events, etc. The anti-"you name it" lobbies have experience too, and it infuriates us when they write up shock propaganda to express their views. Facts carry so much more weight.
Made up stories only give the other side ammo to discredit your view.
>> Edited by madmike on Thursday 31st July 15:20
Paul likes fast cars, but has never been able to afford one, until now. Having received a promotion and pay raise the week before, he is finally in a position to pursue his dream. This morning, he's driving back from the dealership behind the wheel of his brand new TVR. As the engine needs bedding, he's keeping the revs down, and all he wants to do right now is get his baby home to show the family and friends. But it is not to be.
As Paul passes the local Convention Center, he is unaware that a meeting of a prominent anti-car group is releasing after a long day of reviewing emissions studies calling for a ban on petrol engines. 5 numpty ladies emerge from the center and, distracted by their conversations of traffic congestion and 'think of the children' activism, forget to look before crossing the road.
Paul never has a chance to avoid the ladies, and strikes one with his car, killing her. When police arrive, the women offer testimony of the reckless speed and wonton abandon displayed by Paul. Their perceptions swayed by their anti-car vitriol.
One year later, Paul is in jail, his life ruined. TVR enters bankruptcy, after a lawsuit brought by the women results in a 1.3 Billion dollar award. The company is wiped out. The sensationalised reports during the case embolden poiliticians to triple the number of scameras and increase fines and introduce jail terms for more common speeding offenses.
Think of that, the next time you buy a TVR.
Mike - Of course, this is total rubbish, but it's pretty much the same shock journalism employed as the other article. And I nothing better to do
No more of these, please, Ted. Please stick to actual journalism with future selections. That's IMO of course. Great job with everything else tho !!! Edited to add: While I typed this some of you posted. Not slagging off Julian, or other contributions. Just this article. Fine, he has lots of experience, so use actual events, etc. The anti-"you name it" lobbies have experience too, and it infuriates us when they write up shock propaganda to express their views. Facts carry so much more weight.
Made up stories only give the other side ammo to discredit your view.
>> Edited by madmike on Thursday 31st July 15:20
I also want to add, that I do agree in general you should drive responsibly. That fact and the quality of the article are two seperate issues, IMO. I'm a huge gun nut, but when I read in my gun magazines fiction article about people defending their home with a gun my eyes roll. It's brainwashing proaganda, and I don't like it even when it's employed by "my" side.
Mike,
The purpose of Julian's article was to make you stop and think about the style of your driving. You can pick holes in the scenario that he's come up with but if you step back and look at the message that he's trying to convey then I think it's a worthwhile one.
I think there's a fair point being made. Regardless of whether the witnesses would be stopped, regardless of whether their evidence is admissible (in this scenario) the point is clearly made that if you drive like a knob and come unstuck then witnesses may be a factor that you hadn't thought of.
Julian and his colleagues are also serving policeman, so again whatever the rights and wrongs of the particular scenario relayed here, looking at the picture from their point of view may influence some of our driving manners for the better.
Life's not black and white. Let's at least attempt to understand some of the grey areas...
The purpose of Julian's article was to make you stop and think about the style of your driving. You can pick holes in the scenario that he's come up with but if you step back and look at the message that he's trying to convey then I think it's a worthwhile one.
I think there's a fair point being made. Regardless of whether the witnesses would be stopped, regardless of whether their evidence is admissible (in this scenario) the point is clearly made that if you drive like a knob and come unstuck then witnesses may be a factor that you hadn't thought of.
Julian and his colleagues are also serving policeman, so again whatever the rights and wrongs of the particular scenario relayed here, looking at the picture from their point of view may influence some of our driving manners for the better.
Life's not black and white. Let's at least attempt to understand some of the grey areas...
madmike said:
Ummm, am I the only one here who thinks this might be the stupidest PH article...EVER????
First off, it's completely fictitious 'what if' conjecture. And completely in the 'think of the children' vein. Fiction. Worth saying twice.
Secondly, even if the events happened as the author said, how likely is it that the police would round up even a fraction of the so-called 'witnesses' talked about in the early parts of the drive. Most people are too busy to volunteer their opinion, let alone stick around and wait for the coppers to show just so they can say "He was driving like a nutter a mile up the road." Hell, how would most of those people even know there was an accident to relate their opinion to? They saw him driving far away from this point.
Thirdly, since the "incident" involves a pedestrian collision, one would imagine the driver would hire a lawyer. And any lawyer half worth his salt would get any of these "witness" accounts thrown out. They were not eyewitnesses to the accident, and therefore heresay and inadmissable. Your average prosecuter probably wouldn't even use the stuff because he'd know it'd make him look like an ass when it got tossed.
I honestly don't get the point of the article. Drive with your stereo down, don't speed and don't overtake because Big Brother might be watching? Whatever.
The whole thing is scare-tactic propaganda at it's worst. Next time, the author should try to do some investigative journalism and report on a real incident as described. Creating one out of thin air is weak indeed.
Mike
Agree with you completely here. In fact as I read it from the tone of the article I began to assume that it had been written by a bunch of lefty, tree hugging, think of the children, lentil munchers. I was amazed when I read it had been produced by a group from the pro car lobby. Save this c**p for the transport200 web site.
>> Edited by t1grm on Thursday 31st July 15:47
PetrolTed said:
Save this c**p for the transport200 web site.
Unbelievable
Sorry Ted I can't believe it myself. I of course meant the Transport2000 web site
. Please don't take this personally (after all you did not write the article) but I just thought the article was a load of c**p. Mostly for the reasons madmike outlined but also for the patronising manner in which it was written.
Take some time to read www.ridedrive.co.uk
These guys know how to make driving fun.
I'm very disappointed that some people have read anything nanny-like into this piece but I can understand why given its lack of context.
Hopefully as we get some more articles, a clearer picture will emerge of the overall message that these guys are trying to get across. They actually know how to make driving fun again.
These guys know how to make driving fun.
I'm very disappointed that some people have read anything nanny-like into this piece but I can understand why given its lack of context.
Hopefully as we get some more articles, a clearer picture will emerge of the overall message that these guys are trying to get across. They actually know how to make driving fun again.
GasBlaster said:
Makes a great deal of sense, but I wonder whether you could advise me on how to drive a beautiful silver Griffith with a sports exhaust without being noticed (at any speed).
Agree with Ted though, it's the thought provoking nature of this article not the content.
Something very similar actually did happen with one of our works vehicles. Reversing slowly in the high street (one of those 'attention vehicle reversing' bleepers going) and an old fella tripped up over the kerb behind the van. Being a 'big' well known company there were immediately half a dozen people tapping the window saying he had been run over. In actual fact the vehicle was at least 10 feet from him.
Merlot fuelled (again)
I've done RideDrive. I never thought I'd have so much fun in my car without being scared sh1tless. I already had IAM, and have done about 40,000 business miles a year for the past 15 years at least, so I'm not a 'school-run mummy' type. The TrafPol who took me out was a hoot; we spent a fun day throwing the car about and learning (me, not him) what driving (being in sympathy with the car and totally aware of your surroundings) is really about. My ribs ached from laughing when I got home. It was so valuable (IMO) that I booked another straight away - we're doing a track day together. Even Mr Rude, who has more TVR driving experience than anyone I know, was so impressed with what I brought home that he wants to do it too.
Think of the childrenism? Speed killsism? I don't think so.
Whether you think Julian Smith is a good technical author or not, he knows how to find TrafPol who can really make a difference to how you use your car.
PS, just in case you didn't spot it, the gist of the article is 'drive your car as if you had an expert driver you really wanted to impress in the passenger seat - all the time'. Not that out of touch with the spirit of Pistonheads, is it?
I've done RideDrive. I never thought I'd have so much fun in my car without being scared sh1tless. I already had IAM, and have done about 40,000 business miles a year for the past 15 years at least, so I'm not a 'school-run mummy' type. The TrafPol who took me out was a hoot; we spent a fun day throwing the car about and learning (me, not him) what driving (being in sympathy with the car and totally aware of your surroundings) is really about. My ribs ached from laughing when I got home. It was so valuable (IMO) that I booked another straight away - we're doing a track day together. Even Mr Rude, who has more TVR driving experience than anyone I know, was so impressed with what I brought home that he wants to do it too.
Think of the childrenism? Speed killsism? I don't think so.
Whether you think Julian Smith is a good technical author or not, he knows how to find TrafPol who can really make a difference to how you use your car.
PS, just in case you didn't spot it, the gist of the article is 'drive your car as if you had an expert driver you really wanted to impress in the passenger seat - all the time'. Not that out of touch with the spirit of Pistonheads, is it?
Perfect timing - just seen the TV thing on BBC1 (?) a traffic cop pulls over a horrible nova thing and lectures scroat about speeding (occifer couldn't issue a ticket as he hadn't clocked him properly) when an independent witness rolls up and gives the poor scroat a tongue lashing of the first degree for drivng like a tit, then she applauds plod for pulling scoat over !!!! Exquisite timing!
rude girl said:
'drive your car as if you had an expert driver you really wanted to impress in the passenger seat - all the time'
i try this approach as often as i can do - admitedly it falls by the wayside somethimes, but i always liked the idea of someone better qualified at the decision saying - "gee Buff you drive pretty good (for a novice )". Maybe its swellhead syndrome, but theirs nowt wrong with having a bit of pride (and ability) with what you do Rude Girl
Do we need to sit down for a little chat? This is the 4th night in a row i think, where i have noticed your postings have included a bottle of wine....
having a stressful time of late? madmike said:
I also want to add, that I do agree in general you should drive responsibly. That fact and the quality of the article are two seperate issues, IMO. I'm a huge gun nut, but when I read in my gun magazines fiction article about people defending their home with a gun my eyes roll. It's brainwashing proaganda, and I don't like it even when it's employed by "my" side.
I would imagine it's difficult to use real examples of road accidents as the people involved are unlikely to agree to it, and it's just far too much arse to be bothered with.
Given the experience of the ride-drive guys, i wouldn't be surprised if this wa a real incident with the name changed.
Given your liking for personal attacks of late, i think you might benefit from cooling off a little.
oh, and it's most stupid, not stupidest.
agent006 said:
madmike said:
I also want to add, that I do agree in general you should drive responsibly. That fact and the quality of the article are two seperate issues, IMO. I'm a huge gun nut, but when I read in my gun magazines fiction article about people defending their home with a gun my eyes roll. It's brainwashing proaganda, and I don't like it even when it's employed by "my" side.
I would imagine it's difficult to use real examples of road accidents as the people involved are unlikely to agree to it, and it's just far too much arse to be bothered with.
Given the experience of the ride-drive guys, i wouldn't be surprised if this wa a real incident with the name changed.
Given your liking for personal attacks of late, i think you might benefit from cooling off a little.
oh, and it's most stupid, not stupidest.
I wasn't aware I'd made any personal attacks against anyone here lately.
And sorry, "stupidest" is perfectly acceptable English.
Edited to add: http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=stupid
>> Edited by madmike on Friday 1st August 14:01
Just goes to prove that you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Anyway, Ted keep encouraging input like this article. If people don't like it they don't have to read it, or indeed let it influence them. The debates are worthwhile if it gets people thinking and it's a free country, to boot.
Personally I see a lot of value in the author's perspective. And, in case I haven't mentioned it 1001 times already, I am really excited to be going on a RD course next week
so I for one have also put my money where my mouth is.
Anyway, Ted keep encouraging input like this article. If people don't like it they don't have to read it, or indeed let it influence them. The debates are worthwhile if it gets people thinking and it's a free country, to boot.
Personally I see a lot of value in the author's perspective. And, in case I haven't mentioned it 1001 times already, I am really excited to be going on a RD course next week
so I for one have also put my money where my mouth is.Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff