Attitudes to the road toll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

Ian, good post. It shows I've been subverted by their psyops! You are spot on. I wish I had your clarity of thought.

---

I've had a bit of practice.

I wrote the following about 18 months ago in response to an article on the programming of driverless vehicles, and how the AI code should respond to a range of scenarios. I think the tone of my last paragraph will give you a flavour of my attitude.

Real people make moral decisions based on gender, race, religion, a person’s attractiveness (good looking female vs fat lady), a person’s social standing and other factors. Anyone who denies that bias affects their decision making is a liar. The best you can hope for is that a person faced with a decision will be aware of their biases and will consciously attempt to negate that bias.

I find that all your scenarios at moralmachine.mit.edu unrealistic as they presuppose that the driverless vehicle will be travelling in an area with high pedestrian activity at a speed that, in the event of a crash into a solid object, will result in the death or very serious injury of the vehicle occupants. Alternatively, a crash into the group of pedestrians will result in the death of many of them. Go read the Swedish Vision Zero. In it you will find guidance that should result in a driverless car’s programming not allowing the vehicle to exceed 30 km/h in an area with significant pedestrian activity. At 30 km/h a vehicle / pedestrian crash is survivable for the pedestrian (and a vehicle impact into a solid object at that speed is 100% survivable for properly restrained vehicle occupants.)

Even reading the Wikipedia entry – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero – will get you started on a more appropriate path with your vehicle programing.

And the presumption that a pedestrian walking against a DON’T WALK can legitimately be killed is completely morally repugnant and reflects a too legalistic view of road use. People make mistakes, and in some cases ignore instructions or guidance. Those people should not be considered legitimate targets.

Ian, the theme of your last paragraph is applicable to so many situations in life. Thanks for posting it.

Here we go again...

https://www.949powerfm.com.au/news/n...r-granted-bail

Exactly who is responsible if this guy gets behind the wheel of a car while "double-disqualified" and kills or injures someone?? :((

Cars are faster, drugs are prevalent, youth is ever more irresponsible, the aged are getting older, less and less money going to road upkeep, more bicycles, more motor bikes. What do you expect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Brush

Here we go again...

https://www.949powerfm.com.au/news/n...r-granted-bail

Exactly who is responsible if this guy gets behind the wheel of a car while "double-disqualified" and kills or injures someone?? :((

---

in terms of being able to function within Australia society, a licence and/or access to a motor vehicle is almost essential.
Unless you live in one of the Sydney's "silver-tail" suburbs, being disqualified till 2035 is essentially equivalent to being placed under house arrest for 25 years. (The press story implies that disqualification occurred 7 years ago i.e. in 2010).

Disqualifying someone for 25 years may make a bunch of us old fogies feel better, but really, what as a community do we expect to be the outcome?
Pay the guy a disability pension for 25 years? because without a licence and/or a vehicle he can't really access meaningful employment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

in terms of being able to function within Australia society, a licence and/or access to a motor vehicle is almost essential.
Unless you live in one of the Sydney's "silver-tail" suburbs, being disqualified till 2035 is essentially equivalent to being placed under house arrest for 25 years. (The press story implies that disqualification occurred 7 years ago i.e. in 2010).

Disqualifying someone for 25 years may make a bunch of us old fogies feel better, but really, what as a community do we expect to be the outcome?
Pay the guy a disability pension for 25 years? because without a licence and/or a vehicle he can't really access meaningful employment.

---

Well if you are going to follow that argument, then nobody should ever be disqualified from driving. Even loss of license for a month could and has, caused people to lose their jobs.

A girlfriend of mine from several years ago had a daughter who was severely injured when a truck ran into her school bus. Mum and daughter (17 by then, two years after the accident) was in court when the truck driver was sentenced. the penalty was a substantial fine and a license suspension for - if I recall correctly - about two years. After passing sentence, the judge turned to the 17-year-old victim and asked if she understood what had just happened. She replied "I think so your Honour, you just fined a man $10,000.00 and then removed his ability to pay it."

Alcohol is certainly a contributing factor towards our shocking National road toll...and always has been!
I'd like to see zero alcohol tolerance for all road users...that would be a good start
Probably the most insidious drug on this planet...and it's legal...go figure :doh:
Drunk drivers are the ones that should be 'cubed'...MM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

She replied "I think so your Honour, you just fined a man $10,000.00 and then removed his ability to pay it."

---

precisely

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

She replied "I think so your Honour, you just fined a man $10,000.00 and then removed his ability to pay it."

---

This is the real issue. There should be a distinction between the punishment for drink driving and driving while suspended. I think that suspending a persons drivers license for anything other that a driving offense is counter productive. I saw a man in court tell a magistrate that he owed over $40 thousand dollars in unpaid fines. There was a pause in the court and the magistrate said "you'll never drive again". We all new that he would take the risk, as he had nothing to lose. He did and went to gaol. There should be a distinction between keeping a dangerous driver off the road and punishing a person for non payment of fines. Much like we keep firearms away from mentally unstable persons.

TT

Apparently drug use has now overtaken alcohol as a cause of accidents according to recent media reports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lappa

Apparently drug use has now overtaken alcohol as a cause of accidents according to recent media reports.

---

It always has caused more accidents. The difference is that now they are testing for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

It always has caused more accidents. The difference is that now they are testing for it.

---

The police have a test for it now and the results for alcohol and illicit drugs will eventually even out. The problem with the current testing methods is that the saliva swipe does not indicate the level of the drug it detects, just that it detects the drug. This means that people are charged for having an illicit substance in their system that may or may not be affecting their driving. Just because there is a trace of an illicit drug in the system, does not mean that it is impairing a persons ability to drive.
TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

Just because there is a trace of an illicit drug in the system, does not mean that it is impairing a persons ability to drive.

---

I guess that there is no real incentive to come up with a test to indicate the level of drug in the system since it is illegal to drive with any level of concentration. A positive reading and that's another tick against the daily quota.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

I guess that there is no real incentive to come up with a test to indicate the level of drug in the system since it is illegal to drive with any level of concentration. A positive reading and that's another tick against the daily quota.

---

Agreed, but when the test is used to gauge a persons culpability in an accident it isn’t fair. We know cannabis can stay in the system for over a month and amphetamines can still be detected between 3-5 days, however Any impairment may have worn off after a few hours, much like alcohol. So until research is completed that can accurately determine the level of impairment for each illicit drug the test remains unfair. There is little incentive for any government to do address this.

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

So until research is completed that can accurately determine the level of impairment for each illicit drug the test remains unfair. There is little incentive for any government to do address this.

---

That might have to change with more and more people using medicinal cannabis legally.

"Do not drive or use machinery" is marked on many a pill bottle. As for illicits, just take it as a given.

I've lost track of how many dope users I've had to sack over the years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

That might have to change with more and more people using medicinal cannabis legally.

---

I mean in terms of there being residual evidence for some weeks. As I understand it, users of medicinal cannabis do not get stoned as such, so in that case it would seem harsh to effectively ban them from driving altogether. No doubt there'll be some research done.

The current mobile drug testing is a bit of a joke. as mentioned in a previous post, its not like an RBT that measures levels of alcohol, it only looks for traces. So if you dabbled in a little something a week ago (whether or not you approve of such things) it is no longer impacting your ability to drive. If you had it 5 minutes ago, it is. But the drug testing can't determine that. neither can the subsequent blood tests from what i understand.

Now, if the mobile drug tests were looking to charge people for using an illicit substance, thats one thing, but they are using it to charge DUI, which IMO in its current form it can't possibly do because it can't measure the amount of the substance in a persons system.

Now (and this is drawing a very long bow here i know), if I had my drink spiked, theoretically i can't drive for a week or 2 (depending on the drug) because i'd still have traces in my system and if pulled over, i could be charged.

I'm actually surprised that these charges are holding up in court as there are so many flaws in it... probably people aren't willing to fight it because they'd be admitting they'd taken something illegal in the first place...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rustynail

I've lost track of how many dope users I've had to sack over the years.

---

Me too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dibbers

T
I'm actually surprised that these charges are holding up in court as there are so many flaws in it... probably people aren't willing to fight it because they'd be admitting they'd taken something illegal in the first place...

---

Firstly the law is currently written so that if any illicit drugs are found in your system you are guilty of DUI. Secondly the cost of defending the matter is often not worth the lawyers fees and time off work. Better to just cop the fine. Thirdly, many an offender has claimed that his drink has been spiked to no avail :rolleyes:

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

Firstly the law is currently written so that if any illicit drugs are found in your system you are guilty of DUI. Secondly the cost of defending the matter is often not worth the lawyers fees and time off work. Better to just cop the fine. Thirdly, many an offender has claimed that his drink has been spiked to no avail :rolleyes:

TT

---

One can "claim" almost anything. The onus of proof becomes relevant here.

L-plater was on drugs when stolen car ploughed into shuttle bus in Kewdale, killing teen boy - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

And of course there are those that drive around merrily on 'legal' prescription drugs...MM:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

L-plater was on drugs when stolen car ploughed into shuttle bus in Kewdale, killing teen boy - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

---

I'm not sure of your point. given the kid's history he possibly had more experience driving than most other 18 year olds -- I'm not suggesting that the experience was legally obtained. But short of a .22 to the head, how should we as a community react? Lock him up and throw away the key? treat him as a person with a mental illness? give him a smack on the wrist and admonish him not to do it again?

There must be lots of kids out there with histories similar to Mourish -- I tend to think the community's best response is to try and detect these kids and divert them from what is essentially their self-destructive behavior before that behavior affects others.

Bring back the cat!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

I'm not sure of your point. given the kid's history he possibly had more experience driving than most other 18 year olds -- I'm not suggesting that the experience was legally obtained.

---

For the last 20 years or so, our young people have been learning how to drive by playing computer games. Long before the ever get behind the wheel of a real car they already have ingrained bad habits and a poor attitude to safety.

For several years after they get their license, they have more "driving time" on the computer where if a car crashes, it rolls over and the windscreen cracks in front of them. The car then immediately rights itself, the windscreen automatically heals itself miraculously and they drive off unscathed with a new life. When they get an Adrenalin rush in a race or a police chase their mind reverts to the computer scenario that they know so well. In their mind, there are no physical consequences and all that matters is the win.

A human being is a product of their past experiences. Look at what the youth of today are feeding their brains with. Therein lies the problem - and not just on the roads. Society used to discourage the young from watching movies with physical violence that was no where near as bad as what there is in G rated computer games now. It's the old computer adage - garbage in garbage out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

For the last 20 years or so, our young people have been learning how to drive by playing computer games. Long before the ever get behind the wheel of a real car they already have ingrained bad habits and a poor attitude to safety.

For several years after they get their license, they have more "driving time" on the computer where if a car crashes, it rolls over and the windscreen cracks in front of them. The car then immediately rights itself, the windscreen automatically heals itself miraculously and they drive off unscathed with a new life. When they get an Adrenalin rush in a race or a police chase their mind reverts to the computer scenario that they know so well. In their mind, there are no physical consequences and all that matters is the win.

A human being is a product of their past experiences. Look at what the youth of today are feeding their brains with. Therein lies the problem - and not just on the roads. Society used to discourage the young from watching movies with physical violence that was no where near as bad as what there is in G rated computer games now. It's the old computer adage - garbage in garbage out.

---

Not sure that your analogy is a good one Doug. There are numerous studies which indicate that kids can differentiate between reality and what’s on a computer screen. But I agree that there needs to be significant amounts of desentitisation in order for juveniles offenders to behave the way they do. It’s all about the family/community (or lack of it in some instances) which are the significant contributors towards juvenile delinquency. Unemployment , poverty and community expectations are significant contributors to this.

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

Not sure that your analogy is a good one Doug. There are numerous studies which indicate that kids can differentiate between reality and what’s on a computer screen.

---

Computer gaming is a multi-billion industry which can afford to fund research to support ANYTHING that is in their own best interest, true or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Computer gaming is a multi-billion industry which can afford to fund research to support ANYTHING that is in their own best interest, true or not.

---

Im not resourcing data from the computer industry for this Doug. There are a lot of independent, peer reviewed papers which support the thesis that kids can differentiate between what they see on a computer screen and reality. While it was a long time ago that I was researching this, I would be surprised if this has changed.

TT

Can you post a link to one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Can you post a link to one?

---

Sure. I’ll have a look at my stuff. I finished my degree in 2000 but still have my essays in a folder somewhere. It was a Social Welfare degree which majored in Juvenile Justice. One paper I remember noted that TV could exert an influence in a home environment which placed it on a pedestle. So if no one in the family was allowed to speak or interrupt while theTV was on, there was a likelihood that what was seen on TV was likely to be treated as gospel. You’ve only got to look at The guff on American cable TV re Trump/Clinton that was treated as truth to realise that there is more at play than just the fact that “it was on TV”. I’ll have a look and see if there is any recent data on this too.

TT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

Not sure that your analogy is a good one Doug.

---

I tend to agree.

I haven't seen the papers myself, but I'm told that adults who play driving simulator games -- and I'm not sure if in this context an adult is older than 18 or 21 or some other age -- drive more aggressively, especially in respect to tail gating, but have fewer rear end crashes than adults who don't play those sorts of games.

If you want an analogy, the airline industry and military make extensive use of simulators to train pilots and some simulators can be programmed to perform aerodynamically impossible feats -- like flying a 737 under the Harbour Bridge vertically.

Virtual reality is exactly that - virtual. Not quite the real thing. This can lead to trouble in a dangerous situation. As an addition to the real thing, when the real thing is not available, can be a a handy tool. To consider it an alternative becomes the folly of fools. I don't know how many times I have had to "snap" my kids back into reality, as they attempt to take on projects well outside their comfort zones. Work experience, internships, apprenticeships all provide the student with real life training.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Can you post a link to one?

---

Hi Doug
So, went to look for my electronic files and realised that all my early essays were written in Claris Works which became Apple Works. I should be able to open the docs as RTF in Word but it aint playin. In any case most of my older stuff was obtained in hard copy because the interwebby wasn't cranked up in the 90"s.

I have located some recent papers as below. The last link is to an article which leans towards your theory I think.

TT
<style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} @page Section1 {size:595.0pt 842.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> APA Review Confirms Link Between Playing Violent Video Games and Aggression


Do video games make people violent? - BBC News


https://videogames.procon.org/


Impact Of Television In Relation To Juvenile Delinquency - Free Coursework from Essay.uk.com, the UK essay, dissertation and coursework writing company

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jordans.../#33051cbb7556


http://time.com/34075/how-violent-vi...ut-aggression/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twisted Tenon

I have located some recent papers as below. The last link is to an article which leans towards your theory I think.

---

I had a quick read through them all and I can't see one article that really contradicts what I said. I think all the articles at some point said that exposure to media violence at some level impacts upon behaviour. I had never meant to imply that every kid who plays violent driving games will become a killer on the road - just that some, who may overdo the exposure or be more susceptible to the influence due to other environmental factors may get pushed over the line. Others who have not gone that far may still be acting more aggressively than they would have done without some level of exposure to that environment.

I doubt anyone could read those articles objectively and say that they conclude that video games do not have an affect on people.

<style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} @page Section1 {size:595.0pt 842.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

I had a quick read through them all and I can't see one article that really contradicts what I said. I think all the articles at some point said that exposure to media violence at some level impacts upon behaviour. I had never meant to imply that every kid who plays violent driving games will become a killer on the road - just that some, who may overdo the exposure or be more susceptible to the influence due to other environmental factors may get pushed over the line. Others who have not gone that far may still be acting more aggressively than they would have done without some level of exposure to that environment.

I doubt anyone could read those articles objectively and say that they conclude that video games do not have an affect on people.

<style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0mm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} @page Section1 {size:595.0pt 842.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style>

---

Yes the thrust of some the articles was that video games may have a causal effect on violent behaviour but that more research was needed to confirm this and to measure the extent of the influence. Some of the articles indicated that violent video games on their own were unlikely to have a long term affects on violent behaviour unless this was supported by a peer group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

For the last 20 years or so, our young people have been learning how to drive by playing computer games. Long before the ever get behind the wheel of a real car they already have ingrained bad habits and a poor attitude to safety.

I wonder if for the past 20 years our YP have been instead learning to win at a video game. Again the research seems to support the idea that YP can tell the difference between a video game and reality.

For several years after they get their license, they have more "driving time" on the computer where if a car crashes, it rolls over and the windscreen cracks in front of them. The car then immediately rights itself, the windscreen automatically heals itself miraculously and they drive off unscathed with a new life. When they get an Adrenalin rush in a race or a police chase their mind reverts to the computer scenario that they know so well. In their mind, there are no physical consequences and all that matters is the win.

I think that it is more likely that our P plate drivers suffer from the 6' tall and bullet proof syndrome. I lived on my reflexes for the first 2 years of driving. Hence the very restrictive red & green P plate system which is designed to slow down young males. I know women can get toey behind the wheel but it is nothing like a bunch of hyped up males. I have one son and two daughters, boy was there a difference between their driving styles.

Having said that, I for a fact know that during the 90's certain young males would steal a Porsche or something similar and drive to a police station, rev it up and enjoy the ensuing police chase. The police seemed to enjoy it too. There was some rule that once they were caught they went quietly and all was good. I think this supports the view that this behaviour if supported by a peer group is more likely to happen. Mind you after chatting with these manchilds it was a case of much regret after acting in haste and repenting in leisure.

A human being is a product of their past experiences. Look at what the youth of today are feeding their brains with. Therein lies the problem - and not just on the roads. Society used to discourage the young from watching movies with physical violence that was no where near as bad as what there is in G rated computer games now. It's the old computer adage - garbage in garbage out.

Agreed there is a lot of garbage going in. I can't remember the exact numbers, but someone has done a survey of the television a child is likely to watch and has calculated that by the age of ten they will have witnessed several thousand murders, and other acts of violence. Again there is evidence that a family's support will ameliorate the impact this has on the child.

---

I think that alone video games will not cause violence, but when when a young person exhibits violent behaviour, you will find video games present along with DV in the family, absent fathers, illicit drug use, poverty, a peer group that supports violence, anger etc. Therefore your analogy of GIGO is correct.

TT

Shame FIFA world Cup won't make me a better soccer player :)

Man kills mother during tantrum over video games, police say

Food for thought?

TT

Ryan was a neighbor and family friend. CHP: Wrong way driver in I-5 fatal head-on crash may have been suicidal | KRCR