ADUK Archive

For those that haven't seen this...take a look at the following video...beware though it's pretty shocking but in a realistic way (not sensational) and I think it's really effective. I wish it could be shown to a wider audience...
http://www.gwent.police.uk/leadnews.php?a=2172

That was the tragic consequences of not concentrating sufficiently on the important task. It happened to be use of mobile phone in this case, but it could have been any number of other reasons; even something as simple as spending too long looking at the scenery, and I very much doubt if there would have been so much made of it if that had been the cause. I don't support the use of these contrived videos, focussing on specific demons.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I think you're correct Dave. I honestly believe that shock tactics have very lttle effect. Youngsters are so used to them that they take little notice. There is no easy answer to the problem, and using contrived videos will not have the desired effect. Most people learn from personal experience, and certainly the most vulnerable group, the 17 -21 age group are, by and large, imortal in their own eyes. Unfortunately, unless they have close personal involvement with an accident victim, the effect on them is minimal, and even then I think it wears off with time. Continually banging on about an issue produces a negative effect, and I think it makes people switch off. Thats not to say that I don't think something should be done. But what?

Nigel ADI
IAM trainee observer

I think films like this combined with careful 'counselling' by the presenters would have an effect. Advertising sometimes uses shock tactics and they wouldn't do it unless it worked. Helping people to realise the consequences of their actions may make them think twice esp. if peer pressure is involved - that's why I think showing to a group of young drivers is important.

On a related note, I attended a 'speed choice workshop' (volunterily I hasten to add!) done by Avon & Somerset police (actually they were professional presenters but you know what I mean) for drivers caught marginely speeding. Part of the morning was viewing a video of a ficitious crash in slow-mo with the presenter explaining what was happening to the vehicles and people involved in quite graphic detail.

One person had to leave the room.

By the end many people had tears in their eyes (including me) and there was total, deafening silence...until the presenter quietly said: 'I think we all need a break'. Everyone left the room in silence.

I can't believe that didn't have some long-term impact.

Interesting Martin! I can see how shock tactics work (at least in the short term) - were they coupled with any education on how to pick a safe speed for the conditions to try and help long term?

Chris

ScoobyChris wrote:...were they coupled with any education on how to pick a safe speed for the conditions to try and help long term?

Oh yes, I was quite impressed with the half day...good presenters who seemed to know their stuff and didn't talk down to the very assorted audience. They struck a balance of realism, explaining the consequences of inappropriate speed and what to do about it.

Can't say what long-term affect it has (if any) but much better than beating people with a stick (points) I'd have thought.

fungus wrote:I think you're correct Dave. I honestly believe that shock tactics have very lttle effect. Youngsters are so used to them that they take little notice. There is no easy answer to the problem, and using contrived videos will not have the desired effect. Most people learn from personal experience, and certainly the most vulnerable group, the 17 -21 age group are, by and large, imortal in their own eyes. Unfortunately, unless they have close personal involvement with an accident victim, the effect on them is minimal, and even then I think it wears off with time. Continually banging on about an issue produces a negative effect, and I think it makes people switch off. Thats not to say that I don't think something should be done. But what?

Nigel ADI
IAM trainee observer

Nigel is unfortunately right, has anyone looked at the comments being left on YouTube (1,460 already). Yes there are a few who have got the message but the vast majority sadly won't. This one said it all for me:

"that's why you hold the phone up so you can see it and the road like you do when your reading a good book or watching a movie on your i pod i swear some people have no common sense"

[quote="martine"] On a related note, I attended a 'speed choice workshop' (volunterily I hasten to add!) done by Avon & Somerset police (actually they were professional presenters but you know what I mean) for drivers caught marginely speeding. Part of the morning was viewing a video of a ficitious crash in slow-mo with the presenter explaining what was happening to the vehicles and people involved in quite graphic detail.

One person had to leave the room.

By the end many people had tears in their eyes (including me) and there was total, deafening silence...until the presenter quietly said: 'I think we all need a break'. Everyone left the room in silence. quote]

Many years ago, when BBC2 was taking the role that 3 & 4 now have, and the Beeb had discovered 'yoof', there was a prog. which covered an anti-drink driving initiative in the USA in one city.

The police gathered all the young drivers stopped for driving under the influence and, IIRC, gave them the same sort of choice offered here with speed awareness courses.

Only diference was those who said 'yes' were taken off - about a dozen at a time -to watch an autopsy, allegedly of someone who died in a DD-related crash.

Re-offend rate in the time the program had been running was 1 in 140 or 240.

martine wrote:I think films like this combined with careful 'counselling' by the presenters would have an effect. Advertising sometimes uses shock tactics and they wouldn't do it unless it worked. Helping people to realise the consequences of their actions may make them think twice esp. if peer pressure is involved - that's why I think showing to a group of young drivers is important.

On a related note, I attended a 'speed choice workshop' (volunterily I hasten to add!) done by Avon & Somerset police (actually they were professional presenters but you know what I mean) for drivers caught marginely speeding. Part of the morning was viewing a video of a ficitious crash in slow-mo with the presenter explaining what was happening to the vehicles and people involved in quite graphic detail.

One person had to leave the room.

By the end many people had tears in their eyes (including me) and there was total, deafening silence...until the presenter quietly said: 'I think we all need a break'. Everyone left the room in silence.

I can't believe that didn't have some long-term impact.

Was the cause of the crash depicted in the video due to someone speeding marginally over the limit?

ipsg.glf wrote:Was the cause of the crash depicted in the video due to someone speeding marginally over the limit?

Am I missing something? The Gwent video crash was due to texting while driving.

waremark wrote:

ipsg.glf wrote:Was the cause of the crash depicted in the video due to someone speeding marginally over the limit?

Am I missing something? The Gwent video crash was due to texting while driving.

martine wrote:On a related note, I attended a 'speed choice workshop' (volunterily I hasten to add!) done by Avon & Somerset police (actually they were professional presenters but you know what I mean) for drivers caught marginely speeding.

Maybe?

waremark wrote:

ipsg.glf wrote:Was the cause of the crash depicted in the video due to someone speeding marginally over the limit?

Am I missing something? The Gwent video crash was due to texting while driving.

I'm on about the video that Martine saw at the speed workshop.

ipsg.glf wrote:Was the cause of the crash depicted in the video due to someone speeding marginally over the limit?

Yes - a tweaked version was shown on TV - it's the one that shows a car skidding and hitting a child on a busy high street.

Just found it...


The 'full' version is more graphic (no pidgeons to hide impact) and the more extreme slo-mo gives the chance for the presenter to explain what's going on at various stages. Very clever use of CGI with 'hidden' messages the presenters highlighted like: driver's reaction time (basketball bounce), effect of hitting an adult instead of a child (cabbage hitting windscreen) etc.

There is also another message in this video. If the driver had used cadence braking he would be able to steer around the child.

Nigel ADi
IAM trainee observer

fungus wrote:There is also another message in this video. If the driver had used cadence braking he would be able to steer around the child.

Nigel ADi
IAM trainee observer

Or if he'd been travelling faster he'd have been long-gone when the child went into the road?

Re: cadence braking, how many 'L' drivers are taught how to brake with ABS (I hail from an era when it was 'release if the brakes lock')?