Horrifying new TAC ad

cfsmtb wrote:
Watching the ABC news.

Just saw the horrifying new ad for the TAC, shows a young cyclist being
hit head on at high speed. This ad is extremely emotionally confronting.
Not entirely convinced by this style of campaign.

Those who remember the "grim reaper" adverts (AIDS) might be a bit
cynical. Terrified lots of people for no good reason.
Just a big wank by the advertising types.

The figures quoted on the webpage are very contrived:

" a car travelling at 60km/h will take approximately 45 metres to stop
in an emergency braking situation while a car braking at 65km/h will
still be travelling at 32 km/h after 45 metres. "

Lies and statistics. The 60km/hr car will be doing just as fast only a
few metres earlier. And those numbers sound like an elderly person
driving a top-heavy van in the rain.

flyingdutch wrote in message .. .
[snip]
Just to throw a tidbit re who's fault it is if someone pulls out, if you
are invoolved in a collision and it is deemed reasonable that you were
not able/not enough time to react despite identifying the likelihood of
said collision, you are NOT at fault (jumping in front of Bus scenario,
pulling out of sidestreet inside 10 metres of oncoming traffic, etc).
That's the word from 'Blue' mate i just got off the phone with
(incidentally, he's a motorbike cop who pushes traffic light buttons
along Beach Rd - Hitchy?)


I'll second that... In another life I was doing research on behalf of
an insurance company, examining car accident claims.

As far as insurance goes, if you break the law and the other person
doesn't, you're almost surely liable (not always, but mostly).

If you both break the law, (such as fail to give way and the other
person speeding), the responsibility is more likely to be shared. The
magistrate ultimately allocates proportions of the damages to the
parties, depending on the share of responsibility. There is no
black-letter law (so to speak) on allocating the shares of
responsibility, but there are generally very strong precedents. In the
example, the share of blame starts off with the person that failed
right of way and is then shifted to the speeder, depending on how fast
they were going.

Ritch.

I would agree with flyingdutch in that this ad is sending out the wron
message. I guess all the bike shops can start packing away their kid
bikes now

I would say that if the TAC was really worried about young cyclist
being hit they should initiate bike safety programs in primary schools
It would be great for the students and could even be part of P.E

I have a cousin who is a primary school teacher in country VIC who ha
made such a program for her kids. She painted lines for children to rid
over in a bike skill test and had organised an annual day ride wit
them, which they loved

Schools spend thousands of dollars on computer equipment, why can't the
buy at least 20 or so single speed kids bikes and helmets

Maybe parents would rather see racing driver Mark Skaife in th
classroom


-

Mike wrote:
The figures quoted on the webpage are very contrived:
" a car travelling at 60km/h will take approximately 45 metres to stop
in an emergency braking situation while a car braking at 65km/h will
still be travelling at 32 km/h after 45 metres. "
Lies and statistics. The 60km/hr car will be doing just as fast only a
few metres earlier. And those numbers sound like an elderly person
driving a top-heavy van in the rain.


Yep. It always amazes me that every car manufacturer and tester ca
pull up their vehicles from 100km/h in under 40m (good cars well unde
35), but that the TAC can only do it in 45m from 65km/h. Even if i
takes a full second to react, that's only 18m. Another 27m should b
more than enough to stop from 65km/h, and reaction time should be mor
like 0.2-0.4s. Perhaps these are not the people to be teaching us abou
road safety..


-

"Mike" wrote in message


[...]

Those who remember the "grim reaper" adverts (AIDS) might be a bit
cynical. Terrified lots of people for no good reason.
Just a big wank by the advertising types.

The Grim Reaper ads were spot on. The message was there was a horrifying
new disease out there and nobody was immune. It was hailed all over the
world as a benchmark in how governments needed to respond to the crisis,
that part obviously being getting the message out. We were fortunate that
the Australian government took the AIDs threat seriously and responded
quickly and appropriately, unlike many other countries.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Roadie_scum writes:

[...]

reaction time should be more
like 0.2-0.4s. Perhaps these are not the people to be teaching us about
road safety...

Reaction time is around about 0.5s, infact we don't become
continiously aware of anything untill 0.5s after it happens.

--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

Was almost an unwilling particiapnt in a new TAC Ad last night

Heading east across Burke Rd, going along Doncaster Rd as lights turne
Green. 4WD (what else?) driven by mum with toddler in backseat ran th
lights and collected a young guy making a righthand turn

The lights were so red me and another guy on a bike and the car to ou
right were already moving. Luckily for the young dude, he brake
slightly otherwise she would have got him dar worse. The difference i
damage to his Merc/SangYong and his Conformadore was amazing

Helped him out of the car. petrol going everywhere, i had images o
hollywood movies in my head. Those damn airbags STINK!!! Is tha
propellant or something??? Couldnt breathe in the car. He was no
scratched but badly shaken up and complaining of a sore neck and bac
which didnt bode well! Stuck about for about 15min. Ambulance and Polic
were there very quickly and some guy even had a broom in his ca
cleaning up the debris (where is he on my commute?) Hope he's OK. Nic
welcome to the roads for a P-plater..


-