|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
Watching the ABC news
Just saw the horrifying new ad for the TAC, shows a young cyclist bein hit head on at high speed. This ad is extremely emotionally confronting Not entirely convinced by this style of campaign New TAC campaign warns that speed is no acciden http://tinyurl.com/3y3q2 TAC Minister Rob Hulls today launched a graphic new road safety campaig reinforcing the message that drivers who speed are responsible for th injuries they cause to others Mr Hulls said the campaign, specifically targeting low-level speeding served as a timely reminder as the State's road toll continued to climb - |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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. It was a horrible ad, wasn't it? It had the whole family cringing an wincing over their noodles. But wasn't the cyclist the on responsible for the crash? The way I saw the ad was that the cyclis was riding across a road, not at a crossing, and the car hit her fro the side. Now surely in legal terms the driver is not responsible Whether the car was going too fast or not, wouldn't it always hav been the fault of the person who stepped in front, rode in front, ra in front, drove in front Please don't think for a moment I'm suggesting that anyone who gets hi by a car when it's their fault deserves to die, or anything like that I'm just a little confused about the scenario used by the TAC.. - |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
On Thu, 20 May 2004 10:38:32 GMT, Etxy
wrote: 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. It was a horrible ad, wasn't it? It had the whole family cringing and wincing over their noodles. But wasn't the cyclist the one responsible for the crash? The way I saw the ad was that the cyclist was riding across a road, not at a crossing, and the car hit her from the side. Now surely in legal terms the driver is not responsible? Whether the car was going too fast or not, wouldn't it always have been the fault of the person who stepped in front, rode in front, ran in front, drove in front? If you hit something, you're responsible. If you're driving down the road, under the speed limit, and someone shoots out of a side road right into your path and you hit them, you're responsible. They contributed, but you should have been paying attention. Oh yeah. And keeping under the speed limit does NOT mean that you are driving safely. -- Regards. Richard. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
Richard Sherratt wrote:
If you hit something, you're responsible. If you're driving down the road, under the speed limit, and someone shoots out of a side road right into your path and you hit them, you're responsible. They contributed, but you should have been paying attention. Oh yeah. And keeping under the speed limit does NOT mean that you are driving safely. Yeah right. If you're going through a light intersection, and someone else pulls out from the red-lit cross street, and you hit them, you're responsible. So everyone slows down to the point that anyone breaking the law doesn't endanger themselves simply because no-one else is going fast enough to kill them. Instead of stopping people from making stupid manouvers in the first place, they're penalising everyone else for hitting them. I was right all along. Victora is breeding bad drivers. And the more they slow everyone down, the worse it's going to get. -- Linux Registered User # 302622 http://counter.li.org |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
So if someone is suicidal and jumps in front of a bus, the driver get sent to jail - |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
On Thu, 20 May 2004 21:22:40 +1000, John Tserkezis
wrote: Richard Sherratt wrote: If you hit something, you're responsible. If you're driving down the road, under the speed limit, and someone shoots out of a side road right into your path and you hit them, you're responsible. They contributed, but you should have been paying attention. Oh yeah. And keeping under the speed limit does NOT mean that you are driving safely. Yeah right. If you're going through a light intersection, and someone else pulls out from the red-lit cross street, and you hit them, you're responsible. Yes. You ARE responsible - not 100%, but you share some of that responsibility. Having an intersection controlled by traffic lights does not relieve you of the responsibility to ensure that the intersection is safe to enter. --- Cheers PeterC [Rushing headlong: out of control - and there ain't no stopping] [and there's nothing you can do about it at all] |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
On Thu, 20 May 2004 11:57:02 GMT, Etxy
wrote: So if someone is suicidal and jumps in front of a bus, the driver gets sent to jail? Why must everything be so black and white. Just because you share the responsibility (and not always evenly) does not mean that you get punished to the full extent of the law. --- Cheers PeterC [Rushing headlong: out of control - and there ain't no stopping] [and there's nothing you can do about it at all] |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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. New TAC campaign warns that speed is no accident http://tinyurl.com/3y3q2 TAC Minister Rob Hulls today launched a graphic new road safety campaign reinforcing the message that drivers who speed are responsible for the injuries they cause to others. Mr Hulls said the campaign, specifically targeting low-level speeding, served as a timely reminder as the State's road toll continued to climb. Yet another factor to fill our society with fear of ANYTHING an everything! Can see all those mums+dad's telling Johnny/Jane/Pham not t ride to school anymore 'because its dangerous' Just to throw a tidbit re who's fault it is if someone pulls out, if yo are invoolved in a collision and it is deemed reasonable that you wer not able/not enough time to react despite identifying the likelihood o 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 wit (incidentally, he's a motorbike cop who pushes traffic light button along Beach Rd - Hitchy? - |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
Etxy wrote:
So if someone is suicidal and jumps in front of a bus, the driver gets sent to jail? -- The bus driver sues the family for the trauma he/she experiences, loss of sleep at night, etc. T |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Horrifying new TAC ad
Tamyka Bell wrote:
Etxy wrote: So if someone is suicidal and jumps in front of a bus, the driver gets sent to jail? -- The bus driver sues the family for the trauma he/she experiences, loss of sleep at night, etc. T Most public transport Co's now have on-staff or consulting psychiatri road-trauma specialists to help train/bus drivers. Met a bloke i Adelaide who did this for 20 yrs in England. gawd, what a job! Sa reflection of the world we live in.. - |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|