On Tue, 09 May 2006 13:37:17 +0100, The Reid
wrote:

|Following up to Tom Anderson
|
| its a matter of balance, being reasonably safe while being able to get a
| reasonable move on etc.
|
|Exactly. We balance safety against freedom to move; the balance at present
|indicates that we value the convenience we currently have more than a
|couple of thousand lives a year. Or rather, the convenience we would stand
|to lose if we tightened up on safety against the hundreds of lives we'd
|save by doing it.
|
|As one of the safer countries roadwise, we are probably near the
|point where saving more lives requires disporortionate arbitary
|restrictions like driving at 10mph, thats why I advocate using
|more intelligent approaches like the use of matching speed to
|conditions.

If you look at the roads, you will see that they are improving road safety
by small things like putting yellow lines and skid resistant surfaces
approaching roundabouts etc.

Not to mention speed cameras which slow most drivers down.

Also treating casualties better with the good old NHS.
You have all done a First Aid course so that you can do the *right* things
if you come across an accident.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.