The fragility of car computers revealed.
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 28 May 2010 03:39 On Thu, 27 May 2010 17:31:21 +0100, Phil W Lee <phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote: >Most (in fact almost all) traffic collisions are entirely avoidable, >and indeed totally foreseeable, given the behaviour that leads to >them. >Choosing to drive in that manner is no accident. "totally foreseeable" - bullshit. They are all accidents, those that make up new meanings for words to promote their agenda just make themselves look like nutters. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: bod on 28 May 2010 03:47 ChelseaTractorMan wrote: > On Thu, 27 May 2010 17:31:21 +0100, Phil W Lee > <phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote: > >> Most (in fact almost all) traffic collisions are entirely avoidable, >> and indeed totally foreseeable, given the behaviour that leads to >> them. >> Choosing to drive in that manner is no accident. > > "totally foreseeable" - bullshit. They are all accidents, those that > make up new meanings for words to promote their agenda just make > themselves look like nutters. > > Agreed. The same is true with our emergency services, when, instead of referring to an accident as an 'RTA' (Road Traffic Accident), it's RTC now. Whoever makes these things up, are a strange bunch. Bod
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 28 May 2010 03:56 On Fri, 28 May 2010 08:47:47 +0100, bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > The same is true with our emergency services, when, instead of > referring to an accident as an 'RTA' (Road Traffic Accident), it's RTC >now. Whoever makes these things up, are a strange bunch. sadly they caved in, it seems. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 28 May 2010 04:02 >> So you admit that the euphemistic term 'accident' tends to absolve >> from blame it isn't a euphemism. It does not absolve from blame. RTAs are hardly ever intentional. If all people drove at all times in perfect accordance with the law and to the best of their abilities there would still be accidents. Those that think all accidents are avoidable are fanatical idiots. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 28 May 2010 04:11
On Fri, 28 May 2010 08:47:47 +0100, bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >Whoever makes these things up, are a strange bunch. I wonder what they will rename "Accident and Emergency" when the newspeakers get their way and accident only means blameless. What a load of total bolox. How do you know at the time if blame is appropriate? The US gun lobby talk a similar load of nonsense about "dangerous" they misrepresent it as only being possible of sentient beings in order to avoid guns being seen as something we should control for safety. Once you start distorting because it suits your current objective you never know when it will turn round and bite you. objects can be "dangerous" "accident" does not imply blameless. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine. |