anti-speeding adverts - effective?

Little CuChulainn

Skylinehead wrote: »

The RSA pushing out so many anti-speed messages, which takes away from their budget/airtime to show other equally important issues, is detrimental to the overall goal of reducing accidents, because it doesn't make people aware of the real problems. Going with almost exclusive "speed kills" messages is a lazy and ineffectual method of improving road safety.

I think I've seen one RSA phone advert ever. Probably saw 3 or 4 speed ones yesterday alone...

What a load of nonsense. In the last few years there's been ads on phones, attentive driving, drink driving, drug driving, driving while tired, driving without a seatbelt, as well as over a dozen instructional videos on different maneuvers and situations.

ScumLord

osarusan wrote: »

You are making it an 'either/or' when it isn't.

Speed kills would be more palatable if it was part of a more effective campaign that focused mainly on training and enforcement. But speed kills is the main focus of road safety in this country. When you take into account the terrible training people get and the disrepair of Irish roads I think saying speed kills is a nonsense. It's like putting a sign at the bottom of tall buildings warning about the sudden stop at the end if you jump off the top.

osarusan

ScumLord wrote: »

Speed kills would be more palatable if it was part of a more effective campaign that focused mainly on training and enforcement.

It it would be more palatable, then it isn't nonsense in and of itself.

"The over-emphasis on speeding over other factors in road accidents and proper driving is a nonsense" is a different argument than "Speed kills is a nonsense".

Skylinehead

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What a load of nonsense. In the last few years there's been ads on phones, attentive driving, drink driving, drug driving, driving while tired, driving without a seatbelt, as well as over a dozen instructional videos on different maneuvers and situations.

Like I said, drink (and drug) driving is a different, altogether more serious issue than the others. My point was that the speeding adverts get far more air time than any other issues. Do you disagree with that? Certainly seems to be my experience.

ScumLord

osarusan wrote: »

It it would be more palatable, then it isn't nonsense in and of itself.

"The over-emphasis on speeding over other factors in road accidents and proper driving is a nonsense" is a different argument than "Speed kills is a nonsense".

Fine, if that's the way you want to see it.

But I still think it's a waste of time until proper driving training is introduced. It's creating a worse driver, the fear it instils just makes people avoid new situations and focuses the driver on a technique that may help them avoid accidents but is utterly useless in most emergency situations. What does the driver do after they've slowed down? Panic usually.

diomed

I think the only thing that will stop some motorists is confiscation and sale of their cars. Proceeds of sale to pay for uninsured drivers.

We should have one very short TV ad on road safety in every ad break: junctions; traffic lights; roundabouts; indicating; speed limits; lane behaviour and so on - a bit like dozens of ads covering the rules of the road.

Little CuChulainn

Skylinehead wrote: »

Like I said, drink (and drug) driving is a different, altogether more serious issue than the others. My point was that the speeding adverts get far more air time than any other issues. Do you disagree with that? Certainly seems to be my experience.

I would disagree. That "looking back" ad seems to be on all the time. As does the fatigue one. I can't even remember the last time I saw a speeding one.

Skylinehead

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I would disagree. That "looking back" ad seems to be on all the time. As does the fatigue one. I can't even remember the last time I saw a speeding one.

Fair enough, I don't think we're going to agree with our advert "choices" (like we have a choice) being so wildly different

Honestly at this point I think no amount of adverts are going to do much, when so many people can't get the basics right. Overhaul the driving test at the very least, but that doesn't do anything for the people on the road right now.

pxdf9i5cmoavkz

These ads don't help.

The people who are speeding or looking at their cellphones are doing that because in their own narcissistic viewpoint, they honestly don't believe they'll be caught or land up in an accident. While they know they're doing something risky you can be damn sure they don't care about you or what some stupid ad says.

How does the state curb this type of behaviour? That is a hard question and worthy of another thread.

lawlolawl

Rory28 wrote: »

the not paying attention is the biggest factor. I have been rear ended twice on my motorbike at red lights by people texting. I mean what the hell people? put your damn phone down!

Ha , the only accident i was involved in was also on a motorbike years ago.

Some clown in a jeep pulled out of a side road right into the side of me as i was riding past him on the main road. His excuse: "I didn't know who had right of way ". I was doing maybe 20kph because it was in a town.

As i said, i was on the main road and he was pulling out from a dead stop from a side road. He'd let a few cars past already before he decided he wanted to do 5 grands worth of damage to my bike. I presume he got tired of waiting or was just so completely incompetent/dimwitted that he had no ****ing idea how to operate the few tonnes of metal he was piloting.

But at least he wasn't speeding, right?

That same week, a housemate of mine had some auld one drive into the back of his car in the exact same town doing around 20kph as well. She admitted she was half turned around talking to her passenger at the time but my buddy already knew this because he had been watching her do so in his rearview.

lawlolawl

Issac Breezy Jackrabbit wrote: »

These ads don't help.

The people who are speeding or looking at their cellphones are doing that because in their own narcissistic viewpoint, they honestly don't believe they'll be caught or land up in an accident. While they know they're doing something risky you can be damn sure they don't care about you or what some stupid ad says.

How does the state curb this type of behaviour? That is a hard question and worthy of another thread.

First thing would be a two-strikes rule for mobile phone use while driving. Get caught once and you get a warning, next time you lose your licence for 2 years and have to resit your test and go through the whole L, N plate etc. rigmarole again.

It's gotten to the stage where i notice exactly who is on their phone when driving even if i can't see into the car to make sure. Sudden changes in speed (fast, fast, slow, slower, burst of speed, oh we're back down to slow again), drifting all over the place in and out of lane, less indicating than usual (and Irish people barely indicate as is), not responding to traffic lights for a good ten seconds after they've changed. It getting worse out there every day.

The Backwards Man

ScumLord wrote: »

A person that's been driving for years should be able to tell you off the top of their head where all the dangers are on their drive home.

A person that's driving for years might tell you that alright, but an experienced driver knows that no one can tell where all the dangers might appear.

Rory28

The Backwards Man wrote: »

A person that's driving for years might tell you that alright, but an experienced driver knows that no one can tell where all the dangers might appear.

I can. the danger appears where you least suspect it.
Crafty like that it is.

The Backwards Man

Rory28 wrote: »

I can. the danger appears where you least suspect it.
Crafty like that it is.

It can appear where you most expect it, or where you half expect it, just as handy.

PARlance

I would love to see an advert targeting idiots who only give themselves a foot or two breaking / manoeuvre space from the car in front. Drivers who drive up someone's hole basically.

They fall into two frustrating categories. The guys that do it at speed and the guys that do it well below speed limits.

I drive from Dublin to the West a lot. Coming out of Dublin it can be very stop start on the motorway. Generally the 2 lanes are in full use and there's a constant stream. That's not what there designed for but if there's a constant stream of traffic the driving up someone's arse will not get you there any quicker. Traffic up ahead is likely to slow down to a halt at times, give yourself more than a foot of reaction time.
These geniuses will regularly resort to weaving in and out of lanes like madmen once they can't take anymore of sniffing someone's arse.

The other type is the driver one who'll meet a slow moving vehicle ahead and decided to get into the slip stream of that slow moving vehicle, happily sitting there less than a car space behind and no intention of overtaking when safe to do so. This can be great craic once as train of these drivers builds up.
If you're not going to overtake, then give the car behind space to overtake you.

Rant over.

Vorenus400

osarusan wrote: »

Very good ad from New Zealand a few years back.

Thats a great ad. I think the Irish ones are hiting diminishing returns with the shock and horro of a crash. Here is another great Kiwi ad about drink driving

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtWirGxV7Q8

ShadowHearth

Hammer89 wrote: »

The anti-speeding ad which sticks in the mind is the one where your man celebrates his goal with a couple of pints. Then he's driving all along all happy, singing 'there's nowhere I'd rather be', obviously forgetting he's in a ****ty 306, which then flips over into some suburban garden and deads a child.

Speeding was not really an issue, it was driving drunk.

I hate this whole "speed kills" crap they are song hang on here. Its not the speed that kills, it's the **** driving, alcohol and poorly maintained cars with bold tyres.

Assholes doing 60-70km in 100km/h Road are more dangerous, then someone keeping a steady 100-110km/h speed.

Initially these ads have effect but over time i think we become desensitised to the effect of the ad so therefore the RSA need to continuously come up with fresh ideas.

The Backwards Man

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Speeding was not really an issue, it was driving drunk.

I hate this whole "speed kills" crap they are song hang on here. Its not the speed that kills, it's the **** driving, alcohol and poorly maintained cars with bold tyres.

Assholes doing 60-70km in 100km/h Road are more dangerous, then someone keeping a steady 100-110km/h speed.

Do you know there are only to types of drivers on the road? Those who know they have a lot to learn, and those that think they have nothing to learn. Doesn't matter how fast they drive or how adept they are at overtaking, everyone falls into one of those groups.

As a wise man once said, it's better to be stuck behind someone who knows their limitations than stuck in front of someone who doesn't.

wakka12

I really like car ads, generally theyre really powerful. One of them really affected me, the woman in it keeps looking back over her shoulder and ages backwards throughout the ad all the way back to one moment. It reveals that her daughter was killed in a car accident as she looked back over her shoulder to her baby daughter and diverted her attention form the road. And she's been looking back ever since the accident. Just really shocking

ScumLord

The Backwards Man wrote: »

As a wise man once said, it's better to be stuck behind someone who knows their limitations than stuck in front of someone who doesn't.

I could say with absolute certainty if your stuck behind a car on a main road the person driving hasn't the first clue where the limitations of their car is never mind their own limitations. Most people are working off facts and statistics from the 1950s. For most drivers their own car is a complete mystery to them.

Jimmy Garlic

Speed doesn't kill, incompetent drivers and dodgy roads do. Germany has similarly low road fatality rates as ourselves and they have 100s of kms of motorway with absolutely no speed limits. The standard of driving there is better and people tend to look after their cars a bit better aswell. If you took the reckless young fellas with their ancient sh1tbox starlets etc held together with stickers and cable ties out of the equation our road fatality rates would even be a lot lower.

Jimmy Garlic

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Speed doesn't kill, incompetent drivers and dodgy roads do. Germany has similarly low road fatality rates as ourselves and they have 100s of kms of motorway with absolutely no speed limits. The standard of driving there is better and people tend to look after their cars a bit better aswell. If you took the reckless young fellas with their ancient sh1tbox starlets etc held together with stickers and cable ties out of the equation our road fatality rates would even be a lot lower.

I read somewhere that most accidents happen on the smaller roads then the main roads but that was quite a while back. Im not sure the boy racer types are as plentiful as they were but there is still shíte drivers aplenty.

Jimmy Garlic

Deleted User wrote: »

I read somewhere that most accidents happen on the smaller roads then the main roads but that was quite a while back. Im not sure the boy racer types are as plentiful as they were but there is still shíte drivers aplenty.

Regional roads for the most part. And regional standard roads like the N20 and N52 etc that masquerade as national routes. If huge volumes of traffic are forced to use woefully substandard roads like the one that connects our second and third largest cities then people are going to die, it's inevitable. The government and RSA like to blame motorists for everything and never take responsibility for anything.

05eaftqbrs9jlh

It's so strange the amount of people who still actually watch TV.

The Backwards Man

ScumLord wrote: »

I could say with absolute certainty if your stuck behind a car on a main road the person driving hasn't the first clue where the limitations of their car is never mind their own limitations. Most people are working off facts and statistics from the 1950s. For most drivers their own car is a complete mystery to them.

I see you fall into the think they have nothing to learn category. I thought you were wiser than that TBH.

petrolcan

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Do you know there are only to types of drivers on the road? Those who know they have a lot to learn, and those that think they have nothing to learn. Doesn't matter how fast they drive or how adept they are at overtaking, everyone falls into one of those groups.

As a wise man once said, it's better to be stuck behind someone who knows their limitations than stuck in front of someone who doesn't.

The wise words of a man that has done lots of miles in Donegal.

The Backwards Man

petrolcan wrote: »

The wise words of a man that has done lots of miles in Donegal.

It was actually an Aussie that told me that, but yeah!

wil

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Do you know there are only to types of drivers on the road? Those who know they have a lot to learn, and those that think they have nothing to learn. Doesn't matter how fast they drive or how adept they are at overtaking, everyone falls into one of those groups.

As a wise man once said, it's better to be stuck behind someone who knows their limitations than stuck in front of someone who doesn't.

I've learned a fair bit, forgotten some stuff, learned there's much I have yet to learn, unlearned some stuff I later found to be incorrect, might have to relearn some more that now escapes me, but most importantly learned to doubt that I've ever learned anything that was truly learned.

When a wise man starts boiling everything down to a choice between A or B without considering C, he is well on the road to dementia.

Let's go off on a loaded gun analogy.
Some people are naturally brilliant shots, some cross eyed, some cock sure, some take their time, some quick draws, some John Waynes, some who wouldn't know their bore from their butt, but if any of them aims at me while chomping a breakfast roll, while texting or chatting with Sarah or flaming with Keith, or doing their eye/guyliner, doesn't matter how quick or slowly they pull that trigger, I ain't going to be happy**

(**Analogy still in early beta).

Are these "speeding" adverts effective in reducing accidents, probably not significantly. I suspect they are mostly noticed by those that are not the intended targets and excuse poor drivers from having any real responsibility for their driving behaviour so long as they never exceed an arbitrary number on a dial.

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

I read somewhere that most accidents happen on the smaller roads then the main roads but that was quite a while back. Im not sure the boy racer types are as plentiful as they were but there is still shíte drivers aplenty.

I'd say the majority of speeding takes place on the smaller roads. They're like ambrosia to a speeder.

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I see you fall into the think they have nothing to learn category. I thought you were wiser than that TBH.

I don't know how you could jump to that conclusion? I consider driving to be a martial art and I am a long time student. That's got nothing to do with the fact most drivers in this country are terrible drivers.