I 100% agree, Marc. Seat belt use is the most effective safety measure of drivers and passengers. Again though, this is an implementation issue. The legal framework is there and has increased selt-belt wearing even though many more lives would be saved if it were actively enforced.
The majority of fatalities in SA are pedestrians, who do not benefit from seat belt wearing. So a bevy of new laws must address safety for pedestrians *as well as* vehicle occupants. The alcohol laws being put into place go hand in hand with these strategies. Each one does a very little. Combined, these measures achieve a considerable amount. With effective enforcement, they can change the entire picture of road safety. Sweden is attempting to reduce road fatalities to *0*. And they're serious too. But even with our limitations, there's a lot that can be achieved. On Oct 17, 6:48 pm, "Marc Lunau (HOUSES4RENT)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Just my 5 cents. > The much lower hanging fruit are enforcement and of not wearing a seat belt. > This to be done hand in hand with a massive awareness campaign of the > benefits to wear one. Maybe health insurances should even deny cover if it > was found that a belt has not been worn which should be fairly easy. It is > beyond me why people buy cars with loads of safety features including air > bags and all sorts of gizmos, but then do not use the most basic and probably > most effective one - the seat belt. > I have no stats and inside info, but I am sure the majority of road deaths > and even severe injuries and disabilities could have been prevented by simply > wearing a seatbelt. > Just stand 5-10 min at any busy road and count the drivers (never mind > passengers) who are not buckled up.... I am sure you will be horrified to see > how high the percentage of people is who do not wear a seat belt and that > includes the member of any kind of police/law enforcement employees. > Next would be to count the not appropriately secured minors. They do not even > have a choice as parents are supposed to protect them. I cannot believe my > eyes regularly how many kids jump up and down on seats or adults laps > unsecured in a driving car. > As a cyclist I shout at any other cyclist I see without a helmet. Luckily I > do not see many. Some are obviously commuters on old bangers of the less > fortunate population group and most likely cannot afford a helmet which are > not cheap. The little movie in the media from the last few days where a > mountain biker was hit by a bookie illustrates this nicely. > See it here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2oymHHyV1M&feature=player_embedded > Regards > Marc > On 17/10/11 15:57 PM, Alan & Aparna wrote:There are two separate issues at > stake: 1. The capacity of the the traffic department 2. The efficacy of > graduated driving permits A government cannot delay cutting edge legislation > to save lives while it waits to sort out the capacity of the existing system. > Taking that approach we would never have pushed through the provision of > anti- retroviral treatment for HIV positive people - because the health > service is in a mess and the administrative difficulties are considerable. > However, not doing so would leave people to suffer and die for an indefinite > period while you improve capacity. It is similar with the graduated permits. > We know that new drivers are the most dangerous on the road. They are both > inexperienced, and young and risk-taking. There is clear evidence that such > systems decrease road injuries and deaths. That the system is unlikely to be > as successful in SA compared to Australia misses a crucial point. It will > nevertheless prevent deaths and injuries here too - despite the inefficiency > of our traffic department. These lives saved and injuries prevented will add > up. And not just the human cost, the department of transport currently spends > more than half its budget on collisions and their effects. Ultimately, fewer > crashes will also mean less money wasted in terms of closed roads, damage to > infrastructure, delays in commuting etc.. Paired with the alcohol > restrictions in the province, the effect could be considerable. Far from > being on crack, the government is responding to the call of road injury > researchers who are not unaware of the problems with our traffic department. > While it would be ideal to have a traffic department functioning optimally to > make best use of such legislation, it would not be ideal to wait for that day > before attempting proven changes that prevent deaths and permanent > disability. Alan Millar Ash Street. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/obsnw?hl=en.
