We don't need to "accommodate" *anybody.* On the contrary, what we need to do is bring the substandard drivers up to speed (often literally, viz. my last follow-up to one of your posts), or else get them off the road. I also happen to believe that special attention should be focused on immigrant drivers -- not that I necessarily expect such political courage from any of our mealy- mouthed, careerist lawmakers or bureaucrats, of course.

I realize that "diversity" is something of a holy concept (not to mention an annoying buzzword), but you've misidentified the problem. It's long been a truism that driving is a privilege and not a right, but lately it seems to me that while society still pays lip service to that idea, the actual prevailing attitude has shifted more toward the idea that driving is, in fact, a right.

I think that one of the reasons for this is the fact that we live in an aggressively and self-consciously egalitarian society. Another is the quasi-religious regard in which people hold the nebulous concept of "rights," and that many Americans lack the critical thinking skills that would allow them to approach the matter of rights in a dispassionate and rational manner. If "diversity" implies the accepted existence of large numbers of substandard drivers, then we're being far too accomodating.

From leon@hawaii.edu Fri Jul 25 23:34:34 1997 Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 23:15:20 -1000 From: Leon James <leon@hawaii.edu> Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving

A reader wrote: "Sounds good, but I've seen little here, or on your websites, that is refering to the first group [=bad drivers]. It appears that you are more vocal about the second group [aggressive drivers], and since they are only reacting to the first group, I think it might be more effective to more actively address the first group." (snip) "And ignoring the idea that there are justifiable times to be angry is another reason that you don't put forth the image that you claim you are trying to present."

I believe that my Quality Driving Circles (QDCs) idea would work for both groups. In reality, there is only one group: sometimes we're aggressive and sometimes we're bad drivers making others mad.

Getting angry is automatic and natural--can't be helped most of the time. This is not the problem. It's venting your anger with righteous indignation after you've gotten angry--this is the problem. You have a choice. It's a mtter of philosophy or morality or civics or honesty... About research on road rage: the data I've been collecting has to do with hundreds of drivers turning on their tape recorder in the car and speaking their thoughts out loud. This is evidence. From this evidence I make various interpretations and conclusions. You can find many of these empirical reports on my Web site.

Experts, officials, teachers, journalists, legislators--these are the people who have been pointing to the aggressive drivers problem. The problem is not the "bad driver" who makes you mad and aggressive. It's the aggressive driver who fails to contain hostile emotions in the face of provocation by the "bad drivers." Let's get rid of bad driving; let's get rid of aggressive driving which includes not only hostile acts against specific others, but also a general style of compulsive rushing and competition.

Leon James (aka Dr. Driving)

Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 22:29:23 GMT Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving

Leon James <leon@hawaii.edu> said:

A reader wrote: "Sounds good, but I've seen little here, or on your websites, that is refering to the first group [=bad drivers]. It appears that you are more vocal about the second group [aggressive drivers], and since they are only reacting to the first group, I think it might be more ffective to more actively address the first group." (snip) "And ignoring the idea that there are justifiable times to be angry is another reason that you don't put forth the image that you claim you are trying to present."

I believe that my Quality Driving Circles (QDCs) idea would work for both groups. In reality, there is only one group: sometimes we're aggressive and sometimes we're bad drivers making others mad.

As Brandon mentioned before, I'm already a member of a QDC. t goes by the name "Texas A&M Sports Car Club." We are having a little chat theis weekend around a number of orange cones. We not only work on driving attitude, but we get some real experience in driving and how to handle a car. Even with the propensity for what you may consider poor driving within the group, there is a lower accident rate among us than the average.

Leon James:
Getting angry is automatic and natural--can't be helped most of the time. This is not the problem. It's venting your anger with righteous indignation after you've gotten angry--this is the problem. You have a choice. It's a matter of philosophy or morality or civics or honesty...

This seems to be a change from your earlier position. I think that is a positive change, as you are labeling the way the anger is dealt with, and not the anger itself, as it seemed before that you were saying.

Leon James:
About research on road rage: the data I've been collecting has to do with hundreds of drivers turning on their tape recorder in the car and speaking their thoughts out loud. This is evidence. From this evidence I make various interpretations and conclusions. You can find many of these empirical reports on my Web site.

Could you give the exact link to these pieces of empirical evidence? Are you referring to the projects of your students? I didn't find anything else that resembled what you described.

Leon James:
Experts, officials, teachers, journalists, legislators--these are the people who have been pointing to the aggressive drivers problem. The problem is not the "bad driver" who makes you mad and aggressive. It's the aggressive driver who fails to contain hostile emotions in the face of provocation by the "bad drivers." Let's get rid of bad driving; let's get rid of aggressive driving which includes not only hostile acts against specific others, but also a general style of compulsive rushing and competition.

There is nothing wrong with driving in a direct manner. This type of focus is often considered to be "rushing" but it is just the desire to go with minimal interference. "Rushing" implies a haphazard manner with an implied disregard of safety. I don't jeopardize safety in the name of getting there quickly, but I don't always stop and smell the flowers along the way.

I think that if the traffic laws were thoroughly re-worked (and then enforced), there wouldn't be problems on the same order as there is now. As it is now, it is expected that there is no traffic enforcement in rush hour (and in Dallas, there isn't), and there are only a few of the many traffic laws that are enforced with any sort of regularity. If there were fewer, more clear, and more strictly enforced laws, then there would be less people failing to signal, and other minor things that annoy people. There also should be a program where drivers can mount a video camera to their car (no hand held while driving) and turn tapes in to the police and the bad drivers caught on tape would be prosecuted. I think the Big Brother surveillance, as long as not actually done by Big Brother, would also improve people's awareness of their driving and make for better streets. I also think that drivers should have to pass a more strict driving test