Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 16:49:34 -1000 From: "C.R. Krieger" <Just_read_it@my.sig_line To: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Subject: Re: USA Today "Road Rage" article Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving On Mon, 18 Aug 1997 01:51:14 -0600, "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org brazenly asserted: In article <33f320d6.1426269@news.zippo.com , <a href="mailto: postmaster@[127.0.0.1]" </a wrote: People are scared because they haven't been properly trained. If you are thrown into a situation that you have never had to handle before, it is very easy to be intimidated by it. Those that don't get scared and haven't been trained are simply overconfident and will either skate through it by the seat of their pants or screw up really badly. Training is the key. Not speed enforcement. Not singing kumbayah and having seances. ++++++ I almost overlooked this paragraph: something I found to agree with Brandon, can you believe it? DrDriving wrote: Drivers need additional training in emotional intelligence to help them not be intimidated in routine situations, that is, help drivers be less aggressive when they feel like being more aggressive. The need for speed is understandable; the desire to go faster is natural -- but when we can't, why fret and aggress against others? You have little power over other drivers but you can have enough power over yourself -- use inner power tools , Ha! HAHAHAHAHA! Hey, Brandon! Looks like you screwed up! Leon thinks you guys actually agree! Here, I'll save ya the trouble: Brandon's not talking about any "emotional intelligence" crap. He's talking about teaching people how to recognize typical 'emergency' situations, to know what to do to address them, and to have enough skill and training to actually control their vehicles enough to properly deal with the 'emergency'. One's emotional outlook matters not a whit when evasive action needs to be taken. Right, Brandon? C.R. Krieger
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 00:53:53 -1000 From: The Goobers <docdwarf@erols.com To: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Subject: Re: WEW 7057 - The Cause Of Road Rage Newsgroups: soc.culture.malaysia,dc.driving,rec.autos,driving Oh dear... it is my opinion that this is going *too* far; are you advociating good mental health here or some manner of religion?Dr. Driving wrote: Jesting about road rage isn't recommended!
Besides you... says who?
Because it encourages fantasies of violence.
Which is better, catharsis via fantasy or catharsis via action? These are bad for two reasons. First, it strengthens and maintains the road rage tendency within all of us, allowing it to break into open violence or open forms of hostility at unpredictable moments, leading you to acts you'll regret in your normal state, but will have to deal with the negative consequences. Please demonstrate how this is a necessary conclusion; it is my opinion that the logic may be as commanding and inevitable as 'oxygen *can* lead to heroin abuse!'. Second, jesting about road rage weakens our moral conscience. Once again... besides you, says who? Violence becomes more acceptable to contemplate. It corrupts spiritually because we're not shocked by the idea of torturing another human being. How can you conclude (except teleologically) that this happens? If it *does* happen, how can you say it is a Bad Thing? It's best to discuss this seriously -- how we train ourselves to re-gain control over our emotions behind the wheel. It's not easy.... Where are you drawing the line between 're-gaining control' and an unhealthy sort of repression manifested, say, by the concept of 'sins of the heart'?... are you advociating good mental health here or some manner of religion?
Subject: Re: Crowding From: henryj@nina.pagesz.net (George Conklin) Date: 1997/08/18 Message-Id: <5t98u8$q55$1@nina.pagesz.net Newsgroups: misc.transport.urban-transit,alt.planning.urban,alt.politics.libertarian [More Headers]In article <870676784.14576@dejanews.com , Dr. Driving <dyc@drdriving.org wrote: In article <5s2ern$e7j$2@gail.ripco.com , Crowding causes "road rage" ++++++++
Dr. Driving wrote:
This is only an appearance. Crowding does not cause road rage. Crowding is just a condition or occasion during which road rage could manifest itself if the motive is there.
Crowding does increase human problems. Even animal studies by Calhoun have shown that. He called it 'the behaviorial sink.' Pretty clear.
From: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Subject: Re: Crowding Newsgroups: misc.transport.urban-transit
In article <5t98u8$q55$1@nina.pagesz.net , henryj@nina.pagesz.net (George Conklin) wrote: Crowding does increase human problems. Even animal studies by Calhoun have shown that. He called it 'the behaviorial sink.' Pretty clear.
+++++++++
I think this is precisely to my point. I hope you don't identify yourself with rats! So the idea is that we must not operate like rats but like humans. And this means that we humans do have a choice -- a moral choice: when crowding increases, we need to accommodate. Hence the need for more driver training so they can handle routine challenges in an emotionally intelligent manner. Don't you agree?
Leon James (visit "Dr. Driving"
Subject: Re: Accidents and Trucks
From: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org
Date: 1997/08/18 Message-Id: <871884524.28216@dejanews.com Newsgroups: phl.transportation [More Headers]
You aren't serious, are you? What, do we have to rate _everything_ for the lowest common denominator? Don't you think that most people are capable of figuring this out for themselves, and don't need a rating system to spell it out for them? That is a truly pathetic proposal, Leon.
++++++++
I'm afraid John isn't looking at this issue with great care. Think: why do we need and why do we have R ratings and XX ratings, etc.? Because people deserve a choice from being exposed or not to certain things which are controversial, meaning that people feel strongly about it either way. So in the same way, aggressive driving is controversial: drivers feel strongly either way, namely, John and those who depict a similar "tough minded" attitude towards "some" drivers (--I would say ANY driver who does X), on the one hand, and on the other, those who complain about aggressive drivers and are terrified and stressed out by them, or else, are stressed out and become aggressive like the aggressive drivers.
Conclusion: War and mayhem is going to keep increasing until there is sufficient consciousness or spiritual will to treat aggressive driving as a cultural norm we need to overcome through better norms. Car commercials and movies influence children and adults alike. Producers right now are totally unconscious and unaware of the possibility that depicting bad driving behaviors influences children and adults to
1) be more accepting of such bad behavior, or things similar
2) be less shocked when it occurs, thus desensitizing, like violence
3) interpret it as allowable by society since in commercials and movies
4) get new ideas of how to be bad, encourages fantasy
Let me me mention one subtle (rather than obvious) example: the car is depicted taking the bend around the road with a little excessive speed, showing in the tires and car inclination, thus making you think of that lovely G-force to which we get addicted by earlier commercials, cartoons, movies, and rides with aggressive drivers (often the parents....). Another one shows a kid taking the wheel and driving with havoc with a glee on his face, etc. If you want more see one of my student's report on this here
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/459ss97/jenica/report2.html
Subject: Re: Accidents and Trucks From: grimrod@NOSPAMmindless.com (BS) Date: 1997/08/18 Message-Id: <33f878f0.6155656@news.zippo.com Newsgroups: phl.transportation,rec.autos.driving,dc.driving,uk.transport [More Headers]Dr. Driving claimed:
I think law enforcement can only go so far without starting to impose a dictatorial atmosphere which we rather not have. Yes, continue law enforcement activities, but we cannot rely solely on that to reduce the epidemic of aggressive driving and road rage.
If enforcement would move from speed (revenue) related to something more safety related, say, lane discipline, the roads would be safer and people would be more relaxed. The reason being that with good lane discipline you can reasonably predict what another driver will do. Brandon
Subject: Re: Accidents and Trucks From: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Date: 1997/08/16 Message-Id: <871788453.4192@dejanews.com Newsgroups: phl.transportation,rec.autos.driving,dc.driving,uk.transport [More Headers]In article <01bcaa03$9be79300$199eadce@crc3.concentric.net , "Richard Wyllie" <dickwyll@concentric.net wrote: I would definitely agree that law enforcement would cut down on the level of reckless driving. I was driving a cab in New York in the late 80's when the city started enforcing with a vengeance. Up to that time, the streets were lawless. There was a lot of screaming and gnashing of teeth, but the word went out not to mess on the streets of New York, outside of reasonable New York aggressiveness of course.
+++++++++
I think law enforcement can only go so far without starting to impose a dictatorial atmosphere which we rather not have. Yes, continue law enforcement activities, but we cannot rely solely on that to reduce the epidemic of aggressive driving and road rage. We need a social-cultural transformation, a change in norms of aggressiveness behind the wheel. We need to take charge with car commercials and movies and tell advertisers and sponsors that we care about depicting and encouraging bad driving behavior on the screen. Maybe we need an additional rating on movies -- not just Adult language, Violence, Nudity, Sex -- but also BD for Bad Driving Behavior!
Subject: Re: Accidents and Trucks From: whorning@pipeline.com (Walt Horning) Date: 1997/08/18 Message-Id: <33fa4754.47299029@news.pipeline.com Newsgroups: phl.transportation,rec.autos.driving,dc.driving,uk.transport [More Headers] In article <01bcaa03$9be79300$199eadce@crc3.concentric.net ,"Richard Wyllie" <dickwyll@concentric.net wrote:
I would definitely agree that law enforcement would cut down on the level of reckless driving. I was driving a cab in New York in the late 80's when the city started enforcing with a vengeance. Up to that time, the streets were lawless. There was a lot of screaming and gnashing of teeth, but the word went out not to mess on the streets of New York, outside of reasonable New York aggressivenes of course.
+++++++++
"Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org wrote: I think law enforcement can only go so far without starting to impose a dictatorial atmosphere which we rather not have. Yes, continue law enforcement activities, but we cannot rely solely on that to reduce the epidemic of aggressive driving and road rage.
Do you have a lot of "hype" to support your claim of road rage? Yes. Do you have any real statistics from U.S. DOT that show that causes of accidents on the highways are in any significant manner caused by road rage or even aggressive driving? NO! The most significant (over 50%) is caused by alcohol, followed by things like common driver error or mistake (a lack of being aggressive about driving skill), inexperience, falling asleep at the wheel, (the opposite of being aggressive) and a few other miscellaneous categories, with any sort of aggression or rage (excluding those of alcohol or drugs) is easily under 1% of the causes of highway death. People are simply being misinformed about rage and aggression. There has been an increase, perhaps. But if it were say that .5% were caused by this problem, and increase of .1 or .2% occurred in the last several years, while a large increase relative to the .5%, overall its still a lot of hype.
From: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Subject: Re: Accidents and Trucks Newsgroups: phl.transportation,rec.autos.driving,dc.driving,uk.transport,chi.drivingIn article <33fa4754.47299029@news.pipeline.com , whorning@pipeline.com wrote: People are simply being misinformed about rage and aggression. There has been an increase, perhaps. But if it were say that .5% were caused by this problem, and increase of .1 or .2% occurred in the last several years, while a large increase relative to the .5%, overall its still a lot of hype.
+++++++++++++++++
Statistics and trends are documented in several places, including NHTSA.
Try these 3 studies sponsored by the AAA Foundation: http://www.aaafts.org/aaa/text/ragetext.htmI think you might be narrowing the term "aggressive driving" while I might be expanding it more than many of you think it's legitimate (I know). Here is the ultimate example: you say falling asleep is the opposite of aggressive driving, yet I say that it is a form of aggressive driving. DUI is also a form of aggressive driving. Driving at speed limit in the passing lanes and refusing to move over is also aggressive driving. Lane hopping, turning without signaling, following too close, rushing -- these are forms of aggressive driving.
So what is aggressive driving?? And is it a matter of dispute and subjective opinion?? It's not clear, is it. But if I don't have the answer, neither do you....Obviously a better answer is needed than, "That's your opinion, that's my opinion" Any serious suggestions???? I've tried: go see at: my Congressional Testimony here
Dr. Driving (Leon James)
Subject: Re: Accidents and Trucks From: NOSPAM-myarger@concentric.net (Mark Yarger) Date: 1997/08/18 Message-Id: <5t9l7p$a3q@examiner.concentric.net Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving [More Headers]"Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org wrote:
I think law enforcement can only go so far without starting to impose a dictatorial atmosphere which we rather not have. Yes, continue law enforcement activities, but we cannot rely solely on that to reduce the epidemic of aggressive driving and road rage. We need a social-cultural transformation, a change in norms of aggressiveness behind the wheel. We need to take charge with car commercials and movies and tell advertisers and sponsors that we care about depicting and encouraging bad driving behavior on the screen. Maybe we need an additional rating on movies -- not just Adult language, Violence, Nudity, Sex -- but also BD for Bad Driving Behavior! Dr. Driving (Leon James)
We need to protect people from any knowledge of behavior that is not beneficial to the collective. By controlling the collective mind we will shape minds to be capable of holding only the collectives opinions and beliefs. Lets purge our literature, rewrite our history books, and control our films! I suggest we create a Ministry of Media that is responsible for producing all information that the public will ingest. That should make engineering opinions and attitudes simple, easy, and painless. What Crap, Mark
Subject: Re: USA Today "Road Rage" article From: sense@direct.ca (SENSE / J. Michael Cain) Date: 1997/08/18 Message-Id: <5ta26k$mue$1@brie.direct.ca Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving [More Headers] In article <871885637.28890@dejanews.com ,"Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org wrote:
<[..deleted..] but the reality is that surveys everywhere have shown that between one third and half of all drivers report aggressive driving as their no. 1 daily stress and danger problem. Besides breaking speed limits, common offenses are following too close, improper lane changes, not obeying signals, and reckless driving (not specified).
We need to understand that there is a big distinction between aggressive driving and *inconsiderate* driving. Since the repeal of the maximum speed limits and the loss of the tired "speed kills", the safety lobby must create a new epidemic in order to justify it's continued existence (and funding). There will always remain a big difference between a driver who makes a lane change without shoulder checking and a driver who packs a 357 ready to use it. But you can rest assured that insurance industry and others will stop at nothing to ticket the huge proportion of drivers who fit into the former category as justification for the problems created by the infinitesimal few in the latter category.
J. Michael Cain, Director of Research SENSE Society for Safety by Education, Not Speed Enforcement
From: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Subject: Re: USA Today "Road Rage" article Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,dc.driving,uk.transportIn article <5ta26k$mue$1@brie.direct.ca , sense@direct.ca (SENSE / J. Michael Cain) wrote: We need to understand that there is a big distinction between aggressive driving and *inconsiderate* driving. Since the repeal of the maximum speed limits and the loss of the tired "speed kills", the safety lobby must create a new epidemic in order to justify it's continued existence (and funding). WEB-SITE: http://sense.bc.ca
+++++++++++++++
Let me congratulate you on a beautifully presented and organized Web Page! You might consider adding mine (see below) to your Useful Links Page. I see that you're into citizen, grass roots efforts against speeding tickets. I believe your approach is legitimate and your arguments appear rational enough and at least as valid as the other side. One place where I don't go along with you: I don't define the authorities' efforts like you do -- namely, that they are motivated to use speeding as revenue and to persecute you and others -- even though these things may be true in some cases. Besides: government agencies are allowed to raise revenues, one way or another (some are better and more fair, of course...) -- it's not like they're private thieves! About aggressive driving: you'd like to separate out "inconsiderate" driving, and others have suggested "assertive" driving, and still others "fast drivers but competent and safe" etc. These are attempts to justify and legitimate certain aspects of aggressive driving and to make them allowable. Where do you draw the line? Who has the authority to draw the line? And if the line is not drawn, do we just condone it? What about the thousands of people (millions, actually) who compalin of stress and fear? Leon James (aka Dr. Driving)
From: "Dr. Driving" <dyc@drdriving.org Subject: Re: WEW 7057 - The Cause Of Road Rage Newsgroups: soc.culture.malaysia
In article <01bcabf2$1df593c0$da07bcca@Acer.nasionet , "Sun Tzu" <glendl@usa.net wrote: So Doc .... have u encountered such an incident b4 ? Anyway, what should the 'professional and acceptable' response be ???????? +++++++++++
The acceptable response when you're provoked by another road user is to focus on yourself, not the other. Be a witness to your own reactions. Observe it and ask yourself: is this the type of person I want to be? Or, is this psychologically healthy? Or, is this spiritually acceptable and benign? In this way you get to be a better person and you avoid getting into fights and stress producing aggravations. Leon James (aka Dr. Driving)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 04:52:23 -1000 From: RDanknich@aol.com To: leon@hawaii.edu Subject: driver education-Assn for Safe Streets & Highways Hello and greeting Denver, Colorado. I have in hand your July Congressional testimony and several article from your net site. All very interesting. We are agreed on many issues-that the present state of dr. ed. is hopelessly outdated and dead. That any focus on a new approach should be centered around young novice drivers current environment, their attitudes, and their behavior. It is my view that the skills and driving techniques of handling an auto, while important, are uncomplicated and easy to learn. Here is our approach. We are developing a Computer Based Training cd-rom that is centered around six modules of training. It will be interactive, three dimensional, and constructed in such a manner that it will appear to be a "game". It will be largely self-taught and will highlight scenarios that present problems and have choices for solutions. We don't expect the first product to be "perfect", yet interesting and above all, engaging for the young, novice driver. This will not have a component of behind the wheel driving. That is for later. This year and every year for the next decade about 3.9 million people will reach age 16. Our target is to make available our CBT program to those young novice drivers and their parents directly. No stops now to meet the requirements of State Legislatures, No pre-approval by insurers or government agencies. Uncomplicated indeed. The six modules of training are: 1. Traffic laws & regulation (State specific where applicable). 2. Driving skills. 3. Environmental conditions. 4. Traffic interaction. 5. Emotional behavior while driving. 6. Alcohol & drug awareness. Of course, these are only titles. If you wish we can mail a complete, detailed curriculum. Feel free to comment. I am especially interested in your view on module #5. In Colorado we have a serious problem with enforcing a mandatory liability and no-fault insurance law. Our legislature knows how to enforce the law, but lacks the political courange. It is estimated that about 1 million vehicles out of a total of 3.5 million vehicles are running on our streets & highways every day, without any insurance. The question is-what is the message sent to young novice drivers when they know that their very own parents may be breaking the law. You comments, please. Thanks and I will welcome your reply, RGD. Mr. Danknitch, I applaud your attempts to create better driver's ed for young people. Online computer-based training is an excellent idea. I'd be glad to view you materials in greater detail. Emotional intelligence training is most important and I'm glad to see it on your main objectives. I advocate group dynamic techniques as most effective in this area. People need to spend time in focus groups that I call Quality Driving Circles or QDCs (as you're aware) in addition to the online activities. Within this group context, they need specific training activities such as the regular self-witnessing exercises I recommend. Only by a regular and continuous means of self-improvement activities can bring significant change in attitudes and cultural norms Leon James (aka Dr. Driving)