Today's 'crash horror' story

Chuchote

Every day there's a new story of a 'crash horror' on the road. We read them, nod sadly and pass on.

But every one of these ends precious lives, and every one of these deaths devastates families.

How can we stop it?

Seth Brundle

By not driving!

There's a line between complete safety and progress. No cars means we're economically stunted.

Anyhow even if road safety was improved through better policing and education, you'll still see deaths from suicide and from dangerous manoeuvres because that is what some people will do and you won't stop it!

_Brian

We can't stop it.

What we each can do is drive responsibily showing due respect for other motorists be they cyclists or trucks.

Speed and disrespect for other motorists, disrespect for the rules of the road are personal choices people make all the time and these choices increase the chances of being in a fatal accident.

xabi

Stop blaming speed for everything for a start.

maximum12

This happens in every country. In most countries it happens at a higher rate than here but it never makes the news as it would clog the news. You'll never see road accidents reported on BBC unless they involve significant loss of life. In this country every death is reported in detail.

Chuchote

maximum12 wrote: »

This happens in every country. In most countries it happens at a higher rate than here but it never makes the news as it would clog the news. You'll never see road accidents reported on BBC unless they involve significant loss of life. In this country every death is reported in detail.

Does that make it all right?

You're right, though, it does happen in every country, though at different rates:

http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.A997

For instance, by deaths per 100,000 of population,

Ireland: 4.1
UK: 2.9
Denmark: 3.5
Norway: 3.8
Israel: 3.6
Jordan: 26.3
US: 10.6
Liberia: 33.7

Lots of Muslim countries have really high rates. In fact, looking at the numbers, there's a case to be made for poverty (or inequality) being part of the cause.

_Brian

xabi wrote: »

Stop blaming speed for everything for a start.

Speeding isn't being blamed for everything, but OP was talking about fatal accidents and speed is a major factor in most fatal accidents.

Chuchote

_Brian wrote: »

Speeding isn't being blamed for everything, but OP was talking about fatal accidents and speed is a major factor in most fatal accidents.

Speed, the dhrink, inattention, badly-designed roads (which in themselves aid speed), badly-maintained roads, stupidity…

CiniO

maximum12 wrote: »

. In this country every death is reported in detail.

It's not.
All we hear is how many people killed, if it was single or multiple vehicle collision, and that gardai are looking for witnesses.

I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

Chuchote

It's startling that we have nearly 30% more deaths (have I got that right) than our nearest neighbour (the UK figure also includes Northern Ireland, by the way).

kirving

Not surprising at all.

Only 63% of us live in urban areas compared with 83% of the UK. Difficult to be killed driving if you get the Tube to work.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS

maximum12

CiniO wrote: »

It's not.
All we hear is how many people killed, if it was single or multiple vehicle collision, and that gardai are looking for witnesses.

I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

It's reported on the main evening news!! The fault isn't going to be reported on the day of the accident.

Special Circumstances

maximum12 wrote: »

This happens in every country. In most countries it happens at a higher rate than here but it never makes the news as it would clog the news. You'll never see road accidents reported on BBC unless they involve significant loss of life. In this country every death is reported in detail.

CiniO wrote: »

It's not.
All we hear is how many people killed, if it was single or multiple vehicle collision, and that gardai are looking for witnesses.

I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

Agreed Cinio, wishy washy coverage, "oh janey she was a pillar of the community, people are fierce shocked altogether". Obviously they can't pre-empt a courtcase but I wouldn't call the reports on the factual stuff detailed.

_Brian wrote: »

Speeding isn't being blamed for everything, but OP was talking about fatal accidents and speed is a major factor in most fatal accidents.

Only if you regard speed as being a factor in ALL accidents. Which I suppose it is.

Even after the RSA revised upward the contribution of speed to fatal accidents, inappropriate speed is still is only a contributory factor in 32% of fatal accidents. About the same as the driver being uninsured/unlicenced. Actually, it's unclear from stats whether 33% were uninsured or 50%. Approx 50% WERE definitely insured, 33% were definitely not - the rest were insurance fluid/ neutral / non-binary / who knows?
Speed as the main cause is below 20%.

After that it gets even murkier trying to analyse the RSA stats, one report mentions one factor, never mentioned in other reports, one report contradicts another (overtaking / wrong side of the road seems to vary somewhere between 6% and 66% depending on who compiled the report).

maximum12

Chuchote wrote: »

It's startling that we have nearly 30% more deaths (have I got that right) than our nearest neighbour (the UK figure also includes Northern Ireland, by the way).

Not really startling. The UK rate is particularly low and is more of an outlier. The rate in Ireland is one of the lowest in the EU.

IrishZeus

My father spent almost 15 years as a fireman and attended innumerable RTAs.

I guarantee that if he sat with anyone for half an hour and recounted what he has seen, in detail, to them - they will think twice about a lot of things next time they are one the road. Some of the stories he would tell you and some of the things he had to do when attending an RTA would make you shudder.

Education and better driver training would be a start I think.

volchitsa

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Not surprising at all.

Only 63% of us live in urban areas compared with 83% of the UK. Difficult to be killed driving if you get the Tube to work.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS

And yet I bet there's proportionately a higher death rate for cyclists too, which is mainly an urban method of commuting. IME Irish roads are very dangerous, much more than most of the UK (except possibly for NI which is also very bad).

Poor design is a large part of it, but constant, often low level, disobedience of the rules is another.

Chuchote

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Not surprising at all.

Only 63% of us live in urban areas compared with 83% of the UK. Difficult to be killed driving if you get the Tube to work.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS

True; 40% of Dublin car journeys, insanely, are under 4km.

Walter2016

Chuchote wrote: »

It's startling that we have nearly 30% more deaths (have I got that right) than our nearest neighbour (the UK figure also includes Northern Ireland, by the way).

You simply cannot compare a densely populated country with Ireland.

Take Scotland though - pop 5.2m, 200 road fatalities. Slightly higher than Ireland per 100,000.

Wales - pop 3m, 106 road fatalities. About the same per 100,000 as Ireland.

In many parts of England you just don't get the chance to speed due to the level of raod useage. Similarly, drink drive culture in England is quite different to more sparsely populated countries and of course with a more dense population comes a better public transport network.

Atlantic Dawn

You have to take the "tragic" death stories with a pinch of salt, I would say less than 20% of fatal crashes on the road are genuine accidents which couldn't have been reasonably prevented that occured within the speed limit, with no alcohol taken, driver in a fit state to drive, road legal tyres at correct pressure, fully licenced driver and with the car fully insured etc.

Wanderer78

IrishZeus wrote:

My father spent almost 15 years as a fireman and attended innumerable RTAs.

I know a couple of firemen, all say, rta's are the worst bit of their jobs. Ive been given the details, I'm not sure I'd be able for it

jackofalltrades

Chuchote wrote: »

Every day there's a new story of a 'crash horror' on the road. We read them, nod sadly and pass on.

But every one of these ends precious lives, and every one of these deaths devastates families.

I don't bother reading or watching these reports anymore.
If it comes up on the news I'll switch the channel, same goes for road safety Ads.
Our road deaths are a function of our society and our attitudes towards road safety.
If we wanted to we could bring in measures in the morning that could reduce road deaths.
But people would be up in arms, so no one bothers and the pointless reporting continues.

How can we stop it?

Automated cars.

bladespin

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Automated cars.

Unlikely.

TBH bar doing away with cars/trucks/buses/bikes/bicycles etc. You can't stop it, these are moving machines, H&S wise in any other function we wouldn't be allowed within yards of them but on the road we are literally within touching distance of moving traffic every day.

cml387

CiniO wrote: »

I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

Not entirely true, but of course they don't get huge attention but they are reported as part of the inquest.

Example
http://www.mayonews.ie/news/27700-inquest-into-hollymount-crash-returns-accidental-death-verdict

Mc Love

Re-testing and more policing is the way to go.

Henry Ford III

CiniO wrote: »

...I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

Unless a reporter was a witness to it, and their detailed report somehow magically didn't prejudice any potential legal action, you're very unlikely to.

run_Forrest_run

IrishZeus wrote: »

My father spent almost 15 years as a fireman and attended innumerable RTAs.

I guarantee that if he sat with anyone for half an hour and recounted what he has seen, in detail, to them - they will think twice about a lot of things next time they are one the road. Some of the stories he would tell you and some of the things he had to do when attending an RTA would make you shudder.

Education and better driver training would be a start I think.

The young lad sitting there while your dad tells them about his experiences isn't even listening, he's dreaming of getting into his car and going for a spin because you see, he's a great driver, nothing can happen to him, he's invincible.

Arcade_Tryer

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Automated cars.

Never going to work.

At least not on roads not specifically designed for automated cars.

Chuchote

bladespin wrote: »

Unlikely.

TBH bar doing away with cars/trucks/buses/bikes/bicycles etc. You can't stop it, these are moving machines, H&S wise in any other function we wouldn't be allowed within yards of them but on the road we are literally within touching distance of moving traffic every day.

Not really. Cars and trucks kill the vast majority of those who die. Anyone who's killed by a bus or a bike - that's a freak accident about as preventable as falling off the pavement and dying.

One of the reasons poor countries - or unequal countries - have huge road death rates is that everyone drives crap cars. The NCT has largely got rid of that and the result was an immediate big dip in road deaths.

Another problem in Ireland is drink driving - and to me, the problem here is that we have an alcohol limit. The time to work out whether you've had too much to drive isn't after you start to drink. The only safe limit is no alcohol in your bloodstream when you're controlling two tons of metal. If we cared about each other we'd mandate that.

A friend's kid met some of his buddies one day and they said "Ah, come on out for a spin out the road." He didn't really want to go but they nagged him into it, and he thought, sure what's the harm. He was the only casualty in a 'Horror Crash' that day; he was the only one in the car sober. 21 years old, the adored centre of an extended family, no one in that family has recovered. Nor have the idiots who were in the car with him, or their families.

We shouldn't have these crashes, ever.

IrishZeus

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

The young lad sitting there while your dad tells them about his experiences isn't even listening, he's dreaming of getting into his car and going for a spin because you see, he's a great driver, nothing can happen to him, he's invincible.

Sure lets do nothing then - that'll teach em.

run_Forrest_run

IrishZeus wrote: »

Sure lets do nothing then - that'll teach em.

you're missing my point. I'm all for education and education will reach a lot of people but it will not reach those who are ignorant to the dangers and won't even listen.
I'm not sure if you are near any third level college but I often see wrecks from crashes put on display near the main entrance to CIT for example, but I'd really love to know does the message get across to the majority of students?

Dial Hard

CiniO wrote:

I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

Henry Ford III wrote:

Unless a reporter was a witness to it, and their detailed report somehow magically didn't prejudice any potential legal action, you're very unlikely to.

The Irish Times did a four-part series last year called (iirc) Anatomy of a Car Crash last year that went into forensic detail about a fatal crash on New Years Eve a few years ago. It was extremely interesting reading.

Chuchote

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

you're missing my point. I'm all for education and education will reach a lot of people but it will not reach those who are ignorant to the dangers and won't even listen.
I'm not sure if you are near any third level college but I often see wrecks from crashes put on display near the main entrance to CIT for example, but I'd really love to know does the message get across to the majority of students?

Behavioural scientists say that abstract not-now messages like that make no great difference to behaviour; what does make a difference is something that happens just at that moment - the 'teachable moment'.

Among many driving stupidities - not indicating in time, swerving, carving people up, selfish use of the road, having broken lights or indicator lights, staying in the overtaking lane in motorways - one particularly stands out in Ireland: mobile phone use. And when the Gardaí really took a run at that, the use of phones by people in control of cars dropped. An acquaintance of mine who spent her whole life on the phone while driving was caught and lost a few points, and after that would talk briefly, then hastily hang up when she came to a cop-haunted copse. But now people have become brave again, and you see them texting at the lights and holding the phone up with one hand while swerving around the road with the other.

Phone use should (imho) be utterly illegal for drivers; the phone should be locked in the glove compartment for the duration.

NiallBoo

If you want to look at one of the causes it's worth picking up a local paper and having a look at the court's section.

You'll see a raft of cases where judges let people off driving bans and convictions for complete nonsense reasons - "pillar of the community", "need car for work" and even (i kid you not) because a guy was really good at dancing. The funny thing is that the papers never even seem critical of this.

If we won't even stop people from driving when they've proven repeatedly that they're not able to do it safely, then how can we expect to avoid fatalities?

MarkR

Car looks like a levin / trueno. Driver was described "He is the son of a prominent and well respected family who work in the motor trade in the Tramore area."

Do cars even come into it though? I've driven those, and they're not fast as far as I can recall.

Always seems to be the driver who lives, or at least, they seem to be the last ones to be killed. Are drivers seats that much safer, or is it the natural reflexes to protect yourselves that lead to passengers bearing the brunt of it?

Anyway, condolences to the family. Young life cut short, and another with a massive cross to bear.

Special Circumstances

NiallBoo wrote: »

If you want to look at one of the causes it's worth picking up a local paper and having a look at the court's section.

You'll see a raft of cases where judges let people off driving bans and convictions for complete nonsense reasons - "pillar of the community", "need car for work" and even (i kid you not) because a guy was really good at dancing. The funny thing is that the papers never even seem critical of this.

If we won't even stop people from driving when they've proven repeatedly that they're not able to do it safely, then how can we expect to avoid fatalities?

That would be an interesting stat for RSA to pull out. Fatal accidents where the at fault driver was currently banned, previously banned, previously convicted etc.

NiallBoo

Special Circumstances wrote: »

That would be an interesting stat for RSA to pull out. Fatal accidents where the at fault driver was currently banned, previously banned, previously convicted etc.

It would.

But the thing is that so many avoid bans/convictions in the first place.

Special Circumstances

NiallBoo wrote: »

It would.

But the thing is that so many avoid bans/convictions in the first place.

Ah here how would the legal profession put food on the table if everyone wasn't entitled to an 84th chance to not be a scummer with no regard for society. ;-)

gctest50

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

The young lad sitting there while your dad tells them about his experiences isn't even listening, he's dreaming of getting into his car and going for a spin because you see, he's a great driver, nothing can happen to him, he's invincible.

Were damn glad of that little trait last time the Germans were marching down the Champs de Elysees or we'd all be driving Volkswagens

IrishZeus

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

you're missing my point. I'm all for education and education will reach a lot of people but it will not reach those who are ignorant to the dangers and won't even listen.
I'm not sure if you are near any third level college but I often see wrecks from crashes put on display near the main entrance to CIT for example, but I'd really love to know does the message get across to the majority of students?

Fair enough, I see what you mean. Probably not is the answer, in my opinion. Probably not graphic enough to actually create an impression and also not a teachable moment either as another poster pointed out.

Atlantic Dawn

Looks like roof collapsed looking at this picture on RTÉ, possibly rolled over I would think...

Skylinehead

Terrible stuff alright. Wouldn't think a 17 year old would get insured on a Levin.

bazz26

I'd say it's just they cut the roof off when getting the occupants out, standard practice these days if the occupants cannot get out of the car on their own after an accident.

BTW how did a 17 year old manage to insure a Levin?

quadrifoglio verde

I'd hazard a guess at third party extension.

Roanmore

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Looks like roof collapsed looking at this picture on RTÉ, possibly rolled over I would think...

Was probably cut off by the Emergency Services.

Special Circumstances

bazz26 wrote: »

I'd say it's just they cut the roof off when getting the occupants out, standard practice these days if the occupants cannot get out of the car on their own after an accident.

BTW how did a 17 year old manage to insure a Levin?

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

I'd hazard a guess at third party extension.

Family trade is the motor trade - trade insurance would be my guess in this case.

I was liking the general debate on reporting. The actual reporting of today's actual crash horror bucks the trend though - decent pictures of ACTUAL crash site, details of the car involved, clear info on who was driving etc.

Chuchote

MarkR wrote: »

Car looks like a levin / trueno. Driver was described "He is the son of a prominent and well respected family who work in the motor trade in the Tramore area."

Do cars even come into it though? I've driven those, and they're not fast as far as I can recall.

Always seems to be the driver who lives, or at least, they seem to be the last ones to be killed. Are drivers seats that much safer, or is it the natural reflexes to protect yourselves that lead to passengers bearing the brunt of it?

Anyway, condolences to the family. Young life cut short, and another with a massive cross to bear.

No, drivers often die.

And you don't have to be going very fast:


⁃ If someone is hit by a car at 65kp/h they are 90% likely to be killed
⁃ If someone is hit by a car at 50kp/h they are 50% likely to be killed
⁃ If someone is hit by a car at 30kp/h they are 10% likely to be killed

I don't know the equivalent figures for those inside the car, perhaps someone else can provide them.

eeguy

CiniO wrote: »

I don't think I've ever seen an article actually describing how the accident happened, out of whose fault and what was the scenario, reason, etc.

They never do, even though in some cases it would be plainly obvious that someone was at fault.
I wonder what would happen if the News gave these details

"the crash was caused because Mr. So and So was under the influence and veered into the oncoming car"

"The car crashed as the driver Mr. X was speeding at the time. He's now in a critical condition and is indirectly responsible for the death of one of his friends".

If people were named and shamed for causing accidents under certain conditions would we see a reduction in the number?

bazz26

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Family trade is the motor trade - trade insurance would be my guess in this case.

I was liking the general debate on reporting. The actual reporting of today's actual crash horror bucks the trend though - decent pictures of ACTUAL crash site, details of the car involved, clear info on who was driving etc.

My first thought would have been that the policy was under a parent's name.

I would have thought that motor trade insurance would still have some exclusions on who is covered under the policy, ie you need to be at least a certain age and/or hold a full licence for x number of years.

jackofalltrades

bladespin wrote: »

Unlikely.

TBH bar doing away with cars/trucks/buses/bikes/bicycles etc. You can't stop it, these are moving machines, H&S wise in any other function we wouldn't be allowed within yards of them but on the road we are literally within touching distance of moving traffic every day.

I'll agree automated cars won't completely stop accidents from happening.
But it will take them from regular occurrence to somewhat of a rarity.

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Never going to work.

At least not on roads not specifically designed for automated cars.

Automated cars are already running on roads that have not been specifically built for them.

eeguy

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Automated cars are already running on roads that have not been specifically built for them.

Yep, plenty of real world trials going on in dozens of cities around the world.

bladespin

jackofalltrades wrote:

I'll agree automated cars won't completely stop accidents from happening. But it will take them from regular occurrence to somewhat of a rarity.

I doubt it would be all that rare, once you allow pedestrians and other road users into the equation there will always be accidents.