beware of the new Audi A4

[reohn2]

JQ666
Its the mindset thats doing the killing,if we take the,'this article can kill' scenario to a logical conclusion what then for axes,hammers,saws,etc.

Its the user thats to blaim because the chances of being caught are slim,due to a lack of police officers,and if the offenders are caught the punishments don't fit the crimes.

It police and proper sentencing we need not labels,I don't know how many people stop smoking because of labeling cigarette packets but I don't think its many.
Ask yourself if cigarettes cost £20 a pack how many would stop.

Its the same with car crime or any crime for that matter,if the offender thought there was an odds on chance he/she would be caught and it would hurt either through the pocket or otherwise he/she wouldn't commit the crime.
There would of course be the persisent ones which could be locked up for a very long time.
Such a police force needs paying for and taxes provide that,so why do we keep voting in governments that promise to reduce taxes?

[JQ666]

JQ666
Its the mindset thats doing the killing,if we take the,'this article can kill' scenario to a logical conclusion what then for axes,hammers,saws,etc.

Its the user thats to blaim because the chances of being caught are slim,due to a lack of police officers,and if the offenders are caught the punishments don't fit the crimes.

It police and proper sentencing we need not labels,I don't know how many people stop smoking because of labeling cigarette packets but I don't think its many.
Ask yourself if cigarettes cost £20 a pack how many would stop.

Its the same with car crime or any crime for that matter,if the offender thought there was an odds on chance he/she would be caught and it would hurt either through the pocket or otherwise he/she wouldn't commit the crime.
There would of course be the persisent ones which could be locked up for a very long time.
Such a police force needs paying for and taxes provide that,so why do we keep voting in governments that promise to reduce taxes?

Agreed, labels do very little.

My point is quite tongue-in-cheek, but I'm just highlighting that a car manufacturer seems legally able to make a statement, on their advert, which is blatantly false (and may be taken by some drivers as an indication that cars are becoming so 'safe' that responsible and careful driving is no longer required). However, a car manufacturer would never dream of applying the one universally true statement about cars: "cars can kill"

I agree that my logic can be applied to most products, hence why I'm being a bit tongue-in-cheek. But, for example, I've never seen Stanley Tools claim that their axes can "see a by-stander before you do" as you are chopping a lump of wood. In fact, whenever I've bought a tool there is usually some kind of safety guide featured quite prominiently on the packaging.

With regard to taxes - the current Government can hardly be described as an administration that advocates low taxes. I am firmly against high taxes on the grounds that politicians are very good at wasting tax revenue and like to spend your taxes on things you may not agree with. You could easily have increased road-police presence funded from the current tax-take. It would just require that other innitiatives are scrapped (e.g. ID card, the use of consultants within the public sector, military spending, etc).

You have to ask why the Government would prefer to have less road police and more cameras?? There is certainly an agenda, and I would guess it has nothing to do with road safety....

[thirdcrank]

In fact, whenever I've bought a tool there is usually some kind of safety guide featured quite prominiently on the packaging.

It's some ten years since I bought my Cannondale shopper. I've mentioned before that it came with a handbook the size of a paperback novel. I settled down to a good read but found it was just warnings about how dangerous cycling can be, translated into dozens of different languages.

You never see cars, even American ones with a warning sticker saying that careless driving can kill people. And certainly none saying 'always wear a helmet when driving.'

[reohn2]

JQ666
I agree with you entirely.
Our(UK) problem is one of apathy, we are as badly burned as scolded with the choice of government, and I for one feel that no matter who I vote for nothing will change.
Successive governments have just not served the people of this country and I really don't see a way out for us.

Back to cars, manufacturers will use any means possible to sell their product and we all know that 'he who has the most toys wins' as the saying goes,it really is a sad state of affairs I agree.But what to do about it is another question.
I honestly feel impotent with regard to making any changes to things generally.

[JQ666]

JQ666
I agree with you entirely.
Our(UK) problem is one of apathy, we are as badly burned as scolded with the choice of government, and I for one feel that no matter who I vote for nothing will change.
Successive governments have just not served the people of this country and I really don't see a way out for us.

Back to cars, manufacturers will use any means possible to sell their product and we all know that 'he who has the most toys wins' as the saying goes,it really is a sad state of affairs I agree.But what to do about it is another question.
I honestly feel impotent with regard to making any changes to things generally.

I with you there - I don't like the system, but how to get out of it?!

Reading a good book at the mo about EHM's (economic hit men) - very interesting and chilling. It's about the way the West (mainly the USA) uses 'aid' to get control of another country's resources and government - and it's all done in the name of economic growth. Growth is good, full stop, no matter how many lives are ended or ruined, and no matter how much damage is done to the environment!

[reohn2]

JQ666
I agree with you entirely.
Our(UK) problem is one of apathy, we are as badly burned as scolded with the choice of government, and I for one feel that no matter who I vote for nothing will change.
Successive governments have just not served the people of this country and I really don't see a way out for us.

Back to cars, manufacturers will use any means possible to sell their product and we all know that 'he who has the most toys wins' as the saying goes,it really is a sad state of affairs I agree.But what to do about it is another question.
I honestly feel impotent with regard to making any changes to things generally.

I with you there - I don't like the system, but how to get out of it?!

Reading a good book at the mo about EHM's (economic hit men) - very interesting and chilling. It's about the way the West (mainly the USA) uses 'aid' to get control of another country's resources and government - and it's all done in the name of economic growth. Growth is good, full stop, no matter how many lives are ended or ruined, and no matter how much damage is done to the environment!

Growth=profit=power=ego=win=lose(in the long run)= we are all losers.though some think we are winners.Its classic delusion.

[JQ666]

Growth=profit=power=ego=win=lose(in the long run)= we are all losers.though some think we are winners.Its classic delusion.

Sounds like Marx's Dialectical Materialism theory - who's gonna lead the revolution?

[Peter Rowell]

"But, we all know that the majority of car drivers drive regularly above the speed limit (I have no stats to back this up, only personal experience of being a driver), and so "irresponsible" driving is now a generally accepted norm (we have all heard the guy down the pub complaining that he got fined, but was "ONLY doing 36 in a 30")."

Since the by-passing of the A428 in Cambs., the old road has become useable again by cyclist's. A local copper remarked to me that it is now a good place to catch drivers speeding.

[Paulatic]

Another Audi Advert
Even though it's electric you can still drive like a *****!
https://www.youtube.com/embed/YOy3zjdYweI

[old_windbag]

Theres a car advert on at present( it may be the Audi ) but it boasts of super powerful headlights, it shows a stunned fox in the road blinded by them wincing. I thought how stupid that they are so bright they are blinding?

I do think the addition of IR night vision as a head-up on the windscreen is advantageous and benefits all of us. One day it may be commonplace.

When people say " I was only doing 36 in a 30 zone" then if thats measured speed then their speedo was probably nearly on 40mph so quite a margin of error. If an employer miscalculated their salary by that amount for the worse they'd soon spot it and grumble. But if that margin of error is "ok" then employers feel free to adopt the attitude.

[Tangled Metal]

Beware of new Audi A4 drivers who can't decide where to look for themselves.

The lights turn to follow the line of the road but it probably still lights up the road ahead as well as you need to be safe. It is afterall partly a design to prevent dazzling oncoming vehicles in the same way those lights that dip down more going over the crest of a hill. It's about putting the light where you need it and reducing the.dazzling of others.

The issue is with the ad implying it looks for hazards for you. Patently not true. The design is not a bad one just the idea carried by the ad. I think the OP was meaning this too. At the end of the day a car is not necessarily dangerous but the driver car combination can be dangerous. This is the same relationship between human and gun. On it's own a gun is not.dangerous. Put a bullet or cartridge into a gun and the addition of the human has made a dangerous object (combination of gun and human). Guns (cars) don't kill people rabbits do!

[sapperadam]

When people say " I was only doing 36 in a 30 zone" then if thats measured speed then their speedo was probably nearly on 40mph so quite a margin of error.

Actually, it's set down in one of the vehicle construction acts (can't remember the exact name of the act off the top of my head) that while a speedo can have a margin of error, it can NOT show a speed slower than the vehicle is travelling, it can only show an error that is faster than the vehicle is actually going. The 10% + 2mph that is often quoted is a guidance in some police forces to account for human error reading an analogue speedo rather than an error on the speed monitor.

[blackbike]

Beware of the Toyota Yaris.

Its new advertising campaign links this little hatchback with the glamorous world of fighter pilots, not a tactic designed to encourage some moronic young men to drive it carefully and safely.

I remember Saab having a similar silly advert years ago, and thankfully the company went bust.

[simonineaston]

Swiveling headlights:- Citroen DS in the 60's (a beautiful looking vehicle)

Only on the series 3 and later...'68 and on. 2CVs didn't have turning headlamps... too expensive for what was a very cheap car!

[old_windbag]

Actually, it's set down in one of the vehicle construction acts (can't remember the exact name of the act off the top of my head) that while a speedo can have a margin of error, it can NOT show a speed slower than the vehicle is travelling, it can only show an error that is faster than the vehicle is actually going. The 10% + 2mph that is often quoted is a guidance in some police forces to account for human error reading an analogue speedo rather than an error on the speed monitor.

Yes I was not implying peoples speedos under read as that is not allowed and would be a guarantee for always speeding. But I know the speedos I have had have always overead by a reasonable margin, my digital dash on a past vauxhall seemed to have a fixed 2mph offset through most of its speed range so that was quite tight. What I was trying to get over was that when PC Plod uses his doppler radar speed measurer and gives you the ticket that you were doing 36mph, then your analogue speedo is probably showing around 40mph due to its safe "positive" error in measurement, hence at 30mph displayed you are guaranteed to actually be below 30mph in true speed. So the measured speed for the offence may have been 36mph.... but the speedo in the car would have been closer to 40mph which isn't really an acceptable level of error/excuse in reading a car speedo by the driver. Everyone makes mistakes at times, in another post I supported the use of full black box logging to help in filtering such occasional errors/lapses of judgement against those who break the law blatantly on a regular basis. My argument wasn't about speedos, rather the selective reading( ignoring ) of them by drivers and then playing the innocent to everyone when caught.