Skip to content
Archive of posts tagged driving
« Older Entries

new decade means new driving law

Posted by  on 9 January 2010, 6:52 pm

at the beginning of the new decade bc drivers had to do a quick update in regards to what they’re allowed to do while at the wheel of a vehicle. the use of a cellphone, mp3 or any other handheld devices if strictly prohibited while driving. however, just like any other law made by man there are just as many exceptions to the law as there are grammar exceptions in the English language. most important ones are, and this only applies to full driver license holders, you can talk on the phone if you are using a hands free device or if it is an emergency then feel free to use the handheld device.

overall, i agree that while driving one should concentrate on driving and only driving. so, in order to ensure safety on the road i will agree with stricter laws. however, hiding behind the pretext of implementing a change for safety but coming up with a half-assed law should not be allowed. talking on the cellphone is definitely a problem and has been shown to distract drivers while driving. the problem with it…the talking. being involved in a conversation while driving will distract one from being in the fullest state of alert. the conversation itself is the problem. fair enough if you argue that having one hand on the phone is also a problem, but it’s no the only one. if you focus on talking, even if it is on a hand less device, you are still not fully concentrating on the road. so while handheld device and talking are most likely worst than talking by itself; it’s still the talking that takes the huge chunk of the issue. anyhow…the idea of the law is great, the law itself is simply stupid. not sure of what they were smoking when they came up with it, but they should share with the rest of us. if in research we would conclude using the same logic we’d still be in the dark ages.

at this point, i’d like to know how they will address the other bigger problems and causes of lack of attention while driving? things like:

  • putting on make-up
  • eating
  • smoking
  • reading a book
  • having a pet in your lap while you drive
  • drinking (not alcohol) while driving
  • etc…

how and when will they truly address these issues? how is one supposed to drive properly while they hold their ‘rat’ size puddle in their lap? or is a moving animal in the front seat not considered to be a potential hazard? eating and drinking while driving, i guess that’s ok; yet if a law is developed to address this then mcdonald’s will not supply lunch at the office for them anymore. i guess someone had to increase sales profits on bluetooth devices (or bluetooth like devices) and thus…we get the cellphone law.

Filed under safety, vancouver. Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4 Comments

pass it forward…

Posted by  on 9 July 2009, 3:43 pm
recently i’ve been involved in an accident. it happened in the night from saturday towards sunday at around 2:30am. traveling in the second lane of a 3 lane street (kingsway for those who are aware of it) and approaching an intersection. the light turns green, and the car in the second lane remains stationary even thought the light was green. the third lane was quite busy, yet the first lane was clear prior and after the intersection. i switch onto the first lane…and as i get closer to the intersection, the white hyundai in the second lane decided to turn right onto the other street…as he is doing this he runs right into me. here’s how the damage looks…
as my car stops, i take a look back to see the white hyundai finish taking the right turn onto nanaimo st, and continuing. as this occurs, a dark colour car speeds after the hyundai. a witness engages into action, stops the other driver and starts yelling at him as to why he was about to take off. as this happens, i pull behind them and get out of my car…

the following day i spent about an hour sharing my story with icbc, and during this i try to provide as many details as possible, including that the other driver tried to drive away and was stopped by the witness. on top of this, it seemed to me the other driver was impaired, quite heavily. however, at that time it did not occur to me to contact the police…this little detail only occurred to me next morning. anyhow…icbc ruled on the thing quite quickly, 100% the other driver’s fault…

anyhow, this post is not so much about the accident itself, but a gesture received by yours truly. after the icbc thing was concluded, i decided to call the witness and thank him once more for his action on the respective night…and offered to buy him a beer as a sign of recognition for his involvement (keep in mind that the icbc case was closed, thus this would not interfere with his statement…). anyhow, the witness thanked me for taking my time to give him the updates and graciously refused the offer. however, he took time to mention ‘you’ve received a nice gesture, so all i ask instead of the beer is to pass on the gesture when the opportunity occurs’. overall, it’s great to see that nice gestures are still possible and that people will help another in need. appreciate the effort he put in stopping the other driver from taking off and staying with him until i managed to pull my car behind them. amazing gesture not only on the night of the accident, but after-wads as well. so for this…i will finish this with a ‘thank you!’

Filed under safety, vancouver. Tagged , , , , , ,
2 Comments

new bridge…

Posted by  on 7 February 2009, 9:07 pm
in order to decrease congestion on hwy 1…our province’s will charge a $3 fee for crossing each way. let’s put this in context a bit…i am talking about the proposed new bridge for hwy, instead of the undersized portmann bridge. last i recall, they proposed an expansion to the current bridge…something i’d agree would probably help the congestion. now it seems, a new bridge is in order! i fail to see how that decision came about? given the next bridge over (patullo bridge) is not only about half the size of the portman, but has recently suffered two fires, it looks as if it’s going to crumbly any day now (new west bridge is falling down…falling down…), and esthetically…it looks like crap!

so, to cope with the price (recent reported figure was about $3 billion) of building a new bridge…a toll fee will be added. yes, $3 each way…i guess the morning starbucks for all those drivers coming westbound will just have to be forfeit. how is this going to decrease congestion? well, one way comes to mind…most people won’t drive over the new bridge…yes, they’ll probably either skytrain (i guess that’s the only ‘good’ outcome out of this) or use the other bridges…i can only imagine the extra gridlock coming from surrey towards either new westminster or richmond. let’s not forget, the other bridges take drivers way out of the way, increase the amount of stopping at red lights, drive slower, and most likely cause a nice pattern of a ‘stop-&-go’ traffic….in simpler words…at least based on my current understanding of the situation.. it will definitely increase combustion emissions. so…decrease congestion on hwy 1 (with apparently the intention of decreasing our carbon footprint) will probably not happen.

let’s return to the $3 toll…so, hwy speed around these parts is 90km/h. driving to work at that speed (one would only wish) and the have to stop at the bridge, take out the $3 and pay the fool that works there. i guess it will increase job opportunity in this financial crisis by 6 jobs? maybe? oh well, at least the goverment is creating jobs (oh wait…our unemployment rate is just over 7% at this point…about a year and a half ago…was around 3.5%). that’s not going to create congestion though, require everyone to stop, take the coins out (and probably receive change given we don’t have a $3 coin) and then start up again. thus, forcing people to stop will decrease congestion…our liberals never fail to impress us with their logic… probably some people will decide it’s too much, and if they won’t want to take other routes…which will not only waste more time and gas…but indirectly increase the chance of accidents (hey…look at that icbc will probably have an increase in profit for the next few years…yet again)…

they’ll probably skytrain. damn, but wait there’s only 1 line out of surrey…park-and-go around the stations is usually limited if at all available…and the skytrains (even though they run quite often) are usually pretty full. again, thumbs up to the liberals…try to force people to use another undersized public service (ahh…and there we are again…translink will probably profit from the increase as well)… but wait, if people will refuse to pay, refuse to drive out of their way…or simply refuse to use public transit…they’ll probably have to either move closer to work, find work close to home…or work from home. moving closer to work (thinking they might move towards vancouver)…will probably…actually most likely help increase home prices…stunning!…financial crisis, lowering home prices, banks losing since people are not buying…and the liberals find a way to indirectly ‘suggest’ that we should move closer to work…i’m just waiting for the environmental pitch for the move…b/c i’m sure it’s coming…

so…yet again…elections coming up…shortly…the liberals find another way to help business prosper…make another decision with ‘the public’s interest’ in mind…and i’m just ‘guessing’ here…that they’ll win again come spring?

Filed under opinions, vancouver. Tagged , , , , , ,
2 Comments
« Older Entries