Canarian Weekly
27-02-2015, 13:10
DRUNKEN tourists staggering down Spanish streets at night are in danger of more than just taking a tumble.
Spain’s Directorate General of Traffic, which is planning to stamp out “dangerous” walking, also hopes to introduce breathalyser tests for pedestrians involved in car accidents.
In addition, the Government department suggests introducing an off-road speed limit for joggers.
The proposals, buried among other road-safety suggestions, would give pedestrians responsibilities akin to drivers, and could inspire other new laws in their footsteps.
A British pensioner, for instance, falling out of a bar on a sunny Saturday afternoon after watching his favourite football team lose, could be a prime target, even though his hotel is just a few yards away.
And the pavements of major streets could be barred to parents pushing buggies because they’re going too slow. Well, slowcoach drivers on motorways can be fined, can’t they?
It seems a preposterous idea by the Spanish, and a closer look at the small print of the plan – heavily criticised by other sectors of the Government – reveals that it won’t be taking it that far just yet.
In fact, it can’t anyway because there is no official level of alcohol intake in Spain at which you can be banned from walking.
What the outlined scheme does suggest is that when pedestrians are charged with an already-existing legal infraction – such as jaywalking, or being involved in a car accident – they could be given a drug or alcohol test.
But it is not entirely clear what the authorities would do with this information.
Looking at the proposal sensibly, pedestrians – and cyclists for that matter – are capable of causing harm through neglect, so perhaps they should fall foul of the law, in the same way as motorists are.
It might seem obvious that drunken pedestrians are likely to be naughtier than those who are sober, but some experts have actually backed up that assumption.
A 2011 study published in the Journal of Trauma (honestly, that’s what it’s called), found that 55% of pedestrians who had been drinking ignored pedestrian crossings, compared with 22% of sober walkers who didn’t.
When things went wrong, the drinkers also did themselves (and possibly others) far more damage.
They stayed, on average, two days longer in hospital than sober accident victims, and, typically, their injuries were almost twice as severe.
But it’s still quite a leap from what is, effectively, a supposition – that legal curbs on drunkards crossing the road could actually improve road safety – to the specific change that Spain’s Directorate of Traffic is proposing.
If the plan goes ahead, pedestrians would be reclassified, just like drivers, as “users of the road”.
This suggests an equality of responsibility between pedestrian and drivers that just doesn’t add up.
At the risk of stating the obvious, pedestrians are not as closely-controlled as drivers because they are not, for the most part, encased within what could be classified as a potential death trap.
Labelling pedestrians as road-users is also ridiculous, unless having to dodge numerous cars whenever crossing the street is to be deemed as “use”.
If pedestrians really were “users of the road” on the same footing as motor vehicles, our roads would simply be unsafe .
In fact, Spain’s plans can be read as part of a long history of the authorities trying to shift responsibility away from drivers on to those they hit.
Prior to the mid-Twenties, it was just about a given that vehicles should always take responsibility for road accidents.
It was only intense lobbying by the car industry that saw jaywalking classified as a US offence.
This lobbying came in response to public campaigns to cut accidents by fitting cars with compulsory speed-limiters.
The move to shift blame for the high road death and injury toll from drivers on to pedestrians was powered as much by the car industry as by safety concerns.
And attempting to overturn this bias towards blaming victims is an ongoing, arduous task.
Proposed laws like those in Spain, which try to divert responsibility away from cars and their drivers, would only make things worse, by releasing the pressure to create, say, lower urban speed limits.
Mind you, if the law-makers can find a way to hammer people who text while strolling along, head down and oblivious of what is going on around them, they might stroll home!
More... (http://www.canarianweekly.com/staggering-ideas-from-the-traffic-authorities/)
Spain’s Directorate General of Traffic, which is planning to stamp out “dangerous” walking, also hopes to introduce breathalyser tests for pedestrians involved in car accidents.
In addition, the Government department suggests introducing an off-road speed limit for joggers.
The proposals, buried among other road-safety suggestions, would give pedestrians responsibilities akin to drivers, and could inspire other new laws in their footsteps.
A British pensioner, for instance, falling out of a bar on a sunny Saturday afternoon after watching his favourite football team lose, could be a prime target, even though his hotel is just a few yards away.
And the pavements of major streets could be barred to parents pushing buggies because they’re going too slow. Well, slowcoach drivers on motorways can be fined, can’t they?
It seems a preposterous idea by the Spanish, and a closer look at the small print of the plan – heavily criticised by other sectors of the Government – reveals that it won’t be taking it that far just yet.
In fact, it can’t anyway because there is no official level of alcohol intake in Spain at which you can be banned from walking.
What the outlined scheme does suggest is that when pedestrians are charged with an already-existing legal infraction – such as jaywalking, or being involved in a car accident – they could be given a drug or alcohol test.
But it is not entirely clear what the authorities would do with this information.
Looking at the proposal sensibly, pedestrians – and cyclists for that matter – are capable of causing harm through neglect, so perhaps they should fall foul of the law, in the same way as motorists are.
It might seem obvious that drunken pedestrians are likely to be naughtier than those who are sober, but some experts have actually backed up that assumption.
A 2011 study published in the Journal of Trauma (honestly, that’s what it’s called), found that 55% of pedestrians who had been drinking ignored pedestrian crossings, compared with 22% of sober walkers who didn’t.
When things went wrong, the drinkers also did themselves (and possibly others) far more damage.
They stayed, on average, two days longer in hospital than sober accident victims, and, typically, their injuries were almost twice as severe.
But it’s still quite a leap from what is, effectively, a supposition – that legal curbs on drunkards crossing the road could actually improve road safety – to the specific change that Spain’s Directorate of Traffic is proposing.
If the plan goes ahead, pedestrians would be reclassified, just like drivers, as “users of the road”.
This suggests an equality of responsibility between pedestrian and drivers that just doesn’t add up.
At the risk of stating the obvious, pedestrians are not as closely-controlled as drivers because they are not, for the most part, encased within what could be classified as a potential death trap.
Labelling pedestrians as road-users is also ridiculous, unless having to dodge numerous cars whenever crossing the street is to be deemed as “use”.
If pedestrians really were “users of the road” on the same footing as motor vehicles, our roads would simply be unsafe .
In fact, Spain’s plans can be read as part of a long history of the authorities trying to shift responsibility away from drivers on to those they hit.
Prior to the mid-Twenties, it was just about a given that vehicles should always take responsibility for road accidents.
It was only intense lobbying by the car industry that saw jaywalking classified as a US offence.
This lobbying came in response to public campaigns to cut accidents by fitting cars with compulsory speed-limiters.
The move to shift blame for the high road death and injury toll from drivers on to pedestrians was powered as much by the car industry as by safety concerns.
And attempting to overturn this bias towards blaming victims is an ongoing, arduous task.
Proposed laws like those in Spain, which try to divert responsibility away from cars and their drivers, would only make things worse, by releasing the pressure to create, say, lower urban speed limits.
Mind you, if the law-makers can find a way to hammer people who text while strolling along, head down and oblivious of what is going on around them, they might stroll home!
More... (http://www.canarianweekly.com/staggering-ideas-from-the-traffic-authorities/)