As Designed

This article will help you get more out of the safety features around you that already exist.

Have you ever noticed the car in front drive around a speed hump rather than slow down and go over it?

This is a simple example of how many people don't use existing safety systems 'as designed'. Let's take the speed hump example above. Speed humps don't just appear for no reason to bother drivers. They cost money to install and maintain and only appear where a legitimate need has been identified; in front of a school for example.

Wherever a speed hump (also called a speed bump, or more correctly, a traffic calming device) has been installed, there has been crashes, near hits or complaints of 'speeding  drivers' in that precise location.

That's because ordinary drivers have failed to discern the nature and extent risks of driving  through this location.

When you see the driver in front go around a speed hump at higher than the advised maximum, let's say 20 kph, that driver is intentionally going out of their way to ignore the safety concerns of all those who rallied to have the changes made, and put their own personal motivations first. 

There are many examples of people failing to use the road system 'as designed'. Consider the pedestrian that doesn't use a crossing; or walks across against the 'red man'. Once again, we see how an individual's personal motivations trump a well designed and effective safety system. 

It's hard to imagine a safety system that is perfect, but if a driver put a little extra effort in to slowing before hazards, all cyclists wore helmets, and pedestrians used crossings, all these systems would work better.

Two more examples and I'll finish up. Have you ever noticed cyclists riding on the road in traffic when there is a purpose-built cycle lane off to the left and parallel to the road? It's sometimes hard to reconcile cyclists complaining about drivers on the evening news with an empty cycle lane made specifically to separate cars and bikes. Again, the cyclist has a personal motivation that trumps the safety motivation. 

And finally, have you ever seen an 'after-market' bull bar fitted to 4WD. 4WD vehicle safety has come a long way over recent years, particularly since we started to think about them as SUVs rather than the traditional off-road workhorse.     

An enormous amount of work has been done by vehicle manufactures to make 4WD and SUVs less aggressive. International crash tests and "aggressivity" scores are available and you can compare one vehicle to another. Aggressivity relates to the protection offered to vulnerable road users in a crash; particularly pedestrians and cyclists. Fitting a hard and sharp bull bar usually defeats the intentional soft and rounded profile of a modern 4WD or SUV. In addition, rigid bull bars can defeat or reduce the efficacy of other systems designed to protect the driver and passengers.

You wouldn't be permitted to use a chisel as a screwdriver in trade school. Even though you can probably get away with using the wrong tool for the job in the short term, over a lifetime it will come at a cost. So too with not using the road system 'as designed'.

If you’d like help understanding, applying or sharing these principles, please ask.

Cheers, Jeremy Williams

First published December 2021