Safety Measures and Deadly Accidents - Essay Example

Safety Measures and Deadly Accidents Introduction Ever since Ralph Nader wrote his book Unsafe at any Speed, measures have been taken by the motor vehicle industry. He had accused them in the book for not taking the precautions and making vehicles with in built safety measures that would save accident victims and probably protect them from accidental experiences. Unfortunately, the change that the motor vehicle industry has adopted has been of little use since accidents still happen on the roads; though there is a general decline of deadly accidents. Many factors can explain this strange phenomenon depending on the experiences of a country and its people on political, social and economic scopes. The book itself outlines in the title that people are unsafe at any speed they drive at. What is notable strange in the act of taking these safety measures is that even though others are effective, others are not effective at all; or even liked to the occurrence of accidents. Cost of Production of the Safety Automobile industry is made up of profit making companies. For this to be possible revenue must be maximized, and costs must be minimized. Installing inbuilt features to add safety to drivers, especially in a case that they were not incorporated in the previous designs, meant that it was a move that only added cost to the production. No manufacturer embraces added costs and if it obliged, the companies had to look for other measures to cub the cost. According to this fact, the reason to some feature’s ineffectiveness is the use of cheap material and technology to design and manufacture them. Companies only make cheap safety features that only appealed the buyer’s perception but having little to protect them in case of accidents. The worst part of it all is that the customers trust the features and are not ready to take extra precautions, which further put the in more risk with accidents. Rule and Policies Safety features in motor vehicles alone cannot help in reducing the general prevalence of deadly accidents. There are other factors that need to be observed in order to compliment safety measures in providing safety to both motor vehicle occupants and non-occupants (National Academy, 2000). Rules and policies should be enacted in respective countries to help cub motor vehicle accidents. When people only depend on safety measures to give them road safety, they are not doing themselves any favours, but exposing themselves to even more accidents. Relevant authorities should look into this issue other than only supporting the use of safety measures. Road accidents do not always involve single sides, but are normally suffered by two parties. Both parties should therefore observe safety measures. One party can have all the safety features required for safety, but when the other party does not, accidents is still likely to occur. There are many countries with unreasonable income inequality and when only the few can afford the vehicles with safety features, which are obviously more expensive, they do not really benefit from the features because the many who cannot afford such vehicles are prone to causing accidents. Overconfidence Features for protecting motor vehicle occupants during accidents can be linked to deadly accidents because their availability is closely linked to the comfort and overconfidence of drivers. When a driver has too much confidence in the safety of the vehicles they are driving, the false believe that they are anti-accidents injuries. Therefore, they tend to drive recklessly, knowing very well that incase anything happens, nothing fatal will occur to them. This is always a false notion that has cost many motorists their lives. No one is immune to accidents and taking precaution or paying adequate attention to the road when driving is a sure way of stopping the road carnage. Alcoholism Drivers with safety features in there vehicles can intentionally engage in alcohol abuse with little consideration of safety. The only remedy to this is fighting alcoholism at all costs. Alcoholism is closely associated with stress factors and depression among the members of a society. There are hardships in less developed countries and even in the developed countries, there are certain factors that contribute to high stress levels that do not actually affect the underdeveloped countries. This is to say, each society has its own set of stress factors associated with social, political and economic states. Low economic conditions, such as low income, and low living standards is a great contributor to high stress levels witness in the countries of the world especially in an age where global crisis has affected the whole world. Suffering and distressed people often engage in harmful habits such as taking drugs and alcohol. Drunk driving is one of the top reasons for accidents today (Smart & Watson, 2008). In spite of the motor vehicle companies manufacturing vehicles with the safety features inside, if the issue of binge drinking is not dealt with appropriately, accident will continue to occur due to drunk driving. Sometimes, drunken pedestrians who cross the roads recklessly can cause dangerous accidents. A drunk driver would forget tying the seatbelts or initiating the safety devises in the car. Tough economic times are therefore a factor that must be taken into account when making arguments on the causes of road accidents. Providing safety features will be of no us if the stress factor is left unresolved. It is the disease that should be cured, not the symptoms; meaning that solution is empowering the people economically in a bid to stop reckless drinking and driving. Population Increase More accidents are likely to occur with an increase in population. The cost of keeping a large population is high and at some point, the government may fail to look at measures that bring safety on the roads due to the lack of funds needed to initiate necessary programs and incentives. High population means that there would be high density of passengers boarding the Public Service Vehicles and the increase of traffic volume as well. In the developed countries, many people are able to afford personal vehicles. The more people have cars in a given country, the more the traffic volume. Traffic volume can grow to an extent that it becomes hard to control. It also increases the probability of accidents happening regardless of the availability of safety features installed in the vehicles from the manufacturers. In the developing countries, increase in population needs to be balanced with increase in transportation means such as establishing electronic traffic monitors and control. Psychological empowerment Through studies, it has been noted that the drivers with four-wheel vehicles are more likely to be stuck in the mad than drivers with two wheel vehicles. The argument is based on the psychology of the drivers. Many people feel empowered when they feel safe, so by the moment they have what it takes to make them feel safe, they tend to be more reckless in their actions. People easily trust their vehicles when they have more safety and accident control features. Therefore, they become ready to take risks with the mentality that they have nothing to fear with available protection. For this reason, features like airbags and seatbelts would protect the lives of the drivers, but the rate of accidents would not be reduced by the incorporation of these features in the vehicles. Unfortunately, reckless driving can cause more accidents; with reduced fatality rates to the occupants of the vehicles, but with increased fatalities and even deaths to the non-occupants (pedestrians). These accidents can also cause injuries and deaths in a case where they involve a protected reckless driver and a non-protected driver. Speed Governors Speed governors are safety features in vehicles that can actually cause accidents. They are meant to control speed. Research on road accidents has established that there is no level of speed that is considered safe depending on the road the driver is using. Obviously, high speed is dangerous, but slow speeds can also cause accidents. Slow speeds are safe on the pathways and delivery roads but on the main roads especially on the highways, slow speed can be dangerous as well. Highways and express lanes are meant for rapidly moving traffic and when a driver moves slower than the advisable speed on these roads; they are likely to cause accidents. Speed governors deprive the driver from accelerating to the extent of keeping uniformity on highways. Uniform movement of traffic is an aspect of highway driving that can hinder accidental occurrences (U.S.N.R.C, 2000). Some drivers are able to afford these devices while others cannot due to hard economic situations other drivers face. Income inequality especially in the less developed countries is the primary cause of this imbalance in the countries. With some drivers having speed governors installed in their vehicles while others do not, the safety feature then only cause irregular movement of traffic, which makes road users vulnerable to accidents instead of being protected from it by the safety device. Poor Infrastructure At the cost of improved road infrastructure and traffic control systems, authorities can adopt the application of safety features in the vehicles instead. This can happen mainly in the less developed countries where cutting costs or government spending is the order of the day. The more safety features are placed in the vehicles, the more proper road infrastructure and safety control are established in these countries. This is a dangerous assumption since the safety features do not actually play a major role in hindering accidents, but they save the lives of the fatalities or victims. This is not normally witnessed in the developed world with adequate resources. The underdeveloped countries have problems with resources and whenever an opportunity arises of perceived benefit, for instance, a reason to cut cost. It is overlooked with blind reasoning. The result is obvious, the rates of accidents rises; even though the rates of deaths is reduced among the motorists and other occupants. The worst scenario however happens when a non-occupant is involved in the accident. Pedestrians are the non-protected lot with the introduction of more safety features in the vehicles (Sanderson, 1996). Motorists with safe driving features do not bother going through the safety and precaution training anymore. The belief that they are fine with the features blinds their reasoning as far as ultimate and adequate safety is concerned. They would rather put their expenditure on something else following these tough economic times. To such individuals, safety features in the vehicles are not only seen as protective measures, but as economic saviors as well. Initially, people would spend money and time on initiatives that enhances safety on the roads. Introduction of safety features in the vehicles has replaced this undertaking and people behave as if they do not care anymore. Consequently, many are inexperienced and oblivious of the obvious procedures of avoiding accidents on the roads, hence contributing to more accidents than before. Taking care on the road is a mutual undertaking. When motorists put so much trust on the roads, accidents are bound to occur. Many people believe that the concept is universal and drive as if all the road users are responsible; with all the safety features in their vehicles. They drive with a dangerous assumption that other vehicles can avoid collisions with them. They forget that some road users are young and adrenaline driven, while others are just naturally reckless. Some road users have very high innate need for taking risk (Bryden, 2002). This assumption increases the chances of accidents. In conclusion, these features should be seen as device for saving lives in cases of unintentional occurrence or bad road or driving experiences. Accidents are never intentional and it should remain like that. When an intentional thought, idea or practice causes a bad road experience, it can be fatal whether safety features are available in the vehicle or not. References Bryden, J. E. (2002). Work zone crashes involving traffic control devices, safety features, and work vehicles and equipment. Durban: Pinnacle. National Academy. (2000).Current research on roadside safety features. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press. U.S.N.R.C. (2000). Highway safety: design, features, and evaluation. Washington, D.C: United States. National Research Council. Transportation Research Board. Sanderson, R. (1996). Canadian road safety and public highway infrastructure. Ottawa: Transport Canada, Policy and Coordination. Smart, H., & Watson, J. (2008). Road policing 2008 (7th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More