Real, constant danger

May 18, 2005

Dear Sir,

“The picture also shows the reality of road accidents in a way that words never can.”

I am of two minds when I see the distressing picture of the aftermath of Mr. Eugene Christopher's horrific crash. On the one hand I am sickened by the need to show the graphic detail of this incident.I find a photo of the victim's blood a bit to much for the front page of the local newspaper, especially as it will no doubt cause great pain to their friends and family. On the other hand it brings home with nothing less than stark reality that every person who gets on a motorbike faces a real and constant danger. Personally, I would rather see a photograph as we see in the other article featuring Mr. Scott Gibbons along with a story on who they are.

In addition, this kind of graphic detail will do absolutely no good in helping convince our visitors that renting a moped is a viable and very much pleasant way to tour our beautiful Island. But that's another and far less important issue at this moment.

The more important issue is that I believe this tragedy was an accident that was waiting to happen.If my memory serves me correctly, this crash occurred as Mr. Christopher was coming around the bend having just passed St. Mark's Church. This is a notorious blind spot for vehicles coming out of the road next to the farm and even at a moderate speed can be dangerous. I even think my father was involved in a bike accident at that very spot quite a few years ago which was caused in much the same manner. In many ways Bermuda's roads have become increasingly dangerous due to people's stupidity, arrogance, aggressiveness, carelessness and plain old lack of concern for others. In other ways, it's simply because the roads are too narrow with too many vehicles and too many hidden driveways etc. So what do we do about it?

Simple. We must accept it and deal with it appropriately. It's not likely to go away for quite some time. As an individual we must learn to be defensive in our driving. Keep your eyes and ears alert to the fact that the other driver might at any time do something that could cause you or others harm. Be prepared and become skilful at avoiding trouble. At the same time become considerate and learn how to drive in a manner that does not cause harm or interference with other vehicles. Show courtesy and respect to other drivers. It's a dangerous game that you must play every time you take to the roads. Your life depends upon it.

As a country we must expect that our leaders and elected officials take control of the areas they can control.Take those who have broken the law or continue to abuse the laws off of the roads. Put them on public transportation and if that doesn't work prosecute them to the full extent of the law, no questions asked.

We should also expect that all Government employees who drive a Government vehicle be dealt with in strict accordance of the laws receiving no preferential treatment. Government employees must find the blind spots and figure out ways to fix them. We must expect our leaders to lead by example. Get rid of the oversized cars and turn in the extra vehicles if you don't really need it. Get into the schools and help young people learn at an early age that driving a moped in Bermuda at the age of 16 is a privilege, not a right.

Create incentives for people to drive safely. Give discounts to good drivers in the form of subsidising insurance premiums and gas prices for those that have good track records. Those with bad records can have a surcharge and pay more for their gas. Why not!

We must do something today because tomorrow is not always around the corner.

DEREK A. G. JONES

Boston, Massachusetts

Time to get tough (again)

May 19, 2005

Dear Sirs,

There has been a marked increase in the number of road fatalities over the past few years for one very simple reason: the punishment is no longer a significant deterrent. When I first obtained my licence you could count on the fact that:

1) If you were travelling at 60 kph or more you would automatically be put off the road. Now it is 70 kph (this was recently stated by a Magistrate to those in attendance and evidenced by the punishments subsequently meted out)

2) Second speeding offence within two years, no matter the speed, was automatic off the road. This is no longer the case.

3) Off the road used to mean just that, you were put off the road (ALL motorised vehicles) for a minimum of six months and typically one year. Now, one is given the option of paying a fine in lieu of being put off the road. I wonder how many people have opted for the latter?

4) These days if you are put off the road, it is only for the class of vehicle that you were caught speeding on/in. Were these changes implemented as a way of increasing revenue at the expense of lives? Who made this decision?

I implore the powers that be to revert to the punishments handed out some five-plus years ago. We will see a marked decrease in the number of road fatalities within one year - guaranteed. There is a definite correlation between the increase in traffic fatalities and the decrease in the severity of the deterrent, it's not rocket science. By the way, those youngsters who are now old enough to drive cars have never been off the road. I think we can all agree that, at high speed, a car is potentially much more of a lethal weapon than a bike. I'd also wager that some car drivers feel like Mario Andretti when they buckle up, especially after a session on their PS2.

IB JMC

Paget

Carnage on our roads

May 18, 2005

Dear Sir,

Thank you for showing Bermuda the bloody consequences of poor judgment with your front page picture and articles this morning. It is way past time for us to wake up.

I am writing to express my regret and total disgust at the carnage that has been taking place on our highways of late. None of it is accidental, and we did not arrive in this situation by accident.

Probably the best way to solve the issue is to look at how and why we got here, and suggest some possible cures. I think that it is useful to recognise that there is a difference between root causes of our bad driving behaviour, and symptomatic results. For example: Speed does not kill, people do. What pushes people to speed is bad judgment, i.e. driving at a speed in excess of the driver's ability and road conditions. The bad judgment is the root cause, the speeding is the symptom. Radar alone does not make the problem go away, it just makes a stupid driver go slower if he knows it's there.

Clearly we have too many vehicles on the roads. We are rapidly approaching total gridlock. Not just at rush hour, but all day long. Generated by the congestion is impatience and frustration. This impatience is what drives the bikers to pass on the inside, “centre line” it down the centre of the road, and sit less than a safe distance behind the vehicle they are following while attempting to pass. What would happen if we said we are not going to do this anymore?

The low standard of driving and road judgment skills is appalling. We are not doing enough to educate new riders and drivers in the consequences of their actions. One would think that the carnage that has taken place over the last four and a half months would get through to people. Evidently not. We desperately need a new and comprehensive approach to driver education. Project Ride is not near enough, and it came far too late.

Since the mid-1990s, I have perceived an ever diminishing Police presence on the roads. We have laws, and we have rules, but we have an invisible Police Service. When we do occasionally see them, their own driving and riding often mimics that of the general public! And we licence these people to speed? Let's have a dedicated team of well trained officers tasked with highway safety. I am not just talking about radar, I am talking about a patrol officer who will pull over a biker for following to close, driving recklessly, or riding with a cellphone jammed into his helmet. Once the public see that their everyday behaviour is not to be tolerated, they will moderate it. We can lead by example. Either we enforce the laws as written, re-write them, or scrap them if they are not to be enforced.

Interestingly, at the recent trial of the motorist accused causing of the death of little Miss Cox, an expert witness testified that the accused motorist was doing what any other motorist would do. This statement is almost as sad as losing that precious little girl! Have our standards slid so far that just plain bad judgment is the norm and accepted? It would appear to be the case.

We need to re-invent our Road Safety Council. It is ineffective in its present form, and has no teeth. Perhaps the Council could be closely allied with the above mentioned highway task force. The Council needs to be comprised of well motivated persons with real experience in road safety and who are not bogged down by politics.

I hope that when the Honourable Dr. Brown recovers from his depression he may be able to see some merit in some of my suggestions. There is much that his Ministry can do here. We need action, and we need it now. With the Honourable Doctor's reputation for getting things done, it should be easy, he just has to adopt the concept.

Most of my suggestions are do-able, although there will be a cost factor. The congestion problem is far more complex and difficult, but by recognising we have a problem, we can develop strategies that can keep us from maiming and killing ourselves on a regular basis while we figure out how to solve the congestion issue.

The public has its part to play in this issue: Before you drive, think about what impact your actions will have upon you, as well as others. Driving is not only a privilege, but a responsibility. The use of the term accident implies that it was no one's fault, but every driver can make smart choices to avoid crashing. In fact there is no such thing as an accident, they are just collisions or crashes that could have been prevented had you thought about the consequences of yours and others actions. Do not take your vehicle anywhere your brain has not already been ten seconds before. It is called ‘Risk Management'. Does the public care enough to do anything about this? Then clean up your own driving, and speak to our politicians, telling them you have had enough. Speak to your family, friends and your associates, and say it is not OK to drive or ride dangerously and irresponsibly.

TOM TRIMINGHAM

Paget

Above the law?

May 11, 2005

Dear Sir,

In yesterday's paper there was an article printed about Mr. Vic Ball and his dogs. In this article it was said that Mr. Vic Ball had not one, two, three or four, but five complaints about these same dogs. But Department of Environmental Protection were ordered to give him his dogs back because he wasn't present when the dogs were seized.

After five complaints, why was he allowed to receive his dogs back? This is totally ridiculous and proves that the justice system does not work and I can understand why people take things into their own hands as far as the law is concerned.

I have had personal dealings with Mr. Ball and an argument with him about this situation. At the end of this argument Mr. Ball told me himself that he will be getting his dogs back.

I know of other cases where dogs were taken for just biting another dog and the dogs were put to sleep within three days. So why is this particular man being given so many chances to kill yet another animal, or even worse, attacking someone, or heaven forbid, a child. For some reason the laws that are used on others don't seem to work on him.

The next time someone's dog goes through the same situation they should get there dog(s) back and if they don't everyone will know that Mr. Vic Ball is above the law and will continue to get away with things that others can't unless someone does something about it, someone who is willing to actually stand up to this man and do what's right and put these dogs to sleep before they kill a child and I hope it won't be a member of the judge or lawyer that is helping him.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Ball knows exactly who this letter is coming from, but for the rest of Bermuda, my name is:

KARL HASSELL

Warwick

Negative consequences

Dear Sir,

Some time ago, Housing Minister Ashfield DeVent had expressed an interesting opinion in your daily newspaper that raised questions in his mind about a possible relationship between destabilised home life and Bermuda's growing housing crisis. From the reading on the topic, it appeared that divorced families were on the increase, and that the separation of these families into independent units was inadvertently contributing to the shortage of adequate housing. Not too long after, a female public official (whose name I am unable to recall) waded into the Minister's comment. Her cutting response was to the effect that there is nothing dysfunctional about a single family home, that single families produce successful human beings and that in Bermuda, a significant portion of the population comprises single families and will always be. My interpretation of that official's point of view was that when it comes to single families there is really very little to be fixed.

I reflected upon the Minister's words, and the public official's response and became excited. I thought, mistakenly, that the divergence of views by two officials was going to be fertile ground for serious public analysis and revelation, which in turn would inform the planners of Government's Social Agenda. I recall reading only a statistical challenge in respect of the degree of the high divorce rate in Bermuda, searching several weeks in newspapers for follow-up comments particularly from NGOs and religious institutions. In general, no-one appeared interested in articulating statistics on the growth of single families or even what kinds of impact existing single family units are making on the fabric, well-being and future of Bermudian society.

Many years ago, single parents single-handedly and selflessly raised successful and productive human beings, without much formal education and affluence. Today, however, growing street gangs and tacit support, if not proclivity, for criminal activity by groups of people, many of whom are latch-key young men, present some early indication the single family unit is falling apart. It appears too, that sacrifices made by former generations are being lost on current single parents, who, represent a significant sub-group in the society and who, by their own admission, are far more literate, enlightened and affluent, but appear to be failing their offspring.

In Bermuda, social anomalies exist in outstanding ways. My own observation leads me to conclude that because the Island is confined, closed, stratified and isolated, intimate relationships among adults tend to be recycled or recyclable and consequentially appear pervasively incestuous, meaning being devoid of meaningful evolution, authenticity and diversity. As a result of the paucity of options on human choice, opportunities for invigorating sustained relationships on the Island are limited and fresh perspectives on ongoing issues have become a challenge. An ultimate consequence of this circumstance is boredom and societal decay which is beginning to manifest itself on the well-being of Bermuda's young.

That an exempt company with common European ties would in the 21st century identify and advertise the absence or unsuitability of Bermudians for companionship of their eligible employees should give pause for reflection when the environment produces many lonely women who opt for futile, unsuitable or illicit liaisons, smiling sweetly through the concept that a quarter of a man is so much better than no man at all, while sons grow up to become their unfulfilled mothers' husbands and never leave home, literally and or figuratively. Men, under pressure from all quarters, appear to hide out in solitary houses while their sons and daughters grow up being confused about the strengths of their own gender and respective responsibilities, having taken and cemented their core values from their erstwhile primary care providers.

The ultimate price exacted under these circumstances is utter contempt and disrespect for self and each other.

There are many progressive, visionary, civic-minded Bermudians who work very hard at home to address the Island's social ills, but are not assisted by the larger society in ways that can make a positive fundamental difference.

That the moral compass of the society has shifted to my mind is in large part because both principal institutions, that of the family and the churches have abdicated their responsibilities to lead by good example and instead chose to engage in obsessive self gratification and unholy defensive power-plays.

It does not take a rocket scientist to conclude that there is a positive relationship between strong spiritual or moral values, respect for the rule of law and a successful family unit.

But like any successful marketing campaign, high profile reinforcement of ideological values is perennially necessary and a core responsibility of religious organisations. Restoration of these values must begin somewhere soon because at this stage in the Island's development, it can ill-afford the negative consequences of narrow personal self interests.

Perhaps it is time to reengineer Bermudian society with a return of its prodigal sons and daughters and injection of a greater diversity of human talent, a core ingredient in propelling nations toward greatness.

KATHLEEN W. MUSSENDEN

Sandys