My Second Oral
Presentation: Chapter 7

1) Ike Matsunaga: "If you could construct one law, what would it be and why?"

If I could construct one traffic law, it would be that at a certain age, there should be competence testing. I hope no one takes this as an insult, but I think that there is a certain age that people get to be too old to drive, and they are dangerous on the road. There should be a law at a certain age, then every 2-4 years thereafter, there should be a competence test/driving test AGAIN. I think this would decrease the number of dangerous drivers we have out there.

2) Dr. James: "Can accident proneness be predicted?"

Under certain circumstances, yes. But those circumstances vary greatly. They include tiredness, affects of outside stimulants such as alcohol, drug use, medication, etc. But under "no" circumstances...I don't think accident proneness can be predicted. That is why they call it accidents.

3) Jason Thompson: "Can too much restraint through the induction of road laws cause people to become mindless drivers and therefore cause people to become non-thinking on the road?"

I can't say what it would do for other drivers, but I can speculate in relation to my own experiences. To me, the more restraint I have on the road, the more I think because I consider myself a cautious driver. I am constantly thinking about whether or not I am breaking some kind of law, or rule of thumb. That's just me. However, I do believe that in some cases, such as people who especially hate following rules or laws, too much restraint may set off some kind of "automatic driver" such as Dr. James would put it, and therefore cause them to be not as alert as they should be if they were mindful drivers.

4) Juliet Baptista: "You said that 'not all accidents are discovered to be in connection with violations.' What are some examples?"

An example would be you stopping at a stop light (when red, of course) when all of a sudden, someone hits you from behind. ON YOUR PART, there was no violation made. You followed the law and stopped at a red light, and someone hit you. You are involved in an accident, but no violation has occurred on your part. It happens quite frequently, innocent people are involved in accidents.

5) Alma Valvieja: "Is there a big difference between an individualist and a collectivist driver?" and "Why do you think people don't know all of the traffic laws?"

There is a big difference between an individualist and a collectivist driver, for all the reasons I had mentioned in class. The biggest difference is that individual drivers, when thinking on the road, are only thinking about themselves. An example of this would be wanting to get to work on time, but you are late. An individualist driver would speed and weave through cars just to be on time. This endangers other people, but the individualist doesn't care, or doesn't consider this. Opposed to the individualist, the collectivist driver does think about others, the environment around him/her. When in the same situation, he would rather follow the law (made to protect others as well as himself) as to not endanger himself and those around him.

I think that not all people know all of the traffic laws because they don't take the time out to learn them all. There are many, and most people know most of them, but not all. It takes initiative to spend time to find information and find out what are laws that you don't know about, but most people don't want to take the time, we learn by hearsay, or experiences (which in some cases are just too late).

6) Jayson Nakasone: "Do the laws of the three groups have reasons for them, or are they just stated?"

In the book, the laws are just stated, as a sort of guideline for constructing laws. But they do pretty much cover most aspects (if not all) of driving. They are stated above in the last paragraph in the summary.

Chris Flores: "Are the three groups of traffic laws ranked in any way from better to worse?"

It does not state in the book if any are better than any other, but in my opinion, they are equally important as all of them are created to protect the welfare of all road users.

Don Huynh: "What do you think law makers should consider when constructing traffic laws?"

Well, I think they should consider everything they already do consider. So, I'll answer the question by stating what I think they should consider that they DO NOT already consider. That would probably be (just as in my first answer) age of competency for elders. One of the three groups of guidelines for constructing traffic laws is driver appropriateness. They have already considered intoxication and disabilities, but they do not yet consider age of competence.