With Nine’s airing of the US Moment of Truth program last week, an intriguing thought came to mind.
Let’s get all the people of interest from the ICAC investigation on an Australian version of the show. Forget the questionable reliability of the polygraph and the game show melodrama, I reckon it would be a great concept for law enforcement.
It’s now obvious that most of the councillors, developers, MPs and staff named in the inquiry will do anything for money, so they won’t turn down a cash incentive to tell the truth for a change.
Just think about it, no more ‘I do not recall,’ ‘I cannot remember,’ ‘I don’t know’ and my favourite, ‘I cannot recollect.’ Just yes and no answers, true or false.
Your Opinion Counts. CLICK HERE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Taking a risk
Growing up I have often noticed differences between the generations. I sometimes wonder if this is just because I am young, and as you grow older your philosophy on life changes, or is it because I have come from an entirely different generation.
One of the big differences I see between those my age and those twice my age is the ability to accept change and take risks. Young people taking risks is hardly a new concept, it’s been evident in all forms of life, from sports stars to entrepreneurs -young people are more likely to gamble, and gamble big.
What’s more, brain scans and brain development studies are starting to back up the anecdotal evidence. However, what is different is the emphasis on young people taking risks. If there is one prime example of the representation of young people taking risks, it’s road fatalities.
Whenever our state government wants to look like they are doing something, they increase the restrictions on young drivers. But is this approach necessary and does it work?
Is it necessary?
I’m sorry to say it but people under 20 make up a larger proportion of road fatalities than they should. But so do people 70 and over.
The number people on our roads under 20 and over 70 is roughly the same and the number of fatalities are roughly the same. From this table you will see that the figures are very similar:
.jpg)
• You will also see that while there was a 10% decrease in youth deaths, there was a 35% increase in deaths in the over 70s group.
• There are just as many over 70 male car hoons as there are under 20 male car hoons.
• Over the whole population, men make up more fatalities than women, 71% from 1997-2001 and 72% from 2002-2006.
• AND, the gender divide still does not come close when it comes to pedestrian fatalities, from 2002-2006 62% of pedestrian fatalities were men.
So I ask the Iemma government, where are the ads for Grandpa the drag racer and the male kamikaze pedestrian?
Does it work?
You might have noticed a 10% decrease in Under 20 fatalities. Does this mean that the State Government has improved youth road safety? Maybe, over the whole population there was a decrease in fatalities of 3%, so the restrictions introduced in the last five years can account for about a 7% decrease in fatalities.
After increasing learner hours, reducing maximum speeds, restricting the amount of passengers and restricting the performance of vehicles, why are there still so many deaths from people under 20?
Because people who die on our roads, do so because someone made a mistake and inexperienced drivers will make more mistakes than experienced drivers. No matter how many hours they log as learner drivers, new drivers need to make decisions on their own and that’s how they become better drivers.
People over 70 vote and parents like to think that the government can control the unexpected. The government continues to increase restrictions to grab boosts in the polls, instead of coming up with real solutions to the problems.
In all areas of life, the reason why young people take risks is because they are inexperienced. Young people learn and grow from their mistakes and make better decisions in the future. I doubt this will ever change.
Your Opinion Counts. CLICK HERE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | 
