Safe driving can’t be enforced
The stated rationale for the Taipei City police “crackdown” on scooter drivers to improve road safety is both false and dishonest (“Taipei police target scooters in crackdown,” Aug. 13, page 2).
It is false to claim that police intimidation tactics reduce fatalities — if this really were so, then why haven’t the police always maintained a high level of intimidation? It isn’t as if the police will run out of money.
That obvious logical objection aside however, the chief reason why police intimidation does not improve road safety is that most traffic accidents are caused not by violation of traffic laws, but by the criminal negligence of drivers.
There is nothing more important to being a good driver than paying attention to what is happening on the road at all times — a driver who does not pay scrupulous attention at all times is a dangerous driver, even when, and especially when, he or she behaves within the enforceable scope of traffic laws.
For example, failure to check mirrors properly, signaling too late and even outright daydreaming are all extremely dangerous and extremely common behaviors that cannot be adequately reined in by laws.
Merely enforcing traffic laws with more gusto will have zero effect on the behaviors that actually cause accidents.
This being the case, it is hard to avoid coming to the conclusion that the claim that police intimidation tactics actually reduce fatalities is a falsehood. I would gladly examine any statistical evidence that suggests otherwise.
Aside from issues of infrastructure quality, maintenance (or lack thereof) and ownership, the principle solution to the problem of poor road safety must be psychological, in the sense of education and normative pressure toward promoting road awareness and shifting drivers’ sense of responsibility away from robotic observance of traffic laws and toward themselves as fully cognizant adults capable of paying attention to the road and thinking about what they are doing.
Such solutions however, cannot be mandated by law and least of all by this country’s utterly absurd and worthless licensing system.
It is impossible to force people to think by threatening them with violence; it is a responsibility that people have to take upon themselves and encourage in others by social pressure — not the violence of government.
To believe otherwise is to commit oneself to the childishly nonsensical and yet monstrously common precept of mind control.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had
RSS