It's pretty well-known in other domains (and indeed in road design in other countries) that just asking people to try harder or pay closer attention is no substitute for better system design. Just think of aviation safety.
As to "urbanist conclusions", the crazy fact is they aren't more widespread. The old human-scale walkable neighborhoods of DC, Boston, and New York are expensive tourist hotspots, and companies build fake versions of Europe or Main Street to draw people to Disney World, Vegas, and Rodeo Drive. It's just proof that people tend to accept whatever they're given.
I often think about the way in which we trust one another on freeways. We are inside potential deadly machines and trust the skills of the other drivers. I'm especially astounded by tailgaters. Just this week, a driver tailgated me at 70 mph. He was depending on me NOT to brake—depending on nothing to happen in front of me that would require braking. What do we call thia kind of faith?
Mostly just want to say kudos on tying this Catholic concept to speeding - very creative! Personally, the older I get (and the more car accidents I have been in), the less likely I am to be tempted to speed. I am getting to the point where I think many speed limits are too generous as I see the carnage on the roads. I agree better design would be good, and I have a longing for safer non-car forms of transportation that doesn't require cramming into Metro cars at rush hour (a miserable experience).
As someone in Reformed circles, I definitely feel a general tendency to individualize/intellectualize understanding of "sin" in ways that I don't think are correct or healthy. The traditional area this comes up is around money, but I'm increasingly convinced that driving-related things are a huge blind spot. I just find it hard to accept that "be subject to the governing authorities" can be read to have an "except when it's inconvenient or requires extra vigilance" loophole. Which *does* seem like it's got a pretty important implication about how we ought to engage with politics with an eye towards laws being both good and enforceable...this coming from someone who scrupulously pays his use tax on things he buys online (and thus is very appreciative of my state's provision of a "safe harbor" that doesn't require itemizing every order).
If your hand causes you to sin, make a design change to it (!). I appreciate how you applied basic Christian theology to public safety. Guardrails are more than just a metaphor here. This is basic love your neighbor stuff that unfortunately requires forced compliance since cars truly are killing machines. Even if we can't stop the hurried urge behind the wheel in everyone, we can design roads that "curb" our appetites.
I'm not a Catholic, but you sure hit the bullseye on this one: "The road itself, and the speed limit sign, are giving you conflicting signals as a motorist. The potential for speed, foreclosed by what feels like an artificial, arbitrary limit, produces a constant, gnawing frustration when you’re behind the wheel."
We invented a technology that basically lets you get wherever you want, until you hit an ocean, probably around 90mph before speed itself becomes a safety issue. Then we throttled that technology with bad design that makes life frustrating, and dangerous, both for people behind the wheel and people walking about town.
But I don't have any problem saying this is an issue that needs to be solved through better design and better infrastructure. It shouldn't be our responsibility as citizens to avoid every situation that gives us angst. Our responsibility is to build and protect the institutions that let good design and good engineering thrive.
Well said! That's exactly it - people can't be relied on to process the key differences when they aren't obvious...we have arterials that look similar in different areas but some have speed limits that are 35-40 and some have speed limits that are 50-55. The difference is for the slower ones, there are more residential features along the roadway, more turnouts, potential for more vulnerable users along the roadway, HOWEVER, to most drivers these roads LOOK THE SAME whether they are 35 or 55 mph limits, and they adjust their behavior to the approach they prefer, which is the faster one, and it seems "ok" since the other faster road is very very similar...yet,...the dangers are WAY different...for those outside of cars..and even in the cars because, for instance in front of my house on an arterial road, we have turning cars getting hit every 4-6 weeks because the through drivers have acclimated to constantly driving 50-70mph in a 40mph zone and they think this is normal and "ok"...until some unlucky hapless driver gets crashed into (again)...wash rinse repeat...keeps happening because the design of the road and people's "weakness"...and OMG I didn't even mention the pedestrians and the hazards they face here..every crash has occurred in a place where I can show you dozens of pedestrians and cyclists standing on a regular basis...impact with a pedestrian is only a matter of time...
'The problem with traffic safety, of course, is that there is no way for an individual motorist to stop subjecting himself to the “near occasion of speeding,” because the roads are built to induce that temptation.'
There is. The person can stop being a motorist and use some other type of transportation. Not every person can stop being a motorist, but unless you live in a very rural area, car usage is more about convenience and safety (boosting your own safety at the expense of everyone else's) rather than necessity.
It's pretty well-known in other domains (and indeed in road design in other countries) that just asking people to try harder or pay closer attention is no substitute for better system design. Just think of aviation safety.
As to "urbanist conclusions", the crazy fact is they aren't more widespread. The old human-scale walkable neighborhoods of DC, Boston, and New York are expensive tourist hotspots, and companies build fake versions of Europe or Main Street to draw people to Disney World, Vegas, and Rodeo Drive. It's just proof that people tend to accept whatever they're given.
I often think about the way in which we trust one another on freeways. We are inside potential deadly machines and trust the skills of the other drivers. I'm especially astounded by tailgaters. Just this week, a driver tailgated me at 70 mph. He was depending on me NOT to brake—depending on nothing to happen in front of me that would require braking. What do we call thia kind of faith?
Mostly just want to say kudos on tying this Catholic concept to speeding - very creative! Personally, the older I get (and the more car accidents I have been in), the less likely I am to be tempted to speed. I am getting to the point where I think many speed limits are too generous as I see the carnage on the roads. I agree better design would be good, and I have a longing for safer non-car forms of transportation that doesn't require cramming into Metro cars at rush hour (a miserable experience).
"figure out a way to remove the temptation, or the circumstances which give rise to it" -- YES.
As someone in Reformed circles, I definitely feel a general tendency to individualize/intellectualize understanding of "sin" in ways that I don't think are correct or healthy. The traditional area this comes up is around money, but I'm increasingly convinced that driving-related things are a huge blind spot. I just find it hard to accept that "be subject to the governing authorities" can be read to have an "except when it's inconvenient or requires extra vigilance" loophole. Which *does* seem like it's got a pretty important implication about how we ought to engage with politics with an eye towards laws being both good and enforceable...this coming from someone who scrupulously pays his use tax on things he buys online (and thus is very appreciative of my state's provision of a "safe harbor" that doesn't require itemizing every order).
If your hand causes you to sin, make a design change to it (!). I appreciate how you applied basic Christian theology to public safety. Guardrails are more than just a metaphor here. This is basic love your neighbor stuff that unfortunately requires forced compliance since cars truly are killing machines. Even if we can't stop the hurried urge behind the wheel in everyone, we can design roads that "curb" our appetites.
I'm not a Catholic, but you sure hit the bullseye on this one: "The road itself, and the speed limit sign, are giving you conflicting signals as a motorist. The potential for speed, foreclosed by what feels like an artificial, arbitrary limit, produces a constant, gnawing frustration when you’re behind the wheel."
We invented a technology that basically lets you get wherever you want, until you hit an ocean, probably around 90mph before speed itself becomes a safety issue. Then we throttled that technology with bad design that makes life frustrating, and dangerous, both for people behind the wheel and people walking about town.
But I don't have any problem saying this is an issue that needs to be solved through better design and better infrastructure. It shouldn't be our responsibility as citizens to avoid every situation that gives us angst. Our responsibility is to build and protect the institutions that let good design and good engineering thrive.
This really explains Germany and Martin Luther.
Well said! That's exactly it - people can't be relied on to process the key differences when they aren't obvious...we have arterials that look similar in different areas but some have speed limits that are 35-40 and some have speed limits that are 50-55. The difference is for the slower ones, there are more residential features along the roadway, more turnouts, potential for more vulnerable users along the roadway, HOWEVER, to most drivers these roads LOOK THE SAME whether they are 35 or 55 mph limits, and they adjust their behavior to the approach they prefer, which is the faster one, and it seems "ok" since the other faster road is very very similar...yet,...the dangers are WAY different...for those outside of cars..and even in the cars because, for instance in front of my house on an arterial road, we have turning cars getting hit every 4-6 weeks because the through drivers have acclimated to constantly driving 50-70mph in a 40mph zone and they think this is normal and "ok"...until some unlucky hapless driver gets crashed into (again)...wash rinse repeat...keeps happening because the design of the road and people's "weakness"...and OMG I didn't even mention the pedestrians and the hazards they face here..every crash has occurred in a place where I can show you dozens of pedestrians and cyclists standing on a regular basis...impact with a pedestrian is only a matter of time...
'The problem with traffic safety, of course, is that there is no way for an individual motorist to stop subjecting himself to the “near occasion of speeding,” because the roads are built to induce that temptation.'
There is. The person can stop being a motorist and use some other type of transportation. Not every person can stop being a motorist, but unless you live in a very rural area, car usage is more about convenience and safety (boosting your own safety at the expense of everyone else's) rather than necessity.
So then... good Catholics shouldn't drive! ;)