<p>When you’re at the driver seat and distracted, lives of many people are jeopardised.&nbsp;Cab drivers and vehicle owners alike are guilty of scrolling social media, talking on the phone, and attending work meetings while driving.</p>

<p>A lawmaker from Ohio, United States, recently participated in a government meeting while driving. Senator Andrew Brenner could be seen joining the call from his car. A couple of minutes into the meeting, the senator switches to a virtual background. As a result, he is seen sitting at a fake office, with a seatbelt on.</p>

<p>It would have been funny, had it not been so dangerously careless.</p>

<p>This happened on a day when the state of Ohio introduced a “Distracted Driving Bill” which bans writing, sending or reading texts while driving. In addition, it also bans taking photos, livestreaming and using other applications while driving. Looking at videos is also banned. The senator exemplified all that is wrong with distracted drivers.</p>

<p><strong>In the age of GPS navigation, can we really drive without looking at our phones?</strong></p>

<p>From cab drivers to food delivery executives, everyone uses GPS and maps are integral to the service they offer. How will they deliver your parcel if they can't find your address? It's true that while looking at the map, a text or two are often opened, emojis are exchanged, and voice notes are shared. But how do we stop it? Laws have been made, but have they made driving safe?</p>

<p>Last year, India implemented its new Motor Vehicles Act. Under it, a driver is allowed to use his or her phone only for navigation. Talking on the phone while driving can attract fines up to 5,000 rupees and Indian states are allowed to multiply the penalty up to 10 times.</p>

<p>In the UK, the Road Safety Code says that holding a phone while driving is illegal. You can use a phone only when you’re parked and flouting these rules may result in a penalty of up to 2,500 pounds. You can also be taken to court.</p>

<p>A headline from German Autolabs says the following - “Distracted driving is getting worse and legislation isn't working”. Drivers using mobile phones are nearly four times more likely to be involved in a crash. In 2019, over 3,000&nbsp;people died because of distracted driving in the US alone.</p>

<p>Instead of creating awareness about road safety, lawmakers today are leading by example when it comes to risking road safety.</p>

<p>Andrew Brenner, the US Senator, said the following when he was asked about attending a government meeting while driving. &nbsp;“I’ve actually been on other calls, numerous calls, while driving”.</p>

<p>“I had two meeting that were back to back that were in separate location,”&nbsp;he added.</p>

<p>There is absolutely no excuse for driving while attending a meeting from a fake virtual office and being totally unapologetic about it.</p>

<p>Uber’s website claims that distracting driving accounts for 26 per cent of fatalities on the road. The company should share this data with its drivers and create awareness among them. They should also equip employees with navigation system so that they avoid using their phones for map. Replying to texts can wait, phone calls can be made later. Work calls are not about life and death, but distracted driving is.</p>


When you’re at the driver seat and distracted, lives of many people are jeopardised. Cab drivers and vehicle owners alike are guilty of scrolling social media, talking on the phone, and attending work meetings while driving.

When you’re at the driver seat and distracted, lives of many people are jeopardised. Cab drivers and vehicle owners alike are guilty of scrolling social media, talking on the phone, and attending work meetings while driving. A lawmaker from Ohio, United States, recently participated in a government meeting while driving. Senator Andrew Brenner could be seen joining the call from his car. A couple of minutes into the meeting, the senator switches to a virtual background. As a result, he is seen sitting at a fake office, with a seatbelt on. It would have been funny, had it not been so dangerously careless. This happened on a day when the state of Ohio introduced a “Distracted Driving Bill” which bans writing, sending or reading texts while driving. In addition, it also bans taking photos, livestreaming and using other applications while driving. Looking at videos is also banned. The senator exemplified all that is wrong with distracted drivers. In the age of GPS navigation, can we really drive without looking at our phones? From cab drivers to food delivery executives, everyone uses GPS and maps are integral to the service they offer. How will they deliver your parcel if they can't find your address? It's true that while looking at the map, a text or two are often opened, emojis are exchanged, and voice notes are shared. But how do we stop it? Laws have been made, but have they made driving safe? Last year, India implemented its new Motor Vehicles Act. Under it, a driver is allowed to use his or her phone only for navigation. Talking on the phone while driving can attract fines up to 5,000 rupees and Indian states are allowed to multiply the penalty up to 10 times. In the UK, the Road Safety Code says that holding a phone while driving is illegal. You can use a phone only when you’re parked and flouting these rules may result in a penalty of up to 2,500 pounds. You can also be taken to court. A headline from German Autolabs says the following - “Distracted driving is getting worse and legislation isn't working”. Drivers using mobile phones are nearly four times more likely to be involved in a crash. In 2019, over 3,000 people died because of distracted driving in the US alone. Instead of creating awareness about road safety, lawmakers today are leading by example when it comes to risking road safety. Andrew Brenner, the US Senator, said the following when he was asked about attending a government meeting while driving. “I’ve actually been on other calls, numerous calls, while driving”. “I had two meeting that were back to back that were in separate location,” he added. There is absolutely no excuse for driving while attending a meeting from a fake virtual office and being totally unapologetic about it. Uber’s website claims that distracting driving accounts for 26 per cent of fatalities on the road. The company should share this data with its drivers and create awareness among them. They should also equip employees with navigation system so that they avoid using their phones for map. Replying to texts can wait, phone calls can be made later. Work calls are not about life and death, but distracted driving is.

Ohio senator recently attended a Zoom call while driving. Here's what it reveals about 'distracted driving' awareness

<p>Technology is a great help, but not if you want to fake your sincerity for a cause, and a senator has recently when he was caught using a virtual background of his home to hide the fact that he was driving during a Zoom meeting — on the same day a bill to ban distracted driving was introduced.</p>

<p>Andrew Brenner, an Ohio state senator, decided to use a virtual background of his home office during a Zoom meeting to hide the fact that he was, in reality, driving.</p>

<p>The footage of the meeting was live-streamed to the public with the state’s controlling board. Brenner was spotted wearing a seat belt, which gave away his act.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">This Ohio State Senator thought he was slick, using a Zoom background of his home office while driving... debating a bill for harsher penalties for distracted driving <a href="https://t.co/XfangsLaHX">https://t.co/XfangsLaHX</a> <a href="https://t.co/r55ti7bsma">pic.twitter.com/r55ti7bsma</a></p>
— Brody Logan (@BrodyLogan) <a href="https://twitter.com/BrodyLogan/status/1390271590093447169?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 6, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<p>Glimpses of the road were also spotted behind him and he was also constantly looking at the road and turning his head while changing lanes — which is a good habit while driving but not when attending a Zoom meeting.</p>

<p>The Republican, who actively took part in the conversation and answered all questions directed towards him, claims he "wasn't distracted" during the meeting and was paying attention.</p>

<p>"I wasn’t distracted. I was paying attention to the driving and listening to it [the meeting]," he was quoted by local media. "And I've actually been on other calls, numerous calls while driving. Phone calls for the most part, but on video calls, I'm not paying attention to the video. To me, it’s like a phone call."</p>

<p>However, some social media users could not stop trolling the senator for this act as his faux pas coincided with the introduction of the bill to penalise unsafe driving.</p>

<p>"Distracted driving is a choice that must be as culturally unacceptable as drunk driving is today, and strengthening our current laws will lead to more responsible driving," state's Republican governor, Mike DeWine said.</p>


Technology is a great help, but not if you want to fake your sincerity for a cause, and a senator has recently when he was caught using a virtual background of his home to hide the fact that he was driving during a Zoom meeting — on the same day a bill to ban distracted driving was introduced.

Technology is a great help, but not if you want to fake your sincerity for a cause, and a senator has recently when he was caught using a virtual background of his home to hide the fact that he was driving during a Zoom meeting — on the same day a bill to ban distracted driving was introduced. Andrew Brenner, an Ohio state senator, decided to use a virtual background of his home office during a Zoom meeting to hide the fact that he was, in reality, driving. The footage of the meeting was live-streamed to the public with the state’s controlling board. Brenner was spotted wearing a seat belt, which gave away his act. This Ohio State Senator thought he was slick, using a Zoom background of his home office while driving... debating a bill for harsher penalties for distracted driving https://t.co/XfangsLaHX pic.twitter.com/r55ti7bsma — Brody Logan (@BrodyLogan) May 6, 2021 × Glimpses of the road were also spotted behind him and he was also constantly looking at the road and turning his head while changing lanes — which is a good habit while driving but not when attending a Zoom meeting. The Republican, who actively took part in the conversation and answered all questions directed towards him, claims he "wasn't distracted" during the meeting and was paying attention. "I wasn’t distracted. I was paying attention to the driving and listening to it [the meeting]," he was quoted by local media. "And I've actually been on other calls, numerous calls while driving. Phone calls for the most part, but on video calls, I'm not paying attention to the video. To me, it’s like a phone call." However, some social media users could not stop trolling the senator for this act as his faux pas coincided with the introduction of the bill to penalise unsafe driving. "Distracted driving is a choice that must be as culturally unacceptable as drunk driving is today, and strengthening our current laws will lead to more responsible driving," state's Republican governor, Mike DeWine said.

Ohio state senator caught in car in meeting for ban on distracted driving

<p>A Manhattan judge has dismissed Uber Technologies Inc's lawsuit challenging a New York City law limiting the number of licenses for ride-hailing services, the first such cap by a major American city.</p>

<p>In a decision made public on Friday, New York State Supreme Court Justice Lyle Frank rejected Uber's argument that the city wrongly gave its Taxi and Limousine Commission power to enforce the cap.</p>

<p>Frank was also unconvinced that the cap, part of Local Law 147, would impede state efforts to reduce traffic congestion through "congestion pricing" on vehicles entering high-traffic areas of Manhattan.</p>

<p>"It would appear that LL 147, rather than being in conflict with the congestion pricing law, in fact, appears to complement it," Frank wrote. His decision is dated Oct. 31.</p>

<p>“We’re disappointed that the TLC's cap that punishes drivers who are forced to rent vehicles will remain in effect," Uber said in a statement.</p>

<p>Nicholas Paolucci, a spokesman for the city's law department, said in an email: "Hardworking for-hire vehicle drivers and everyone else impacted by our congested roads should be pleased with this court ruling."</p>

<p>The August 2018 law was meant to give New York City greater oversight of ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft Inc.</p>

<p>It included a one-year freeze on new licenses to for-hire vehicles, which was later extended through August 2020, and also set minimum pay standards for drivers.</p>

<p>The case is separate from Uber's Sept. 20 challenge to a New York City "cruising cap" rule limiting how much time its drivers could spend without passengers in Manhattan south of 96th Street.</p>

<p>Based in San Francisco, Uber has drawn criticism from many cities that its vehicles increase congestion, and commandeer&nbsp;business&nbsp;from taxis.</p>

<p>The value of medallions, which are permits needed to operate yellow taxis in New York City and are distinct from ride-hailing licenses, has plunged as Uber and Lyft gained popularity.</p>

<p>"This cap has been life-saving &amp; is the basis for any group of drivers - Uber or yellow cab - to come out of poverty &amp; instability," Bhairavi Desai, executive director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, said on Twitter.</p>

<p>The case is ZEHN-NY LLC et al v City of New York et al, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, No. 151730/2019.</p>


A Manhattan judge has dismissed Uber Technologies Inc's lawsuit challenging a New York City law limiting the number of licenses for ride-hailing services, the first such cap by a major American city.

A Manhattan judge has dismissed Uber Technologies Inc's lawsuit challenging a New York City law limiting the number of licenses for ride-hailing services, the first such cap by a major American city. In a decision made public on Friday, New York State Supreme Court Justice Lyle Frank rejected Uber's argument that the city wrongly gave its Taxi and Limousine Commission power to enforce the cap. Frank was also unconvinced that the cap, part of Local Law 147, would impede state efforts to reduce traffic congestion through "congestion pricing" on vehicles entering high-traffic areas of Manhattan. "It would appear that LL 147, rather than being in conflict with the congestion pricing law, in fact, appears to complement it," Frank wrote. His decision is dated Oct. 31. “We’re disappointed that the TLC's cap that punishes drivers who are forced to rent vehicles will remain in effect," Uber said in a statement. Nicholas Paolucci, a spokesman for the city's law department, said in an email: "Hardworking for-hire vehicle drivers and everyone else impacted by our congested roads should be pleased with this court ruling." The August 2018 law was meant to give New York City greater oversight of ride-hailing companies such as Uber and Lyft Inc. It included a one-year freeze on new licenses to for-hire vehicles, which was later extended through August 2020, and also set minimum pay standards for drivers. The case is separate from Uber's Sept. 20 challenge to a New York City "cruising cap" rule limiting how much time its drivers could spend without passengers in Manhattan south of 96th Street. Based in San Francisco, Uber has drawn criticism from many cities that its vehicles increase congestion, and commandeer business from taxis. The value of medallions, which are permits needed to operate yellow taxis in New York City and are distinct from ride-hailing licenses, has plunged as Uber and Lyft gained popularity. "This cap has been life-saving & is the basis for any group of drivers - Uber or yellow cab - to come out of poverty & instability," Bhairavi Desai, executive director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, said on Twitter. The case is ZEHN-NY LLC et al v City of New York et al, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, No. 151730/2019.

Judge dismisses Uber lawsuit opposing New York City vehicle license caps

<p>Former England footballer <a href="https://www.wionews.com/search?q=David+Beckham">David Beckham</a> was on Thursday disqualified from driving for six months after using his phone while behind the wheel.</p>

<p>The 44-year-old had previously admitted the offence after being spotted by a member of the public as he drove his Bentley in London on November 21.</p>

<p>At Bromley Magistrates Court, south of London, Beckham was given six penalty points on his licence, fined £750 (868 euros, $975), and ordered to pay £100 to prosecution costs and a £75 surcharge fee.</p>

<p>District Judge Catherine Moore said he already had six points on his licence for previous speeding matters, meaning he reached the 12-point limit which triggers a disqualification.</p>

<p>The ex-Manchester United and Real Madrid player was present in court. Wearing a dark grey suit and tie, he spoke to give his full name, date of birth and address.</p>

<p>Prosecuting lawyer Matthew Spratt said he had been photographed by a member of the public as he held his phone while driving in "slowly moving traffic".</p>

<p>Defence lawyer Gerrard Tyrrell said Beckham was travelling slowly and has "no recollection of the day in question or this particular incident".</p>

<p>He added, "There is no excuse for what took place but his view is as he cannot remember... he's going to plead guilty and that's what he's done."</p>

<p>Last year, Beckham drew criticism after avoiding a charge of speeding because of a technicality.</p>

<p>He accepted he drove at 59 miles (95 kilometres) per hour in a 40 mph zone in London in January 2018.</p>

<p>But the notice of his prosecution was not received until one day after the statutory 14-day time limit.</p>


Former England footballer David Beckham was on Thursday disqualified from driving for six months after using his phone while behind the wheel. The 44-year-old had previously admitted the offence after being spotted by a member of the public as he drove his Bentley in London on November 21.

Former England footballer David Beckham was on Thursday disqualified from driving for six months after using his phone while behind the wheel. The 44-year-old had previously admitted the offence after being spotted by a member of the public as he drove his Bentley in London on November 21. At Bromley Magistrates Court, south of London, Beckham was given six penalty points on his licence, fined £750 (868 euros, $975), and ordered to pay £100 to prosecution costs and a £75 surcharge fee. District Judge Catherine Moore said he already had six points on his licence for previous speeding matters, meaning he reached the 12-point limit which triggers a disqualification. The ex-Manchester United and Real Madrid player was present in court. Wearing a dark grey suit and tie, he spoke to give his full name, date of birth and address. Prosecuting lawyer Matthew Spratt said he had been photographed by a member of the public as he held his phone while driving in "slowly moving traffic". Defence lawyer Gerrard Tyrrell said Beckham was travelling slowly and has "no recollection of the day in question or this particular incident". He added, "There is no excuse for what took place but his view is as he cannot remember... he's going to plead guilty and that's what he's done." Last year, Beckham drew criticism after avoiding a charge of speeding because of a technicality. He accepted he drove at 59 miles (95 kilometres) per hour in a 40 mph zone in London in January 2018. But the notice of his prosecution was not received until one day after the statutory 14-day time limit.

David Beckham handed driving ban for using phone at the wheel

<p>As self-driving cars come closer to being common on American roads, much of the rhetoric promoting them has to do with safety. About 40,000 people die on U.S. roads every year, and driver errors are linked to more than 90 per cent of crashes. But many of the biggest advocates of autonomous vehicles aren&rsquo;t car companies looking to improve the safety of their existing products. Huge backing for self-driving technologies is coming from Silicon Valley giants like Google and Apple.</p>

<p>Those of us who have studied the relationship between technology and society tend to look more carefully at the motivations behind any technological push. In this case, it&rsquo;s clear that in addition to addressing safety concerns, Silicon Valley firms have a strong incentive to create a new venue for increasing the use of their digital devices. Every minute people spend on their mobile phones provides data &ndash; and often money &ndash; to tech companies.</p>

<p>At present, digital devices and driving are in conflict: There are serious, often fatal, consequences when drivers use smartphones to talk or to text. Regulators and safety advocates look to resolve that conflict by banning phone use while driving &ndash; as has happened in virtually every state. But the tech companies are taking a different approach. The obvious answer for Silicon Valley is creating an automobile in which continuous cellphone use no longer poses a threat to anyone.</p>

<p><strong>Not a new idea</strong></p>

<p>The idea of a car so capable a driver is not needed isn&rsquo;t new. As far back as the 1950s, the Saturday Evening Post ran an illustration imagining a family playing a board game (in a convertible!) as the car conducts itself down the road. When self-driving cars actually take to the streets in large numbers, today&rsquo;s families likely won&rsquo;t be playing Scrabble &ndash; though Words With Friends and other mobile games are a near certainty. Every passenger is likely to be using a mobile device.</p>

<p>In recent years, the amount of time adults spend on their mobile devices (beyond actual phone calls) has grown rapidly. At the moment, it&rsquo;s around four hours a day for the average adult in the U.S. However, that rapid growth is likely to slow down as people run out of time that&rsquo;s available for them to use their devices.</p>

<p>Unless, of course, there&rsquo;s a new block of time that suddenly opens up. The average American now spends about 48 minutes in a car every day, a sizable opportunity for increased cellphone use.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Uj-rK8V-rik" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Chris Urmson, former director of Google&rsquo;s self-driving car project, made this interest clear in a 2016 talk, saying that autonomous vehicles offer the &ldquo;exciting&rdquo; possibility of creating &ldquo;another room for you&rdquo; where, among other activities, you can watch videos. The investment analysts at Morgan Stanley have talked about autonomous cars becoming a &ldquo;fourth screen&rdquo; in Americans&rsquo; lives (in addition to the home TV, personal computer and mobile phones or tablets).</p>

<p>Perhaps the most explicit declaration of this interest came from Jia Yueting, co-founder of the budding Chinese automaker LeEco, when he said, &ldquo;We see the car in the future as an extension of the internet, another entry point for us to sell web-based content and services.&rdquo;</p>

<p>So as the public conversation around autonomous cars highlights the safety advantages, don&rsquo;t forget the tech industry&rsquo;s powerful desire for more profits, which goes well beyond simply saving us from ourselves.</p>

<p>This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-silicon-valley-wants-you-to-text-and-drive-87972" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.</p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).</em></p>

<p>Image Credit:&nbsp;Shutterstock</p>


Why do tech companies care so much about self-driving cars? If drivers no longer need to pay attention to the road, they can use their mobile devices even more

As self-driving cars come closer to being common on American roads, much of the rhetoric promoting them has to do with safety. About 40,000 people die on U.S. roads every year, and driver errors are linked to more than 90 per cent of crashes. But many of the biggest advocates of autonomous vehicles aren’t car companies looking to improve the safety of their existing products. Huge backing for self-driving technologies is coming from Silicon Valley giants like Google and Apple. Those of us who have studied the relationship between technology and society tend to look more carefully at the motivations behind any technological push. In this case, it’s clear that in addition to addressing safety concerns, Silicon Valley firms have a strong incentive to create a new venue for increasing the use of their digital devices. Every minute people spend on their mobile phones provides data – and often money – to tech companies. At present, digital devices and driving are in conflict: There are serious, often fatal, consequences when drivers use smartphones to talk or to text. Regulators and safety advocates look to resolve that conflict by banning phone use while driving – as has happened in virtually every state. But the tech companies are taking a different approach. The obvious answer for Silicon Valley is creating an automobile in which continuous cellphone use no longer poses a threat to anyone. Not a new idea The idea of a car so capable a driver is not needed isn’t new. As far back as the 1950s, the Saturday Evening Post ran an illustration imagining a family playing a board game (in a convertible!) as the car conducts itself down the road. When self-driving cars actually take to the streets in large numbers, today’s families likely won’t be playing Scrabble – though Words With Friends and other mobile games are a near certainty. Every passenger is likely to be using a mobile device. In recent years, the amount of time adults spend on their mobile devices (beyond actual phone calls) has grown rapidly. At the moment, it’s around four hours a day for the average adult in the U.S. However, that rapid growth is likely to slow down as people run out of time that’s available for them to use their devices. Unless, of course, there’s a new block of time that suddenly opens up. The average American now spends about 48 minutes in a car every day, a sizable opportunity for increased cellphone use. × Chris Urmson, former director of Google’s self-driving car project, made this interest clear in a 2016 talk, saying that autonomous vehicles offer the “exciting” possibility of creating “another room for you” where, among other activities, you can watch videos. The investment analysts at Morgan Stanley have talked about autonomous cars becoming a “fourth screen” in Americans’ lives (in addition to the home TV, personal computer and mobile phones or tablets). Perhaps the most explicit declaration of this interest came from Jia Yueting, co-founder of the budding Chinese automaker LeEco, when he said, “We see the car in the future as an extension of the internet, another entry point for us to sell web-based content and services.” So as the public conversation around autonomous cars highlights the safety advantages, don’t forget the tech industry’s powerful desire for more profits, which goes well beyond simply saving us from ourselves. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity). Image Credit: Shutterstock

Opinion: Why Google & Apple want you to text and drive

<p>First time travellers to&nbsp;India&nbsp;enter a&nbsp;cab from the airport&nbsp;and almost immediately are positive they will die.</p>

<p>Westerners need human-made rules, and on Indian roads&nbsp;things just are what they are. Being in&nbsp;a place where every aspect of&nbsp;life operates according to such a different&nbsp;underlying schema can be&nbsp;shocking, especially when in a zooming car. But switching between&nbsp;these two worlds&nbsp;is the real&nbsp;shock. The two worlds go something like this.</p>

<p>The West presupposes that society needs codified rules everyone follows. It&#39;s&nbsp;OK, but the rules&nbsp;rather than general order end&nbsp;up becoming their&nbsp;own goal. This explains why&nbsp;Western driver&#39;s sometimes (always)&nbsp;freak&nbsp;out at the slightest road infraction, even if it has no impact on their life. Drivers&nbsp;from my hometown Toronto scream if another car&#39;s&nbsp;wheel accidentally crosses&nbsp;a painted line. Paint on an Indian road is&nbsp;like paint anywhere else, purely decorative.</p>

<p>In India there is no need to create a set of rules when physics already has&nbsp;good and inescapable ones. Another way of putting it: The Westerner observes the laws of the road,&nbsp;while Indians are subject to the law of physics. I ask cab drivers if they feel bound to drive within their lanes&nbsp;and they smile at the adorable question.</p>

<p>I half joke that North Americans drive on the right side of the road, Europeans on the left, and Indians on both. If an Indian can go forward, they go. Isn&rsquo;t the point of driving to <em>drive</em>? India is&nbsp;a vast country&nbsp;with everything on Earth in it somewhere, except for&nbsp;stop signs. It&#39;s less reckless than it sounds, though.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Indians are incredible&nbsp;at gauging space. Maybe because they need to be, they&#39;re more in tune&nbsp;with what&#39;s&nbsp;physically&nbsp;around them.&nbsp;North Americans have&nbsp;wide generous lanes, and often feel uncomfortable driving without a foot or two&nbsp;of clearance on either side. Indians need one inch. Even when backing up into a spot or negotiating tight traffic, there doesn&#39;t seem to be enough room, but there always is. Barely, but always.&nbsp;I joke that India&nbsp;would be stuck in hopeless gridlock if the country was a&nbsp;centimetre smaller.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>I ask cab drivers if they feel bound to drive within their lanes&nbsp;and they smile at the adorable question</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I ask cab drivers if they feel bound to drive within their lanes?and they smile at the adorable question" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Whereas Western driver&#39;s&nbsp;safety and comfort derives from&nbsp;their expectation that others will follow The Rules, Indian motorists trust their fellow drivers are competent. While this is simple to understand it requires time to really <em>get</em>. In lieu of rules, Indian drivers&nbsp;appear to have developed a hive-mind linking them to all other drivers. Like the Borg. A friend in Delhi, mimicking an unspoken conversation he has with all&nbsp;nearby drivers, put it this way: &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t know you, you don&rsquo;t know me, but come&hellip;let&rsquo;s pull a maneuver!&rdquo; This everyday telepathy somehow works, even when the road is shared not with fellow drivers&nbsp;but&nbsp;cows.</p>

<p>I can see a Western person reading this, shaking their head.&nbsp;If you&rsquo;re from a place where the prevailing order on the road is very formalised and laid out, the apparent absence of any system governing driving&nbsp;(which after all does kill many&nbsp;people every day) seems understandably scary. But there isn&#39;t <em>nothing;</em>&nbsp;the lack of a formal system to govern&nbsp;the road&nbsp;gives rise to&nbsp;an informal one.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Indian&#39;t&nbsp;<em>know </em>there are no rules&nbsp;and&nbsp;they drive&nbsp;accordingly. They slow down if needed.&nbsp;Roads have their own groove. Indians, with their incredible&nbsp;spatial awareness,&nbsp;made a shocking discovery, that actually two cars can be stuffed into one lane, or five cars into two, etc. Lanes seem to shrink and swell here when needed. Cars get close enough to kiss, and&nbsp;drivers don&rsquo;t flinch, as if every vehicle is protected by a force field.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>I don&rsquo;t know you, you don&rsquo;t know me, but come&hellip;let&rsquo;s pull a maneuver!</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I don?t know you, you don?t know me, but come?let?s pull a maneuver!" target="_blank"><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>In the way more protective&nbsp;padding&nbsp;makes ice hockey possibly more rather than&nbsp;less dangerous&nbsp;(because players who wrongly feel they&rsquo;re indestructible resort to violent savagery), the lack of rules and safety infrastructure may make&nbsp;Indian drivers feel more vulnerable, and&nbsp;drive more cautiously.&nbsp;Once the vibe of Indian roads is felt&nbsp;and not merely grasped,&nbsp;they can be beautiful to watch! Cars here dance and weave with a fluency yellow dashes on Western roads prevent. &nbsp;</p>

<p>The West&nbsp;smugly thinks that not only is its own system superior&nbsp;but that India has no system at all.&nbsp;The West&nbsp;believes life will fall apart&nbsp;without&nbsp;rules.&nbsp;Just like the West&nbsp;believes&nbsp;that the only thing keeping neighbours&nbsp;from murdering&nbsp;each other&nbsp;is the Bible&#39;s commandment not to,&nbsp;so it thinks&nbsp;every&nbsp;driver would always&nbsp;crash and soon die&nbsp;if not for its rules. The West is paranoid and cynical!</p>

<p>On the flip side, Indian roads&nbsp;place an affirming&nbsp;faith in&nbsp;other people&#39;s judgement and life-preserving instinct. Indians do value being alive, too! But to them danger means two cars colliding at a high speed, not a tire touching a painted line. Indians are gaugers of reality, not followers of a constructed reality. The Westerner&nbsp;obeys a system of rules not for their individual sake, but to know what everyone else will do. Indians simply avoid disaster&nbsp;and carry on with their life.</p>

<p>Once near Vasant Kunj&nbsp;I saw a man descending public&nbsp;stairs&nbsp;towards a sidewalk, and&nbsp;right below the very last step of this sidewalk was a gaping manhole. As if someone left&nbsp;a trail of breadcrumbs meant to lead someone&nbsp;directly into the sewer.</p>

<p>If this were&nbsp;Toronto a committee would install pylons and warning signs, to prevent&nbsp;lawsuits.&nbsp;Then&nbsp;some idiot would fall in anyway and successfully sue the city. A committee would empower&nbsp;tax payer-funded&nbsp;inspectors to prowl&nbsp;the streets,&nbsp;carrying&nbsp;bigger pylons and signs. Rules breed&nbsp;rules,&nbsp;lawsuits&nbsp;and&nbsp;bureaucracy. &nbsp;</p>

<p>So, what did this Delhi gentleman&nbsp;do upon reaching the final stair? He simply&nbsp;avoided&nbsp;walking into a&nbsp;sewer&nbsp;and continued&nbsp;his life.</p>

<p>Such is Indian driving.</p>

<p>(WION)</p>


Western people think roads in India are just insane jungles. Well they're not totally wrong, but under the chaos are lessons worth emulating

First time travellers to India enter a cab from the airport and almost immediately are positive they will die. Westerners need human-made rules, and on Indian roads things just are what they are. Being in a place where every aspect of life operates according to such a different underlying schema can be shocking, especially when in a zooming car. But switching between these two worlds is the real shock. The two worlds go something like this. The West presupposes that society needs codified rules everyone follows. It's OK, but the rules rather than general order end up becoming their own goal. This explains why Western driver's sometimes (always) freak out at the slightest road infraction, even if it has no impact on their life. Drivers from my hometown Toronto scream if another car's wheel accidentally crosses a painted line. Paint on an Indian road is like paint anywhere else, purely decorative. In India there is no need to create a set of rules when physics already has good and inescapable ones. Another way of putting it: The Westerner observes the laws of the road, while Indians are subject to the law of physics. I ask cab drivers if they feel bound to drive within their lanes and they smile at the adorable question. I half joke that North Americans drive on the right side of the road, Europeans on the left, and Indians on both. If an Indian can go forward, they go. Isn’t the point of driving to drive? India is a vast country with everything on Earth in it somewhere, except for stop signs. It's less reckless than it sounds, though. Indians are incredible at gauging space. Maybe because they need to be, they're more in tune with what's physically around them. North Americans have wide generous lanes, and often feel uncomfortable driving without a foot or two of clearance on either side. Indians need one inch. Even when backing up into a spot or negotiating tight traffic, there doesn't seem to be enough room, but there always is. Barely, but always. I joke that India would be stuck in hopeless gridlock if the country was a centimetre smaller. I ask cab drivers if they feel bound to drive within their lanes and they smile at the adorable question × Whereas Western driver's safety and comfort derives from their expectation that others will follow The Rules, Indian motorists trust their fellow drivers are competent. While this is simple to understand it requires time to really get. In lieu of rules, Indian drivers appear to have developed a hive-mind linking them to all other drivers. Like the Borg. A friend in Delhi, mimicking an unspoken conversation he has with all nearby drivers, put it this way: “I don’t know you, you don’t know me, but come…let’s pull a maneuver!” This everyday telepathy somehow works, even when the road is shared not with fellow drivers but cows. I can see a Western person reading this, shaking their head. If you’re from a place where the prevailing order on the road is very formalised and laid out, the apparent absence of any system governing driving (which after all does kill many people every day) seems understandably scary. But there isn't nothing; the lack of a formal system to govern the road gives rise to an informal one. Indian't know there are no rules and they drive accordingly. They slow down if needed. Roads have their own groove. Indians, with their incredible spatial awareness, made a shocking discovery, that actually two cars can be stuffed into one lane, or five cars into two, etc. Lanes seem to shrink and swell here when needed. Cars get close enough to kiss, and drivers don’t flinch, as if every vehicle is protected by a force field. I don’t know you, you don’t know me, but come…let’s pull a maneuver! × In the way more protective padding makes ice hockey possibly more rather than less dangerous (because players who wrongly feel they’re indestructible resort to violent savagery), the lack of rules and safety infrastructure may make Indian drivers feel more vulnerable, and drive more cautiously. Once the vibe of Indian roads is felt and not merely grasped, they can be beautiful to watch! Cars here dance and weave with a fluency yellow dashes on Western roads prevent. The West smugly thinks that not only is its own system superior but that India has no system at all. The West believes life will fall apart without rules. Just like the West believes that the only thing keeping neighbours from murdering each other is the Bible's commandment not to, so it thinks every driver would always crash and soon die if not for its rules. The West is paranoid and cynical! On the flip side, Indian roads place an affirming faith in other people's judgement and life-preserving instinct. Indians do value being alive, too! But to them danger means two cars colliding at a high speed, not a tire touching a painted line. Indians are gaugers of reality, not followers of a constructed reality. The Westerner obeys a system of rules not for their individual sake, but to know what everyone else will do. Indians simply avoid disaster and carry on with their life. Once near Vasant Kunj I saw a man descending public stairs towards a sidewalk, and right below the very last step of this sidewalk was a gaping manhole. As if someone left a trail of breadcrumbs meant to lead someone directly into the sewer. If this were Toronto a committee would install pylons and warning signs, to prevent lawsuits. Then some idiot would fall in anyway and successfully sue the city. A committee would empower tax payer-funded inspectors to prowl the streets, carrying bigger pylons and signs. Rules breed rules, lawsuits and bureaucracy. So, what did this Delhi gentleman do upon reaching the final stair? He simply avoided walking into a sewer and continued his life. Such is Indian driving. (WION)

Driving in India: An invisible order

driving

Driving, News on Driving, stories on Driving, articles on Driving, Driving stories at Wion, Driving news, Driving latest news