LockH
1 PW
Instead? TRAFFIC COLLISIONS
Yes? Or No... (COLLISIONS due to inattention, equipment failure, etc etc etc...)
Yes? Or No... (COLLISIONS due to inattention, equipment failure, etc etc etc...)
Resolved: NO SUCH THINGS AS TRAFFIC "ACCIDENTS"
- Thread starter LockH
- Start date
Pretty quixotic to try to redefine words. Accident and collision are two different things, even if they are not always properly used. You can have an accidental collision or an intentional collision. Accident alone is appropriate in conversational English (although perhaps not on a police report or law suit) when referring to an accidental collision. When an ex-spouse is trying to run over their ex, that is NOT an accident in any sense!
cal3thousand
10 MW
I've viewed collision or accidents as situations where the collective 'carelessness/risk' between all parties involved has exceeded an unknown threshold. Whether it was 1 person that contributed all of the 'carelessness/risk' or whether it was a culmination of the separate parties' activities.
And, if one party is diligent or careful enough, they may even compensate for some of the 'carelessness/risk' of the other party and be able to avoid the situation.
Imagine a person with a blind fold skating in a rink in a highly aggressive manner. If he meets another that is slightly aloof, their collective risk levels may culminate in an event. Then imagine a situation where everyone else is hyper-aware and vigilant of his carelessness and they do everything within their powers to successfully avoid him. Those are 2 extremes that illustrate the point of collective risk with quite a spectrum in between.
And, if one party is diligent or careful enough, they may even compensate for some of the 'carelessness/risk' of the other party and be able to avoid the situation.
Imagine a person with a blind fold skating in a rink in a highly aggressive manner. If he meets another that is slightly aloof, their collective risk levels may culminate in an event. Then imagine a situation where everyone else is hyper-aware and vigilant of his carelessness and they do everything within their powers to successfully avoid him. Those are 2 extremes that illustrate the point of collective risk with quite a spectrum in between.
Well, sure there are accidents.
The reason people want to use the word "collision" instead in this context is because "accident" implies that somebody wasn't at fault. That's not a constructive approach to analyzing an accident--it's better to ALWAYS figure out what you could have done to avoid it.
I support the "no such things as traffic accidents" approach.
The reason people want to use the word "collision" instead in this context is because "accident" implies that somebody wasn't at fault. That's not a constructive approach to analyzing an accident--it's better to ALWAYS figure out what you could have done to avoid it.
I support the "no such things as traffic accidents" approach.
Similar threads
