Probably one of those idiot pedestrians that think they own the road. That don't think before crossing the road.

Myself I am not very impressed with antilock brakes. Has anyone else noticed when coming to a stop when the antilocks cut in the car just seems to keep on going. Yes I know the road is slippery that is why they cut in, but I am coming to a nice even stop before they cut in, and then when they do the car goes on and on before stopping.

I did an experiment on parking lot and found when I pumped the brakes on the same conditions I stopped in a shorter distance.

WRONG! learn to drive

In a lot of cases ABS brakes do not shorten the stopping distance. They are designed more for allowing the driver to steer around hazards while braking hard. As Sgt. Steinhauser points out, this is not always possible so that is why ICBC and the RCMP are telling drivers to SLOW DOWN WHEN CONDITIONS ARE BAD.

Wouldn't it be great if ICBC put on a winter driving course for Novice drivers, in this country it should be a requirement, but then it's not only them what needs it.

Great story! I wish all those idiots who are speeding on icy roads would get a copy of this story...

100% agree slim

Brownshoe was thar comment directed to me. That is why I am experimenting, to learn. How about you?

As for steering around hazards while breaking hard is that really realistic. Think about it, most of your driving is in traffic and with traffic on either side where are you going to go. It is just that I have found ABS causes my car to take a longer distance to stop.

This technology along with front wheel drive requires more skill on part of the driver which is lacking big time. There should be some skills required before getting a license.

How does driving a car with ABS require MORE skill? How many times in the past have you seen vehicles with the front wheels locked up and cut hard to one side. These drivers are putting the brake pedal through the floor board and are afraid to lift in order to steer. ABS brakes are designed to compensate for this VERY common mistake. And to answer your question, YES, I do think its realistic. You have somewhere to go, more often than not.
I agree that there are way too many drivers that don't have the skills required to drive in the winter.

Justifying a police state.

Sergeant Steinhauser should, but will never, admit that there are many factors that lead to deadly accidents beyond speed. Most of the accidents in recent weeks were due to things such as crossing the yellow line, bad tires, inexperienced drivers for the conditions, personal distractions in adverse conditions, and yes weather conditions do play a role and can change in a heart beat.

To over simplify things as just a factor of speed in the justification of police state tactics that are employed by the likes of Sergeant Steinhauser in circumstances that have no relation to safety, but everything to do with the exercise of police powers... is an injustice to all those who are true victims of violent crimes, crimes against property, and financial crimes that go unresolved because we allow our police state to dictate to us what the crimes are and where our police resources will be focused on... primarily the focus now is on revenue generation from trumped up hypotheticals that generate more resources for the polices state to do a job that is unrelated to actual crime fighting that puts real criminals behind bars.

I would ask Sergeant Steinhauser when is the last time he put an hour of his time into actually investigating and arresting an opium, crack, or ecstasy dealer, or the missing women file, or the rash of break in's we've had in this city... the answer is he doesn't, because he and many others of his ilk spend all there time making criminals out of law abiding citizens in their ICBC funded mandate to divert police resources from real crimes to those which they can easily ensnare their victims. And the lemmings applaud this as a good use of police resources.

Congratulations Sergeant Steinhauser and the rest of the RCMP in PG for the violent crime capital of Canada label. You all wear it well.

-------------------

A link for some to think about. The kind of country we are becoming, and another four letter acronym service many in the RCMP would be proud to serve as they choose to model their conduct after.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1333394/Seventy-years-late-Russia-finally-admits-slaughter-20-000-Polish-officers-Katyn-Stalin-s-orders.html

IMO the best use of resources for the RCMP would be for guys like Sergeant Steinhauser, and his superiors, to take a course in 'due process' and the importance of that in maintaining the kind of society they have greatly benefited from. Enforcing ICBC bureaucracy enacted laws that fail the due process test is a sign that they no longer work for the public safety, but rather for the police state of a present and growing totalitarian bureaucracy where democracy is a thing of the past and enforcing bureaucratic edicts is the norm.

Continuing on the police state theme. I've noticed in the last couple of weeks Canadian boarder services now inspects international mail as per new edicts from the bureaucracy relating to potential terrorism. So they open private mail even though all it is is clearly paper documents sent via DHL... and they require you to identify the documents you sent (even though they have opened it and clearly know it has nothing to do with anything illegal), and require a copy of your passport and SIN before they will release the documents to their destination.

This is police stat creep folks. Since when do bureaucrats have a right to open your mail. What if you had trade secrets or personal information... when sending documents by secure mail isn't that the purpose, so as to have privacy and security in knowing that only those you send to will read what you have to say? Why does the bureaucracy have any right to open a letter and then require proof of sender via a passport in order to allow it through the border? This is the new police state and I guess we will have to get use to it.

Eagleone....All that from an excersise that promotes traffic safety and education...You need serious help.. It's painfully obvious that you have no clue and you're doing nothing but making yourself sound like a total looney. Try pulling dead bodies from car wrecks. Try telling families that thier loved ones have been killed because someone was driving like an idiot. Yes there are many factors that can lead to collisions, but 98% of them have one thing in common. SPEED. Sgt Steinhauser spends time on commitees that promote traffic safety through education for kids, parents, and teens. He takes courses on traffic and lives it everyday. He probably has not spend much time on investigating and arresting an opium, crack, or ecstasy dealer, or the missing women file, or the rash of break in's. You know why? He is in the TRAFFIC DIVISION. You're stating that it not important to keep the roads safe because other crimes are being committed. Where do you get your experience from? Driving to work for 10 -20 minutes a day? The odd trip on the highway? Ask ANYONE who drives all day everyday. No one will say speed is not dangerous. Sgt. Steinhauser and the rest of his division are there to keep the roads as safe as they can with the sources they have. Diana Pozer (ICBC)is a very dedicated person is extremely serious about promoting safety on the roads.
They are both stand up people and are there for people like you too, no matter how ignorant and confused you are.

Eagleone, you now have the "Most Ridiculous Post" prize. Get a grip!

Hey dude: Well said.

Brakes have one purpose, to stop the car.
However, they cannot work without traction.
Traction comes from two places – tires and roads.

Tires vary with the amount they contribute to traction. For icy conditions one can buy more pliable tires, definitely not over inflated. But do not inflate to less than the recommended tire pressure. The tread needs to be such that snow and ice is less likely to build up in them. The lugs have sipes in them to increase the grip value. Studded tires provide a far superior grip.

Just as with tires, one “icy road” is not the same as another “icy road”. The icy parts of roads no doubt have extremely low traction, even when compared to snow covered roads. However, the amount of traction varies on exactly the type of icy road it is. Is it an icy road from freezing rain on an asphalt surface or is it an icy road that is actually snow covered with icy tracks resulting from too many people stopping repeatedly at the same location at an intersection, or even at a location where the road curves enough for some people to start the cycle of building icy conditions as they start to fishtail or otherwise spin as they go around the curve too fast for the conditions.

There did not seem to be anything in this "course" or information package being delivered to the audience by the media about all the other tools at one's disposal when stopping on a winter road that might be icy or partially icy.

You are in control of the tires. So protect yourself as best as possible for the conditions you will typically drive in the winter. However, don’t let the quality of your tires trick you into thinking you are now safe.

You are not in control of the roads. The City and the Province have the greatest control there, including changing the conditions by adding traction materials to the icy sections of roads. The only control you have is your attention to road conditions immediately in front of you as well as the anticipation of road conditions that may be coming up – intersections, curves, inclines, unsanded surfaces, traffic volume, etc.

Brakes? Make sure they work and that you know how to use them in icy conditions. DO not lock them up. In fact, drive at such speeds that you can stop the vehicle with the least amount of breaking. Use the transmission whenever possible. When depressing the brake, pretend there is an egg between your foot and the pedal and you don’t want to break it.

ABS brakes. How to use them properly in such extreme conditions is a course in itself. The same as cruise control - shut it off on winter roads. Personally, I wish I could shut off ABS breaks with the way some of them work.

The ultimate solution to minimize the chances of skidding on icy roads is to simply drive slower for the conditions. Basically that is what the article states.

-----------------------------------------
As far as RCMP teaching driving courses?

I did not realize that was their job. I look at that as someone else's job.

I like to use people who are trained for the job at hand. RCMP are trained to apply their policing expertise. They might take a driving course at Depot. They might teach the driving course at Depot. They might do a lot of driving.

But they have expertise in other areas which only they can apply to our needs. We have others who can do that job quite well and probably at a lower rate of pay. Seek them out and use them.

ABS brakes. They are not a panacea. They do not do the driving for you. I prefer to drive vehicles without them.

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jan2006/bw20060101_185650.htm

Although car antilocks perform well on the test track, there is no evidence they have made significant reductions in the number of on-the-road crashes. A 1994 Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) study1 and a subsequent 1995 study compared insurance claims for groups of otherwise identical cars with and without antilocks, finding no differences in the overall frequency or cost of crashes for which insurance claims for vehicle damage are filed. Because antilocks should make the most difference on wet and slippery roads, researchers also studied insurance claims experience in 29 northern states during winter months. Even here they found no difference in the frequency of insurance claims for vehicles with and without antilock brakes. A 1997 Institute study and a 2001 update reported no difference in the overall fatal crash involvement of cars with and without antilocks.

Federal studies of car antilocks are consistent with Institute and HLDI findings. According to one federal report, "the overall, net effect of antilock brakes" on both police-reported crashes and fatal crashes "was close to zero." The federal studies of the effects of antilocks on passenger vehicle crashes found positive effects on wet roads and negative effects for run-off-road crashes. These results cancel each other.

Leonard Evans, a researcher with General Motors, reported that antilock-equipped cars were less likely to rear-end other vehicles but more likely to have other vehicles rear-end them. Again, the net result was little effect on overall crash risk.

In a study conducted for auto manufacturers, Failure Analysis Associates reported a net beneficial effect of antilocks on nonfatal crashes but no effect on fatal crashes.

Dude, nowhere did I say speed is not a safety concern. I said the RCMP and Sgt. Cheka have their priorities mixed up.

If ICBC wants to fund their own propaganda, than so be it... propaganda can be good if they are propagating a good idea... but we don't need RCMP resources to do that.

If an officers sole focus is on ambushing the working guy with zero tolerance and unreasonable judgment in order to maximize revenue for ICBC, then I would say that is a wasted resource in the realm of police protection of the public from real crimes that are being under investigated... because the scarce resources are not being prioritized correctly when Sgt Cheka is out confiscating private property and raising police state revenue... rather than investigating real crimes that have impacted real peoples lives.

If that makes me a little bit funny for thinking scarce resources should be prioritized, and that the RCMP shouldn't be used as ICBC prostitutes... enforcing an unelected bodies regulations and edicts... than so be it I'll be the funny guy.

My thinking is that Sgt. Steinhauser will not (and should not be the person too) want to talk about those 'other' things that greatly impact driver safety, because those things are not part of the revenue generating scope they operate under. Its more about the business model of revenue generation and the justification for it, then the actual safety learning of the public, or creating awareness of the full gambit of hypothetical's that could go wrong in winter driving and ways to prevent it.

I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of accidents had no over speed factor at all involved, and that most are attributable to other causes most of which would be mental distraction related.

First you say that the RCMP's mandate is only to generate revenue. At the same time you're bashing them for teaming up with ICBC to help educate people on some of the dangers of winter driving. I didn't say you were funny Eagleone, I said Looney.

eagleone
It's not the RCMP's job to teach one how to drive as everyone who drives should hold a valid driver's licence and as such have met the requirements of the province to do so. As for the majority of the individuals that are involved in collisions speed is a factor as a mentioned in the article if one took the time to read it. Speed relative to condictions meaning slow down use common sence which isn't as common as one would like it to be..