Motoring Manners

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 272, 7 February 1928, Page 7

Motoring Manners

Lack of Courtesy on the Road Are We Always Right? COMPXiAINTS of road-hogging, bad driving, and general bad manners in road usage by all parties, are, like the poor, always with us. The manners of motorists towards cyclists and pedestrians (if any pedestrians are left), complaints of each other, the attitude adopted to each other by members of the opposite sex, and the complaints by the pedestrian about all of the others, are rife.

HTHE last mentioned Is perhaps the most voluble, and although a lot of exaggeration is used, there is at least some good ground for his annoyance. At the same time, the general idea that courtesy of the road and politeness are lost arts, the place of which has been taken by aggressiveness and bad manners among all roadusers, is not due to any general increase of discourtesy. The real reason for the suspicion is that a general idea has grown up in all of us that we must never by any possible chance admit that we are in the wrong, and that, in its turn, started from the -idea that it would be a sympto mof the neophyte to admit any such possibility. Those of us who have driven for any length of time can easily remember when the manners of the motorist to another were exactly the reverse of the present-day manners, but if we search our own consciences we shall also remember a few times when even the best of us has been guilty of a momentary lapse, and not always involuntary. Never in the Wrong Who can place his hand on his heart and swear that he has never “stood on the gas” to pass, say, a pair-horse wagon at a street intersection, when the alternative was to brake and wait? And who, having accomplished such a purpose by a matter of inches, has not felt a glow of satisfaction at having avoided a tedious stoppage and gear change? .1 know I have been g-uilty on more than one occasion. As we do not live in our cars, we sometimes see someone else doing the same thing when we are in the position of the pedestrian, or slow vehicle owner, and then the attitude of mind is entirely different. “Look at that crazy blighter, not lit to drive a donkey cart.’* That, or a similar expression, correctly betrays our attitude. Now, when, as sometimes happens, these momentary lapses are attended with a minor accident, or even with only the sudden and violent application of brakes and swerving by both vehicles—what happens? Each of the pair at once begins to assert his innocence, and with equal vehemence lays the blame on the other. Where there has been an accident which can possibly result in a claim for damages, this attitude is intensified a thousandfold. The general idea is that the blame must be laid on the other fellow, our own individual actions justified, and,' if possible or necessary, witnesses at one© obtained who will vouch fo.r our

story. Even without any accident, one can see evidence of the attitude at every little traffic contretemps. Glowering looks, indignant signals and hootings, and even verbal abuse are not wanting. Remember the Other Man 1 do not think that this is an exaggerated picture of the general attitude, and it is this which has given rise to the idea that every ordinarily decent law-abiding man or woman changes into a hard-visaged, aggressive brute the moment he o.r she takes the wheel of a car. And if, instead of this general attitude, we could remember that the man who is driving the other car or pushing the bike is, like ourselves, an ordinary decent human being, and that we ourselves are not infallible, there would be no more of, or at least much less of, the principle of self justification. If, when one of these momentary lapses happens to us and we have nearly run someone down, we were to acknowledge the fault with a deprecating smile and a polite “Sorry,” it would act like magic. The mere fact that such action has put the other man in the right is a balm to his selfesteem and nine times out of ten the answer would be in the same strain. There is, of course, the natural born hog who can only be cured by death, and in the opinion of most of us, the quicker and more violent, the better. “Something with boiling oil in it,” as Shakespeare might have said, but didn’t. These belong to all classes, but they are in a great minority, and vve are all, under the surface, in sympathy with other road users. Aggressiveness is born in all of us by the expectation of even hastier aggression on the part of .the other chap. If vve could all remember that a soft answer turneth away wrath and the French proverb “Qui s’xcuse, s’accuse,” half the unpleasantness of the road would die still-born. The real trouble is that we translate the last proverb as “He who hesitates is lost.” Like the Colonel’s lady and Judy O’Grady we are alU“sisters under our skins.”