I disagree with a quite a lot that has been said on this. Particularly I feel emotion is prevalent in some of the views. A lot of lessons can be missed. To take an un emotional view these are my personal feelings.
The lorry driver in question is an entirely one kettle of fish. I quite rightly feel he deserves the law and recompense. What he did was inexcusable, and no actions by others within the clip warrant or justify his course of action.
However. Do you think this is it for further study of this incident? Surprising. Bare in mind if an airliner crashes the mental state and work pattern of even the innocent chap that cleaned the windshield that blew out is studied.
I do not agree with the sentiment that as professional drivers you are there to set an example. This is emotional and detracting. You are required to drive within the law applicable to your class of vehicle. Any role setting is a nice human aside, but detracts from study. You are required to drive within the law and the law includes appropriate behaviour. That’s it.
A car driver has his or her own separate merry cart of apples to deal with. People who drive by law, are not children in the truer sense or infirm. At least they shouldn’t be. They hold a licence as a gifted entitlement that can be revoked. A road user has a responsibility every time they take to the roads, no matter in what vehicle or what capacity, regardless of licence held.
They are well trained as proved by test. That’s the way the law sees it. Not half trained. Not only trained depending on the circumstances. Not trained with a get out clause to act the blush eyed innocent bamby. In the eyes of the law, you are either a licence holder to drive within the law for your class of vehicle or your are not. You obey and act according to the laws that apply to your class of vehicle within the wider road traffic act. That includes the Highway Code recommendation of defensive driving, which applies, to all.
For instance, is a car driver who runs over a pedestrian less culpable than a person on a motorcycle? An innocent, A-B, infantile car driver in this angry lorry video becomes all to easily the “reckless, entitlement abusing trained driver” who should be accountable on the next pedestrian squishing video. Human emotion and relative perception again.
My original statement came about because of this, I maybe mistaken but if I didn’t know better I do think there was a little of the red eyed devil going on with the car on the left. The lorry sped up, the car sped up. It was most likely playing the old “you won’t get in here” game. It’s innocent enough.
But. When dealing with accident investigation ALL mitigating human factors and behaviours have to be evaluated, without predjudice or emotion. Bare in mind, all road users, all adults, all accountable. No one is in kindergarten in this incident. If an accident is to be truly studied, all factors must be assessed if anything complete is to be learned. It’s not about blame. The pitch fork team looking for blame can miss out on further lessons once you think you’ve found the culprit.
I’ve been tally to an investigation or two in my time. In air incident investigation. Take a case of gross misconduct in performance. It’s incredibly rare in aviation but the formula stands. You simply, will not find the attitude that along the following path:-
The culprit is supposed to be highly professional and due gross misconduct upon their part, no other human factors within the case are worthy of further behavioural study, or judicial review as nothing is to be learned.
The air investigation culture has spent decades destroying and overcoming just the very attitudes that tempt people down this path that some show on here. A person or entity overwhelmingly seems responsible for an act. They’re highly trained, those around them less so. So that relative step in “perceived” accountability shifts the focus exactly upon the former. So many lessons missed. To truly study incidents you have to divorce yourself and separate all the factors. There normally isn’t just one lesson to be learned.
It’s not about blame, it’s about understanding the reasons why everyone Involved did what they did so lessons can be learned. That’s the way
in that situation, just adding to that view.