PRIVATE PATROLS

Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 13, 15 July 1939, Page 28

PRIVATE PATROLS

TARANAKI SCHEME

A REPLY TO "AUTOS"

"One of the main objects of an automobile association is to protect its members and assist them in any way that lies in the association's povver. We have been told repeatedly by the Minister of Transport that he wants the motorist educated in the proper use Of the roads, and we feel that our members will appreciate this attempt to, achieve that object." This statement.was made by Mr. Val Duff, secretary of the Automobile Asso- j ciation (Taranaki) in an interview in which he made a vigorous answer to recent criticism of the. association's plan to institute a system of selected road, safety patrols among its members, states the "Tai-anaki Herald." Mr. Duff found much to comment upon in the reply of "Autos" (see July 1-.) "In Lancashire, England, they have courtesy patrols;" said Mr. Duff, "and during the past year/these patrols have contacted over 1,000,000 road users, 250,000 notices have been issued to motorists, and prosecutions have dropped from 23,000 four years ago to 9000. Accidents to children have dropped by 44 per cent., and. fatal accidents have dropped by 41 per cent. CARRY OWN JUSTIFICATION. "These figures are significant in a place where these courtesy patrols are functioning, and I am quite satisfied that if we can achieve anything like that the scheme will carry its own justification. ■ . ' ' " 'Autos' takes me to task concerning my statement that 'the law does not come into it.' That really is a distortion of my statement—though no doubt an innocent distortion which is shorn of its cbntexi. What I said was that we intended as far as possible to keep our members clear of the law by giving them friendly warning if they should happen to do something which is not quite in accordance with the road code. i " 'Autos' makes a grea^.-feature of his* desire for the 'preservation of the British sense of order, law, and justice.' That is a very high-sounding phrase and a sentiment that every decent Citizen must ascribe to. At the same time if we see cne of our brother motorists doing something which is-contrary to order, law, and justice to his fellow road-user, we feel that it is more in keeping with the British sense of friendliness to one's fellows to tell that motorist what he has \done. _ feel quite certain that if he is imbued with that sense of British fairness to others he will appreciate it. GUILTY OF BOTH. "'Autos' says: 'Judgment without knowledge is not% according to Solomon, Citizen will not be deceived about-this. Ignorance and intolerance go hand in hand; it is only the understanding who are tolerant.' "I am going to say that my1 friend 'Autos' clearly shows by his expressed views that he is guilty of both —of ignorance because his articles show that he is not fully conversant with the idea of the scheme, and intolerance because he shows that he is intolerant of any genuine effort to educate motorists short of police prosecution. To adapt 'Autos's' statement, if he was more understanding he would be more tolerant. " 'Autos' says: 'Unless a man is a skilled driver he can have no right to set himself up as. a judge of others.' I ask 'Autos': What is a skilled driver and who sets the standard? It is quite true one motorist cannot decide whether another motorist is skilled or unskilled, but a man does not need to be a skilled driver—at any rate in the sense that I understand the word 'skill'—to be able to, determine whether a motorist is doing* something he should not be doing. " Autos' asks: If a policeman reports an offender twice what is the attitude of the Bench?' From such a statement I can only conclude that 'Autos' is determined that every motorist ?who offends against the rules of\the road, however slightly, must be haled before the Court to answer for his sins. That is one of the very things we are trying to obviate. We feel certain that the various members of the great family of motorists would infinitely prefer to, have a breach pointed out by brother motorists rather than be forced to answer in the court for some minor, breach." ' ; Referring to "Autos's" concluding statement, in which he raises a fresh point, that "a ¥ car's .number and the car's driver are not synonymous." Mr. Duff said: "I can only say that, in my opinion, confirms my previous statement that 'Autos' appears to be quite ignorant of the way the scheme is going to work."