Motor Horn Outlawed By Mr. Semple

Northern Advocate, 9 July 1938, Page 10

Motor Horn Outlawed By Mr. Semple

1 Per Press Association. < m?njng/u.]

WELLINGTON. This Day. The Minister of Transport, the Hon. R. Semple, to-day disallowed all bylaws throughout the Dominion relating to the sounding of warning devices on motor vehicles. More than 50 sets of by-laws are affected. The Minister stated that he proposed to deal with the sounding of warning devices by regulation. Uniformity would be achieved, and the usual excuse for “excessive hornblowing" in built-up areas would he removed. A Detriment. “The Road Safety Council unanimously recommended mo to disallow by-laws requiring the use of a horn or other warning device on approaching intersections in urban areas,” raid Mi Semple. “The council expressed the opinion that it was not conducive to good driving to require that a horn sounded at every crossroad, and. indeed, tHe better driver was the man who did not use the horn in these circumstances.”

Mr Semple said that a special subcommittee of the Road Safety Council had made a very thorough investigation of the question, and obtained evidence from overseas. The recommendation of the sub-committee went much further than it was proposed to go at the present time. “As used by many drivers,” said Mr Semple, “the horn is merely a declaration that they are on the road and that all other drivers must look out. The louder the blast at an intersection generally the faster the speed of the approach. Drive on your vision, not on the other fellow’s hearing, should be the rule.” The Road Safety Council believes that the all-too-prevalent practice of unnecessary horn-blowing went beyond the creation of nerve-deranging noise, said Mr Semple. It robbed a true emergency signal of much of its effect, it encouraged speeding and reckless approach to bends, corners and intersections, and it tended to the embarrassment and confusion of other users of roads and streets. Some Exceptions. The council, considered that there were cases in the city where the blowing of a horn was justifiable, to warn a pedestrian who was about to place himself in danger, or to warn a car ahead, but, generally speaking, the safe driver in built-up areas should find no need whatever, apart from cases of emergency, to sound his horn. “On country roads, the position may be different,” said Mr Semple. “There the element of nuisance is not present and in remote districts the horn has its greatest justification. In cities, however, the value of the horn as a warning device is smothered by a mass of unnecessary and unintelligentlyapplied sounds. The council is definitely of the opinion that if the use of the horn is restricted the horn will gain immeasurably in effectiveness, and safer driving will result.”