I'm a bit late in posting this but just got to know about this news today after coming back from a holiday. Apparently the writeup on Star paper on Sunday was a bit different from the online writeup here http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2015...t-Family-Death/

The writeup of the manner of accident is intriguing and raises some questions. Firstly, it was said that the speeding Myvi crashed onto the Mitsubishi Pajero Sport when the Pajero was struck on the rear when the vehicle was trying to merge into the fast lane. The sentence "when trying to merge into the fast lane" may suggest that the Pajero may be driven at moderate speeds. I was suprised that the speeding Myvi that hit the rear of the Pajero had caused the vehicle to overturn several times as reported. The crash must be pretty bad. Though the driver of the Myvi survived that crash I presume. What baffles me is how can a larger and heavier Pajero Sport overturned several times and the smaller and lighter Myvi seemed to be intact with the driver having "minor injury".

Secondly, it was reported that the crash caused the three occupants in the Pajero Sport to be thrown out from the vehicle. Presuming the seatbelts are on, how could that possibly happen? Or the crash is seriously terribly bad that the seatbelts failed to secure the occupants and snapped, causing all three to be flung out from the vehicle?

Any thoughts? Really bad news this one as the deceased had left behind two young daughters.

pajero is got higher point of gravity. Myvi got lower gravity. when crash happen, its likely myvi just bulldozer the pajero and cause it to lose balance.

Another version with graphics was posted online on FB I believe. It depicts the first MyVi from the fast lane grazed the Pajero on the middle lane (Pajero may also have switched to the fast lane close to where 1st MyVi was overtaking). Upon graze impact Pajero countered hard to left and lost control, swerving to the left-most lane where the 2nd speeding MyVi from the left crashed (probably to the left side of) the Pajero, causing it to turned turtle... The first MyVi must have ran away (or did it..?), leaving the 2nd MyVi damaged at the front... If you look at the aftermath, the rear of the Pajero looks almost intact without much impact damage.

In short, 1st MyVi grazed the right side of Pajero, then Pajero lost control and veered to the left where 2nd MyVi crashed onto the left of the Pajero...

This post has been edited by Eithanius: May 5 2015, 09:19 PM

I highly doubt the passengers wore seatbelts, which is why they died.

Basically the Myvi must have made the Pajero lose control.

Btw., you still think that safety features are not so important? Defensive driving more important, and it all depends on fate? Seatbelts and airbags could have saved the Pajero passengers. Stability control might even have prevented the car from losing control and rolling.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: May 5 2015, 09:49 PM

It was a Pajero Sport with ASTC (stability control) and 6 airbags, which were all deployed in the accident. It was T-boned at high speed by a second Myvi, which caused it to roll. The only question was, whether they wore seatbelts.

If you are not aversive to /k, there is a 95 page tered there with news and some info.

https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/3567352

Select images from that tered. Credits to the TS



This post has been edited by dares: May 5 2015, 10:46 PM

For sure they didn't. No man will ever flung out of the vehicle that is supposed to protect him as a shell.

Some people thought they sit in a high big tough car they don't need to put on seatbelts.

If no seatbelt, airbags wont deployed right?

According to Paul's website, the Pajero Sport Euro edition (which was involved in this accident), has 6 airbags but NO Stability Control..

Some cars rely to airbag impact sensor to deploy the airbags, not all rely to seatbelt pre-tensioner and airbag impact sensor to active airbag deployment.

Myvi doesn't, so is Vios first generation.

Pajero is a very tall SUV while Myvi is much lower. Then if the SUV was hit at relatively higher speeds at an angle from the side rear then it will easily spin (just like the technique that police use to spin criminal's cars they're chasing). Then there's another speeding myvi at the other lane hitting it again presumably at another angle from the side, so no surprise that it rolled over, with or without VSC. To make matter worse there's a chance that at those wee hours, the Pajero driver might be a bit sleepy and hence swerved unexpectedly at even lower speeds resulting in a much bigger speed difference with the speeding myvis, and he was not in the proper condition to also do any sort of last ditch attempt to correct it. I know this last bit is speculation but it's not impossible too, who knows.

As for how come they're thrown out, maybe they just didn't wear seat belts? This though with thorough investigation should be able to get confirmed whether the seat belts were functioning properly but they didn't wear them, or it was faulty (but I doubt it was faulty for all 3 passengers).

Sos? I can't find it in Potan

This post has been edited by dares: May 6 2015, 01:37 AM

SOS KICAP

No mentions of ESC in the post, comments section got la

I see, I stand corrected then. I guess if it had, maybe it would've avoided the second collision....but now we'll never know.

This post has been edited by dares: May 6 2015, 01:42 AM

Seatbelts are very, very tough. So it's extremely unlikely, especially all 3 seatbelts.

I hope this incident will be made use of to make people wear seltbelts at all times. If you crash without seatbelts, even if it is the latest Volvo, you'll be dead. Seatbelts are the very basis of safety equipment, the foundation. Without a seatbelt everything else is useless.

Agreed on the seatbelts. Saw an accident a couple of years back where a motocyclist had a head on collision with a small truck. Motocyclist died due to impact and the truck driver was thrown through the front windshield. Another is a cousin of mine, had a head on impact with a tree at high speed after a drinking session, he was seriously injured but the seatbelt save his life.

actually how fast was the pajero?

link pls?

I wished I could find back the link... Saw it on the FMC FB site or its sister FMurderC FB site couple of days back... It's probably a snapshot of an illustration taken from a malay daily...

EDIT: found it...!



This post has been edited by Eithanius: May 6 2015, 03:31 PM

The death is fated. Whatever stability control that you think "might" have prevented the car from losing control. It might, it might not. But it is fated. You cannot turn back time to change fate.

I concur... Whether with ESC or not, it is the 2nd myvi which hit the Pajero on its side, causing the latter to turn turtle...

There is a limit to everything, not only traveling speed of the vehicle but the manner the vehicle's steering is controlled by the driver. When the limit is exceeded, whatever stability thing will be rendered useless.

It takes minimum 2 retards to make the sheet happens.
While the Myvi drivers racing are wrong, doesn't means that the Pajero driver is right either.
The only thing that makes Pajero driver right is because he died. If the Myvi driver died, then the Pajero driver would take the blame.
If not going to overtake, there's no excuse to simply change lane.

If this indeed true then yellow myvi is not at fault is she?

Why not at fault...?

She was racing... some more speeding on the left lane... If she wasn't speeding, she would have been able to brake on time... Even not speeding and crashed on the Pajero, the impact wouldn't be so great to cause it to turn turtle...

Anyway, just let the police investigate, we can just end the speculation here...

Who change lane?

I read in the paper that Pajero changed lane.

pajero lost control and spun to her lane right? so she was not the one who caused the accident to happen.

in her defense, she may not brake on time to stop the second collision even she drive moderately

If the Myvis were neither racing nor at fault, why rest of the group members fled the accident scene in the 1st place?

Yes, you can't turn back time. But these deaths could have easily been averted by something as simple as them wearing their seatbelts. Maybe stability control may have avoided the accident in the first place, but in any case they did not have to be dead, even in the car they were driving. What I am preaching is that by taking a couple of basic security precautions... wearing seatbelts, buying a safe car if the budget allows, you can greatly reduce the risk of dying in a car accident. Nothing to do with fate. All about reducing risk. Even though it can't be 100% eliminated you can lower the risk a lot. If you are doing all sorts of stupid stunts on a bike, do you expect to live long? Drive very fast, weave through traffic, especially in the wet? No. Sooner than later you'll end up in a deadly accident. Call that fate?

Well, I'll just enjoy the fact that I'm European and thus fated to live a long life... apparently fate (or God) doesn't like Malaysians. At least the ones believing in fate.

Your faith begin with seatbelts on and place your child in a proper child seat before you set off. Even Jesus Mohamad Budda wouldn't be able to protect you without seatbelts or childseat. It's a no brainer.

There are contradictory elements in your post above if you are not aware of it. While I agree on taking precautions, reducing risk does not eliminate death completely as death can still happen even if one has taken all necessary precautions including wearing seatbelts and driving a safe car with stability control. Fate still plays a part in this context.

If you can predict your own future and are absolutely sure you will live until 100 years then it is appropriate to say you are "fated" to live a long life. Otherwise it is improper usage of the term. Fate is something that predetermines events. A more appropriate word to use in replacement of "fated" is expected.

Seatbelts don't need to snap for passengers to get flung out of their vehicles, esp when it involves a roll which all the windows will shatter on the first rotation allowing the passengers to be flung out. Our standard 3 point harness is made for head on collision but offers little protection in a roll. For that you need a 4 to 5 point harness used by racing cars that straps you tightly to the seats without any leeway. There are plenty of articles on the lack of safety in our standard 3 point harness in the event of a violent roll over.

Yes sir, you are right on this
But on another sport car accident recently the driver also flew. On the newspaper it shows that the seat belt still intact from its original place. The seat part is still look good despite the front and rear are badly damaged. So, 4, 5 or 6 point harness does not protect a person when the driver refuses to use it.
If post 19's photo correct, then it maybe showing that the people in Pajero never wear seat belt. Since wearing seat belt in Malaysia is not a must.

Wouldn't the car make annoying sound if vehicle travels above certain speed limit without putting on seat belts

Read yesterday's papers. The reporting on News Straits Times are more explicit than The Star. It was reported that the lady driver in the Myvi was saying there was insider help from Myvi Club and this had created some havoc and tension as people are slamming the lady on Facebook. Even her home address was traced and published.

The News Straits Times also reported that Myvi Club members are also advised to take off their car stickers for safety reasons. From yesterday's papers it was said that 90% of the investigation was completed. Looks like the Myvi cars may be in racing mode on the fateful day that caused the death of the 3 occupants in the Pajero Sport.

Good information in that occupants can still be flung out from the vehicle despite having the safety belt on. I was wondering how this could happen but guess only extreme real life situations whereby the car was in a 360 degrees rotation for 2 to 3 times. No wonder race drivers had different seat belt configurations which the body was strapped firmly to the seats. Guess only those who had experience in the race tracks would know.

You surely are optimistic to know that you are fated to live a long life as a European though your last paragraph revealed your ignorance on the subject matter. As in your usual self you always make silly statements.

The pajero has side airbags and deployed. So now the question is they fly out first or air bag deployed first?

Usually they will ignore it.

wow. .but that noise is seriously annoying..mine make sound even for passenger seat n even if the passenger is a small boy. But it's s good reminder. .not sure y ppl ignore seat belts

Airbags inflate and then deflate almost immediately. It does not form a obstructive object as seen in Hollywood which you have to hack your way out of an airbag. In this case the side airbags aren't going to stop you from getting flung out.

If Malaysian think of safety all the time, then no need to have 15-20 fatalities everyday. Ignoring seat belts are tradition.

But from inflate till deflate it will take few seconds. And this time will be enough to prevent people from flying out.
Unless the pajero also join the group and race with the myvis.

It makes sense if the lady and the baby were sat as back passengers, in which most passengers at the back won't buckle up, typical of Malaysians... And there's no annoying sound for back seat belts unfastened...?

As for the guy...

This post has been edited by Eithanius: May 7 2015, 03:10 PM

From inflation to deflation is less than a second. The airbag is only made to take one hit and actually deflates as you are hitting it so that it does not crush your face.

Usually back seat does not have sensor.
Again, we need to make wearing seat belt as habit.

I think should be 1-2 seconds.
Still, let police and jpj do the job.
Unless the pajero had 2 impacts, 1st impact they are still inside, airbag deployed follow by 2nd impact that throw them out.
If they were thrown out on 1st impact, obviously they never wear seat belt. As no matter how useless the 3 point seat belt is, it will still give some restrictions.

This post has been edited by supersound: May 7 2015, 03:22 PM

Of course you can't eliminate death completely. You can reduce the risk. Every bit you do to reduce risk helps. Now if you want to call the remaining risk fate... fine. I'd call it remaining risk, but fate will work. But at least do all to reduce the risk. After all people live in gated condos and do all sorts of stuff to protect themselves, but then when sitting in a car they can't put on their seatbelts? That's my main issue with fate. It gives away all responsibilities. People who believe in fate tend to avoid doing things they don't want to, in order to protect themselves. Seen that many times. "Oh, I don't need a safe car, if I die it is fate." But at the same time they'll take some food supplement to prolong their life, because they want to, and there it's not fate. So fate is just an excuse to be lazy, to be stingy, ...

@sleepwalker: It's less likely to fall out of the car though with a seatbelt. Even in a rollover. And considering that everyone left the car...? But we'll have to wait for the result of the investigations to know for sure... I really hope that if they find that they didn't wear the seatbelts the police, government and press makes sure to mention that. And that they would probably be still alive had they worn the seatbelt. Maybe it will make some people wear their seatbelt in future...

@Dwango: 3 point seatbelts are a compromise between giving good protection yet convenience. We can see how people are reluctant to put on even the 3 point seatbelt (2 point is worse, as your body isn't kept back). Imagine a 4 point, 5 point, 6 point harness. It's much more restrictive, and much harder to put on. Safety technology works, just look at race cars and how they crash. They can have very violent crashes, and just get out of the car and walk away. Unfortunately that sort of technology is very cumbersome, so car makers try to protect you as good as possible without having to resort to a roll cage, 6 point seatbelts, helmets etc. Some effort is still required though.

Now... put on a seatbelt. Try to leave it. It IS possible, but it is rather difficult, especially given that when there is an accident the seatbelt will pull you towards the seat, into the seat. Escaping that is not easy. One way is when you lean back the seat a lot and crash frontally... you may slide under the seatbelt. But that's not what could have happened here.

I have seen devices to educate people on the importance of seatbelts... like, you get into a specially prepared car shell, put on the seatbelt, and then they will roll the car shell (it's like a wheel). People will stay inside. Or ones where you are on a car seat that's propelled forward and then suddenly stops. To show the importance of a seatbelt. Maybe such devices should be created in Malaysia and then toured around the country... like demonstrating it on shopping center car parks etc. Go from school to school and demonstrate it to the kids and their parents. Those who think they don't need a seatbelt can try without... so the car interior needs to be soft. And when they fail at a very slow speed maybe they realize their mistake. Clearly some very basic education needs to be done.

My last statement was not serious, I was poking fun at people believing in fate. I do believe that when you do a bit effort to reduce the risk in a car accident it helps, and I try to do that, as it is common with people in Europe. Obviously I am not invincible. Fate doesn't exist.

As for the sound the car makes... you can buy fake seatbelts to deactivate the alarm for example.

@supersound: Given how fast airbags deploy I'd say the airbag deployed first, however they may have hit the airbag while it was deploying, and in any case it won't stop you from existing the car, where you get hurt even more. The deflation happens much faster... it's not a rock solid thing... well, initially it is, but only for a couple of ms perhaps.

The Pajero Sport don't come with side nor curtain airbag. Those are not airbags, it's just interior liner falling apart.



This post has been edited by IpohLad: May 8 2015, 06:34 AM

No, you wouldn't get flung out of the car if you use the seat belt properly. They didn't use seat belts and child seat obviously.

Start from 1:19min. You can clearly see the dummy did going downward when the car is tip over at 180, but safe by the seat belt strap on it's lap



This post has been edited by IpohLad: May 8 2015, 07:52 AM

My bad, that's why Malaysia are special, we are stripped by AP to buy stripped safety cars, yet we still say it is superior

Already told this to him, but he refuse to accept it and keep on saying the normal seat belt are unsafe
For me, the normal seat belt no matter how unsafe it is, if we buckle it up, it will still safe us from flying out
At least we still can die inside our car rather than thrown out.

would you prefer to die inside a car bro? no body wants to die in a car crash, inside or outside.

airbag fully inflate under 100ms after first impact, then will rapidly deflate.

In some sense you are right.
But then on the road fatalities daily in Malaysia says that you are wrong. Malaysian like to die in road accidents

At this point I would think they have no choice but to die on the road because they drive coffins (some can even self-cremate) on crappy roads to hell...

That's why I said, attitude are more important than getting a "safe" car.

excellent vid. I dont have the source, but in US rollover accident survey, with the proper usage of seatbealts, ejection of passenger is prevented 99% of the time

Or seat belts on Pajero defective? Not the first time from Mitsubishi.

Should be Euro spec Pajero Sport which does come with side and curtain airbags. The big problem is that without seatbelts those are useless.

As to attitude matters... it does, but in a SUV without side airbags the passengers heads would be banging against the interior of the car, which can at least injure them. Still better than having a safe car but not wearing seatbelts of course.

Totally agreed on this one.

Nowadays people having mental stress and you just need a trigger point to blow

Its the limited edition Euro Pajero Sport VGT. RM180k. 6 airbags but without ESC

The investigation was already wrapped up by police and experts by now but there was no mention on the details of the accident other than the accused being brought to justice. Looks like the media may not be interested in publishing the details? I only read about articles implementing safety seatbelts for baby seats and a full page on The Star or News Straits Times on MIROS president Dr Wong supporting the use of safety seatbelts and overall driving ethics.

It would be surprising if the driver (deceased) in the Pajero Sport did not have his seat belt on. If it was on, whether the seatbelt had snapped through the impact. Also, there is no mention whether the wife is sitting at the front passenger seat or the back seat. I was wondering why the media did not publish these details. Does anybody have the details or report of the accident apart from the Myvi grazing the Pajero and another Myvi colliding head-on to the Pajero that caused it to overturn several times?

In the news today, saw Siti Noor Aini and Mohammad Fizal being charged at the magistrate's court with Siti covering her face with a scarf.

The pajero driver did right was to die? Where did that came from?

Whatever the cause maybe, who caused it, this debate wont reverse what already happened. Instead, we should focus on how to improve safety and enforcement to ensure road safety for everyone.

It would be good if he and the Pajero passengers get most of the blame, because what they could have done to avoid certain death is rarely done by Malaysians. But it is easier to blame a few racers. Not that what they did was ok, but we can't stop others from doing stupid things (and trying to do so is dangerous and illegal). All we can do is protect ourself in case someone else causes an accident and try not to be the one that does.

In this case the person causing it was racing. In another case it may be unsecured freight. Tyres used long past their prime. Someone falling asleep at the wheel, or being too busy with their phone. Getting distracted by a kid. etc.

There is no conclusive evidence that they did not wear their seatbelts, and sleepwalker has already mentioned the regular 3-point seatbelts is not foolproof especially in a rollover.

Since they are charged in court, all details will be withheld as evidence until the court hearing and judgement. Only then will they be able to publish the findings otherwise it would interfere with the jury's decisions.

Someone correct me... but AFAIK Malaysia judiciary do not use the jury system.... the judge will decide.. i.e one man/woman.

We used to have juries. Last jury case in 1994. I still used to using the words jury. Judge or jury doesn't matter. It's an on going case which they cannot publish the results of the findings until the case is over.

What this tells me is that Pajero isn't a very safe vehicle. Look at the condition of the Pajero, almost broken into half. No structural strength at all.

This post has been edited by KennyKB: May 10 2015, 01:37 PM

No vehicle are safe nowadays, 5 star CAP are just meant for marketing, to charge more, that's all.
Does a Porsche a safe racing car? Yes indeed it is. But the recent accident that cause that stupid racer's brain to splash on another car makes the Porsche not "safe". But if you managed to look at the photo, the whole car almost deformed but the seat structure still intact. What makes that car not "safe" is because that jerk never wear seatbelt.

Some people are still oblivious to the perils of not taking seatbelts seriously even after this recent news. This photo was taken 2 days ago. There are 2 young kids on the front passenger seat without any seatbelts.

Then
In Seremban, there's a family driving below a bridge's roundabout, the small boy are jumping inside the front passenger seat and thrown out then ramp by a truck.
Yours are nothing since nothing happen

And that is a bloody shame. At this point the incident could still be used to educate people and move some to wear seatbelts and use child seats. By the time the trial is on no one cares anymore, and it will be a footnote.

Not surprised those kids weren't wearing any seatbelts or using child seats (with seatbelts). All the media and the public focus on is the Myvi racers. While those did cause the accident to happen in the first place, it is (probably) caused by

http://www.lieffcabraser.com/Personal-Inju...-Failures.shtml
This source is trying to paint a bleak picture about seatbelts... as they want to start a class A lawsuit. But even so they say that: "Almost 2,000 of the over 10,000 persons that died in rollover accidents were wearing their seat belts, and about 1,000 of these persons were partially or fully ejected from the vehicle." 2000 out of 10000 deaths were wearing a seatbelt, which makes it pretty clear that it is much more likely to die without a seatbelt (I'm sure somewhere there are stats that show that Americans aren't too bad with wearing seatbelts, though nowhere near perfect). Half of those with a seatbelt did get ejected out of the car. Now, how likely is it that the seatbelt failed for all 3 passengers, when the chance of the seatbelt failing is already pretty small for even one passenger?

It should be quite safe to assume that the people in the Pajero did not protect themselves, yet there is nothing about that in the media, is there? It would have been a great chance to increase awareness and change behavior in the public, so that at least something good comes out of this tragic accident. Instead people focus their hate on Myvis.

(If I was cynical enough I'd say Proton sponsors those media reports... anyone out there who still wants to buy a Myvi? And is Perodua trying to do damage control?)

This post has been edited by kadajawi: May 11 2015, 12:25 AM

to me,
its a highway, crusing at speed is normal,
kena knock til lost control is not normal,
duno how to react is normal (malaysia driving school standard),
stunned/slow reaction for out of sudden situation is normal,
a vehicle suddenly came into your way from horizontal direction is not normal
attitute is a problem,
all pasengers kena thrown out is not normal.

All in all, its an accident....wan speed and zig zag pls do with skills, mayb if tat 2nd myvi skillful know how to do 180 degree emergency spin can impact with pajero from side, then mayb no ppl die, or mayb myvi driver head knock into mirror and kill herself, or mayb another real sport car/pajero from behind sandwich her and kill her

haiz, to me i blame government, 2pid uneven highway, imba driving schools standard, imba regulation enforcement, imba vehicle quality standards, imba infrastructure causing driving is compulsary, lauzy road designs/engineering/development planning etc~~~~~

Is it really the governments fault that people are too stupid to put on their seatbelts? It's in their own interest.

Though maybe they are to blame...

u sounds like the same people blaming ladies wearing too sexy for being rape

i don't care whether the pajero ppl wear seatbelt or not,i don't care whether the myvi was racing dangerously on PUBLIC ROAD

the thing is you knock people at warp speed,now you are completely wrong

even the pajero passenger didn't flung out,a piece of metal could pierce them and die either,there are a thousand scenario you could die as long as you get hit at high speed

That is clearly not my intention, it is too unfortunate that that connection can be drawn.

But everyone should know that they should put on their seatbelts to protect themselves and their loved ones. You don't do that, you risk your life. Point proven by the Pajero folks.

You can't stop others from doing stupid shit, and sometimes we ourselves, no matter how careful, will do a mistake. That is HUMAN. You only need to misjudge things once. Be a bit too tired when driving. And you can crash. Given that a crash can ALWAYS happen, heck, even in a car park, it is only sensible to put on your seatbelt. Should anything happen you have got the most important protection that you can have already covered.

The wrecked Pajero btw. looks pretty decent, I've seen much worse car wrecks that the passengers have survived... because they were wearing seatbelts!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyigWhdSqco
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abuaYiyk-xQ

Staying in the car helps a lot in not getting killed.

from my POV... based on the CCTV, the 4x4 were on the right most lane (fast lane and travelling quite fast) and upon seeing those myvi (racing), he switched to the middle lane but those myvi would assume that the 4x4 wouldn't change lane, thus overtake on the mid lane, at the speed they are going... fail to slow down/avoid the 4x4 that change lane thus the crash

Frankly, we have seen those racing on the road and most of the time, it doesn't gives a shit for u to switch lane even with signal indicator. Saw too many on NSE

This post has been edited by Intrigue: May 11 2015, 09:45 AM

Just drive at 140km/h and apply sudden brake, see will those so-called superior safety features will help to balance your car or not?
If we do our part with the right attitude, then everyday no need to have 15-20 people died on road accidents

A lot of people until now still thinks : driving 110km/h shall stay on right lane.
This is wrong, as long as your speed are constant, you shall be staying on middle or left lanes.
And when I see a fast car coming near to me, I won't change lane, if that fellow wants to overtake from left, just let it be.

Still surprising if you just think in the lines of Myvi vs Pajero Sport and the Myvi wins.

all i want to say is that,just because somebody didn't wear seat belt doesn't entitle you to knock them or drive dangerously, in fact you have to drive even more carefully knowing there's people who didn't wear seat belts

Yes. That is correct because their perception is you (in front) will stay on same lane, resulting them to zoom past us on the left lane. If we sudden swerve to left, they might crahs onto us

On this case, I prefer to be a retard, get flash, honk or middle finger being show to me
At least that bugger behind me and me still alive, 1 is to show, 1 is to see.

And you are absolutely right about that. I never tried to justify the Myvi drivers actions.

What I am saying is that as a normal, decent person on the road you also have the obligation to protect yourselves and your loved ones. The main thing is seatbelts, followed by buying a safer car when you are going to buy a car anyway. You don't need to spend much on safety these days. Had the Pajero people followed these rules (they did to a certain degree, that Pajero Euro spec is a decent car) they could have averted their deaths. Blame for the accident (so far) goes to the Myvi drivers, but blame for the deaths have to be shared.

As far as the rape analogy goes I would say I am not telling women to dress less sexy, but to bring along peper spray. Something so they can defend themselves. To protect themselves.

The rule of sticking to the slow lane is there to avoid events like this, and it works in countries where people follow it. Big speed difference need not be dangerous, as Germany proves. There can be lorries on the slow lane doing 80, with everyone else doing something between 80 and 250. And it works, no crashes. Lots of very different speeds on a 2 or 3 lane highway, without being dangerous.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: May 11 2015, 09:09 PM

i agree 1000% with you on this point

This post has been edited by Valentino46: May 12 2015, 04:52 AM

First you say it's risk fate. Then later on you say fate doesn't exist. Which is which? Don't need to complicate things, live in denial or try being smart. Fate is something that exists.

When sugar is sweet, you don't say it isn't sweet, or sweet doesn't exist.

Where did I say it is fate? Fate does not exist.

There is a risk in driving/being on the roads, and that is related to the way you behave on the road, where you drive, what you drive, ... it can be higher, it can be lower. That's all.

People who believe in fate, and thus neglect things like wearing seatbelts, buying safe cars, behaving properly on the road, they will live shorter lives. There's proof for that, and it's a big difference. Fatality rates in Europe are much lower than in Malaysia/South East Asian countries.

their cars are proper cars

unlike our overly expensive stripped down versions

Your post surely sounds stupid. You still don't have a grasp on the definition of the term fate.

I guess it is your style to write not only contradictory statements but also points which are out of context, repeating on the same facts when people are referring to something else.