|
The BBC report actually touches on that and Brunstrom makes that very point.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 19:38
|
|
My mum reads the mail and she was telling me a while ago about stories how the cheif always goes hard on private motorists but lets foriegn truck drivers off as police force is political preasure as they do not want to diescourage the truck drivers from using Hollyhead I am not sure how much truth in that. Again its Mail stuff.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 19:37
|
|
|
|
We have to face facts. Every day of every week now sees a fatal accident or a collision involving wagons on our major routes, i.e M1, M6,M40, M5 plus A roads. This now results in instant road closures with the usual scene of a crime treatment and it's costing us all MILLIONS in lost business, missed appointments, extra fuel.
Yes, I know it's some body's loved one and all that but if we held a minutes silence for everyone who died everyday, we'd all be standing still 24/7.
The millions of police hours spent investigating RTA's has not actual bought any one back from the dead and I very much doubt it ever will. As for preventing accidents, well they're still happening .
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 19:37
|
No, but it's put those responsible of killing someone behind bars. If we hadn't closed the motorway, a certain footballer wouldn't be in jail for killing two children on the M6 recently (a thread in which a great many complained of the 'leniency' of the sentence)
We wouldn't have caught a murderer, who deliberately ran someone over. The evidence of which only came about after meticulous investigation.
There are reasons why roads are closed and I'll always defend the reasons for doing so. As for Brunstrum. The man's an idiot of the highest order and how he continues to hold the position he does is beyond me.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 19:37
|
3 killed as car hits house @ 80mph (estimate of witness)
House now demolished.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7863...m
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 19:37
|
|
|
There are reasons why roads are closed and I'll always defend the reasons for doing so.
why does no other country do it? why do we do it in a country that has some of the best accident statistics in the world?
7 hours for a road closure? the local force should be charged for every hour the road is closed.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 19:39
|
I can see and understand your point of view MLC, I really can. The examples you gave illustrate that clearly.
However, I do feel that the implications of road closures are not fully taken in to consideration. If there is a compelling reason such as the extreme examples you mention, then it may well be to the greater good to close the road. I don't know enough about your work to comment any more deeply than that.
What I do know is that the effects of these delays are very far reaching. Not just on the commercial needs and plans of the occupants of the vehicles affected but on their social responsibilities.
Deals not done, goods not delivered, children not met.....the list goes on. Thousands of people and those they were en route to are affected by these road closures and quite frankly if the objective is to decide who gets the fine and points, sorry, but I don't really care.
Don't mean to be controversial or harsh but a sense of perspective is, I think, missing in some instances.
Not knocking what you guys do in any way. It must be tough and often harrowing. But the world has to keep turning too.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:38
|
|
Humph - no-one closes a road if all we're looking at is potential points and a fine. It isn't closed to fine someone, it's closed for the reasons stated above i.e. for fatal or very likely to become fatal accidents.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:38
|
|
Before the fire, police and ambulance services got all their new toys ( and each force now has tons of technology at their fingertips ) road closures lasted for a fraction of the time they do now.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:41
|
Mr X.
We also used to tell rape victims that they probably deserved it. Thankfully things have moved on for the better.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:42
|
|
|
|
As a 'motorway type', we're more than aware of the delays that are caused. But ridiculous comments like 'charge the force for every hour closed' just demonstrate complete ignorance. The road is closed for the least amount of time possible and only when really necessary. 99 times out of 100, it's hitch up the damaged cars and drag them to the hard shoulder, often at considerable risk to ourselves. Fatals are very different.
I really wish I could take each and every one of to the scene of a fatal and show just exactly what it entails, from start to finish.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:42
|
I have stood amongst the bits and pieces and you're right, it's not a pretty site. But we can't go on treating every fatal as a possible murder or manslaughter case. There just aren't the resources in terms of police time, court time and alternative routes.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:41
|
|
Yes we can and yes there are!
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:38
|
|
|
|
I wonder if there isnt just a little traffic police job justification involved. Speed cameras cant investigate accidents.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:39
|
Oh! You got me. First thing I think about. Forget the dead, I'll be able to justify me existence now!
(I'm being sarcastic, just in case it's not obvious)
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:39
|
|
Nothing personal mlc, If the traffic cop/camera ratio was more balanced mabe we wouldnt have so many fatals.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:44
|
|
|
|
|
MrX and Old Navy - I don't see any reasoned argument from you. Are you able to digest my points and understand that the actions taken are not made up by the Police but driven by a higher authority? Surely the point of the forum is for reasoned, informed debate. I suggest you have the benefit from other contributors of reason and fact but you are not able to respond in kind or you simply post to create petty annoyance. Perhaps you could answer my point about what your response would be if one of your family members died on the road? I imagine you'd have a few searching questions about what the Police had done and a suitable complaint if you thought their response inadequate or lacking in professional investigation. Can you honestly say that you think the Police are closing the road to 'play with toys' or justify their jobs? Juvenile responses methinks, not the post of an intelligent adult.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:41
|
I would accept that its a road ACCIDENT (there i used that nasty word, sorry) like we used to in the old days
perhaps we could spend the money thats investigating the few hundreds killed on motorways to try and get a cure for cancer that kills hundreds of thousands a year.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:41
|
Which nicely makes my point. We attended a pedestrain RTC. All seemed simple on the face of it. Under your methods, it would have been all swept up and Bob's your uncle.
The investigation (primarily evidence from the scene) established that the incident couldn't have happened as the driver said and he was eventually found to have deliberately run the person over.
There's a term we use 'open mind'.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:40
|
There's a term we use 'open mind'.
and the other 499? some poor driver made a mistake and the world was dropped on his shoulders. because an inapropriate amount of resource and importance was thrown at the case.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:40
|
perhaps we could spend the money thats investigating the few hundreds killed on motorways to try and get a cure for cancer that kills hundreds of thousands a year.
I doubt that its that costly, certainly compared with the millions needed for a cancer cure.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:40
|
snip
How much does a 5 hour clousre of a major motorway cost?
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:39
|
|
I'll second that. It's been said on here countless times, we have thousands of people die in our hospitals every year from infections they catch in them and through medical peoples mistakes yet we can't handle the fact that a few hundred fatalities will occur on our roads . I doubt we e can not bring that figure any lower and that it is at the lowest possible rate for the number of vehicular movements on our roads.
|
|
A few hundred? You don't really believe that, do you Mr X.
|
|
Can you honestly say that you think the Police are closing the road to 'play with toys' or justify their jobs?>>
No but will you be happy when your Subaru (or whatever) is replaced with a speed camera and you are driving a desk. I wont, I would rather you were on the road scooping up the drunks, uninsured, and idiot drivers that are a threat to us all.
Edited by Honestjohn on 01/02/2009 at 20:39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so. As for Brunstrum. The man's an idiot of the highest order and how he continues to hold the position he does is beyond me.
Who wrote the 'ACPO Road Death Investigation Manual'?
|
and as any idiot knows he spells his name Brunstrom.
Keep it civilized guys please - "Surely the point of the forum is for reasoned, informed debate"
puts it in a nutshell.
Edited by Pugugly on 01/02/2009 at 20:14
|
I would actually like to see this debate continue, particularly if it can be done in a proper manner.
This subject affects me on a regular basis and costs me quite a lot of money. If I am unable to move I am unable to earn so any road closure tends to concentrate my mind more than some.
I am interested to hear both sides but would also prefer to read reasoned arguments.
To re-open my question and pose it in a different way, there would seem, to me at least, to be an imbalance of recognition of need at present. It can not be more tragic than to lose a loved one but some of these events have a major effect on very large number of people and I guess the toughest question is where the line is drawn between the successful investigation of one horrific event and the effect of doing so on thousands of otherwise unconnected people.
|
|
I can think of at least 5 major and lengthy road closures ( mainly Motorways ) in the last 6 months that have been the result of murder victims being dumped on or close to them. This new trend is adding to the problem.
|
|
|
Two things:
Firstly, Humph makes a very good point about thousands of people being adversely affected. It sounds callous (and perhaps it is somewhat) to argue for a quick sweep-up job when clearly there can be illuminating evidence to be gathered, but the costs, and not only financial, to so many people as a result is only acceptable in exceptional cases imo. Thing is, I'm salaried, live close to my work and never need to travel to do my job. As a graphic designer I can stay at home. It would make little difference to me personally if roads were closed as before. But if you're self-employed or need to travel to earn money (say in sales) then it's a very different story.
Secondly I cannot abide the term "RTC". Eliminating the word "accident" is a simple word game and little else, designed to attribute blame where it may not be appropriate and will almost certainly judge someone's future few years, in the case of a serious accident, on the basis of an unfortunate lapse of concentration, something which few would deny occur. Accidents happen in all areas of life. Because the effects of an accident while driving are so much more extreme than dropping a coffee onto a friend's new carpet, I don't see why we should take particular exception to it. "Accident" has meant many things to many people over history but a recurring theme common to all is the 'unintended consequences'. Consequently I don't get quite so hot under the collar anymore when I hear that someone who mowed someone down received a paltry sentence. I do however think how terrible it must be to be involved and thank my lucky stars that a freak incident causing injury or death has neither occurred to me or family members or anyone else at the moment they passed. It's mostly about luck, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
Who signed the finished article. (I suspect he wasn't sat at his typewriter for a few evenings banging it out)
The man does the Police cause more damage than anyone else I know.
|
|
Doubt with his obsession with Technology he has a typewriter !
|
Oldnavy, you said: ''No but will you be happy when your Subaru (or whatever) is replaced with a speed camera and you are driving a desk. I wont, I would rather you were on the road scooping up the drunks, uninsured, and idiot drivers that are a threat to us all. ''
So you clearly applaud 'scooping up idiot drivers that are a threat to us all'??
isn't that the point of investigating these accidents properly??
|
I think he is talking about prevention.
|
|
Got it AE, I am not the most eloquent.
|
I get affected as much as anyone when roads are closed, but i fully support the reasons for doing so and am glad that in this country someone's death will be investigated to ensure that justice is done.
I care little that millions of hours are lost if just one evil person is locked up as a result, or the useless/incompetent/drunk/drugged driver who kills someone's loved one by criminal negligence or whatever reason gets their just reward.
This is not wartime, we are for the time being at least a civilised society and a persons life counts and is priceless (well in my book), long may that continue.
|
'I care little that millions of hours are lost '
You don't and I do.
|
|
There has to be a balance. It's a difficult balance to achieve. I think Humph's viewpoint is about right.
Some years back it was an accepted practice to scoop people up, brush the road down and we all got on with it....that IMO isn't acceptable in a modern civilised society, because if someone has driven like a right clown or driven with a seriously defective vehicle etc.. and killed someone, then they need to be brought to book for it, because the unnecessary death of someone ought to be the highest priority to try to prevent... and hammering someone who's caused it is a means of showing others that they ought to be more careful.
however,
closing a busy motorway during rush hour or a bank holiday weekend ought to be a decision made most sparingly and for the absolute shortest time possible e.g. a few hours tops, not 1 or 2 days. In fairness to the officers investigating these sorts of things, i believe the infrastructure needs tightening up...so the support services are available sharpish to 'get on with it' because come what may, that road has to be open in 4 hours time (or whatever). No excuses, no ifs no buts. If it costs overtime or an expensive 'call out' so be it.
I would be interested to know how much of this has become a problem since the civilianisation of some of these support posts, because their contracts do not necessarily include having to stay there to the end despite the fact you've been on duty already for 12 hours or turning out 'come what may'... as you would have to if you were in a disciplined service
|
As someone who has spent many, many, hours stuck in a stationary car as a result of an accident of some sort or other, a thought has, in these circumstances, often passed through my mind.
If the roads have to be closed for so long after accidents, fatal and otherwise, this is presumably to remove casualties, remove accident wreckage and try to work out who was to blame. I strongly suspect that, for many accidents, it's the last activity which causes the roads to be closed for the longest amount of time.
So, when they work out who was to blame for the accident, let everyone who has been inconvenienced, made late, lost money, wasted fuel, etc. as a result of the accident they have caused, know who they are and the name of their insurance company. All those who have suffered as a result could then put in a claim for their losses, and the people who cause these accidents would find their insurance premiums would have rocketed so much as a result they would be permanently off the road. Then they couldn't cause any more accidents!
|
|
gotta love chief constable brainstorm the light are on but i dont think anyones home
|
... Perhaps it is time to publicly debate some of the systems at work in the UK, ..>>
... brush the road down and we all got on with it....that IMO isn't acceptable in a modern civilised society .. >>
This practice of closing motorways/roads for hours after crashes is unique to Britain.
No other country in the world does it, civilised or uncivilised.
But then where would be bureaucracy without Britain?
[example of our leaders' topsy-turvy thinking: The Consultative Group on the Past in NI has proposed giving £12,000 to "victims" at a total cost of £40 million, whereas the yet incomplete B. Sunday inquiry has already cost £180 million].
Edited by jbif on 01/02/2009 at 23:20
|
|
Whilst I agree with jbif's thoughts - putting you on notice now that straying into non-motoring issues(The references to NI are a case in point) will be pulled. Plenty of other places to vent your spleen elsewhere on the web.
|
I agree totally with what's been said by the traffic cops on this thread. As usual they have to defend themselves and there actions again on here.
As I have stated before on another thread, the immediate road network as near to an RTC, needs proper traffic management to get the traffic flowing around these closures.
That's giving written information roadside and radio reports well in advance, so that alternative routes can be planned.
For those stuck in stationary or diverted traffic, it is usually the selfish, arrogant, "get out my way, lane hopping,I'm late" types who cause the resulting gridlock with their poor driving skills, trying to beat the queues. One or two appear to be posting here, perhaps!
We shall see. Watch the replies MLC.
So for these herberts there has to be a little nannying, because they behave like spoilt brats.They cannot think logically for themselves, or have any social skills, so other agencies need to be involved to give them a hand. I suggest better organisation of highways and local constabulary personnel/resources at these diversions to get the traffic moving fairly and quickley.
Also it's not just the investigations that keep the motorways closed. Usually road furniture is damaged and needs repairing which can take up a larger part of the day.
|
Not just road furniture, but the M3 northbound was closed for many hours on Saturday as it needed re-surfacing!
|
I drive roughly 45000 miles every year around the motorway networks of south east England, and have done so for the last seven years. The amount of time I have lost to motorway closures totals a few hours.
Annoying to get stuck in at the time, but in the great scheme of things, totally insignificant.
|
I travel less than I ever did on our Motorway net work but the amount of times I have been caught in the closure of these roads is greater than it was when I was doing 30,000 a year on them.
|
|
Does anyone think that eventually "accidents" will be investigated by a "Highways and Accident investigation Agency" who will be paid less than traffic police, have full sized 4x4s with lots of flashing lights, and have the authority to close roads. Traffic cars will be recycled into speed cameras, and insurance and tax offences will be done by database and post. Health and safety will end car chases (air power used instead) and police released from traffic duties will be employed on buracratic duties.
Edited by Old Navy on 02/02/2009 at 07:59
|
As ever, there do seem to be those who prefer to take an extreme stance on such matters. Perhaps as an excuse to vent spleens. I wouldn't like to say.
To be clear, I do not take a black or white view of this. Of course there must be situations which require in depth investigation. Any right minded individual accepts that.
My call is for balance which in my experience and opinion has tipped too far in favour of the complex analysis of some relatively simple situations.
I too have little sympathy with the aggressive press on driver who causes or contributes further to such events, but I would gently remind the more bombastic supporters of the current system that it is very much easier to take the moral high ground if one enjoys a salary and or expenses while doing so.
Certain motorways and other major roads have sections which see more than a usual amount of grief. Almost inevitably that is a function of the volume of traffic at those locations. The closure of these roads by very definition causes massive disruption.
No, of course we should not ignore the human element or deliberately cause the authorities charged with sorting out these tragedies to be constrained but I repeat my plea for a more balanced approach and an appreciation of the wider implications. Nothing more.
If that makes me a "Herbert", I apologise.
|
What gets me (or used to, don't have to drive that much anymore) is the fact that the road is closed, but then it takes the Police hours and hours to do the simple task of turning people round to take them off at the last junction!!
Doing this earlier would solve a lot of the problems. You can turn a full length artic round on a motorway with ease and obviously a car/van is no problem. But the Police seem to use this as a very last resort, if it was done earlier then they could take far longer to investigate the accident whilst minimising the impact to other road users.
|
What gets me (or used to don't have to drive that much anymore) is the fact that the road is closed but then it takes the Police hours and hours to do the simple task of turning people round to take them off at the last junction!! Doing this earlier would solve a lot of the problems. You can turn a full length artic round on a motorway with ease and obviously a car/van is no problem. But the Police seem to use this as a very last resort if it was done earlier then they could take far longer to investigate the accident whilst minimising the impact to other road users.
As you can gather, being at the sharp end, I have particularly strong views about this, especially when they are as wrong as this.
There was a recent crossover on the M6, that caused carnage and featured on the national news. The M6 was closed for a day, as both carriageways were resurfaced. Even whilst the drivers were being cut out, we had cutting torches on the central reservation to enable traffic to turn.
A reverse flow was implemented for traffic at the rear of the queue. This is not a 'simple' task, as a large amount of traffic is now flowing in the 'wrong' direction, while traffic comes towards them in the 'right' direction. It takes an awful lot of co-ordination between motorway Police, Highways Agency and local Police (to stop more traffic joining at junctions).
I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I hear this described as a 'simple' task.
|
|
There used to be gaps in the central reservation of motorway barriers for the use of the Police and for when traffic needed to be turned around during road closures. A couple of cross over accidents through them and the exaggeration pundits swooped in to action and they were sealed up.
|
As ever there do seem to be those who prefer to take an extreme stance on such matters.
I am not intending to be extreme, the traffic police have already been partially hived off to the Highways Agency, thin edge of the wedge? How many government agencies do we have now? I very mutch hope not, the more traffic police on the road the better in my view. They have the training, and discretion that automated systems dont. But as always it is down to money, and the cheapest option will probably happen eventually. As I am retired the only way motorway closures effect me is if I miss a flight to somewere hot and sunny, and insurance covers that, I do feel for the people who are trying to earn a crust though.
|
Humph - you said: ''I too have little sympathy with the aggressive press on driver who causes or contributes further to such events, but I would gently remind the more bombastic supporters of the current system that it is very much easier to take the moral high ground if one enjoys a salary and or expenses while doing so.''
You still seem to suggest that the ensuing investigation and road closure by the Police is a stance of 'taking the moral high ground' . Don't you understand the concept of doing what one is employed and required to do? If you refer to my previous post about serving the coroner you'll understand that the criticisms in the whole of this thread are inappropriately aimed at the Police in general. For 'enjoys a salary' read: being paid to work. You differentiate the police from any other paid employee as 'enjoying a salary' and allude to getting something for nothing. Exactly what do you mean?? Similarly, exactly what 'expenses' do you refer to??
This has reduced to the level of petty sniping whilst ignoring the facts. The criticisms should be aimed at our lawmakers. I repeat myself, but it's extremely short-sighted to criticise the public face of a far larger process.
Again I say that the forum should be for informed, reasoned debate. I emphasise informed (having some knowledge) and reasoned ( with some evidence for one's argument). Sadly your comments in the paragraph I quote fall outside of these parameters without some qualification.
I recognise and accept the cost to businesses and other people but note one previous poster who is realistic about time lost in such hold-ups. How much time have you actually lost?
And I must refer again to my previous comments that no-one has responded to: if a member of your family died on the road would it be acceptable to clear up the mess and simply record an accident or would you be looking for someone to blame?? Do you honestly think you'd accept 'accident' as closure in this event??
|
|
My interpretation of Humph's post is that it was aimed at the people in the tailback not the Cops - i.e. the salaried/expenses person rather than the self employed businessman who is earning a crust (or not earning when sitting in a queue)
|
|
Ah, I see what you mean, and apologise unreservedly to Humph if that's the case.
|
Sorry if my comments are misleading. The discussion of remuneration is not aimed at the officers attending but at all members of society affected. In other words those who claim not to be concerned by being delayed if there is some greater good being served. It was not intended to be specific to any one group.
All I was drawing attention to is that those of us who rely on the road network to travel long distances on a regular basis to earn self-employed rewards perhaps notice the cost effect of delays, whatever their cause, more acutely than those who will be paid anyway whether they reach their destination on time or not and in particular those who will have their fuel funded for a wasted journey .
If every time you were affected by such a closure you lost a days pay and also had to write off any costs of the journey abandoned it might just elicit a somewhat more jaded view.
My apologies if it did not read that way, I was certainly not sniping at anyone. I repeat, merely calling for more balance.
As for your last paragraph. It so happens that I do have a very personal experience of the sort of scenario you describe but would feel it inappropriate to use it as a discussion point.
Sorry if I have irritated or upset anyone., that was absolutely not my intention. I am though, interested in reading rational debate from any relevant standpoint on the justification or otherwise for long term closure of major roads given the impact it has on such large numbers of people.
|
Humph, my apologies are required here. I've misread and misinterpreted you post. I take your point and understand what you say. I enjoy the discussion and didn't mean to offend, but I suspect your smart enough to see that and not be offended.
I'm going to pass the blame to my refilling glass - friends and children round to play in the snow and I've enjoyed a convivial meal and few drinks!! very sorry....
|
Hey no probs woodster ! Just underlines how careful we all all have to be in the way we phrase things I guess.
The trouble with the written word is that it can so easily be read in so many different ways. If we were having this conversation face to face, tone of voice and body language would have added the correct emphasis I think.
Forgotten and moved on !
;-)
|
'If every time you were affected by such a closure you lost a days pay and also had to write off any costs of the journey abandoned it might just elicit a somewhat more jaded view.'
I have been more than once and believe me, very few clients who are not on the road continually, rarely give credence to the fact that your lateness or non appearance was totally out of your control.
|
I have been more than once and believe me very few clients who are not on the road continually rarely give credence to the fact that your lateness or non appearance was totally out of your control.
Appreciate the impact is less immediate than a loss of earnings but the salaried managers of salaried techys/trainers/caseworkers/ junior managers have much the same attitude as clients!!!
|
I find all this discussion bizzare in the extreme.
I've managed to do just over 200,000 miles in the last 8 years. In that time I've missed one appointment and been seriously delayed around 4 times.
And the appointment I missed was because of a broken down lorry on the slip road where the two A14s join around Cambridge, oh and because I was running late as I got up half an hour late ......
|
And I must refer again to my previous comments that no-one has responded to:
I did - see above
a member of your family died on the road would it be acceptable to clear up the mess and simply record an accident
yes
Do you honestly think you'd accept 'accident' as closure in this event??
Yes
And dont say "I am sure you wouldnt really react like that if it really happened." It has and I did.
Edited by Honestjohn on 03/02/2009 at 09:33
|
|
Was there a police investigation prior to your decision ?
|
Or to put it another way:
" Mr AE?"
"Can I come in"
"Sorry I've got some bad news, would you like to sit down?"
"........................................................."
"We think ............................... happened but due to the fact that we had to open up the road in the least possible time we did not collect any evidence. Anyway its only an accident and no one will be prosecuted"
"Bye"
|
IMHO AE is making this up. For someone not to want justice or an explanation why a family member or loved one ended up dead in a RTC is totally cold hearted, and a no brainer.
I would have expected AE to respond with this in their first post. Considering the loss and pain of such an incident, I would be chomping at the bit to get this written in earlier in the thread. Not the eighth post!
|
For someone not to want justice or an explanation why a family member or loved one ended up dead in a RTC is totally cold hearted and a no brainer.
most people see things completely differently when it's their own...an understandable human trait....but nevertheless an irritating one when their view is usually opposed to something
personal grief somewhat focuses the mind doesn't it ...trouble is at one end of the spectrum it puts things into perpsective, but at the other it clouds your judgement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
