David Taylor
Using the term "dangerous" to describe a device or situation allows people to shift the blame whereas if the term "hazardous" were used instead then the responsibility for the misuse of the device or failing to act correctly in suc a situation can be correctly apportioned and dealt with.
In view of this and other similar threads there appears to be a considerable number of people who have difficulty with it.
NIP arrived. 986I think we are essentially in agreement. Except that because you don't want people to be able to weasel out of things...
MF is not attempting to shift the blame at all, he is simply trying to get people to accept their own culpability for collisions. Describing roads, vehicles or conditions as "dangerous" and resulting collisions as "an accident" allows them to shrug it off and listeners to shake their heads in sympathy.
There are also cases where people have been quite unintentionally at fault in an incident and have tried to get out of recompensing the other party because "it was only an accident".
In this context use of the term "accident" is inapproapriate because it indicates an unforseen event, whereas the vast majority of road traffic collisions are caused by human error and are therefore foreseeable if the people concerned are paying attention.
It'snot necessarily the definition of a word that is the problem, it's the way people use them. A similar situation as exists with cars and other tools.
