Do I need to confess how I drive?

[Socrates92]

I take issue with defining safety and conformity with laws as one and the same. That seems like a sloppy (dangerous?) way of addressing safety. The latter half of your post confuses me. Are you saying that safety, and not the law itself, is the prime measure of morality in driving? It seems like you’re mixing two issues together.

 

[Irishmom2]

I am saying laws are there for safety when driving and should be followed. Not sure why you think following the law is dangerous or sloppy. Too many people think speeding is no big deal. Talking on the phone, etc as they drive. The second part was that some people that are disregarding the driving laws are sticklers on CAF about following the laws of Catholicism.

 

[Cruciferi]

Just today I was going down a four lane road. I was in the curb lane going about 38mph. The vehicle to my left decelerated to turn left onto a side street. Well, the person behind him wasn’t gonna wait for that! So, he quickly merged into my lane and we nearly collided. I’d estimate that there were two feet between us! Had I not braked quickly, they would’ve taken out my front end and I would’ve destroyed their right rear passenger side. Well, after that they merged back into the left lane and drove about 55mph away. UNBELIEVABLE!

 

[TK421]

Yes, dangerous driving habits should be confessed. It is against the law of love.

 

[John_Martin]

In society morality is rendering to your neighbor what is due to your neighbor whether your neighbor is the governing Authority or the individual driver on the road.
Since the statutory speed limit is posted, your neighbors are expecting you to be accountable to that speed limit and are depending on you to do that.
When you take liberties with the speed limit you are taking something away from your neighbors on the highway which is: their justifiable. anticipation that you will be obeying the speed limits, and not creating anxiety for them when you race around them with the rest of the traffic that refuses to follow the speed limit.
You are also bearing false witness against your neighbor who is following the speed limits by saying that the people obeying the speed limits are the causes of unsafe conditions on the highway when the majority of the people want to break the speed limit laws and have to avoid hitting the slower drivers who are obeying the laws.
Swerving to avoid hitting a person obeying the speed limit is not the fault of the person observing the speed limit; the safety issue is with the person who is driving so fast that he can’t control himself without swerving.

Morality, which is justice, has to do with giving your neighbor what is due to him, what he can rightly expect from you without having to press charges for your rear-ending him because you were driving too fast to have sufficient reaction time.

Speeders want to drive fast; they impatiently do not want to be where they are on the highway, but want to be somewhere else faster, and they will think up any Sophistry to argue that their speeding is justifiable and safe and to argue that the slow drivers are the problem.

 

[BornInMarch]

Traffic Laws are a serious matter; by driving dangerously or illegally you endanger your life, the lives of all your passengers, and the lives of everyone else on the road with you. I’m sure you would not want to be responsible for a vehicular collision.

 

[vz71]

Are traffic laws just?
Are we not called to obey just laws?

We can try to justify ourselves in a number of ways, but when it comes to it, it is a just law that we are violating.

 

[mythbuster1]

Reckless driving is a sin against the 5th Commandment. It is grave matter. Concerning minor violations of traffic laws that do not constitute reckless endangerment, they are venial sins.

 

[therese1998]

I think it is a mortal sin if you are driving to endanger the lives of others

I think we need to consider intent, here. Speeding, at least as I do it () is because I’m late or rushing to get somewhere. I can’t recall a time when I have decided “I’m going to speed to see if I can cause an accident and potentially endanger a life”. Of course, should you actually harm someone through your speeding, you bear culpability no matter what your original intention was or wasn’t. But I believe this falls under venial sin rather than mortal sin; one that separates you from God, potentially forever.

This is a prudential matter that you really must take seriously, but I don’t think you need to confess

I second this

Didn’t know that; VERY interesting.

I confess to these, as well I’ve found that using a phone cradle, Google Speak function and cruise control have been quite helpful in this area. Calling people bad names, taking the Lord’s name in vain and the occasional “Jersey smile”…these I still struggle with

I dont know what it is in the US.

Reckless driving, maybe? Comes with a hefty 5 points on your license…

they are seldom caused by big things…mostly tiny little inattentions.

Very, very true. And this goes back to the comment about prudence…even if these things are not technically mortal sins, do any of us really want to be responsible, even indirectly for harm to someone else or their property?

I think it is safer than being the guy that slows everyone down to the point where they’re all passing him and muttering imprecations as they go by.

Agreed…I see far more “reckless” behavior and near or actual collisions caused by someone going too slow (whatever that is defined by) than by people who are speeding.

From what he posted, it doesn’t sound like he is a menace and a high risk driver. I highly doubt most Confessors would take what the OP posted and call it “grave matter”.

That was my impression as well. If he goes to some of the priests I’ve had for confession, he may be told (fairly abruptly) that it is not necessary to confess that sin within the confessional and to do it at one’s daily reflection and Act of Contrition.

 

[therese1998]

don’t slow down upon the sight of patrol cars

Not a fair comment. I would slow down when I saw a police officer because I know he has the potential to give me a ticket in reference to an arbitrary number, not because my speed was intrinsically “wrong”.

I’ll eventually get a ticket

Don’t know if this still applies, but about 25 years ago, I had a few times of being warned and let go. At one point, I had the misfortune/stupidity to rack up either quite close to or just over the 12 points maximum on my license. I went to traffic court for them all and they were all knocked down until I was only left with 6 points (and years of inflated car insurance premiums) on my license. Although I can’t claim perfect driving since then, I have not received any more speeding tickets as I am much more careful now. What I noticed was that once I started racking up documented offenses, the tolerance for “don’t do it again; have a nice day” was completely gone. It was a very different experience…I was definitely treated as an “offender”. The one or two times I’ve been pulled over for speeding (36 in a 25, 47 in a 35), I’ve once again gone back to "just watch it). So, keep it in mind as you do your “vroom vroom in your old white van”

My insurance company is going to regard that as his fault. Not mine.

Actually, I happen to know that the insurance company will assign you a percentage of fault (even a small one) as long as you are moving. If you are at a dead stop, such as a traffic light or yeild sign, and are rear-ended that is the only time that you are 100% not “at fault”.

If Annie believed she was doing nothing wrong she would not slow down when she saw a patrol car because she was not doing anything wrong, but she does slow down because she is doing something wrong, willfully doing something wrong and knowing it is wrong but with disdain for the truth.

Not necessarily. It is “against the law” for me to teach my students about Jesus. If I AM teaching them about Jesus and my principal comes in, I stop. Not because I feel I am wrong in referencing Jesus but rather because I know that he will punish me for it. Additionally, am I “immoral” and “unpatriotic” if I reference Jesus in my lesson?

Do what you will, but you will be always known as what you do.

Indeed. Then will I be “wrong” to be known as a Christian in my school workplace?

Police who think speeding is okay if done in moderation of the excess so it is not hyper speeding, are themselves of the same caliber as priests who abuse children

I respectfully disagree with you on some things, but you have totally lost your sense on this one…and are quite disrespectful of the torment of those abused by priests.

 

[mythbuster1]

The 5th Commandment also forbids recklessly endangering your life or others’ lives even without malice aforethought. There is a moral obligation to exercise due caution.

 

[therese1998]

Yes, I am familiar with the 5th commandment. Yet we have still not established full consent to the act of harming another.

 

[PennyinCanada]

I see many questions on Catholic Answers about some kind of line and how close I can get to it. There’s a ledge, and how close can I get to falling off without falling off.

I would like to offer you a spiritual exercise. When you want to go 5 or 10 over the speed limit, make a conscious decision to stay on the limit, and offer it up to Jesus for the conversion of sinners. This is your opportunity to take something very ordinary and make it extra ordinary. Supernatural even. There’s a bit of self denial, and self control. It’s flexing your Catholic muscles. Then when you go to mass on Sunday, you have something to offer on the altar from your week. Try it out and let us know how it went, kay? Good bless!

 

[GospelOfMatthew]

I will try this, thank you!

 

[PennyinCanada]

I will try this, thank you!

Awesome!
(must be 10 characters)

 

[AdamP88]

Actually, I happen to know that the insurance company will assign you a percentage of fault (even a small one) as long as you are moving. If you are at a dead stop, such as a traffic light or yeild sign, and are rear-ended that is the only time that you are 100% not “at fault”.

Not in Ireland. If you rear end someone on the highway by law it’s 100% your fault.
Rules of the road state you must be a safe distance behind the car in front of you.

 

[vz71]

I would slow down when I saw a police officer because I know he has the potential to give me a ticket in reference to an arbitrary number, not because my speed was intrinsically “wrong”.

It is the just law of the state providing that basis for the ticket.
And that makes it a moral issue.

 

[Socrates92]

Actually, I happen to know that the insurance company will assign you a percentage of fault (even a small one) as long as you are moving. If you are at a dead stop, such as a traffic light or yeild sign, and are rear-ended that is the only time that you are 100% not “at fault”.

Technically speaking, the insurance doesn’t care if you’re at “fault”. They only care about your risk factor, which is correlated with your accumulated “faults”.

 

[Socrates92]

Not in Ireland. If you rear end someone on the highway by law it’s 100% your fault.
Rules of the road state you must be a safe distance behind the car in front of you.

Is that the law that insurance must treat it that way in Ireland, or is it just common practise?

 

[therese1998]

I don’t agree. Fortunately, it is not necessary for us to agree.