Rising bollards destroy vehicles, injure drivers!

[530dTPhil]

Surely there would be some very obvious 'No through road' or similar signs at every possible entry to that section of road?
Given the speed that each vehicle has hit the bollards, I have to agree that all of the dirvers were trying to beat the rise of the bollards.

[anonymous-user]

Look how quickly those bollards spring back up - it's not like there's a huge delay - the white van is fractions of a second after the post office van and still gets caught.

These people are muppets, especially the woman in the silver car - she was parked against the bollards to start with FFS, and the guy in the black 4x4 clearly floors it half way towards the bollards.

That's one of the funniest videos I've seen for a long time.

[victormeldrew]

It still seems a trifle extreme to have your car impaled, the occupants injured, and, judging by the way the black 4x4 almost sideswiped a pedestrian and PUSHCHAIR, innocent third parties possibly injured too.

It seems to me if this can be justified, automated stingers on speed cameras can't be far off.

Bear in mind that the use of razor wire, barbed wire, broken glass and the like to protect your property from deliberate attempts at robbery are illegal, how can these be a legally proportionate use of force?

[mondeohdear]

victormeldrew said:

It still seems a trifle extreme to have your car impaled, the occupants injured, and, judging by the way the black 4x4 almost sideswiped a pedestrian and PUSHCHAIR, innocent third parties possibly injured too.

It seems to me if this can be justified, automated stingers on speed cameras can't be far off.

Bear in mind that the use of razor wire, barbed wire, broken glass and the like to protect your property from deliberate attempts at robbery are illegal, how can these be a legally proportionate use of force?

Razor wire/ barbed wire is NOT illegal provided it cannot reasonably be reached by accident and is clearly labelled as a hazard.

These barriers are up all the time other than when an authorised vehicle passes over it and are clearly indicated. As you saw, they come up bloody quick and you've got to be a total tt if you ignore the warnings and try to beat it.

On a lighter note, I can't wait to see some video footage of some chav having a go at "bollard surfing" "I know, I'll wait till the bus goes then try to balance on the bollard as it goes up. That'll be so phat, innit?"

[Pagey]

Any one else notice that when the driver of the black 4X4 runs round the back of his car holding his head and his missus jumps out of the passenger side - a pedestrian opens the rear drivers door!


Hmm! now was this out of concern for any back seat passengers.....



or is my suspicious mind working overtime??

[love machine]

mondeohdear said:

love machine said:

emicen said:

cars getting impaled on the buslane bollards.

You're ing serious? I'd be driving around with a big arc welder welding them down with a sod off great big 200 amp current and 12mm penetration. Since a 7.5 ton lorry wont shift them, I imagine they will have great fun trying to sort it out.

These things sound like the next speed camera. Coercion via gagetry isn't very English or sporting. By all means impose a heavy fine.... What's next, Robocop?


Serious question, what powers these things up and down. Is it an 18 ton hydraulic ram or a single phase, small motor?

Edited by love machine on Monday 23 October 15:36

What's your problem? Do you think that you should just be able to drive through a bus/pedestrian zone if you feel like it?

If I've got a reason to then yes. Why is a bus allowed down there if it's a pedestrian zone?

I'm not going to form a rational arguement, I can't. It offends my principles and this big stick treatment of people needs to stop. I can't really form a rational arguement about speed cameras either, it offends me and if they put up too many I will be out there doing something about it. As a scientist, I like my stuff clear cut, this isn't about right or wrong, this is about shoulds and shouldn'ts. No real rules but perhaps even the more important. If you see something you don't agree with, do something about it. It seems that in the non-listening age of the people with big sticks, that's a waste of time. Your vote isn't going to change it. I agree with you in principle, bollards, cool. You shouldn't be in there, but it represents something I stand against, the thin end of the wedge. Speed cameras with stingers, a great idea, speed, we'll pop your tyres.......brilliant way to learn. It's proven that in education, sanctions don't work. The cane, the detentions don't do anything apart from make your clients ing angry, resentful and ready to spit in your face. So perhaps they crawl inside their cop cars or whatever. Hey, I don't see policemen, I see police cars. They are making themselves the enemy by doing this sort of shit, I don't buy it, I don't take kindly to being poked with a big stick and if you do, watch what happens

[tank slapper]

Peoples attitudes to this are intersting. Compare and contrast to the reaction to if say, a burgler had slipped and fallen injuring himself while breaking in somewhere, or had cut himself on razor wire. It would be "Serves him right" etc.

What is the difference to this? People thinking they can get away with something, and finding out that sometimes they can't. They are quite clearly trying to get through the barriers behind a bus, thinking that they will stay open in the same way that some automatic barriers will if you follow closely.

It is perfectly clear that the barriers are there and they are well signed. To say that the people might not notice them is daft. In that case they shouldn't be driving - What else might they 'not notice' when distracted by unfamiliar surroundings/road signs/pedestrians or whatever.

There is no excuse and I have no sympathy for them.

[Oakey]

love machine said:

I agree with you in principle, bollards, cool. You shouldn't be in there, but it represents something I stand against, the thin end of the wedge. Speed cameras with stingers, a great idea, speed, we'll pop your tyres.......brilliant way to learn.

Except that's something you've just made up out of thin air, when have they ever proposed this or considered it? However, the police do use stingers to stop joyriders, people who are doing what they shouldn't be doing (ie, stealing your car and driving it around like a loon). These stingers will pop your tyres (they're not the joyriders tyres are they?) thus causing damage to YOUR property, they may also cause the car to lose control, crash, injure the occupants and perhaps some bystanders too. Perhaps. Maybe. It could happen. It's not impossible. I guess we should ban those as well then just in case, and allow these people to continue doing what they're not supposed to?

[nicecupoftea]

Attitudes to this are indeed interesting.

I can't say that I find damage to any car, however mundane, however idiotically self-induced, amusing.

I agree that most if not all 3 of the candidates in the video were trying it on.

However, I agree with Love Machine, it's yet more of the Big Stick(tm) approach to road safety Personally I think there should be a sensor to stop it coming up if people try it on. By all means track the cheeky buggers down and fine them hugely, I'm sure they'll think twice next time. Potential injury and property damage is not the way to go though. My concern is that of others here too - it's conceivable that (in a strange town, with lots of distractions) when trying to find somewhere, one could follow a bus/van over the bollards without having seen them. As in the other thread, there is such a huge sign overload especially in town centres that you have to try and rationalise them - parking restrictions go by the wayside as you look for directions for example. Could you swear that you've never missed a sign / made a mistake in a situation like this before?

I find the "laughing at others' misfortune" prevalent here a bit depressing, even if you could say they brought it on themselves.

As a side note - I can't see why insurance wouldn't pay out. If you spank your car into a wall in an own-fault accident they pay don't they? Do they pay out for damage to perps' cars in D&D incidents? Can't see why they shouldn't, the insurance has been paid for.

[jd]

victormeldrew said:

It still seems a trifle extreme to have your car impaled, the occupants injured, and, judging by the way the black 4x4 almost sideswiped a pedestrian and PUSHCHAIR, innocent third parties possibly injured too.

ive just seen tomorrows papers on News 24

There going to be banning walls, incase someone drives into them and bounces off into a pushchair

somone argued that they could make all the walls flash, but then the counter argument was that the driver might have there eyes closed at the time

[tank slapper]

nicecupoftea said:

However, I agree with Love Machine, it's yet more of the Big Stick(tm) approach to road safety Personally I think there should be a sensor to stop it coming up if people try it on. By all means track the cheeky buggers down and fine them hugely, I'm sure they'll think twice next time. Potential injury and property damage is not the way to go though.

The point appears to be to prevent cars passing a particular point. I don't know whether it is for safety or just a control measure. The fact that people are chancing damaging their car by trying to follow behind a bus just shows that they are simply ignoring the sign, and would most likely have done so were there no bollards.

nicecupoftea said:

My concern is that of others here too - it's conceivable that (in a strange town, with lots of distractions) when trying to find somewhere, one could follow a bus/van over the bollards without having seen them. As in the other thread, there is such a huge sign overload especially in town centres that you have to try and rationalise them - parking restrictions go by the wayside as you look for directions for example. Could you swear that you've never missed a sign / made a mistake in a situation like this before?

I can honestly say that I have never driven through a no entry sign, accidently or otherwise. They are usually pretty obvious and especially when lit up like christmas trees. The fact that there is a width restriction should only serve to reinforce that there is something that deserves extra attention. Following closely enough behind another vehicle so that you have no view of upcoming signs and hazards is pretty dumb, especially when in unfamiliar territory.

This really comes down to whether the person is paying proper attention to what they are doing, or have just chosen to disregard the situation because they think they can get away with it. Neither way is really acceptable in my view and makes the argument as to whether there should or should not be bollards secondary.

[grayme]

Maybe the subject people would prefer here would be 'DRIVING INTO RISING BOLLARDS DESTROY VEHICLES, INJURE DRIVERS FURTHER!

I'm for the 'big stick' approach as too many are too stupid or arrogant to learn any other way.

I bet there are a lot less chancers at these bollards these days...

[smilerbaker]

Other methods obviously didn't work, look at londons bus lanes, hundreds probably thousands of people drive down them everyday, ok some get fined, but it does not stop people doing it. Would you prefer the pedestrian area in the video just had a couple of cameras and they fined everyone who drove down it? the poor innocent family out shopping who get hit by the chav looning around?? but its ok its on camera.

The bollards are a top idea, if it removes a couple of idiots from the gene pool then even better.

You cant say the council are doing it to make money, they really are doing it to make people safer (except the idiot drivers).

You can bet your life those people caught out wont ignore a sign like that again, works a whole lot better then a 30 quid fine.

I'd have them continue to raise even when they have a car on top of them, and sharpen the tops to, then every christmas release a best of impailed cars dvd.

[Marki]

smilerbaker said:

I'd have them continue to raise even when they have a car on top of them, and sharpen the tops to, then every christmas release a best of impailed cars dvd.

You are a bad man

[ninjaboy]

looking at the videos it looks like some people didnt see the things if they cut of a town centre thats not too bad but more and more you see them on normal roads around towns. I hate the bloody mail too grrrr

[mondeohdear]

love machine said:

mondeohdear said:

love machine said:

emicen said:

cars getting impaled on the buslane bollards.

You're ing serious? I'd be driving around with a big arc welder welding them down with a sod off great big 200 amp current and 12mm penetration. Since a 7.5 ton lorry wont shift them, I imagine they will have great fun trying to sort it out.

These things sound like the next speed camera. Coercion via gagetry isn't very English or sporting. By all means impose a heavy fine.... What's next, Robocop?


Serious question, what powers these things up and down. Is it an 18 ton hydraulic ram or a single phase, small motor?

Edited by love machine on Monday 23 October 15:36

What's your problem? Do you think that you should just be able to drive through a bus/pedestrian zone if you feel like it?

If I've got a reason to then yes. Why is a bus allowed down there if it's a pedestrian zone?

I'm not going to form a rational arguement, I can't. It offends my principles and this big stick treatment of people needs to stop. I can't really form a rational arguement about speed cameras either, it offends me and if they put up too many I will be out there doing something about it. As a scientist, I like my stuff clear cut, this isn't about right or wrong, this is about shoulds and shouldn'ts. No real rules but perhaps even the more important. If you see something you don't agree with, do something about it. It seems that in the non-listening age of the people with big sticks, that's a waste of time. Your vote isn't going to change it. I agree with you in principle, bollards, cool. You shouldn't be in there, but it represents something I stand against, the thin end of the wedge. Speed cameras with stingers, a great idea, speed, we'll pop your tyres.......brilliant way to learn. It's proven that in education, sanctions don't work. The cane, the detentions don't do anything apart from make your clients ing angry, resentful and ready to spit in your face. So perhaps they crawl inside their cop cars or whatever. Hey, I don't see policemen, I see police cars. They are making themselves the enemy by doing this sort of shit, I don't buy it, I don't take kindly to being poked with a big stick and if you do, watch what happens

Firstly, if you had a reason to drive down the pedestrian zone, for instance you're disabled or a delivery driver, most of these access control areas have an intercom to allow you to talk to the camera operators who will lower them for you, no need to break out the welding torch (which presumeably you'd have to be lying under a bus to use anyway). Buses are allowed as they drive slowly through these areas, are big and red, and pedestrians use them to get from point A to point B, essentially they're pedestrian delivery drivers.

Secondly, this isn't a "big stick" approach. Apart from the short period when a bus is crossing the bollard they're just like ordinary bollards or walls, do you have a problem with those? If you've witnessed the way they work they dohave sensors. If you look at all those videos closely the bollards stop rising as soon as they hit the metal, the impact was caused by the fact that the cars were still accelerating into a solid obstacle.

[smilerbaker]

Marki said:

smilerbaker said:

I'd have them continue to raise even when they have a car on top of them, and sharpen the tops to, then every christmas release a best of impailed cars dvd.

You are a bad man

yep, and sick of the way people (esp chavs) blame everyone else without taking any responsibility for there own actions.

you can bet your arse those people got out and said somthing like 'its not my fault' or 'why did that happen' or 'does anyone have the phone number of claims direct?'

I bet the Kia's drivers mrs gave him hell

[victormeldrew]

mondeohdear said:

Firstly, if you had a reason to drive down the pedestrian zone, for instance you're disabled or a delivery driver

And you studied the video in the link closely then? Third vehicle is, er, a delivery driver. In a courier van.

mondeohdear said:

Secondly, this isn't a "big stick" approach.

Let's leave aside the obvious literal argument that these are actually big sticks.

mondeohdear said:

Apart from the short period when a bus is crossing the bollard they're just like ordinary bollards or walls, do you have a problem with those?

Just like, apart from the slightly germaine characteristic of appearing out of the ground at high velocity. An inconsequential difference? Speed matters you know!

mondeohdear said:

If you've witnessed the way they work they do have sensors. If you look at all those videos closely the bollards stop rising as soon as they hit the metal, the impact was caused by the fact that the cars were still accelerating into a solid obstacle.

That wouldn't be my definition of working. That's like lift doors recognising someone is still entering the lift and stopping as they squish the hapless would be passenger between the doors, then staying put while everyone has a good laugh at the brainless moron who tried to outrun the lift doors.

Regardless how stupid you would have to be to miss the signs or take a chance on beating the bollards, these are simply not the right answer; a principle of British justice used to be innocent until proven guilty. Speed cameras seem to have turned that on its head, and indoctrinated people with the notion that justice is absolute and indicriminate. If you can't see that is wrong then I really do fear for the future of this nation.

Edited by victormeldrew on Tuesday 24th October 08:53

[smilerbaker]

victormeldrew said:

mondeohdear said:

Firstly, if you had a reason to drive down the pedestrian zone, for instance you're disabled or a delivery driver

And you studied the video in the link closely then? Third vehicle is, er, a delivery driver. In a courier van.

If its like the bollards in staines then the signs clearly state when delivery drivers are allowed in the pedestrain area, so this guy didn't want to get off his arse and walk the package to the destination. He had no right to go into the area at that time, he knew it which is why he floored it behind the royal mail van, and got caught out, really cant see your point here victormeldrew

[Marki]

smilerbaker said:

Marki said:

smilerbaker said:

I'd have them continue to raise even when they have a car on top of them, and sharpen the tops to, then every christmas release a best of impailed cars dvd.

You are a bad man

yep, and sick of the way people (esp chavs) blame everyone else without taking any responsibility for there own actions.

you can bet your arse those people got out and said somthing like 'its not my fault' or 'why did that happen' or 'does anyone have the phone number of claims direct?'

I bet the Kia's drivers mrs gave him hell

And thats been my point on this subject , no one accepts blame for anything any more