Usual distortion of the facts ...
Discussion
on BBC Breakfast this morning.
Sussex Safety Camera Partnership representative (standing by 'SID' - a system that displays the speed of an approaching veicle ... which is a good idea) stated, "You are twice as likely to kill someone at 35mph as you are at 30mph."
This sound-bite distorts the real statement that, "A person (and I believe that it is actually a child) hit by certain types of vehicles is twice as likely to be killed if the impact occurs at 35mph as they would be if the impact occurs at 30mph."
Somewhat different!
Streaky
Sussex Safety Camera Partnership representative (standing by 'SID' - a system that displays the speed of an approaching veicle ... which is a good idea) stated, "You are twice as likely to kill someone at 35mph as you are at 30mph."
This sound-bite distorts the real statement that, "A person (and I believe that it is actually a child) hit by certain types of vehicles is twice as likely to be killed if the impact occurs at 35mph as they would be if the impact occurs at 30mph."
Somewhat different!
Streaky
Yes .. and only if the child is in the path of the moving vehicle .. KEEP PEOPLE OUT OF THE WAY OF MOVING VEHICLES!!!! .. sheesh .. it's really quite simple ..
teach basic road safety manners from an early age and make it stick.
Make crossing the road without looking as anti-social as smoking and drink driving.
Make people accountable for their own actions.
Let's get some common sense going for christ's sake ..
teach basic road safety manners from an early age and make it stick.
Make crossing the road without looking as anti-social as smoking and drink driving.
Make people accountable for their own actions.
Let's get some common sense going for christ's sake ..
mondeoman said:
pedestrians don't have number plates ....
ah - hah -ID cards and tags
ker-ching!!!!
And what do we do if the pedetrian does not pay up?
Deny them the right to an ID card? Ban them from walking?
I am not sure how they deal with jaywalkers in the USA, but i have been stopped and searched over there on the basis that i was jaywalking, they let me off because off my accent
Could you end up in Jail for jaywalking? not sure....
>> Edited by hedders on Monday 24th November 10:54
Again - put speed limits in relevant areas ie where pedestrian injury is most likely to occur then enforce them thoroughly. Relax the limits in areas of less risk, ie the motorways. We need to get people who speed through built up areas to be seen as anti social. That will never happen whilst the speed limit is too low on motorways (etc.) Everybody breaks the law on the motorway and so how can they critisise another fellow road user for doing the same, even if he is some t*at in a pearlescent jap/saxo/peugeot with monster wheels, a sound system that extracts blood from your ears and neon strips underneath racing round a housing estate or the town centre on a Friday night.
We all feel 70mph is an artificially low limit. In the right conditions 80-90mph is safe. Unfortunately people think the same margins apply in a 30 zone, ie 40-45mph is safe, when clearly this is not the case where pedestrian contact is likely.
Don`t kid yourselves into thinking the 35mph kills more children is a load of bo**ocks. It really is true. Next time you`re in a 30 zone turn the stereo down and imagine the thud of a child hitting your bonnet. Then imagine the car bouncing up as it rides over them. Then imagine what you`ll feel as you step out of the car and see them trapped underneth the car. It`s a bit sobering isn`t it.
One final point make sure limits are well posted. Don`t just rely on the spacing of lamp posts to convey this vital info.
Henry
>> Edited by Henry-F on Monday 24th November 11:16
We all feel 70mph is an artificially low limit. In the right conditions 80-90mph is safe. Unfortunately people think the same margins apply in a 30 zone, ie 40-45mph is safe, when clearly this is not the case where pedestrian contact is likely.
Don`t kid yourselves into thinking the 35mph kills more children is a load of bo**ocks. It really is true. Next time you`re in a 30 zone turn the stereo down and imagine the thud of a child hitting your bonnet. Then imagine the car bouncing up as it rides over them. Then imagine what you`ll feel as you step out of the car and see them trapped underneth the car. It`s a bit sobering isn`t it.
One final point make sure limits are well posted. Don`t just rely on the spacing of lamp posts to convey this vital info.
Henry
>> Edited by Henry-F on Monday 24th November 11:16
For Henry-F:
But surely you're arguing for the wrong cause? .. no one is denying that hitting a child at 35 is more ilkely to kill them than 30mph, that's not the real issue.
What I'd like to nkow is what was the child doing in the road in the first place?
Give kids a proper play area, make it an offence to let your kids play in the road.
Make parents accountable for their kids' actions and enforce it (unlike presently).
Make car drivers aware that if the pedestrian was at fault they can claim for damages to their car (might make a few pedestrians take note if they got a broken leg and a 2000 pound repair bill for stepping out without looking!!)
Make it the rule that if you're walking in the road EXPECT to get knocked down.
The car driver isn't always to blame.
All this should be part of a nationwide assault on road safety as a package .. more light controlled crossings, more play areas well away from roads, more emphasis on where the blame for an incident actually lies (there's very few proper accidents, most of the time someone was negligent). Adverts on road safety for car and pedestrians on prime time TV and national press. Better street lighting and roads designed for safety on all fronts (less signs blocking your view, less overgrown plants on roundabouts blocking your view of traffic joining the roundabout, parents forced to walk their kids to school instead of blocking the roads for a 5 minute journey, etc etc).. the list goes on.
>> Edited by joospeed on Monday 24th November 11:41
But surely you're arguing for the wrong cause? .. no one is denying that hitting a child at 35 is more ilkely to kill them than 30mph, that's not the real issue.
What I'd like to nkow is what was the child doing in the road in the first place?
Give kids a proper play area, make it an offence to let your kids play in the road.
Make parents accountable for their kids' actions and enforce it (unlike presently).
Make car drivers aware that if the pedestrian was at fault they can claim for damages to their car (might make a few pedestrians take note if they got a broken leg and a 2000 pound repair bill for stepping out without looking!!)
Make it the rule that if you're walking in the road EXPECT to get knocked down.
The car driver isn't always to blame.
All this should be part of a nationwide assault on road safety as a package .. more light controlled crossings, more play areas well away from roads, more emphasis on where the blame for an incident actually lies (there's very few proper accidents, most of the time someone was negligent). Adverts on road safety for car and pedestrians on prime time TV and national press. Better street lighting and roads designed for safety on all fronts (less signs blocking your view, less overgrown plants on roundabouts blocking your view of traffic joining the roundabout, parents forced to walk their kids to school instead of blocking the roads for a 5 minute journey, etc etc).. the list goes on.
>> Edited by joospeed on Monday 24th November 11:41
Mad Dave said:
I was driving into a car park the other night (at about 15mph) when a bloke and about 4 of his little kids walked straight into the road in front of me - the bloke stopped, held his kids back and started shaking his head and shouting at me - I just don't get it! Its a road ffs!
Joospeed. The problem is that 9 or 10 year old children are not responsible enough to rely on them to never make a mistake in the height of excited play.
Motorists on the other hand are supposedly intelligent and responsible adults who have passed a test allowing them to be at the wheel - yes I know you do wonder when driving the highways and byways but I`m assured they have all somehow passed.
The nature and layout of our urban areas especially means there is simply no way of seperating cars and pedestrians. You also have to be carefull about being too ideolistic re: parents and their control over children. I know at 10 years old I was riding my bike away from home and yes we used to pull wheelies, skids, race around and do all the other things kids do.
Henry
Motorists on the other hand are supposedly intelligent and responsible adults who have passed a test allowing them to be at the wheel - yes I know you do wonder when driving the highways and byways but I`m assured they have all somehow passed.
The nature and layout of our urban areas especially means there is simply no way of seperating cars and pedestrians. You also have to be carefull about being too ideolistic re: parents and their control over children. I know at 10 years old I was riding my bike away from home and yes we used to pull wheelies, skids, race around and do all the other things kids do.
Henry
Henry-F.
I think the point was that so many people, adults and children, now threat roads as a pedestrian right of way that they can walk across without looking, or sometimes deliberately in front of a car that they've seen. They then expect the car to slow down suddenly to avoid them in a situation where any sane person would simply have not started to cross the road.
I agree we have to allow for others' mistakes, but not for people purposefully ignoring their own safety and then trying to blame an innocent motorist.
I think the point was that so many people, adults and children, now threat roads as a pedestrian right of way that they can walk across without looking, or sometimes deliberately in front of a car that they've seen. They then expect the car to slow down suddenly to avoid them in a situation where any sane person would simply have not started to cross the road.
I agree we have to allow for others' mistakes, but not for people purposefully ignoring their own safety and then trying to blame an innocent motorist.
Agree with Henry here. Roads in urban areas only exist because that's where people live. Life would be better for all of us if more kids walked to school instead of being driven there in massive 4x4s. 30 limits in town are there for a reason - that is that pedestrians and cars are necessarily in close proximity and we need to mitigate against the risk. Don't forget, if you knocked down and killed a child it would ruin your life as well as their family's (I know someone who did it nearly 20 years ago and he's never recovered).
Agree strongly with Joolz though that the pendulum has swung too far in one direction, and we should be making the use of pedestrian crossings mandatory where they exist, and use public information adverts to promote pedestrian as well as driving skills. Bring back the Tufty Club and Cycling Proficiency (you weren't allowed to take a bike to my school without it), and make it socially unacceptable to allow 4 and 5 year-olds to run loose; they terrify me when they are toddling off 50 metres in front of mum, completely out of control.
Agree strongly with Joolz though that the pendulum has swung too far in one direction, and we should be making the use of pedestrian crossings mandatory where they exist, and use public information adverts to promote pedestrian as well as driving skills. Bring back the Tufty Club and Cycling Proficiency (you weren't allowed to take a bike to my school without it), and make it socially unacceptable to allow 4 and 5 year-olds to run loose; they terrify me when they are toddling off 50 metres in front of mum, completely out of control.
Henry-F said:
Don`t kid yourselves into thinking the 35mph kills more children is a load of bo**ocks. It really is true. Next time you`re in a 30 zone turn the stereo down and imagine the thud of a child hitting your bonnet.
Ahhh., but you're believing the spin again. Very, very few impacts occur at the free travelling speed. Invariably some braking has occurred. That is not to say that the figures claimed for the difference between a 35MPH inpact and one at 30MPH are incorrect, merely that it seldom happens. The actual improvement that should be quoted is for the impact (post braking) speed. And whilst the post braking speed will obviously be lower for a lower free travelling speed, the 'improvement' (reduction in fatalities/injuries) will be far less than claimed.
Henry-F said:The one I hit when I was learning to drive went over the roof.
...
Don`t kid yourselves into thinking the 35mph kills more children is a load of bo**ocks. It really is true. Next time you`re in a 30 zone turn the stereo down and imagine the thud of a child hitting your bonnet. Then imagine the car bouncing up as it rides over them. Then imagine what you`ll feel as you step out of the car and see them trapped underneth the car. It`s a bit sobering isn`t it. ...
My father's Wolsey 16/60 (not an insubstantially built car) had a bent front bumper, a dented bonnet, a dented roof, a dented boot lid and the rear bumper was wrenched off! The lad had a sprained ankle and bruising ... and a lesson neither of us will ever forget I'm sure.
Streaky
I sort of agree with Henry-F, I normally keep close to 30mph in 30mph zones, and in some streets where I know kids play and you get lots of parked cars, will be at 15mph or even 10mph.
This was fine up until 10 years ago but where I live we have subsequently seen a systematic reduction in speed limits, so you may have urban duel carriageways which used to be 40mph or 50mph with not a houses about; no kids playing; no reason to reduce the limit but the limit is now 30mph, and they have a speed camera.
All limits where justified should be rigorously enforced but only after a proper analysis proves the justification, and they should all be better sign posted.
This was fine up until 10 years ago but where I live we have subsequently seen a systematic reduction in speed limits, so you may have urban duel carriageways which used to be 40mph or 50mph with not a houses about; no kids playing; no reason to reduce the limit but the limit is now 30mph, and they have a speed camera.
All limits where justified should be rigorously enforced but only after a proper analysis proves the justification, and they should all be better sign posted.
Mad Dave said:
I was driving into a car park the other night (at about 15mph) when a bloke and about 4 of his little kids walked straight into the road in front of me - the bloke stopped, held his kids back and started shaking his head and shouting at me - I just don't get it! Its a road ffs!
If you were turning off a main road, then they may well have had right of way. You haven't said what the form of the junction was, but rule 146 says "watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way"
You'd be surprised at how many drivers are ignorant of this rule, and who think that they have right of way.
northernboy said:Agreed, but rule 8 states, "At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you." It does not say, "Step into the road without looking." nor does it say, "Look, observe the vehicle, wait until it has committed to the turn, then step out in front of it with your hand held up imperiously." And we've all seen lots of exxamples of that!
I was driving into a car park the other night (at about 15mph) when a bloke and about 4 of his little kids walked straight into the road in front of me - the bloke stopped, held his kids back and started shaking his head and shouting at me - I just don't get it! Its a road ffs!
If you were turning off a main road, then they may well have had right of way. You haven't said what the form of the junction was, but rule 146 says "watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way"
You'd be surprised at how many drivers are ignorant of this rule, and who think that they have right of way.
In the USA pedestrians are given right of way at junctions (without pedestrian crossing controls). What's more, traffic behind recognises this and there are no blaring horns or cars pulling out and round the stationary vehicles.
Streaky
Tonybav. That`s just my point. That wide open dual carriageway with no houses but still a 30 limit, and worse still little signage to tell you is the problem.
It was probably put there by someone who thought if they said 30 most people would do 50 and that would be about right. Unfortunately people treat a 30 limit near houses in the same way.
It`s for the same reason we all ignore the matrix boards in the middle of the motorway. Unfortunately they are wrong / out of date 80% of the time so we get complacent.
Henry
It was probably put there by someone who thought if they said 30 most people would do 50 and that would be about right. Unfortunately people treat a 30 limit near houses in the same way.
It`s for the same reason we all ignore the matrix boards in the middle of the motorway. Unfortunately they are wrong / out of date 80% of the time so we get complacent.
Henry
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff