Spot the deliberate mistake
Discussion
Spot the deliberate mistake.....
Slow down before you kill a child just like me
ONE year ago Chelsey Royston suffered horrific injuries when she was tossed into the air by a car driving near her school.
The little girl spent two weeks in Sheffield Children's Hospital with a shattered leg and her parents were warned she might never walk properly again.
Now 10-year-old Chelsey is back on her feet - and delivering a hard-hitting message to drivers who speed on the Sheffield road where she was knocked down.
Armed with a police speed camera, Chelsey flagged down speeding drivers on Blackstock Road in Gleadless Valley and told them: "Slow down before you kill a child."
She was joined by the police and fellow pupils from nearby Bankwood Primary School to warn motorists of the dangers of breaking the road's 30mph speed limit.
The scheme was organised by Sheffield Council, the police and South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership after campaigners failed in a bid to get permanent speed cameras installed.
Under current legislation roads can only have them if three people have died or suffered serious injury in car smashes within a 1km section.
Alan Brailey, from the South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership, said: "Getting children to explain to speeding motorists the dangers they are causing is a very effective way of raising awareness."
"We also want to educate youngsters about the extra distances it takes drivers to stop if they when they are going faster."
New traffic calming measures are being put into place on the road within the next few months.
Chelsey's mum Louise Royston, aged 36, told The Star: "Chelsey has tonsillitis at the moment, but we made sure she came in today as it's a very important issue for her.
"The road needs speed cameras before there is another accident."
Chelsey was knocked down on November 2003, although there was no indication the driver had been speeding and he was not charged in relation to the incident.
Another mother of pupils at Bankwood Primary School, Julie Oates, aged 40, said Blackstock Road's two pelican crossings will be unmanned from next Friday until Sheffield Council recruits more staff.
She currently works as a lollipop lady on the crossing near the school, but is quitting the job next week.
09 November 2004
from
www.rotherhamtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?sectionid=85&articleid=884556
Slow down before you kill a child just like me
ONE year ago Chelsey Royston suffered horrific injuries when she was tossed into the air by a car driving near her school.
The little girl spent two weeks in Sheffield Children's Hospital with a shattered leg and her parents were warned she might never walk properly again.
Now 10-year-old Chelsey is back on her feet - and delivering a hard-hitting message to drivers who speed on the Sheffield road where she was knocked down.
Armed with a police speed camera, Chelsey flagged down speeding drivers on Blackstock Road in Gleadless Valley and told them: "Slow down before you kill a child."
She was joined by the police and fellow pupils from nearby Bankwood Primary School to warn motorists of the dangers of breaking the road's 30mph speed limit.
The scheme was organised by Sheffield Council, the police and South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership after campaigners failed in a bid to get permanent speed cameras installed.
Under current legislation roads can only have them if three people have died or suffered serious injury in car smashes within a 1km section.
Alan Brailey, from the South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership, said: "Getting children to explain to speeding motorists the dangers they are causing is a very effective way of raising awareness."
"We also want to educate youngsters about the extra distances it takes drivers to stop if they when they are going faster."
New traffic calming measures are being put into place on the road within the next few months.
Chelsey's mum Louise Royston, aged 36, told The Star: "Chelsey has tonsillitis at the moment, but we made sure she came in today as it's a very important issue for her.
"The road needs speed cameras before there is another accident."
Chelsey was knocked down on November 2003, although there was no indication the driver had been speeding and he was not charged in relation to the incident.
Another mother of pupils at Bankwood Primary School, Julie Oates, aged 40, said Blackstock Road's two pelican crossings will be unmanned from next Friday until Sheffield Council recruits more staff.
She currently works as a lollipop lady on the crossing near the school, but is quitting the job next week.
09 November 2004
from
www.rotherhamtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?sectionid=85&articleid=884556
SO there has only been 1 accident
It was not caused by speed
The council are creating traffic jams with bumps in order to kill a child
So they can have speed cameras to save a life even though no one has been killed and the 1 dozy little bugger who was run over was hit by a car within the speed limit
Terrific.
More expense to achieve nothing typical of traffic light world. Sheffield the only place in the UK that takes longer to get accross than London.
mybrainhurts said:
Spot the deliberate mistake.....
Slow down before you kill a child just like me
Alan Brailey, from the South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership, said: "Getting children to explain to speeding motorists the dangers they are causing is a very effective way of raising awareness."
Chelsey was knocked down on November 2003, although there was no indication the driver had been speeding and he was not charged in relation to the incident.
from
www.rotherhamtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?sectionid=85&articleid=884556
So this ten year old child is an experienced and qualified road safety expert is she?
Because if someone stops me and starts lecturing me about road safety they better have a bloody good reason for it and know exactly what they're talking about or I'm going to be very miffed.
What kind of idiot puts stupid and overtly dangerous ideas like this into a child's head?
Has anybody discovered why she was knocked down or was in the middle of the road in the first place?
As we know the driver of the car that hit her wasn't speeding has anyone taken the time to see if he is OK?
Could it be that he is severely traumatised from hitting a chid, whether it was his fault or not?
Absolutely disgraceful behaviour by the police and the council, pure sensationalism!
mybrainhurts said:
The scheme was organised by Sheffield Council, the police and South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership after campaigners failed in a bid to get permanent speed cameras installed.
Hang on - we keep saying this is where we should have spped cam with lots of pre-warning whether or not there has been an accident - as schools areas are supposedly "vulnerable"
Though - the danger usually comes from the mumpties and a mile further along the road as the kids saunter home in normal teenage trance......
But still - children should be taught road sense in any case. If parents judge their child is still not capable of crossing a road without adult guidance - then parent ensures child is met by responsible adult.
mybrainhurts said:
Alan Brailey, from the South Yorkshire Safety Camera Partnership, said: "Getting children to explain to speeding motorists the dangers they are causing is a very effective way of raising awareness."
"We also want to educate youngsters about the extra distances it takes drivers to stop if they when they are going faster."
That only inflames a situation and serves no useful purpose. It was a bit like BRAKE asking me to allow photos of Wildy's injuries to be used in a speed campaign. We ceased to be BRAKE members at that point.
Have no problem with getting children to judge speed of an approaching car under guided conditions - I do that with my own anyway - but children should stay out of any conversation with the driver.
mybrainhurts said:
New traffic calming measures are being put into place on the road within the next few months.
Well I am sure that will be a huge help should there be an emergency at the school.... or along the residential road .. Not to mention the acceleration which occurs between humps....
mybrainhurts said:
"The road needs speed cameras before there is another accident."
Chelsey was knocked down on November 2003, although there was no indication the driver had been speeding and he was not charged in relation to the incident.
Another mother of pupils at Bankwood Primary School, Julie Oates, aged 40, said Blackstock Road's two pelican crossings will be unmanned from next Friday until Sheffield Council recruits more staff.
She currently works as a lollipop lady on the crossing near the school, but is quitting the job next week.
09 November 2004
But the man was driving legally - " no indication the driver had been speeding and he was not charged" per the article.
What about the two pelicans? I think Chelsey's Ma needs to do some thinking here....
... like telling Chelsey (aged 10 and thus old enough to know difference between right and wrong - according to the law) that you use the pelicans and crossings provided to cross a road
And that she stops at kerb, looks and listens for traffic in future ....
Yet another daft sob story .... no doubt Streetcop will tell me off for being callous .....
JMGS4 said:
So this ten year old child is an experienced and qualified road safety expert is she? !
Certainly better qualified than brownshirtführer or mad mary [tongue in cheek smiley]!!!!
I have had chest infections that were better qualified to judge speeding drivers than Richard Brunstrom or Mary Williams!
10 year old random child would seem like a university professor in comparison
The serious bit:
Couldn't agree more with the above.
Perhaps that will get worse too.
Without wishing to appear to bigotted, the name Chelsey shouts
CHAV! to me. Mum's apparently non-existent care for the kid only bears this out.
The less serious bit:
[quote=Slogan]Slow down before you kill a child[quote]
Speed up after to get away with it?
Actually, I'd have thought speeding up would be a more effective way of killing a kid if you wanted to.
Couldn't agree more with the above.
Mum said:
Chelsey has tonsillitis at the moment, but we made sure she came in today
Perhaps that will get worse too. Without wishing to appear to bigotted, the name Chelsey shouts
CHAV! to me. Mum's apparently non-existent care for the kid only bears this out. The less serious bit:
[quote=Slogan]Slow down before you kill a child[quote]
Speed up after to get away with it?
Actually, I'd have thought speeding up would be a more effective way of killing a kid if you wanted to.
Considering the driver was not speeding or charged with anything, this whole stunt makes me want to vomit.
No one wants to see people getting injured or killed on the roads, whether they be children or adults.
To take such an incident and twist it to serve an anti-car pro-camera pro-revenue-collection agenda is to put aside the real dangers related to our roads and allow future injuries and deaths to continue unabated.
These people are no different to those that sell potions and charms, claiming they will cure your ills, at the expense of real medicine.
They are just charlatans, tricksters and thieves.
No one wants to see people getting injured or killed on the roads, whether they be children or adults.
To take such an incident and twist it to serve an anti-car pro-camera pro-revenue-collection agenda is to put aside the real dangers related to our roads and allow future injuries and deaths to continue unabated.
These people are no different to those that sell potions and charms, claiming they will cure your ills, at the expense of real medicine.
They are just charlatans, tricksters and thieves.
nonegreen said:
So they can have speed cameras to save a life even though no one has been killed and the 1 dozy little bugger who was run over was hit by a car within the speed limit
Terrific.
Until it becomes one of your own little buggers eh nonegreen? Or don't they count either? expendable to the great god of speed/careless drivers?
I have met people like you before when I have had to deliver the terrible news. Flash fast motor on the drive, 9 points on their licence and a completely different spin on life seconds after the news following the knock! There are few that are willing or ready to accept that the fault was with their perfect child!
Maybe in the case above, the child was at fault. Many are but if cars travelled slower, then the outcomes would not require 'the knock'!
deeen said:
Hi Gone. No matter whose child it is, if the child is at fault, why blame the driver?
I am not saying blame the driver. What I am saying is that by having a campaign such as this, it might make a difference!
Not only to the way in which people actually drive and concentrate around areas where this is more likely to happen, but also to those who may be vulnerable such as the child that was in the road when he/she was struck!
My other point about Nonegreens post was that it is all very well making comments like he has until the victim happens to be one of your own!
Experience then tells me that the parent/s look to the Police to prosecute the driver even if the driver was not at fault because.
1. They are a driver
2. Their child has been hurt.
3. Their child could not possibly have been at fault!!! They never are
gone said:
Maybe in the case above, the child was at fault. Many are but if cars travelled slower, then the outcomes would not require 'the knock'!
No way is it that simple.
We know that 50% of pedestrians die in 30mph impacts.
We know that 59% of vehicles were exceeding the 30mph limit in 30mph zones in the last official survey.
We also know that in 30 AND 40mph zones in the last full year, the following figures apply to child pedestrian impacts:
injured: 14,000
killed: 58
The percentage that died was 0.4%
But with 59% exceeding the speed limit we might have expected over 7,000 to die.
Some of the 58 were killed by reckless drivers.
We need to base policy on the factors that actually save kids already, not on the factors that we imagine might in the future.
GET REAL!
>> Edited by safespeed on Thursday 11th November 12:29
OK to answer the question originally posed 
deliberate mistakes include:
1) Calling a child Chelsea
2) Spelling its name incorrectly
3) Allowing a child to operate police enforcement eqipment in public
4) Allowing / encouraging a child to flag down cars
5) Brainwashing children with the "speed kills" lie
6) Slowing emergency vehicles to save lives
7) Either keeping a kid off school when she is well enough to attend, or needlessly infecting all the other kiddies. If it really was tonsillitis and one of them died... oh the irony.
8) Kid not crossing the road properly
9) Assuming a speed camera would stop accidents
10) One lollipop person for two crossings, and...
11) Failing to recruit in time to replace her
12) Trying to imply the driver was responsible when "there was no implication he was speeding and he was not charged for any offence"
13) Failing to make Chelsea's parents pay compensation to the driver for his emotional anguish.
Well this post started off tongue in cheek but now I look at it... this whole stunt and story weren't by any chance cooked up as a smokescreen to cover up the council's faliure with the lollipop person, were they?
Not that I'm cynical, you understand...
>> Edited by deeen on Thursday 11th November 12:36
deliberate mistakes include: 1) Calling a child Chelsea
2) Spelling its name incorrectly
3) Allowing a child to operate police enforcement eqipment in public
4) Allowing / encouraging a child to flag down cars
5) Brainwashing children with the "speed kills" lie
6) Slowing emergency vehicles to save lives
7) Either keeping a kid off school when she is well enough to attend, or needlessly infecting all the other kiddies. If it really was tonsillitis and one of them died... oh the irony.
8) Kid not crossing the road properly
9) Assuming a speed camera would stop accidents
10) One lollipop person for two crossings, and...
11) Failing to recruit in time to replace her
12) Trying to imply the driver was responsible when "there was no implication he was speeding and he was not charged for any offence"
13) Failing to make Chelsea's parents pay compensation to the driver for his emotional anguish.
Well this post started off tongue in cheek but now I look at it... this whole stunt and story weren't by any chance cooked up as a smokescreen to cover up the council's faliure with the lollipop person, were they?
Not that I'm cynical, you understand...
>> Edited by deeen on Thursday 11th November 12:36
safespeed said:
GET REAL!
Year in, year out for the last 24 years, I have attended real
For 12 years, it was my specialist job to deal with these types of incidents. I have deal with much real
Unfortunately sitting as you do, tapping away at a PC and entering statistics, you do not see real. You only propose to make things worse by making people believe that they are capable of things that they actually are not.
I attended the scene of a rail crash in Berkshire on Sunday. I helped (with some colleaugues) to remove the dead (part of my job). I have never seen such devastation!
The front of that train gouged a trench 4 feet deep for over 100 yards in the centre of the track. The damage was collosal. How so many more people did not die in that disaster, I can only put dwon to luck.
That is what your statistics and graphs are trying to negate. It is really down to luck if a child is hit and dies which has a huge amount of bearing on the speed related to the collision. That is real. That is the bit which you so blatently have missing from your CV safespeed
>> Edited by gone on Thursday 11th November 12:40
gone said:
So they can have speed cameras to save a life even though no one has been killed and the 1 dozy little bugger who was run over was hit by a car within the speed limit
Terrific.
Until it becomes one of your own little buggers eh nonegreen? Or don't they count either? expendable to the great god of speed/careless drivers?
I have met people like you before when I have had to deliver the terrible news. Flash fast motor on the drive, 9 points on their licence and a completely different spin on life seconds after the news following the knock! There are few that are willing or ready to accept that the fault was with their perfect child!
Maybe in the case above, the child was at fault. Many are but if cars travelled slower, then the outcomes would not require 'the knock'!
Gone, I spent years accruing and analysing road traffic accidents and, without wishing to generalise too much, what leapt out of the pages at you in almost every county throughout this land was that:-
a) the highest casualty rates amongst pedestrians were children in the early mornings and evenings, and adults in the late evening.
b) in almost every case the child was unaccompanied and on a busy traffic route.
c) in almost every case the vehicle speed was substantially under the speed limit on impact.
c) in almost every case the child had ran out or attempted to cross without using a crossing.
d) the percentage rate increased considerably in winter during the hours of darkness and bad weather.
e) the percentage rate increased dramatically in areas of high unemployment and poverty.
f) of all adult casualties in the evening, a huge majority,(over 90% in some areas) were drunk; not just a wee bit over the limit but staggering drunk, not the drivers, the pedestrians.
g) the percentage rate of f) also increased substantially in areas of high unemployment and poverty.
There has never been a single case in this country to my knowledge where a pedestrian has been prosecuted for causing an accident. Why?
Over the past few years there have quite literally been billions of prosecutions of motorists for speeding, and in this figure I'm obviously including Fixed Penalty figures, almost none of whom were involved in accidents of any sort. Why?
When I was at school, we had pedestrian road safety literally hammered into us non stop both by our parents and by the police via lectures at school.
On every single school jotter was a road safety message telling you what and what not to do on the roads; it became subliminal and autononomic.
Not only is it virtually non existent now, but we have parent's groups, with the full cooperation and endorsement of the police and so called Safety Partnerships actually encouraging children to believe that it is speeding cars that are killing them, and further reinforcing this by taking them out on road checks to lecture motorists.
Totally and utterly unacceptable and highly dangerous.
If I were a copper right now I would be going hell for leather at opposing this, even if it cost me my job, that's how important I think this is and how potentially dangerous it is.
Allowing the status quo to continue, grow and perpetrate itself on society will have you performing "the knock" on a lot more doors.
gone said:
So they can have speed cameras to save a life even though no one has been killed and the 1 dozy little bugger who was run over was hit by a car within the speed limit
Terrific.
Until it becomes one of your own little buggers eh nonegreen? Or don't they count either? expendable to the great god of speed/careless drivers?
I have met people like you before when I have had to deliver the terrible news. Flash fast motor on the drive, 9 points on their licence and a completely different spin on life seconds after the news following the knock! There are few that are willing or ready to accept that the fault was with their perfect child!
Maybe in the case above, the child was at fault. Many are but if cars travelled slower, then the outcomes would not require 'the knock'!
I cast a cold eye Gone, because they are readily reproduced by unskilled labour and Darwin rules. Of course on a detailed level I care very deeply about those close to me, but guess what? I am responsible enough to make absolutely sure they dont get to run about willy nilly near main roads. This is because the main arterial transport roadways are not for children or any other idiot to play on. They are the lifeblood of our economy. Speed cameras, limits and enforcement are the trappings of the terminally bewildered.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff