Saving 2000 child deaths a year
Discussion
Woohoo, we have another new law 
My bold.
But wait, we are going to save 2000 children from dying, surely that's a good thing. Err, perhaps if I believed the numbers for one second surely we 'only' have about 3,500 KSI per year anyway. Since when did children start being allowed to drive unaccompanied, or perhaps that's the problem.
Now this new law is one I definitely won't comply with. For starters look at the rear seats in a 996.
If you put a booster in there you risk serious injury to a child as you will push them out of the protective cell
Not only that, but it's unenforceable.
Unbelieveable, so now we have a law that you specifically don't have to comply with
It really begs the question why? The only answer I can think of is it's about being seen to do something rather than actually doing something.
The DFT said:
New regulations governing the use of child car seats will come into force on 18 September 2006.
We will be running advertising from July to September in press, radio and online to advise parent and carers about the new regulations governing the use of child car seats.
Stephen Ladyman, Road Safety Minister said:
"Most people make sure that children use some kind of restraint when travelling on the road, but it is vitally important to use the right one; and not to use an adult belt before the child is big enough.
"Small children need the protection that baby seats and child seats are designed to provide. Seat belts are designed for adults. Children who have grown out of child seats still need to use booster seats and booster cushions.
"We estimate that these changes could prevent over 2000 child deaths or injuries each year."
We will be running advertising from July to September in press, radio and online to advise parent and carers about the new regulations governing the use of child car seats.
Stephen Ladyman, Road Safety Minister said:
"Most people make sure that children use some kind of restraint when travelling on the road, but it is vitally important to use the right one; and not to use an adult belt before the child is big enough.
"Small children need the protection that baby seats and child seats are designed to provide. Seat belts are designed for adults. Children who have grown out of child seats still need to use booster seats and booster cushions.
"We estimate that these changes could prevent over 2000 child deaths or injuries each year."
My bold.
But wait, we are going to save 2000 children from dying, surely that's a good thing. Err, perhaps if I believed the numbers for one second surely we 'only' have about 3,500 KSI per year anyway. Since when did children start being allowed to drive unaccompanied, or perhaps that's the problem.
Now this new law is one I definitely won't comply with. For starters look at the rear seats in a 996.
If you put a booster in there you risk serious injury to a child as you will push them out of the protective cell
Not only that, but it's unenforceable.
TheDFT said:
Are there any exemptions?
Three exceptions allow children 3 years to 135 cms in height to travel in the rear and use an adult belt:
*
in a taxi, if the right child restraint is not available;
*
for an occasional journey over a short distance, if the right child restraint is not available;
*
where two occupied child seats in the rear prevent the fitment of a third child seat.
Children under 3 years may travel n the rear of a taxi unrestrained if not child restraint is available.
Three exceptions allow children 3 years to 135 cms in height to travel in the rear and use an adult belt:
*
in a taxi, if the right child restraint is not available;
*
for an occasional journey over a short distance, if the right child restraint is not available;
*
where two occupied child seats in the rear prevent the fitment of a third child seat.
Children under 3 years may travel n the rear of a taxi unrestrained if not child restraint is available.
Unbelieveable, so now we have a law that you specifically don't have to comply with
It really begs the question why? The only answer I can think of is it's about being seen to do something rather than actually doing something.
HMMMMMM - got 2 grand kids being very iff with the law -
first one - grandaughter - only 10 - but over the 1.35 m .
second one - grandson - 13,but less than 1,35M -
looking at the law , which one needs a full seat - both can use the belts in my car , as the belts lower to accomodatre a person of less than 1.2 M
eRGO - THE LAW IS AN ASS.
first one - grandaughter - only 10 - but over the 1.35 m .
second one - grandson - 13,but less than 1,35M -
looking at the law , which one needs a full seat - both can use the belts in my car , as the belts lower to accomodatre a person of less than 1.2 M
eRGO - THE LAW IS AN ASS.
I suspect that the '2000' figure has a rather heavier bias on injuries than deaths. Quite what constitutes 'injury' I don't know. Minor graze? Shock?
Government figures to be trusted?
Protecting children in cars is common sense. However, that doesn't seem to be applicable to a section of the population (for example those who allow their offspring to stand up on the seats/in the boot etc.), so in comes the nanny state with more interference...
Government figures to be trusted?
Protecting children in cars is common sense. However, that doesn't seem to be applicable to a section of the population (for example those who allow their offspring to stand up on the seats/in the boot etc.), so in comes the nanny state with more interference...
Edited by julianhj on Wednesday 19th July 21:37
My husband - Mad (Moggie) Doc raised this for debate on Paulie's site when first mentioned.
We have a lot of kittens as most on here know. Ist quite an expensive outlay und only the car which we consider to be least safe in garage could accommodate all these child seats.
As you know - we have Moggies.. Jags und a VW people carrier which we do not use that often .. as we consider the car chassis quick to crumple if the worst happened. Besides ... it ist useless on the family hols on A/bahn
But back to OP .. you try putting a load of these seats for "rogues who consider themselves to be "big boys now" .. und you have a bit of a discipline problem und our kittens are fairly compliant despite their "challenges" to our word. 
We have a lot of kittens as most on here know. Ist quite an expensive outlay und only the car which we consider to be least safe in garage could accommodate all these child seats.
As you know - we have Moggies.. Jags und a VW people carrier which we do not use that often .. as we consider the car chassis quick to crumple if the worst happened. Besides ... it ist useless on the family hols on A/bahn
But back to OP .. you try putting a load of these seats for "rogues who consider themselves to be "big boys now" .. und you have a bit of a discipline problem
und our kittens are fairly compliant despite their "challenges" to our word. Perhaps , instead of using a big stick - Tony / Gordon , might start giving out some safety advice - as new fathers - baby in rear seat , unrestrained , meets windscreen - result = few KG of mince. Kiddy in rear , in middle of rear seats - stops suddenly - 20KG , passing front seat pasengers has high kinetic energy, enough to kill, and when meets windscreen ---almost instant hi volume mince.
5 year old in rear seat - unconstrained - car stops in hurry - you've got missile in rear - it might stop when it klls you - then again , it might miss you and let you see you'r kid get splattered accross the car you stopped in a hurry for.
Then again - the old Labridor sleeping in the rear seat - weighs agout 20KG( 44 poumds) - doing about 30 mph , when you stop in a hurry - to stop that in a hurry needs 1936 ft lb = about 1936 lb in about 1 inch = approx 1 ton
Just some thoughts on unsecured rear seat passengers
5 year old in rear seat - unconstrained - car stops in hurry - you've got missile in rear - it might stop when it klls you - then again , it might miss you and let you see you'r kid get splattered accross the car you stopped in a hurry for.
Then again - the old Labridor sleeping in the rear seat - weighs agout 20KG( 44 poumds) - doing about 30 mph , when you stop in a hurry - to stop that in a hurry needs 1936 ft lb = about 1936 lb in about 1 inch = approx 1 ton
Just some thoughts on unsecured rear seat passengers
I think this is a law throught the backdoor. ie, non enforcable in real terms but scary enough to make the people who would offend make a difference.
The key in the report is the mention of advertising. The govt advertise heavily with 'Your child will die....etc' with scare tactics and Halfrauds will simultaneously run a free fitting on car seats campaign. That would make a difference whilst the 'sense' behind the law and the exemptions are still there.
Ok to me.
The key in the report is the mention of advertising. The govt advertise heavily with 'Your child will die....etc' with scare tactics and Halfrauds will simultaneously run a free fitting on car seats campaign. That would make a difference whilst the 'sense' behind the law and the exemptions are still there.
Ok to me.
UK ist leader in EU for child car seat use. Ist not that much of a problem in this country. Abroad do not buy .. why law brought in. But ist OTT up to age 12/13.
Our rogues aged 8 und 6 consider themselves to be "big boys" now und we have bought the seats in readiness und are trying to get them to use them. Ist a bit of a challenge at times.
However, will perhaps cut school runs as time fiddling around.. und the fights with the kids may make bus look good!
Our rogues aged 8 und 6 consider themselves to be "big boys" now und we have bought the seats in readiness und are trying to get them to use them. Ist a bit of a challenge at times.
However, will perhaps cut school runs as time fiddling around.. und the fights with the kids may make bus look good!
jasandjules said:
Bit concerning when a Minister states 2000 child deaths/injuries could be saved when the total is 3500....Incl of all ages... Do wonder whether it is true what they say, 99% of statistics are made up on the spot.. In Labour's case, 101%........
That depends on the definition of injury!
I've heard of a claim against a driver for the stress caused on an unborn child!
They may therefore include additional stress caused by waking up from a horn sounding as "injury"!
Incidently, I think the percentage of support for your theory on Labour's fictional statistics would be around 99% on this forum!
jasandjules said:
Bit concerning when a Minister states 2000 child deaths/injuries could be saved when the total is 3500....Incl of all ages... Do wonder whether it is true what they say, 99% of statistics are made up on the spot.. In Labour's case, 101%........
Currently 3500K and ~35000KSI
"for an occasional journey over a short distance, if the right child restraint is not available"
This makes it unenforceable. What is a "short distance" and an "occasional" journey?
This will just give those parents on the school run the justification to put their kids in the car without a child seat because the law says its ok. I see it alot when I drop my kids off at school. These are supposedly intelligent and responsible parents who run around in £20k cars but can't be bothered to restrain their kids properly. I even see 5/6 kids in a 5 seater car arriving at school . . . . driven by a classroom assistant/trainee teacher!
Just don't get me started . . . . oops too late.
This makes it unenforceable. What is a "short distance" and an "occasional" journey?
This will just give those parents on the school run the justification to put their kids in the car without a child seat because the law says its ok. I see it alot when I drop my kids off at school. These are supposedly intelligent and responsible parents who run around in £20k cars but can't be bothered to restrain their kids properly. I even see 5/6 kids in a 5 seater car arriving at school . . . . driven by a classroom assistant/trainee teacher!
Just don't get me started . . . . oops too late.
greatgranny said:
"These are supposedly intelligent and responsible parents who run around in £20k cars but can't be bothered to restrain their kids properly. .
Dropped my girls off at pre school the other morning, 2 women turn up in a 405 estate with one 3 year old on board - in the boot... have they no idea what would happen if they hit something.. even at 30mph!
Fools!
If there aren't enough Police around to catch idiots like that how will the new law ever get enforced, unless you stop someone and look in for the booster seat....
Scoop940 said:
greatgranny said:
"These are supposedly intelligent and responsible parents who run around in £20k cars but can't be bothered to restrain their kids properly. .
Dropped my girls off at pre school the other morning, 2 women turn up in a 405 estate with one 3 year old on board - in the boot... have they no idea what would happen if they hit something.. even at 30mph!
Fools!
If there aren't enough Police around to catch idiots like that how will the new law ever get enforced, unless you stop someone and look in for the booster seat....
do?Stubby Pete said:
jasandjules said:
Bit concerning when a Minister states 2000 child deaths/injuries could be saved when the total is 3500....Incl of all ages... Do wonder whether it is true what they say, 99% of statistics are made up on the spot.. In Labour's case, 101%........
That depends on the definition of injury!
I've heard of a claim against a driver for the stress caused on an unborn child!
They may therefore include additional stress caused by waking up from a horn sounding as "injury"!
Incidently, I think the percentage of support for your theory on Labour's fictional statistics would be around 99% on this forum!
Some people will try anything. Though I think all my kittens have benfitted for track days in the Wildy womb.
saw a kid in a car, when mother pulled up to the carpark, cant have been older than 7 years old. she was sittin gin the front seat, with her nose lined up with the pointed bit of the dash and / or airbag. reckon she would have been taken out by the airbag in a 20 mph crash
some parents do need legal help to protect their kids
some parents do need legal help to protect their kids
Slightly OT, but perhaps not.
Anyone ever been shunted up the rear - hard enough for the shell to have to be replaced?. OK, know that the car i was in was by modern day standards poor, to say the least, but took a look at a workmates Zafira ( think it was ) with seats in rear ( behind rear seats, immediatly in front of back door) ---he has a large family.
My reaction - a flashback to the day i was tail ended twice and car needed new shell - dog in boot shot over rear seat and was later found to have liver damage.
Me - with his size family --i'd not just think about mini bus - i'd get one .
Anyone ever been shunted up the rear - hard enough for the shell to have to be replaced?. OK, know that the car i was in was by modern day standards poor, to say the least, but took a look at a workmates Zafira ( think it was ) with seats in rear ( behind rear seats, immediatly in front of back door) ---he has a large family.
My reaction - a flashback to the day i was tail ended twice and car needed new shell - dog in boot shot over rear seat and was later found to have liver damage.
Me - with his size family --i'd not just think about mini bus - i'd get one .
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff