Safe Speed Forums

Is it me, or is it a part of this "new age" road safety attitude, that pedestrians can behave and do what the hell they like, and drivers are fully responsible for the outcome? yes they are more vulnerable and extra care need be attributed, but giving one side the "moral high ground" will lead them to neglect their own responsibility for themselves. "oh you can step out whenever you feel like it 'cos the car will stop" (?) Both sides need to have equal responsibilities. but i suppose we live in the day where we blame peter for what paul does.
May i add i am not condoning any motorist who has caused harm to people by atrocious driving.
when I cross the road, I think like a driver and just take a little extra care in case someone is "booting it" down the road, or to make sure it is clear and safe to cross, or be aware that "umm that cars brakes might fail" or "hit some oil"
A car can be doing 10mph or 100mph (I'm not condoning it at all!), it aint going to hit you if you don't put yourself in front of it!
STOP LOOK LISTEN THINK!


moderator message:
this thread has been split from here and renamed appropriately. [S]

There was an atrocious speed kills ad showing a woman standing behind a small van (escort type IIRC) she steps out from behind this vehicle as the car reaches the end of the vehicle, it cannot stop by the time it reaches the front of the vehicle (and her) the next shot you see are the driver talking to the coprse with the 'ghost' of the woman saying if you'd slowed down if you weren't driving so fast.

IMO fataly flawed and as a road safety or 'education' advert talks crap !

How many cars can stop from 30mph in the length of a escort size van I'm also including the drivers reaction time as per this advert ? So why do we have an ad that indicates that cars should stop in a distance that is unrealistic ? Does this not give pedestrians a false idea of a cars actual stopping distance, let alone allowing for factors such as rain, ice, snow, oil etc ?

The pedestrian steps out from behind a parked car, the first thing I was taught as a kid was 'Find a safe clear space to cross', also given the number of pedestrians involved in accidents where they step out from behind a parked car, ice cream van, bus why do we have an ad implying that it is acceptable to step out from behind a parked car ?

These so called road safety messages have a lot to answer for !

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

In most towns these days obeying the rule of never crossing where a car is parked would condemn many pedestrians to a life spent entirely on one side of the road. The right of the motorist to park wherever he find convenient and the right of the delivery driver to stop directly outside his destination now takes priority over road safety.

At a public meeting with the police about the danger caused by parked vehicles in our village we were told by an officer that parking offences were a very low priority because "nobody has ever been knocked down by a parked vehicle". Curiously enough the priority has escalated now that the Borough Council has been given civil enforcement powers and can impose a £70 fixed penalty

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

These last two posts seem like deja vu. This has been discussed on here before with almost the same words.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Not many, which is why you should be driving slower near parked traffic.

Are you taking non prescription drugs?

Even at 10mph, I doubt you'd stop in the length of an average car by the time that thinking distance, reaction time, and actual stopping distance has been factored in.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Yes, but at 10-20mph you're not going to send some dolt who steps out from behind a parked van on an arcing trajectory 100 yards down the road, 30 to 40 (which is clearly the speed quite a few people drive down lines of parked cars), and they'll be dead pretty much instantly, as well as airbourne.

Is there anything which prevents anyone who crosses the road between parked vehicles from looking BEFORE they emerge from the shelter of the vehicles? Should this simple precaution be hammered home through public advertisements?

Should anyone who does not and duly gets a sojourn in the morgue get a Darwin Award? (for removing themselves from the gene pool)

Should any driver who puts the above mentioned dolt into a sub orbital trajectory get an award for increasing the average IQ of the nation?

Seriously there does seem to be a very strong case for getting a message out that those who are most likely to be hurt need to learn to look out for themselves. The old epitaph should be emphasised to everyone. "Here lies the body of poor old Joe. He was right, dead right as he sailed/walked/cycled/drove along but he's just as dead as if he was wrong."

_________________
The only thing that should be prohibited is prohibition.

How slow is slower? Can you quantify that in any way? What about passing parked vehicles within areas with limits higher than 30, even NSL - how much does one need to slow down there? Where do we draw the line?

Or is there a better way, like leaving as much gap to the parked cars as safely possible, whilst remaining acutely aware of the possibility of people emerging from them? (one would probably be going slower anyway if one can't leave a reasonable gap to the parked cars)

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Well quite, but the original post that got my back up was the assertion that it's perfectly acceptable to pass parked cars at 30mph (and subsequently that a lower speed would make no difference).

Even if it was hammered home every minute of every day people would still do it, forgetful, drunk, stoned, running away from something etc, just using their ears, didn't hear your approach (I get that on the cycle a LOT, and when electric cars are common I'll get it in the car a LOT I suspect)...

It's your job as a licensed driver of a vehicle NOT to strike them if at all possible, and that includes mitigating your speed when driving near hazards just in case; sorry 'bout that.

You can't drive you car expecting not to have to deal with peds in the road.

I don't disagree, but you have to apply a reasonableness test to it. You can't drive everywhere on the assumption that every pedestrian you see might just run out into the road right in front of you. If there are very young children on the pavement, groups of teenagers or drunks etc, then obviously it makes sense to exercise extra caution.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

You see, with those first two comments I think you ARE being serious, after all, what are pedestrians doing in YOUR road?

It is perfectly acceptable to pass a parked car 30 mph, or even faster. If within an NSL then a lower speed may well not make any difference to the survival rate (0). Granted the original post was implying a 30 limit. Even then there are many major roads with 30 limits (and more as time goes by), those with parked cars (in laybys and such), you can't expect all drivers to always slow down so drastically when passing all parked cars, more so for events which are sooooo very infrequent, especially when the fault is entirely someone else's.

How slow is slower? Can you quantify that in any way? What about passing parked vehicles within areas with limits higher than 30, even NSL - how much does one need to slow down there? Where do we draw the line?


But they would do it an awful lot less.....

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Yup sure, there's a bit of road I go down quite a lot next to a motorway up ramp which is composed of brick right next to the road.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&sourc ... 0714285715

Obviously the only safe speed to go past that is about 5 mph just in case somebody jumped out from behind it, I don't though, I go past it at 30-40, always ready to stop though, but yes, if somebody did jump out from behind it too late then it'd be curtains for them.

Like I say, on a pushbike you become very aware of what could jump out in front of you, as if something does it's going to hurt, I just don't think some car drivers have been exposed to such a situation and hence don't really consider the risks they are taking when they buzz close to objects that obscure their view by the side of the road.

But it can still happen so you've always got to be prepared for it...

Yes it can still happen, it doesn't mean we can be complacent about campaigning to all road users - especially pedestrians - the dangers of not looking properly; this was MFL's very valid point.
Furthermore, drivers need not have to slow down for each and every instance where a pedestrian could conceivably step out without looking (heck that's a lot more for drivers to watch out for). Hell I've seem more peds step out without looking where there are no parked cars (especially in front of me when I'm cycling, indeed my only hit was where there were no parked cars).


So why slow down for one type of visible obstruction and not the other? In fact, why slow down if it's "curtains" anyway?
Even 5mph isn't absolutely safe; someone could still go under your wheels before you could react.


I just don't think some other road users (especially pedestrians) have been exposed to adequate warnings and training and hence don't really consider the risks they are taking when they step out without looking between objects that obscure their view by the side of the road.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

I think there's a great deal more chance of a pedestrian dashing out without looking from behind an ice cream van or a bus than from behind this brick wall.

Hence I'd slow right down for an ice cream van, and I don't slow down for this wall.

So at what speed would you drive along this 40-limit dual-carriageway, with a fairly constant line of parked vehicles on the left?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Wait a minute - I thought we were talking about "parked cars" (those were your exact words), not temporarily stopped public service vehicles - the latter where it is reasonably expected to have people wanting to cross, sometimes in a hurry hence dashing ?!?

Let me ask again: why slow down for parked cars (not ice cream vans and buses) and not for visible obstructions, such as the wall you've shown?
Why slow down if it's "curtains" anyway?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign