Unnecessary/Dangerous School Zones

[mazdamad]

Originally posted by Che Castro
The problem is that fencing wont solve anything as there are several driveways as well as parking on city road, there is no space for a cross over, the closest traffic lighst are about ~30m away or so. Its a pretty stuffed up situation there.

This is half the problem, people are to f'n lazy to walk 30m's down the road to a crossing. They would much rather rishk their lives crossing were its dangerous. Yet it sounds like half of you would still blame the driver

[Che Castro]

yeah thats my point I made in my post earleir too, no matter what people will always take the easiest way across, and kids would be worse. You just can't fence a road sometimes, like when there are driveways of business' and stuff.

well even if the pedestrian is in the wrong the driver should be also constantly scanning the road looking for hazards. The driver should also be driving at an appropriate speed for the situation to be able to deal with the worst possible case.

Although sometimes even the most cautious driver will be unable to stop in time.

Cyberian Knight, how can you ever say a pedestrian deserves to die? Like what Fatboy said, what if it was your own child that you ran over? Kids are selfish and irrational at the best of times!

[Stang]

Having poor judgment or being distracted does not make you deserving of getting run over and killed. It's foolish, but not worthy of capital punishment.

[smellytofu]

Originally posted by Daveee
Marty, is this the one near where Beecroft rd joins? (at the big triangle park?)
If so its a girls high school with massive brick walls? Once again with a crossing within a couple of hundred meters?

Daveee, the girls also have a bus stop along the Beecroft Road side of the triangle. Penno Rd SHOULDN"T have been taken to 40 though. They have a footbridge as well as a traffic lights to get them across that road.

[mazdamad]

so why cant people use roads, sidewalks, and crossings as they should be used. Could it be because people breaking the law conserned are allowed to get away with it??

[Che Castro]

it would be good if jaywalking and that was enforced a lot more often and people actually crossed at crossings... but then again its the NSW police

[CyberianKnight]

Originally posted by shano2

If it were proved that the driver was over the speed limit and their speeding contributed to the accident however, the ****er would be mince meat!!!

What if they couldn't have stopped even at 40km/h anyway?

Originally posted by shano2

I did say above (in not so many words) that the lowest common denominator in these circumstances are most certainly the kids who make judgement call that they are most probably not yet mentally equiped to make.

So are you telling me that highschoolers do not have the cognitive ability to decide when and when not to cross a road? If so, please state some proof that they are by and large incapable of such judgement.

Originally posted by shano2

I am in no way excusing the kids from doing the wrong thing, but as a whole it's "our" (everyone's) job as both parents and as more responcible / wiser people in general to look after them by both teaching them what to do and what not to do and also by being aware of what they are likely to do wrong and if at all possible counter it.

Good, fence those footpaths. Its far more foolproof than the schoolzones you are supporting.

Originally posted by shano2

Sorry to harp on it but with this in mind it's the lower speed limit in these zones that are designed to give the drivers the ability to react in time to counteract the poor judgement of the kid who runs out in front of them.

On the other hand it may have the side effect of encouraging poor judgement on the kid's behalf who may now think that he has ample time to cross before the car gets to him. I have witnessed this many times with everyone, not just kids when I decided to slow down in a busy area. These people NEED to learn and making rules that only encourage them does not help.

Originally posted by shano2

Please point out however where I was in anyway critical of those who abide by the speed limit in school zones?
I was only being critical of those who don't..........

Would a kid be more inclined to cross on a road that has cars zooming past at high speed (spook factor) or would they be more inclined to take chances on a road that has slow moving traffic? Common sense analysis here will prove that it is the latter.

Originally posted by shano2

Of course it does. There's nothing wrong with that.
Like I, and others, have said the road rules are geared to the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR, i.e. the part of your statement that suggests it MAY HAPPEN.

And part of that same argument is that the exact opposite of what you wanted by having 40km/h zone MAY happen because of that change. And a driver zooming by at the normal limit may have saved your daughter's life because it left the stretch of road where she would've crossed seconds before she decided to set foot on the road. Its all circumstancial and to put it down to an arbitrary speed limit as a yardstick of driver responsibility, safety and all the other claptrap that one can throw at it is ludicrous and a complete logical fallacy.

Whereas my suggestion of fencing does not. It is a very effective deterrant and physically prevents people from crossing where they should not. If you are serious about your daughter's safety as you have empassionately argued, you should be championing that idea rather than be content with the status quo.

Originally posted by shano2

I don't see this as entirely relevant. Correct perhaps but not really relevant. The argument still comes down to if it's a 40 zone, DO NO MORE THAN 40 and if anything goes wrong it's the kid at fault.

Ah that clarifies your position much better. Your recognition of fault hinges entirely on the posted speed limit. REGARDLESS of who actually caused the accident by being somewhere he shouldn't be.

Originally posted by shano2

I'll say it again......

I couldn't give a flying **** if it's appropriately positioned or not IT'S THERE, and despite your objections to it you WILL NOT get it changed, and you know it, so slow the **** down and drive in an appropriate manner for the given conditions.

Cheers
Shane

1) Why do you believe that I won't get it changed? Remember, if they get enough complaints they will be forced to change it eventually. That is the whole point of a DEMOCRACY or have you failed to believe in it in favour of a nanny-state?

2) You haven't addressed at all the arguments pertaining to school zones on multi-laned roads which is what the original post dealt with. You have merely blanket stated that ALL schoolzone should be obeyed when the validity of that statement has been in dispute and the subject of debate throughout this thread.

The issue is there, answer it.

[CyberianKnight]

Originally posted by Stang
Having poor judgment or being distracted does not make you deserving of getting run over and killed. It's foolish, but not worthy of capital punishment.

There is a difference between INTENTIONALLY killing a person as punishment (capital punishment) and NATURAL consequences like being stupid enough to go bunjy jumping into a volcano.....

[CyberianKnight]

Originally posted by Che Castro
yeah thats my point I made in my post earleir too, no matter what people will always take the easiest way across, and kids would be worse. You just can't fence a road sometimes, like when there are driveways of business' and stuff.

You can on main multi-laned roads because you are not meant to stop on the side of it anyway, people are not allowed to cross anyway etc. Obviously I was referring to the specific incidences as outlined in the first post when I put forward that solution.

Originally posted by Che Castro

well even if the pedestrian is in the wrong the driver should be also constantly scanning the road looking for hazards. The driver should also be driving at an appropriate speed for the situation to be able to deal with the worst possible case.

I always scan ahead looking for hazards and I have always managed to stop for idiots who jump out in front without looking, kids and adults alike.

Originally posted by Che Castro

Although sometimes even the most cautious driver will be unable to stop in time.

Even one travelling at 40km/h because the pedo was very very stupid.... So where does that leave us? Its not the driver's fault now is it? A guy can get run over at 40 and you can argue that had the driver been travelling at 35 it wouldn't have happened and so on. But that type of logic is fluff. The only solid logical link that can be made is one of cause and effect. Step on the road and get run over. It IS that simple and it is that line of reasoning that must be hammered into people's heads and more lives will be saved in the long run.

Originally posted by Che Castro

Cyberian Knight, how can you ever say a pedestrian deserves to die? Like what Fatboy said, what if it was your own child that you ran over? Kids are selfish and irrational at the best of times!

I didn't say they deserved to die. I said they deserved to get run over. They MAY die but thats just too bad.

[CyberianKnight]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FatBoy
[B]Ok, we've established you don't have kids, that's cool, neither do i... so what about parents ??
Dear old mum hits 90, she's partially blind, deaf as a post, and accidently walks behind you as you back out of your parking space and ends up splattered...
What the hell, she shouldn't have been there, so who cares, the silly bitch deserved to be road kill right ??

Funny you should use that example, I've experienced a whole group of 5-6 elderly people just waltze within one or two meters the path of my car when backing out. If they are that deaf and blind, they should stay with specialist care. If they don't like being cooped up in specialist care, then they accept the risk to themselves and others. It is fair that way.

Originally posted by FatBoy

Mate, unfortunately people are human and therefore fallible. We all make mistakes, we can all be distracted, and we can all be somewhere we really shouldn't be... kids are even worse.

Then you live with the consequences if you get run over. We can't just slow down the world for the lowest common denominator or slow down the whole class just because one kid doesn't get it. The world does not and should not work like that.

Originally posted by FatBoy

I agree that school zones can be a pain in the arse in heavy traffic, but they are there for a reason... to keep kids safe.
I'd much rather have some goose run up the back of my car than see a young kid robbed of his or her life.

They're not robbed of their lives if they threw it away.

Originally posted by FatBoy

In a perfect world kids would be smarter, drivers would be smarter, and we wouldn't need school zones or traffic cops.
We all know it's not a perfect world...

Cheers,
Paul...

And you're advocating action which will in effect be subsidising the stupid and the irresponsible rather than forcing them to change their behaviour for their own sakes.

[phee]

We have a primary school on a main road up here except it only drops from 80kms per hr to 70kms per hr. Originally AGES ago it would have been a 40km per hr zone since the school is there and all, but they got around causing accidents etc by building a walkway OVER the main road for the kids to cross without even worrying about traffic. There are bus stops on both sides of the road so there isn't any real danger. Some kids cant be bothered to walk up the stairs and over the bridge built for them though so they try and run across the road which can be dangerous. And I have come home form work during peak hour traffic to find some kids trying to cross at one of the most dangerous intersections in Darwin because they couldn't be bothered going over the walk way.

It is a 2 way street here, excuse the pun, but the government has done what they can to prevent accidents happening on this main road for drivers and pedestrians, but if the pedisterains are going to be so stupid not to even bother helping themself save their own life, then they don't necessarily deserve to be hit, but deserve to have the shit scared out of them with a car flying past narrowly missing them. They might actually use what the government gave them then.

As far as normal 40km per hr zones go they are fine for the suburbs, but some are quite an effort to keep up. Another school is basically offside of the main shopping centre in Darwin and going down to 40kms around there can be dangerous when there are cars turning in every direction possible. Maybe another walkway would be the go here, or pedestrian traffic lights.

Pet hate: People who press the button and then walk across anyway without waiting for the little green man to say go, causing the traffic to stop for some bastard who isnt even there anymore.

[skitz_supra]

:worship: CyberianKnight :worship:

"we must blame them before they think of blaming us" -Shelia Broflowski (in reference to why their children behave badly)

"the majority isn't always right"

"common sense isn't so common"

prevention is the best cure, we can't prevent cars being on the roads, but we can prevent children being on them, i will agree with previous statements about fences, they are a much better idea than 40km/h zones, especially around mulit lane roads, but around "normal" zones (50km/h here) they have there advantages, like giving me enough time to avoid that HUGE 4x4 that pulled out infront of me without indicating (with 1 parent and 1 kid inside) if i was doing 60, my pride and joy might not be here (ohhh, my baby [leans over and hugs supra] what would i do without you!)

i could ravel on for ages about people taking responsibility for there actions ("hot coffee? who would have guessed that!")
but i wont.....

p.s. we need Michael Moore to examine the underlying social issues

p.p.s. thus post may contain spulling errors

[CyberianKnight]

Originally posted by phee
We have a primary school on a main road up here except it only drops from 80kms per hr to 70kms per hr. Originally AGES ago it would have been a 40km per hr zone since the school is there and all, but they got around causing accidents etc by building a walkway OVER the main road for the kids to cross without even worrying about traffic.

Sounds like a much fairer and better solution to me than blanket 40km/h zones.

[CyberianKnight]

Originally posted by skitz_supra
:worship: CyberianKnight :worship:

"we must blame them before they think of blaming us" -Shelia Broflowski (in reference to why their children behave badly)

"the majority isn't always right"

"common sense isn't so common"

prevention is the best cure, we can't prevent cars being on the roads, but we can prevent children being on them, i will agree with previous statements about fences, they are a much better idea than 40km/h zones, especially around mulit lane roads, but around "normal" zones (50km/h here) they have there advantages, like giving me enough time to avoid that HUGE 4x4 that pulled out infront of me without indicating (with 1 parent and 1 kid inside) if i was doing 60, my pride and joy might not be here (ohhh, my baby [leans over and hugs supra] what would i do without you!)

i could ravel on for ages about people taking responsibility for there actions ("hot coffee? who would have guessed that!")
but i wont.....

p.s. we need Michael Moore to examine the underlying social issues

p.p.s. thus post may contain spulling errors

Glad to have your vote of confidence

[CussCuss]

in my opinion

flashing lights are a must.
fencing on a main road like vic road is a good idea and i cant possibly see a downside to doing it aslong as there are no driveways etc therefore there isnt really an excuse for not doing it.

40 zones are cool, it gives that pit lane feeling