Gizmo wrote:
Its about time parents started to take their fare share of the blame.
A couple of years ago in Manchester on a fairly quiet suburban street, a man opened his garden gate and crossed the street. He didn't shut the gate behind him, and as a result his toddler followed him, ran straight in front of a car, and was killed.
So what happened? There was an outcry about "speeding motorists" causing "danger to children by their reckless driving". Not long afterwards the street was traffic calmed. Very little was said about the irresponsibility of the father, who had caused the death of his child by wilful negligence. There was also no information on how fast the car was travelling when it struck the child. If a child ran out straight in front of a car doing 8 mph, there is a good chance that it would at the very least be seriously injured.
Closer to where I live, another road was traffic calmed after some nutter on a motor bike attempted 0 to 60 in 3 seconds, went out of control, crashed into a tree, and killed himself. I've mentioned that one elsewhere, but the point here is that this isn't in my view a reason for traffic calming a road either.
If all roads where a biker had killed himself by riding recklessly (or a child had run in front of a car) were traffic calmed, there wouldn't be many uncalmed roads left. As usual, penalise the long suffering motorist for problems which lie elsewhere.
Brian