Parents are calling for tougher safety measures at a crossing in West Way after a four-year-old girl was hit by a car.
The pupil from Botley School suffered fractures to her legs and a minor head injury after she was struck as she crossed the road last Thursday.
The schoolgirl was using the pedestrian crossing when it is claimed the vehicle, travelling at 20mph, drove through a red light.I’m not sure what more ‘must be done’, frankly. Rules of the road are clear, but there’s nothing to really stop people disobeying them, if that’s what happened.
District councillor Emily Smith, whose children also attend the primary school, said: “I’m wondering whether a 20mph zone might slow cars down and help drivers to notice traffic lights turning red. “Well, given the driver in this case was estimated at 20mph then…no.
But surely if he really did run a red light, the police will come down on him like a ton of bricks?
Spokeswoman for Thames Valley Police, Charlotte Redman, confirmed that no arrests have been made in relation to the incident.Hmmm. Perhaps the witnesses’ insistence that the light was red should be taken with a pinch of salt?
We could have zones where someone has to walk in front with a white flag. That should reduce the amount of injuries in those zones. I suspect that a variant of that is being suggested all over the country.
The fact the kids will then go out into other zones and have no road sense doesn't occur to these people. Of course they can always roll out the white flag regime countrywide.
The sad fact is that many people ignore the 20 mph limit now. Plod don't even seem to enforce it. Mainly because they can get more victims, sorry, criminals by parking up around 30 mph zones as 20 mph zones tend to be back streets with little traffic and when the kids are out there is so much traffic there they can't target enough to keep their social fund topped up.
...or perhaps the driver was a member of a protected class?
Rather than the parents waiting for someone else to do something why don't they do something themselves, something like organising some of them to be there and walk across the road with the children?
That way they, the parents, wouldn't be breaking any rules, after all they would just be walking across the road. The problem is that doesn't fit the general idea that someone else should be doing something for them.
No hint as to whether the four year old was accompanied or not? Or whether she had been turned loose in dodgy circumstances by a caring parent?
That reminds me of the young boy killed by a van in a 20 mph zone: "Something must be done!" wailed the distraught mother, utterly ignoring the fact that, had the van NOT been obeying the speed limit, it would have been long past them. She was probably torn up in her angst that there was just so much that SHE could have done, but didn't.
Why 20 mph? Being ultra-careful?
why don't they do something themselves
Sounds like a nice idea, but how long before someone doing this gets sued when something goes wrong? Or someone demands they have a check to ensure they aren't kiddy-fiddlers?
Independent action is more or less impossible today. This is not an accident.
"We could have zones where someone has to walk in front with a white flag."
GAH! Don't give them ideas!
"...or perhaps the driver was a member of a protected class?"
"Rather than the parents waiting for someone else to do something why don't they do something themselves"
Well, there's the 'sue at the drop of a hat!' culture, as Brian points out. And then there's the 'I pay my taxes so government should do it!' culture.
"No hint as to whether the four year old was accompanied or not?"
There often isn't.
20mph zones signify a particular council's intent- "We wanted to pedestrianise this road, but couldn't get away with it."
I further suspect the reason they can't get away with banning cars is because there are no reasonably maintained alternative routes!
Post a Comment