Thread: Bull bar blitz: rural drivers fined

Originally Posted by PAT303

It's all about personal responsibility,we have pedestrian crossings for a reason,in the news this week train drivers are complaining about people crossing in front of them,the video's of people running in front of trains beggers belief. Pat

It's a very black and white view if you consider that all vehicle on pedestrian incidents are somehow down to a lack of personal responsibility on the part of the pedestrian, and therefore we should say stuff them.

Not everyone is standing in the middle of the road due to a lack of foresight, intelligence, or responsibility. What about the traffic controller directing traffic? Or the cop conducting an RBT? Or, just to pluck an example at random, crossing a pedestrian crossing on a green signal, when a driver (who had had an argument with her boyfriend) managed to not see the red signal and plough through the red signal where two of my sisters-in-law, my mother-in-law and my niece were crossing. Caused permanent brain damage to my niece, and a permanent disability to one of my two sisters-in-law, though the other two escaped with relatively light injuries.

Yep, natural selection in action there Pat.

Originally Posted by sheerluck

It's a very black and white view if you consider that all vehicle on pedestrian incidents are somehow down to a lack of personal responsibility on the part of the pedestrian, and therefore we should say stuff them.

A friend did this to me yesterday. He took my words, changed a couple, and threw it back at me.

It's a very black and white view if you consider that all vehicle on pedestrian incidents are somehow down to a lack of personal responsibility on the part of the motorist, and therefore we should say get rid of those bull bars.

His opinion is, if you accept one, you cannot dismiss the other.

The fact is, each party is correct. If we ban bull bars we should also ban pedestrians from the road and wrap them up in cotton wool and airbags. We will have less pedestrian injuries. Why don't we do that?

http://www.improbable.com/news/2002/...-new-suit.html

...

Originally Posted by sheerluck

It's a very black and white view if you consider that all vehicle on pedestrian incidents are somehow down to a lack of personal responsibility on the part of the pedestrian, and therefore we should say stuff them.

Not everyone is standing in the middle of the road due to a lack of foresight, intelligence, or responsibility. What about the traffic controller directing traffic? Or the cop conducting an RBT? Or, just to pluck an example at random, crossing a pedestrian crossing on a green signal, when a driver (who had had an argument with her boyfriend) managed to not see the red signal and plough through the red signal where two of my sisters-in-law, my mother-in-law and my niece were crossing. Caused permanent brain damage to my niece, and a permanent disability to one of my two sisters-in-law, though the other two escaped with relatively light injuries.

Yep, natural selection in action there Pat.

Was she driving a vehicle with a bulbar?


To me this is just the tip of the iceberg. How fast does the average vehicle fitted with a bulbar accelerate? around 0-100 in 10+ seconds overall.
Now go spend the same $$$ you would have on a 4x4 with a bulbar on a hot hatch or hi-po sedan and your looking at acceleration of under 4.5 seconds 0-100kph.
How is this related you ask?
VAST majority of pedestrians are hit in the city, less in the burbs, they are collected by vehicles doing the green light drag, stepping out from between parked courier vans into oncoming traffic not looking. Now if you have a TDv6, 5,toy4.2/4.4,niss 4.2/3.0,jeep 2.8 etc... whatever that can maybe get to 30kph over 60m before hitting Joe iPod, you in the next lane at the same price can have AMG($75k for GLA)/WRX/Evo($40k+)/HSV hitting 60kph+.
Now according to the pedestrian councils own data your just as dead being hit by a 5post bulbar with fishing rod holders protruding at 30kph as you are being hit by a normal car at 60kph.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

A friend did this to me yesterday. He took my words, changed a couple, and threw it back at me.
His opinion is, if you accept one, you cannot dismiss the other.

The fact is, each party is correct. If we ban bull bars we should also ban pedestrians from the road and wrap them up in cotton wool and airbags. We will have less pedestrian injuries. Why don't we do that?

Improbable Research

Mick, my point to Pat was that there is no absolute, but that the world exists in the grey area in the middle. People will have legitimate need to be standing on a road, just as there is a legitimate need for bullbars on vehicles. My intention is not to lobby for the banning of bullbars, far from it. They are a necessary addition in most of this country, but let's at least try and make them the best compromise possible.

Giving the attitude "we shouldn't have to do anything, pedestrians shouldn't be on the road" for me is not correct.

Originally Posted by PhilipA

Pat 303 , it is pretty traumatic to hit someone.
My son in law was driving along in Narrabeen minding his own business and a woman walked out in front. He hit her and stuck around to help and call ambulance etc.
She then accused him of exceeding the speed limit and that he saw her etc etc.
Went to court after a LOOOONG wait and he was exonerated , only because there were witnesses who supported his version.
The wait before court was excruciating for him and really affected his outlook.
Regards Philip A

I know how traumatic it is Philip,I was an ambulance officer for 3 years and many times I saw the aftermath of peoples decision not to use a crossing but simply to cut across the road.I saw first hand what such an accident is like on the driver,witnesses and the persons friends/family.Like I posted earlier these people make decisions that not only effect them but many others as well,a person driving a vehicle has enough to do without dealing with the extra burden of looking out for pedestrians who don't follow simple road rules. Pat

Originally Posted by rovercare

Weekend fatalities | Latrobe Valley Express

My brothers missus, using a phone walked into traffic

I'm not advocating the laws though, not walking infront of vehicles is a better way of staying alive and as for the feeing child as an example?....they are going under regardless, think about it, they only little

Sorry for your families loss Rovercare. Pat

Originally Posted by sheerluck

It's a very black and white view if you consider that all vehicle on pedestrian incidents are somehow down to a lack of personal responsibility on the part of the pedestrian, and therefore we should say stuff them.

Not everyone is standing in the middle of the road due to a lack of foresight, intelligence, or responsibility. What about the traffic controller directing traffic? Or the cop conducting an RBT? Or, just to pluck an example at random, crossing a pedestrian crossing on a green signal, when a driver (who had had an argument with her boyfriend) managed to not see the red signal and plough through the red signal where two of my sisters-in-law, my mother-in-law and my niece were crossing. Caused permanent brain damage to my niece, and a permanent disability to one of my two sisters-in-law, though the other two escaped with relatively light injuries.

Yep, natural selection in action there Pat.

That is an accident,a very sad accident,thats very different from someone who chooses to put themselves at risk,there's nothing but heart break for all involved in that situation. Pat