No. But several members think these people are fair game and love it. They are pretty much all clearly accidents. What idiot knowing that the bollards were there would go through?
What idiot knowing that the bollards were there would go through?
Those that think they can get through before the bollards rise. We've been over this time and again. Some people see these car drivers as innocent victims, with there being no way that it could be the drivers own fault, while others can't believe that all of these drivers are innocent, or are new to the area, or think it's acceptable to say that not seeing the signs is an acceptable excuse.
One woman who was interviewd in the NWN actually said that when you drive around all day you dont really see the signs! Is she a victim too because she's given up reading the road signs because she drives around all day?
Have a look on Youtube at all the videos of people hitting rising bollards and you will see that they are pretty much all people speeding or tailgating to get through before the bollards rise.
This clip from Manchester shows everyone in it chancing their luck to get through...
There is a way to put this to rest once and for all, and that is to install a CCTV camera by the bollards, just like the ones in Manchester. This will prove that it's people acting like morons that is reason their cars are being written off.
I dont believe for a second that anyone enjoys seeing people hitting the bollards, but I do think that the people that show no sympathy for the "bollarded", are the same people that are fed up of having to dodge these idiots on the road when they run red lights, pull out without warning, never give way at roundabouts and refuse to stop at pedestrian crossings.
The lady driving the Rover (today's incident) drove INTO the bollards, they did not come up under the car, they were extended by some distance BEFORE she hit.
Her injuries were caused by banging her head on the steering wheel, (which maybe another indication of her road safety skills)......(e.g. not wearing her seat belt)
Her injuries were caused by banging her head on the steering wheel, (which maybe another indication of her road safety skills)......(e.g. not wearing her seat belt)
Threep.
More likely she is one of those female drivers that sits with their nose against the windscreen. It still doesn't make it right. What next, cutting off their hands or hanging them from crossbars? It's just wrong.
Should the council be allowed to destroy peoples property to enforce the law?
This sort of statement is indicative of people in today's society's unwillingness to take any sort of ownership of their actions. It always seems to be someone else's fault, in this case for driving through many warning signs and into raised bollards perhaps with no seatbelt on.
Quoted from 26
What idiot knowing that the bollards were there would go through?
Let's hope she's prosecuted for driving without due care and attention.This sort of statement is indicative of people in today's society's unwillingness to take any sort of ownership of their actions. It always seems to be someone else's fault, in this case for driving through many warning signs and into raised bollards perhaps with no seatbelt on.
Well at least the driver has well and truly learned their lesson there. Until these bollards were installed, that road, indeed Newbury, was a death trap. Although it doesn't get away from the fact it is a bit of poor road design.
Should the council be allowed to destroy peoples property to enforce the law?
No, of course not. They should and do have the power to levy a fair and reasonable penalty. Would suggest anyone who thinks otherwise should have a look at the Department of Transport's best practice guidelines - but then we don't often do 'best' in Newbury!
The bollards were only put in place because many drivers (but no where near a majority) kept ignoring the regulations and deliberately drove that way.
In exactly the same way, we now have speed cameras and road humps all over the place, again because drivers would not obey limits and tried to enforce their own choices (and long before ludicrously low limits were put in place).
It's the "stuff you I'm doing my own thing" brigade that led to the council putting in the bollards - just like everywhere else where the minority spoil it for the majority.
Having lurked in the old forum for a quite a while, it's funny to see the same discussions quickly reappearing in this new Mark Two forum!
It's the "stuff you I'm doing my own thing" brigade that led to the council putting in the bollards - just like everywhere else where the minority spoil it for the majority.
Having lurked in the old forum for a quite a while, it's funny to see the same discussions quickly reappearing in this new Mark Two forum!
Glad to see you've come out of the closet so to speak. You're probably right about the reasons for these measures, humps, bumps and bollards but it is a pity that the latter enforcement is so draconian and dangerous. There must be a better way......
I think the Council are in a difficult position. If another solution is put in place and someone is hurt or worse by an errant driver, then they would find themselves in a very vulnerable position.
I think the Council are in a difficult position. If another solution is put in place and someone is hurt or worse by an errant driver, then they would find themselves in a very vulnerable position.
Don't think anyone is complaining about enforcing regulations - simply the method. Lets be brutally honest; there are several cheaper and just as effective ways of doing that. Having had a little experience of how local government thinks and operates, I suspect the issue here is simply one of egos. The officers blinded by a small firm trying to extend the market for its technology - can't blame them for that. Can blame them for not correcting the error when its found. That so many cars have been caught / impailed demonstrates there is something very seriously wrong here which wouldn't be tolerated in anywhere else. If its because drivers are so dangerous - lets ban them completely. I've seen taxi's and post office vans near miss market stalls and people walking about.
Lets be brutally honest; there are several cheaper and just as effective ways of doing that.
Such as?
Traffic lights - can be ignored so you would also need to put in place a system for detection, collecting evidence and prosecution.
A barrier - drivers would still tailgate taxis in the hope of squeezing by, or do the usual thing of not paying attention to the signs. The only advantage is the barrier (if down) would be at eye level - but if they didn't read the signs they could claim that they weren't "expecting" the barrier.
A person - would have to be on permanent duty during the hours of operation, with backup for sickness and breaks. Would also be ignored. In pre-bollard days there was some kind of parking official hanging around and I did witness a driver deliberately drive at him swearing abuse out of the window. It was a case of "your safety is worth less than me wanting to do my own thing"
Barrier, backed up with traffic lights - there is a You Tube video of cars in Holland trying to jump the system and still getting hit by the barriers!
Just rely on fines alone - might help a bit but only if fines were draconian. Like jumping traffic lights, it would need decent detection & proof systems Otherwise it wouldn't work.
I think they should simply take the driver out of the car there and then and hang them in the market place! Give the car away in a cheap raffle. Would attract plenty of visitors and the cash raised from the raffle would pay for the rope. Win win.
Or the Market place, Northbrook and Bartholomew Streets could be re-opened to ALL traffic, busses, cars, bikes and delivery lorries - Can't see that one working any more because the shopping environment is far nicer now that it was in pre-paved over days.
Quoted from 40
If its because drivers are so dangerous - lets ban them completely. I've seen taxi's and post office vans near miss market stalls and people walking about.
If proven that the driver is driving badly, yes ban them! Bad and dangerous drivers on ANY public road SHOULD be banned, unless the evidence shows a pedestrian to be 100% at fault or the driver 100% not at fault. The point is, if you ARE driving through a marketplace where people are milling around, common sense says you should be paying attention to all around you and you should be expecting someone to walk/run straight into your path. In the same way you should be slowing down when passing a school at 3:30 or whatever. If you can't understand those basic principles of common sense, you shouldn't be driving, you should be walking or using public transport!
Logged
Male
Although it doesn't get away from the fact it is a bit of poor road design.
