My "cheer when the elderly and pregnant get their cars wrecked club"? Go back and read my earlier posts and then come back and try again. You are the one who seems to be trivialising this. Pathetic.
You wrote: But the point here is that people think that they can get through, therefore dont see it as a risk as such. and I asked you if you had any evidence. Every account I've read is of people that were NOT trying to beat the bollards. How is that a stupid post? Surely it's more stupid to ignore all of the evidence and say those affected were chancers just because it suits your position that it's ok to wreck people's property as punishment for a trivial offence.
Before the bollards, one of things WBC tried was a large 'A' board in the middle of the road with "Road Closed" on it.....and yep...motorists just got out and moved it. ('cos they were locals and it didn't apply to them right?)
You could have a laser light show with cannons and the Vienna Boys Choir singing and pointing at the 'No Entry' sign....and they STILL would drive through...you know it, and I know it.
You cannot arrange traffic signals and signage to serve what you think will be the lowest common denominator...(because there'll always be an even more stupid one that comes along.)
The present signage is more than that which is legally required. Of course they belly-ache if they stuff the car, and one of the normal statements is "I'll never come to Newbury again" To my certain knowledge one lady (VW) and one gent (Beemer) still come in shopping
It's called 'driving without due care and attention' simple as.....and I wish there was a physical barrier on each of the entrances to the town which screened out all who drove without due care before they even got to town...it would make it safer for us all.
It's called 'driving without due care and attention' simple as.....and I wish there was a physical barrier on each of the entrances to the town which screened out all who drove without due care before they even got to town...it would make it safer for us all.
To be fair, I've never felt at danger from the cars. The buses can be intimidating sometimes, but some pedestrians can't see them either!
I heard there's a council review of the bollards, which seems strange considering the repeated WBC line of adequate signage.
I think it’s strange that you would think it’s strange........
If London Zoo were finding that every other week one of their visitors was being dragged into the lion’s cage and torn to bits, despite all the numerous warning signs in place saying ‘WARNING Do Not Feed The Lions' and the big metal bars on the cages, I would imagine that the management would consider a review eventually.
Their first response may be that “the signage is adequate”. But eventually they would be ground down and get sick of clearing up the mess (and anyway, too much human flesh is bad for the digestive system...........) (NB. For ‘dead bodies’ read ‘dead cars’)
Doesn’t mean they would be getting RID of the metal bars (for ‘metal bars’ read ‘bollards’) and it wouldn’t mean they would get rid of the signs either. It may just be that they are looking at the warning signs again, scraping their chins and thinking “How can we IMPROVE these signs so that even the densest buffoon can’t fail to notice the bleedin’ things?”
If London Zoo were finding that every other week one of their visitors was being dragged into the lion’s cage and torn to bits, despite all the numerous warning signs in place saying ‘WARNING Do Not Feed The Lions' and the big metal bars on the cages, I would imagine that the management would consider a review eventually.
The analogy works better if people were actually jumping into the lions cage.
It's the motorist's choice whether they're breaking the law or not, whether they're driving without due care and attention or in some cases trying to rush the bollards before they rise again.
The analogy works better if people were actually jumping into the lions cage. It's the motorist's choice whether they're breaking the law or not, whether they're driving without due care and attention or in some cases trying to rush the bollards before they rise again.
I doubt if any regular poster on this site actually thinks that the 'accidents' are NOT the fault, at least in part, of the driver. I do think though, that it is incumbent of the council to re-think certain designs to see if there is a cheaper way of achieving the same or better results. At the end of the day, it helps none of us when a car is driven over rising bollards. It ties up a lot of effort and costs money that cannot be recouped.
The bollards aren't designed to wreck peoples cars. It is just an unfortunate consequence of their operation.
I think that a CCTV controlled enforcement system, like the one in Reading would be much better. It would save money on repairs etc, and generate revenue to pay for itself. However, it would be a shame to see them go as it is a source of great amusement to me.
Logged
Male
Female
