12-02-2020, 12:44 PM
(12-02-2020, 12:32 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(12-02-2020, 11:55 AM)tomh009 Wrote: I don't have an easy solution for this one. Driving slower in poor conditions would make a lot of sense but is difficult to enforce. Putting out a flare or a warning triangle for the accident would be good but most people don't have those (four-way flashers would be better than nothing). Teaching people to avoid danger after an accident is important but many people don't think of this.
I don't think there are easy solutions for safety. Even when there are "easy solutions" they are not easy. This is what makes me angry. Why aren't we upset about this. Why do we keep defending it.
London Police as a result of this collision gave a list of ways in which pedestrians can be blamed for being hit including clothing. Hamilton Police actually did lay charges of dangerous driving, likely as a result of the witness testimony about the aggressive driving, but if that driver had not actually hit a child, that same testimony of dangerous driving wouldn't have led to so much as a warning.
Would you consider telling people to use a flare or a warning triangle to be blaming? This is similar to telling people that more visible clothing improves safety, is it not?
The reality is that a 2000 kg fast-moving object is always going to be dangerous to other users of the road, so we should take all opportunities to improve safety and reduce risk. That includes road design, vehicle safety features, driver/cyclist/pedestrian training/education, traffic rules, improved visibility and more. I don't personally view any of these as "blaming", only as opportunities to improve safety and reduce risk.