Bollards 1, drivers 0
- Thread starter Ev0
- Start date
who knows Vertigo1 said:
Spot on,
They should be driving with extreme care with a baby in the car, paying total attention to the road, surroundings all everything else, not speed up at some huge bollards trying to nip in behind a bus.
I bet they have a 'baby on board' warning sign in the back of the car as well.
Anyone who feels sorry for these people needs a reality check. Too many people have no regard for the law, and these fools will now learn the hard way.
Great system there, someone goes the wrong way in a city they don't know and them and their family nearly get killed. 
Even if they were deliberatley trying to break the rules no pedestrians would have got killed because they went passed the bollard so trying to kill the driver is unacceptable. Some hypocrites are fine with speeding even though it's breaking the traffic rules but when it comes to this think that it's unacceptable to do it.
Even if they were deliberatley trying to break the rules no pedestrians would have got killed because they went passed the bollard so trying to kill the driver is unacceptable. Some hypocrites are fine with speeding even though it's breaking the traffic rules but when it comes to this think that it's unacceptable to do it.Energize said:Great system there, someone goes the wrong way in a city they don't know and them and their family nearly get killed.
Would you be thick enough to miss the big signs, or dumb enough to try you luck?
Hmm all these posts about how dangerous these are, and how people should be able to sue the council for them.
The people that dont see the signs, markings on the road the red lights or think they can squeeze through are the same sort opf people that go through red lights and kill people going the other way.
If you cant follow the signs dont drive. what do you want us to do? remover anything that might hurt someone at some point? people need to take responsibility for their own safety. People these days expect everuything to be done for them its scary
The people that dont see the signs, markings on the road the red lights or think they can squeeze through are the same sort opf people that go through red lights and kill people going the other way.
If you cant follow the signs dont drive. what do you want us to do? remover anything that might hurt someone at some point? people need to take responsibility for their own safety. People these days expect everuything to be done for them its scary
Energize said:Great system there, someone goes the wrong way in a city they don't know and them and their family nearly get killed.
yep you would all die.... these are often in silly areas where you wouldnt expect them and on roads with 50mph speed limits no signs lights or road markings.....
how do you manage to drive without hitting walls?
Last edited:
Energize said:Great system there, someone goes the wrong way in a city they don't know and them and their family nearly get killed.
Just the kind of wet liberal response that has left our police incapable of chasing "bad people" (cos someone might get hurt) and forcing the taxpayers to spend unncessary funding keeping prisoners happy (if I wanted them to watch TV, I'd have let the scum steal mine to start with).
Can't you people get a grip and TAKE SOME PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOURSELVES.
People who drive are meant to be ADULTS. With adulthood comes responsibility. If people people can't handle that, they should stop driving.
Mr_Sukebe said:
Err I don't want taxpayers to spend money on prisons and I think the police are way too lenient but that has what to do with bollards? If you watched the news you'd know that some of these places are poorly signposted and that sometimes people end up accidentally driving down the wrong road and get trapped with no way out other than the bollards. There is no need for a bollard system when there are other less dangerous methods that can accomplish the same thing. I don't drive for your information but if pedestrians used the crossings then they wouldn't get injured they need to take responsibility for their own stupidity of trying to dodge the oncoming cars when there are traffic lights to cross the road at.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 5,365
- Location
- West Sussex
Mr_Sukebe said:
I have no problem with your statement as long as authorities show consistency and stop telling us we can not block access to our properties in case we injure somebody. It's the double standards that get me.
Not sure who I side with on this one..
The second one is a complete muppet, there is absolutely no mistaking the fact she knew the bollards where there, and tried her luck following the bus.. very funny indeed..
However, the first one is much harder to see that they've done it deliberately.. just looks like they are accelerating behind the bus who would have blocked the view of the bollards..
As for 'signs', sure, two 'no entry' illuminated signs, with writing which is too small to see in the video, I can see how people may well see the no-entry, but seeing other vehicles going through them may follow them, not reading the 'small print'.. coupled with the fact that most people would be looking for pedestrians and looking at the road to read the small print..
In Cheltenham they have the bollards, but much more explicit signs, which show big pictures of the Bollards and the fact they are automatic etc.. much much easier to see..
Since it seems to be catching a few people out in such a violent manner, I'd say they should review the operation of these devices.
Clearly it's the drivers responsibility and fault, but the enforcement is almost criminal..
If the police installed these things right next to a '30' speed limit sign with "bollards will stop you" in small writing under it, which in a few milliseconds before you passed the sign just popped up and 'stopped' you if you where doing 31 or more, I think you'd probably start complaining..
Very funny video non the less..
The second one is a complete muppet, there is absolutely no mistaking the fact she knew the bollards where there, and tried her luck following the bus.. very funny indeed..
However, the first one is much harder to see that they've done it deliberately.. just looks like they are accelerating behind the bus who would have blocked the view of the bollards..
As for 'signs', sure, two 'no entry' illuminated signs, with writing which is too small to see in the video, I can see how people may well see the no-entry, but seeing other vehicles going through them may follow them, not reading the 'small print'.. coupled with the fact that most people would be looking for pedestrians and looking at the road to read the small print..
In Cheltenham they have the bollards, but much more explicit signs, which show big pictures of the Bollards and the fact they are automatic etc.. much much easier to see..
Since it seems to be catching a few people out in such a violent manner, I'd say they should review the operation of these devices.
Clearly it's the drivers responsibility and fault, but the enforcement is almost criminal..
If the police installed these things right next to a '30' speed limit sign with "bollards will stop you" in small writing under it, which in a few milliseconds before you passed the sign just popped up and 'stopped' you if you where doing 31 or more, I think you'd probably start complaining..
Very funny video non the less..
Doesn't look like a pedestrain zone over the bollards to me - there's cars parked the other side.
Let's see how long it takes for a car to hit those bollards full pelt and flip up hitting pedestrians stood waiting to cross. The 4x4 nearly took off and that thing must weigh a fair bit.
Let's see how long it takes for a car to hit those bollards full pelt and flip up hitting pedestrians stood waiting to cross. The 4x4 nearly took off and that thing must weigh a fair bit.
Energize said:
Hahaha, I was begining to wonder why you weren't on my ignore list, but now I remember, you're too damn funny!
I do love the people in this thread blaming the council and not the moronic drivers.
Oh and as for the "baby"... I didn't see a baby?
Energize said:
Such bollards are usually deployed to protect pedestrian zones, not the bus lanes that some people here keep refering too. The reason other vehicles are allowed though are: a) deliveries, b) public transport (which usually includes taxis), c) emergency vehicles, and d) people who live within the protected area.
The idea is not to stop traiffic, but to keep it to a minimum, as the idea is to protect pedestrians. Simply fining people for entering the area is not going to work: some people will just treat it as a fee to park and go in anyway; and more more importantly this will only work if the same people regularly offend. But the locals will know not to enter pedestrian areas, and will know where else to go to get to their destination. The ones in Cambridges almost always get visitors who don't read the signs. And there are a LOT if signs - too many if anything. But the sheer number would cause any normal person to stop and try to work out what they were on about. If you keep going then you are a muppet.
I've seen one take out a car: an elderly gentleman drove his Saab 9000 into one at about 20mpg. The impact was against the front of the front axle, and pushed it backwards, almost certainly writing it off. I've also seen another vehicle some time after the incedent, and it had clearly broken the sump. Somewhere there is a film of a Transit being lifted off the ground by one - not the film in that clip. I seem to remember hearing that the Cambridge ones can lift seven tons.
As for suing, it has been tried and it failed. IIRC the court took the point of view that the council had done everything in its power to make clear that the danger was there. Realistically, I can't see how one of those bollards could hurt anyone in a vehicle unless either a) they were travelling well in excess of the speed limit, or b) their vehicle was too weak to pass an MoT.
M