Child hit by car (she's fine), Lordship lane with upland

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

Yes , witness here ! She went too fast .

[DJKillaQueen]

Data shows that a high percentage of pedestrians hit by cars are intoxicated. Poor road sense is another. Only a small percentage of accidents happen at safe crossing points where pedestrians have priority.

I almost hit a dog recently. It was on the opposite side of the road to it's owner. Was on no lead and just bolted out giving me the splittest of seconds to react. I missed it by a whisker. Some children do that too. My point is that to demonise drivers and pay no regard to thr risks pedestrians sometimes take is unreasonable. Had I hit that dog I would have been devastated. It works both ways.

How about we talk about how we get pedestrians to use designated crossing points more, instead of demanding all traffic be moved away from residential areas.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

Oh for goodness sake ! A little girl got hit crossing the road at an island with her mother .

A few of you don't belong to this planet making insane excuses about drunks, not using a proper crossing and defending cars . Bizarre!

I assume you don't have kids so you are of a selfish mentality ?

[DJKillaQueen]

How fast was he going DB? It can't have been anywhere near the limit......or there would have been serious injury.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

Leaving this thread now so carry on arguing among yourselves justifying a little girl getting hit at an island lovely caring people that you are .

[DJKillaQueen]

Well the girl wasn't at the safety of the island was she.....or she wouldn't have been hit. She was in the road and I believe someone posted BEHIND her mother. I can tell you that when I cross the road with a small child I use a proper crossing and make sure the child is in front or alongside of me. You just don't want to accept that pedestrians make poor choices when crossing the road. The driver isn't here to defend herself either.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

It was a SHE. She probably didn't think she needed to slow down as she probably just saw the mother and others crossing and thought the road would be clear not realising a little girl was holding her mum's house and was behind her mum as there wasn't enough room side by side , point is , it's an island , there are people , slow right down until the road is completely clear of pedestrian . Easy enough yes ? But no , they are supposed to cross various roads and add on another ten minutes because car drivers think they shouldn't be crossing at an island and why should car drivers be considerate enough to stop and let them cross safely or slow right down?

[DJKillaQueen]

Probably probably....you just don't know do you?

[BrandNewGuy]

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Leaving this thread now so carry on arguing among

> yourselves justifying a little girl getting hit at

> an island lovely caring people that you are .

No need for passive-aggressive flouncing, really. To repeat what DJKQ said, if she'd been driving over the speed limit the girl would almost certainly have been killed. And traffic islands are a nightmare - they are *not* a pedestrian crossing and I've often seen drivers confused as to whether to slow down or not when someone's on the island. Personally, as a pedestrian, I don't expect them to - I see islands as somewhere safe to wait until the other carriageway is clear. And of course drivers should be careful, but they should be careful all the time. And you can't legislate for that, unless it's proposed to spend billions on traffic cops, cameras, court officials etc etc.

[DJKillaQueen]

So now we've moved to pedestrians crossing to an island to small to safely hold them all....see what I mean about choosing unsuitable crossing points.....and as for the child being BEHIND while crossing......

Sounds simply like a minor accident to me. Carelessness by pedestrians combined by misjudgement by a driver not going very fast anyway. It happens but to lay blame totally with the driver when that driver isn't here to give her view is just biased outrage at play.

[Loz]

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes , witness here ! She went too fast .

But what is too fast? 5mph? 10mph? 20mph? We've pretty much established that you hate all cars and drivers, so I'm guessing any speed in this case is 'too fast'.

> I assume you don't have kids so you are of a selfish mentality ?

And DOUBLE BINGO!! The 'won't someone think of the children' and 'if you're not a parent you're all selfish' canards all in the one sentence. If you can just slip in 'silent majority' we could just have a forum best.

[LadyDeliah]

...

[LadyDeliah]

Car drivers beating their chest and shouting at anyone who might slow their journey or get in their way again. Selfish, owners of lethal lumps of fast moving metal who enrich the corrupt governments coffers vs flesh and bone 'irritants'.

No prizes for guessing who comes out on top in clash of interests here.

How dare you try to cross the road and get in their way. Their ease of travel is more important than your life.

The drivers pay lots of extra tax so feel they are entitled to put all of our lives in danger and that everyone should accommodate their need to get from A to B as fast as possible with no obstruction.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

For someone who likes to voice her opinions at almost every single thing (DJKQ)I find it totally ironic your concern about the driver . I don't see you defending the people crossing at a designated crossing area . The mind boggled .

Loz, I just pity you really . Your arguments are weak and bordering on childish as all your assumptions about me are wrong making you look idiotic .

[Loz]

LadyDeliah, you have been rather a voice of reason on this thread... right up to your last post. Then you went all 'DulwichBorn&Bred' on us.

[LadyDeliah]

Thank you Loz, I'll take that as a compliment.

[DJKillaQueen]

DB...resorting to insult of anyone just makes YOU look idiotic I'm afraid.

This is what really happened isn't it...

A group of people chose to cross a road using an island that wasn't designed to accomodate them all. A mother failed to make sure her child got to the island before she did.

A car slowed seeing pedestrians crossing and at the last minute the child stopped in the road instead of hopping onto the island because there was no room for her.

The car's speed thankfully was slow enough to avoid a serious injury but there was no time between the child stopping and the car approaching, to stop in time. or avoid a collision.

It was an accident born out of a cumulation of factors on all sides. The Police would have arrested the driver is they thought otherwise.

And LD...for someone usually so reasoned in debate you completely miss the point here. No one was driving with impunity trying to get from A-B. There ARE safe crossings, designed to be so. Pedestrians who use them very rarely get injured. Similarly drivers do not set out intending to knock anyone over.

[Loz]

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz, I just pity you really . Your arguments are weak and bordering on childish as all your

> assumptions about me are wrong making you look idiotic .

Your pity is as misguided as it is worthless.

I've not made any arguments as such (I couldn't be bothered this time). Just taken the mick out of your frothing Daily-Mail-esque rage. I'm waiting earnestly for the next buzzword bingo phrase. You've not used 'silent majority' yet, but can I also suggest 'decent people', 'rip-off Britain' and 'hug a hoodie' next?

ETA: Ooooh, and 'squeezed middle'. That's worth double points at the moment.

[LadyDeliah]

No DJKQ, I didn't miss the point. I just don't agree with it.

[Loz]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thank you Loz, I'll take that as a compliment.

It was. We may disagree a bit (especially on this subject), but at least you can usually frame a coherent argument.

[DJKillaQueen]

Well I'll quote you then....

'The drivers pay lots of extra tax so feel they are entitled to put all of our lives in danger'

That's a big statement.....that anyone who drives feels they are entitled to put people in danger becasue they pay road tax.....and one you might like to retract.

'that everyone should accommodate their need to get from A to B as fast as possible with no obstruction.'

Again, a reactionary assumption on your part. Where are drivers campaigning for the removal of speed limits, junctions, lights??????

The sensible debate is one that looks at addressing the needs of all, and finds a way to create a safe and workable system.....not one that demonises anyone that sits behind a wheel. People need to uses vehicles for all kinds of reasons. And the nation would grind to a halt without motorised transport delivering all our services and goods. But there are some bad drivers. Similarly pedestrians needs a working free flow of crossings to navigate certain roads. But there are again some pedestrians that no matter how many safe crossings are provided will cross at just the worst place to cross, or run out in front vehicles leaving the driver no time to brake safely.

[LadyDeliah]

Like I said you have your point of view and I have an opposing one. Is that allowed in DJKQland?

[LadyDeliah]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LadyDeliah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Thank you Loz, I'll take that as a compliment.

>

> It was. We may disagree a bit (especially on this

> subject), but at least you can usually frame a

> coherent argument.

I'd say we disagree a lot, but vex sex was always my favourite type, so it's all good :-)

[V511]

I saw the accident and it was just that - an accident. Luckily, the driver was not going particularly fast and managed to scrub off some speed by braking.

Horrible thing to see the little girls face as she was hit :(

The mother was actually more traumaatised by it then the girl, who seemed physically ok thankfully.

I hope no long term damage physical or psychological was done to all involved.

[Jeremy]

Of course it was an accident! It's not always necessary to point the finger of blame. Absurd rants about 'chest beating car drivers who feel they're entitled to put all of our lives in danger' are no more helpful than irrelevant talk of 'data showing that a high percentage of pedestrians hit by cars are intoxicated'.