Kill Kids for Fun!

[ufkacbln]

Pretty soon every object that could possibly end up in the road is going to have be covered in hi-viz.

Come to think of it, lots of trees came down around my way over the last few days. We can't have motorists - who are presumably too busy to actually adjust to road conditions and to LOOK OUT for things that might be in the road - crashing into them.

All trees must therefore be painted in bright reflective yellow.

I'm writing a letter to the DfT right now. Let's make this happen people!

You think you are joking, and I haven't made this up...

From the local rag in the New Forest:

Most New Forest roads are unlit, making dark-coloured animals sometimes difficult to see at night and reflective neck collars, which cost £7, improve the visibility of the animals.

Clerk to the Verderers Sue Westwood told The Forest Journal:

"We get many calls from members of the public, usually after they have hit something, for reflective collars to be made mandatory, but to make this a legal requirement would be impossible," said Mrs Westwood.

.. and in Wales (Gower) they are also using HiViz on sheep and cattle!




Remember when it was the (now apparently unacceptable) norm to actually drive so that you could see things in your headlights and then stop before you hit them?

 

[theclaud]

.. and in Wales (Gower) they are also using HiViz on sheep and cattle!

They are??? I haven't seen any Lumisheep. I must pay more attention...

 

[ufkacbln]

They are??? I haven't seen any Lumisheep. I must pay more attention...

No comment!

 

[Rhythm Thief]

The flip side to this is that while we certainly shouldn't be condoning a culture where drivers aren't encouraged to drive within the distance they can see to be clear, we also shouldn't be encouraging a culture where cyclists feel that it's ok to go off riding without lights on busy unlit A roads in the dead of night. I know no one is doing that here, but at the same time no matter how sensibly people drive and how good car headlights become, unlit cyclists can be very difficult to see in time if, say, there's an oncoming car with badly adjusted headlights. Anything which makes cyclists visible from a long way off and thereby gives drivers time to adjust their speed and react to their presence is a good thing. From my experience behind the wheel, hi vis does this. In fact, with some of the loonys I "see" around the place, hi vis is the only thing making them visible at all.

All that said, I don't like the sound of the link in the OP either but I couldn't get it to open to see what all the fuss was about.

 

[theclaud]

No comment!

If I hit one, I shall be blaming it on the sheep...

 

[ufkacbln]

If I hit one, I shall be blaming it on the sheep...

.. and bleat to the local press about irresponsible sheep?

 

[ufkacbln]

On a more obscure note.... There is a material called Lumitwill used for some bespoke tweed clothing and jumpers!

 

[theclaud]

Ugh!

 

[Mark_Robson]

That tank top is just so last year.

 

[Number14]

They are??? I haven't seen any Lumisheep. I must pay more attention...

You're not doing it right if you can't make them glow

 

[srw]

In my opinion CycleClips is talking out of its fundament - and I shall be raising the matter with National Office.

For those of us without your sensitive nose for bollocks, which bit of the following are you intending to object to?

Victim blaming?

CTC has responded to reports that police in Hampshire have been handing out free hi-viz accessories to cyclists in the New Forest. CTC Campaigns Director Roger Geffen said: "Whilst we would obviously not recommend wearing dark colours at night on an unlit road, the limited evidence on the effect of fluorescent clothing is that it makes at best only a marginal difference to cyclists' safety. The police should spend their time tackling the root causes of the hazards cyclists face, notably bad driving."

Meanwhile, in Italy, hi-viz gear for cyclists has recently become compulsory in certain conditions. Here, the DfT has an online game for children which seems to imply that, if they don't wear hi-viz clothing, they could be to blame for being hit.

 

[downfader]

Do as I have done and send the sick link to the press.

Wheres the emphasis on green cross code, understanding how traffic moves and drivers see, finding an appropritate place to cross? The kids in the game just seem to blunder out.

 

[Speshact]

The DfT really do believe the cars are in control: "Even though cars have headlights they might not see you" and then "always wear colourful or fluorescent clothing so cars can see you coming."

Bleugh.

 

[Spinney]

From further up the thread:

Emailed to contact address on the website:

I have just seen your 'game' on the following website:
http://talesoftheroa...k/be-bright.php

This game could easily lead children to believe that wearing high visibility clothing makes them safe on the road without the need to look out for oncoming traffic. It also implies that if a child is not wearing high visibility clothing, then it is their fault if they get hurt, rather than the fault of an inattentive driver. Surely safe behaviour around roads is more important - even the most careful driver cannot avoid a 'high visibility' child if they suddenly run out into the road.

Got an email reply today

Dear XXX

Apologies it has taken a while to get back to you on this. Our response to queries received on the Be Bright, Be Seen game is below. Please let me know if you have any other questions or if you would like further information on the research and evaluation findings used to develop and refine the campaign.

Road Safety Minister Mike Penning said:

“This game is part of a range of educational materials designed to give children the skills they need to stay safe on the roads as they become more independent.

“By explaining the consequences of different behaviour, we are not attributing the blame for accidents to any particular road user. I am clear that everyone on the road has a role to play in creating a safe environment whether they are driving, riding, cycling or walking.”

Aaargh! There is more to the reply, mainly directing me to a couple of websites, but every time I try pasting it in the forum says 'You must enter a post!' So I give up. The above is the main 'meat' of the reply, if you can call such a non-answer a reply at all.

 

[Sheffield_Tiger]

Whether its kids or adults, it common sense to be as visible as possible whilst out on the bike, especially at this time of year.

It would seem common sense....

The problem is not encouraging visibility and self-preservation, the problem is the unwanted side-effect of perpetuating the idea that anyone not at fault but not wearing x-amount of gear not required by law, is "only getting what they deserve" in the event of injury or fatality.


The other problem is..it's cheating. There were never any magic hi-vis coats to wear to play Frogger in my day (though I'm sure the irrepressible Jon North probably worked out an infinite lives POKE for Your Sinclair)