posted
This is just so sad. I thought I'd post about it here because I know there are a lot of LDS members here and I'm sure the family could use prayers.
(My son went to that school for one quarter of a school year a few years ago.)
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh my goodness, that is terrible. Such a loss for the family, I'm so sorry for them.
My school actually has a rule that no elementary children can walk to school alone, they must be accompanied by an adult. I wonder how far of a walk (or scooter ride) it was? Not to cast blame or anything, I'm sure his parents felt it was perfectly safe for him and no one can predict or foresee such a tragedy.
And that poor driver, I mean if he really didn't see the boy and wasn't impaired or doing anything wrong while driving then he has to live with this accident for the rest of his life - I'm sure his burden of guilt is tremendous.
My father in law hit and killed a man once, and was found to be completely innocent of any wrongdoing, in fact they said the man had been suicidal and had talked of throwing himself in front of a car. But still it haunted my FIL until he died.
Such sadness all around. Definitely all involved are in my prayers.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a relatively quite neighborhood and if you see the map at the bottom, the school is in the upper right hand corner of that green thing. I'm a bit confused by the locations and directions they gave. It doesn't make sense in my head, but I'm bad with directions. I just can't figure out how they were both on the same side of the street.
It's just horrifying. Every mother's (and driver's) worst nightmare.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is heartbreaking. A kindergartener. That poor family.
I was walking home from school without a parent in 2nd grade. Times sure have changed. I can see the day coming, though, when I'll let my oldest walk home from school without me (in a group) ... I just think by the time they're in fourth or fifth grade they need to begin to have some independence, to learn to make right choices on their own.
I remember pulling up to the stopsign at the end of our street once, and looking to the left - to oncoming traffic - and when it was clear, I let my foot off the brake to turn right. As I looked to the right, I saw a pedestrian on that sidewalk just about to cross in front of me. Fortunately I was able to step back on the brake in time, but I was shaken. I always look both ways now ... but I can understand how a driver could miss someone, especially someone so small, if they were turning right.
This is really a tragedy for all involved.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We weren't allowed to walk to school until we were fifth graders, and then there had to be at least two of us together. I didn't live close enough, but one of my friends did, and we walked to her house a few times on days they were letting out early for teacher meetings.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, that's so sad. That's hard to read about.
I have my eyes wide open and moving back and forth anytime I near a school, just so I don't inadvertently miss any movement. I am horrified of hitting a child I didn't see. That poor man in the car.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
On an unrelated note, I think that's first time I've seen an LDS bishop called either a "pastor" or "Rev."
Posts: 1068 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
On that unrelated note, this is Kansas. We're not the brightest star on the map.
I mean, heck, we're still teaching creationism here. Give us another millennia and we'll figure out what you call your preachers. Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:On an unrelated note, I think that's first time I've seen an LDS bishop called either a "pastor" or "Rev."
That's 'cause they're not. I usually see "religious leader", "bishop", or "his congregation's lay leader". "Rev." does not belong next to his name, as far as I know it's usually only used for ministers formally ordained by a seminary?
So, so horrible about the little one. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is terrible. I'm particularly disturbed that the drivers explanation was that he never saw the child. It is the responsibility of every driver to see what's going on. Unless there was some sort of physical obstruction that prevented the driver from seeing the 6 year old, the driver was negligent. Of course all the details aren't in the article, but if the report is correct then this driver should feel guilty.
All of us who drive cars need to recognize that we aren't doing something the extraordinary when we look carefully for children and other pedestrians, we are doing what the law requires of every driver. Cars are dangerous. When we drive them, we have a solemn responsibility not to endanger other people through carelessness.
I know that the driver has not yet been cited for any wrong doing. This is somewhat misleading because it is standard in this type of case for the police to take weeks or even months investigating before issueing a citation. I am familiar with cases where it seemed clear cut that a driver was at fault for an accident and it still took the police nearly a year to file charges.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man. I feel bad for the family, but I'm familiar with that area of town, having had a friend grow up a block or two from where the accident happened, and it's not someplace I'd let a 6 year old ride a scooter unsupervised. It's not *that* quiet of a neighborhood; it isn't uncommon (or it wasn't up until the mid 90s) to see cars (a disproportionate number of them being cameros, for some reason) flying through the area more quickly than is safe.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's more likely to happen on 27th St., though, don't you think Noemon> (My husband grew up near 28th and Bonanza. After reading the comments, I see that some people cut through to avoid the traffic. You know what, I was thinking more of 26th St. I guess people using 25th to cut through would make that worse. Hubby knows exactly which house the kid lived in, so next time I'm in Lawrence, I'll have him take me by it to see what happened.)
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
<sigh> I babysit for a ten-year-old boy and a seven-year-old girl. They're responsible kids, and I like to give them a little freedom, insofar as we're not breaking their parents' rules. But the boy throws snowballs at passing cars, and the girl wants to cross the street by herself, and I have to explain to them that there are human people driving those vehicles, that humans are fallible, and just because you can see them doesn't mean that they necessarily see you. Sometimes I think one has to learn to drive before one can be a thoroughly safe pedestrian.
Posts: 1785 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, the more I think about this the more I can't help but wonder what in the heck the parents were thinking to send that little of a boy off to school by himself. However, knowing the terrible grief they're suffering, I'll refrain from making any more comments.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
And yeah, I don't think the parents need anyone right now worrying about how they shouldn't have let their son walk to school, etc. This is something they will never recover from.
Rabbit, I don't know how you come to the conclusion that the driver was at fault. Unfortunately, some kids considerably older and wiser than 6 have been known to zoom around corners and through intersections.
As the instructor I took traffic school with put it 15 years ago, "Keep in mind that there are kids like my son, who race to the corner market. He doesn't cross the street on the red light. But he knows -- to the second -- how long it takes to change, and that the time it takes to zip along from our front door to the corner will mean that the light will change green just as he gets to the corner and whizzes across." And of course there are, and every driver should check for them.
But some of the responsibility lies with the little daredevils as well.
Now, I have no idea who was responsible in this case. It may have been the driver; it may not. I'll leave the reconstruction to the people whose job it is, and my sympathy to both the driver and the little boy's family.
It won't make it any less of a tragedy to point fingers.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
rivka, I think I said that the article didn't provide enough details to make a clear judgement but I stand by what I originally said. Unless there was some physical obstruction that prevented the driver from seeing the child, the driver had a legal and moral obligation to see the child. All drivers have that obligation.
I very frequently hear drivers say "I never saw the (car/bike/pedestrian/dog)" as if that somehow obsolves them of guilt. When I was about 17 I caused a car accident. I pulled out from a stop sign and was hit by a car which I hadn't seen. There were cars parked along the sides of the street which partially obscured my view. I told the investigating police officer that I hadn't seen the car coming. He told me that it was my legal responsibility to see the cars and ticketed me for failure to yield right of way. He was correct. I was stopped at a stop sign. It was my responsibility to make sure no one was coming before I pulled into the intersection. If I had spent another second looking, I would have seen the other vehicle. It was my responsibility to recognize that parked cars might be obscuring an on coming vehicle and to take that extra second to make sure. I didn't. I was negligent.
Yes, many children are little daredevils, but they are only children. The judgement centers of their brains aren't fully developed so we should expect that they will do foolish things. As adults, we have a responsibility to watch out for them because they really can not properly watch out for themselves. That means that as adult drivers we have a RESPONSIBILITY to see children in the road. I know that sometimes things happen so fast that there is not time for the driver to respond. Sometimes a child will dart out from behind a hedge or between two cars and they really can not be seen until there isn't time to stop. But that article doesn't say the driver didn't see the boy until it was too late to stop. The article says that the driver never saw the boy. Maybe the article did a poor job of reporting the facts, but if you can hit a six year old with out ever seeing the child, you are a negligent driver.
Pointing fingers won't bring this little boy back to life. It won't reduce this tragedy. But it has been shown over and over again that when the laws properly penalize negligent drivers and those laws are clearly communicated and enforced, the number of "accidents" drops dramatically. Perhaps pointing fingers will keep the next tragedy from happening.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It doesn't matter one way or the other, but there are a lot of LDS members here and if I put LDS in the title, they might be more likely to click on it and remember the family in their prayers and/or would know how/might want to contact the ward and see if there is anything they can do.
So, in summary, the LDS makes no difference in the tragedy but putting it in the title might change the demographics of who reads the thread, whether they responded or not. (If it had been a Catholic boy, I'd have said that, in order to attract the Catholics of the board.)
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's an update in today's paper. The D.A. isn't going to be filing charges against the driver of the car.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:In his statement, Branson said: “Under the facts of this case, the driver’s view was obstructed by shrubbery on the side of the road, it appears that the driver stopped at the stop sign and waited for traffic to clear before he proceeded forward, and there is doubt as to whether or not the child stopped before entering the roadway while riding a scooter.”
So the evidence suggests the driver stopped at the stop sign and then continued after the traffic cleared, and the little boy was not visible to him because of shrubbery. If that is all correct, then the right thing has been done - the driver doesn't need to be charged.
That last sentence really upsets me. We don't if he stopped or not. Well, of course we don't, and we shouldn't expect a five year old who probably can't even read the traffic signs yet to understand them and know when he is supposed to stop. Rabbit firmly believes drivers have a moral obligation to look for children in the roadway. Can't argue with that. But I wil put forth my own firm belief - no five year old should be riding a scooter to school without adult supervision. The parents need to stop talking about forgiving the driver and whether or not he is at faul and start acknowledging their own negligence.
Edit: Correction, I see the boy was six, not five. Still doesn't change anything. A six year old isn't old enough to be responsible for traffic laws and not old enough to walk or ride himself to school.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I drove by this week. It was totally not where I was thinking of. Yes, there is a lot of cut through traffic. Yes, the stop sign is in the wrong place completely. Yes, I can easily see how the driver missed the boy with all that shrub mess at the corner. No, I can't believe that whole shrub mess is still there.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't believe the shrubbery is still there either.
Since this accident happened, I've noticed and worried everytime I take my kids to school because there is a place where I have to turn right that the view is completely blocked by shrubbery. It is fairly close to the school. What can I do about this because it's a total accident waiting to happen (either solely vehicular or involving pedestrians)? Does anyone know what process to go through--do I talk to the home owner, the city, the school?
I agree with Belle that a Kindergartener shouldn't be going to school by themselves. If it was a mature first grader and was mid-year I might feel differently.
Most schools that my kids have attended don't even allow kids to ride bikes or anything like that to school until 3-4th grade. Now I understand why.
Edit to add: Because LDS was in the title, I was able to share this with a friend who just moved from Lawrence, knew this family and was able to send her support and sympathies. I don't think Kayla meant it in any negative/exclusionary way.
Posts: 697 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope no one is offended by my saying the parents need to acknowledge their own negligence. I don't mean to pile on the parents who obviously are suffering greatly and I don't think there should be any charges or anything.
I just think that the only possible good that can come out of a situation like this is awareness so that it might prevent a similar accident from occurring. Yes, the shrubbery should be cut down if it's obstructing drivers' views. But, we also don't need to ignore the role of responsible parenting either.
Again, I don't like to seem as if I'm being cruel to a devastated family, but I hope that if anyone reads this story that currently allows their children to go to school by themselves, maybe they'll re-think it.
I don't understand why it's even allowed - my school has strict rules on kids walking to and from school. In the elementary school, there must be an adult with the child. Not another child, not an older sibling. They will not allow a child to leave the school grounds on foot without an adult - if you walk to pick up your kid you have to bring the ID card same as the car parents have to do. That's for the protection of the kids and for the school's protection as well. I had to get special permission last year for Emily (a 1st grader at the time) to walk with her older sister to the middle school parking lot so I could pick them up. The middle school is on the same grounds as the elementary school, and the distance was maybe 25 yards from one pick up point to the other.
So I'm really confused - is my school unusual? Are there really bunches of kindergartners and first graders walking or riding bikes and scooters to school by themselves? That idea scares me to death.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
THe school the boys attend is about a half mile away. It goes through fourth grade.
NO ONE is allowed to walk to school there. The sidewalks don't even go up the hill, specifically to discourage walking (I assume).
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:A six year old isn't old enough to be responsible for traffic laws and not old enough to walk or ride himself to school.
I disagree. 6-year olds can read. And 6 year olds should have been taught and therefore know to stop and look both ways before crossing the street.
I walked to school alone when I was a kindergartener (age 5) and so did most of my friends. I learned to ride a 2-wheeler that year also and then rode my bike to school then. I'n 5th grade (age 10) my school changed to one that was about a mile away, and I rode my bike there most mornings too. I had a group of friends I usually rode to and from school with to that school, but sometimes we'd be late or something, and go by ourselves.
We had been taught the rules of the road though since we were "wee bairns." So we could go to school by ourselves any time, from when we were 5 years old and on up.
So I respectfully disagree with you who say this child was "too young." 6 is not too young to be going on his own.
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I walked to and from school by myself in kindergarten, since my older siblings' schedules were different than the kindergarten. We lived in suburban Denver, one short and one long block from the school. I have no memory of any crossing guards at the busy intersection I had to cross. I don't remember being particularly worried about it. I was usually the only child walking that route to school for afternoon kindergarten.
When my children started school ~20 years ago, I did not allow them to walk by themselves. We lived in a very small town, about 5 short blocks from the school. There were no major roads to cross, and dozens of other children walking to/from school.
And I most definitely wouldn't let any small children in my care today walk any significant distance on their own.
Things that were common place and considered safe when the majority of us were children just aren't anymore, unfortunately.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would let my kids walk to school, if they were old enough/mature enough to be responsible and if they were with a group of kids. Also it would depend upon where we lived in relation to the school, roads to cross and all that.
When we moved to the Boston area, I was surprised and slightly annoyed to find that I have to stand outside and wait for the teachers to see me before they release my children for the day (I also have a pre-school age daughter that I don't want out in bad weather to just stand there, it's such a pain). This was the first time I'd ever experienced this type of release from school.
When I taught school in Utah (less than 10 years ago), kids walked or rode the bus or were picked up...whatever. The bell rang, I walked my students to the door and that was it. When we lived in Kansas, the same thing. My oldest rode the bus but she walked to the bus stop by herself and met friends there.
Like I said I was annoyed when I first moved here because I wasn't used to it and I didn't see the need but now I'm slowly coming to understand and be grateful for the safety of my kids, it definately makes the inconvience worthwhile!
And for what it's worth, I agree maui babe, this is indeed a different world from when we grew up.
Posts: 697 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:So I respectfully disagree with you who say this child was "too young." 6 is not too young to be going on his own.
do you have a six year old? Are you parenting one in this society, today? Because I am. I have two kindergartners right now and two older children and there is no way that I think they should be allowed to go to school by themselves.
"Look both ways before you cross the street" is not sufficient, not when we have busy intersections and schools are generally located along busy roads. Most school do not have crossing guards anymore and many, like mine and Olivet's discourage walking.
Why? Because it isn't safe. NOt only because of traffic, but in today's society where everyone lives in fear of their child being snatched away by a stranger (whether or not that fear is valid is a topic for another discussion, but it's safe to say a lot of people have that fear) the schools aren't going to allow those kids to walk away without some reassurance that they're safely under supervision.
And I'm sorry, but what excuse does a parent have for not taking their child to school and assuring they arrive safely? Is there one, besides laziness - that they simply didn't want to get dressed and walk with the kid or drive them? Even when I was a working mom I drove my kids to school and dropped them off on my way to work. Now they ride the bus, it picks them up in front of our house and I'm awake and make sure they do get safely on that bus.
It's illegal to leave a six year old at home alone, so why should it be okay to let them walk unsupervised along and across busy roads? We don't let six year olds take care of themselves because they are too young to be responsible enough. I don't let my kindergartners cook their own suppers either, because even if they could read the directions on the recipe they aren't old enough, experienced enough, and responsible enough to be let loose in a kitchen where they could burn themselves or get hurt in some other way. And a kitchen is a far safer place than a busy roadway.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I walked home from school when I was seven. Granted, it was only about a quarter mile through a quiet suburban neighborhood. There were crossing guards at the busy street next to the school. I didn't think it was a big deal at the time, except for having to walk up a steep hill all the way.
I guess it depends on what the walk home is like.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree, Shigosei. My kids' school is in a residential neighborhood, on a quiet street. There are crossing guards at the corners around the school and only one busy street to cross between my house and the school. My kids are 8 and 6 1/2, and I haven't let them walk alone yet, but I will probably do it next year - meeting them partway just before they get to the "busy street". But we do have discussions about walking TOGETHER, not alone; and about not going anywhere with anyone without permission from me. Not with adults, not with kids, not into someone's house, not even a ride home in the rain without permission from me. And I watch them as we walk home to see if they're stopping and looking both ways. I'm testing them to see if they're ready.
Ultimately I think it's the parents' responsibility to decide when they're ready. I think they do need some small independence in childhood, to learn how to handle total independence later. Unfortunately in this case it seems the parents' judgment was not good. And they are paying the ultimate price for it.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And I'm sorry, but what excuse does a parent have for not taking their child to school and assuring they arrive safely? Is there one, besides laziness - that they simply didn't want to get dressed and walk with the kid or drive them? Even when I was a working mom I drove my kids to school and dropped them off on my way to work. Now they ride the bus, it picks them up in front of our house and I'm awake and make sure they do get safely on that bus.
I'm glad that worked for you. In my area, there were no buses. If your mom or dad couldn't drop you off-- say she had to leave at 6:30 for her 1 1/2 hour commute to work-- you had to carpool or get there on your own. Before-school daycare was only available on "banking days" when we went in later, not regular school days, and you had to be signed up for the school daycare to begin with, and it started at the regular school time. There were other daycare centers that would drop your kid off, but they were too expensive for many parents. Often the older (Jr. High/ HS age) kids would get the younger ones to school, then bike very fast all the way to their schools (which started a little later), but if there were no older kids in a single-parent home or another situation where there just wasn't a solution, it was tough to find a way to get them there short of having them walk with the neighbor kids. There are some places where the norm is different, and some families whose situations are different. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:do you have a six year old? Are you parenting one in this society, today? Because I am. I have two kindergartners right now and two older children and there is no way that I think they should be allowed to go to school by themselves.
My oldest is now 8. She was walking to school by herself or with her friends at age 6. 3 blocks away, quiet area, crossing guards at the school. My son is 6 now, and the 2 of them walk together and sometimes with friends.
My youngest will be 5 a month from today, and she'll start kindergarten in the fall. She'll go with her older siblings.
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
My six year old is allowed to walk to friends houses (with the friend, his older brother or me) but I would never sned him to school on his own. Number one -- the school doesn't allow walking because of the high driver traffic at the school itself. Number two -- he'd probably wander off and join the circus somewhere in those two blocks.
This kid has a talent for danger. He opened a ground floor window and crawled out when he was 14 months old. That included opening the window and unlatching the screen as well as getting the woodblinds open. All this while I put the meat into the sauce for our pasta for dinner. I realized I hadn't had to stp him from grabbing a pot of the stove for almost five minutes and caught the wee beast crawling through the bushes.
He knows the rules. He knows to stay out of the street. But I know he's one "Oh, Look! A butterfly!" away from being road pizza.
So, even if it was allowed... no, thank you.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's odd seeing the discussion on this thread because it is practically unheard of here (Australia) for lower primary school kids to walk to school by themselves.
I certainly could not imagine myself walking to school alone when I was 6 (or, for that matter, when I was 9 - I was allowed to when I was 11).
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:If your mom or dad couldn't drop you off-- say she had to leave at 6:30 for her 1 1/2 hour commute to work-- you had to carpool or get there on your own.
And if there wasn't a carpool available she should have found a different job. No job is going to be more important than my kids safety.
I'm just floored at the idea that people think a kid in kindergarten is responsible enough to navigate home through busy streets. I think I better bow out of this discussion before I say something that will really upset people.
I'll just close with this - I pray that none of you ever regret your decision as I'm sure the parents of this child do.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe, somewhere (maybe not in the article itself, but in the comments afterward, where family members were also commenting, or possibly even one of the follow-up articles or their comments) someone said the mother actually was walking with the boy. It's also possible that either they were just playing before school, or she was going take the scooter home with her.
I don't believe the kids are allowed to ride bikes or scooters to school until 4th grade in Lawrence. I know when we lived there, my son's school didn't allow K-3 graders to do anything but walk. I don't remember what the rules were when he went to the school in question.
Also, when I was in grade school, I walked to and from school alone in Kindergarten. In 4 & 5th grade, I was a crossing guard.
Times change, I guess. Being a paranoid over protective mother has worked for us so far. My kid ain't dead yet, but who knows what tomorrow will bring.
I can't imagine what the mother must be going through, if she was right there.
And I still don't understand why he crossed the road. He must have crossed, then was planning on crossing the road where the car was that hit him, all in order to be on the side of the road with the sidewalk. But it was out of his way to cross the street.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Forget responsibility! It doesn't matter HOW responsible your kids are, or how safe your neighborhood is: kids that are 5 and 6 simply aren't big enough to be seen by people driving a car, especially a full-size truck or SUV. If someone's leaning toward the crosswalk because they're waiting to make a right turn, turns away to look for traffic and then turns back and doesn't see anyone protruding in their field of vision, they're going to go forward.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thursday, one of my good friends was hit by a car and seriously injured. She has MS and gets around in a motorized wheel chair. She had taken the bus to downtown Salt Lake for our weekly peace vigil. She was crossing state street in a cross walk carrying an orange flag. She was hit about half way across a 5 lane road. Both her legs were broken and her wheel chair was destroyed. Because of her MS, any injury that reduces the amount of exercise she can do, could be life threatening.
She is the sixth one of my friends who has been hit and injured by cars while walking or cycling in the past 4 years. Everyone of these people who have been hit have been adults with a great deal of experience as cyclists and pedestrians. Everyone of them was obeying all traffic laws when they were hit. In all cases, the automobile drivers were found to be at fault but none of the drivers received more than a $60 fine. Several of my friends have permanent disabilities because of their accidents.
I have investigated the situation. In every area where they have instituted harsher penalties for car drivers who hit pedestrians and cyclists, the number of "accidents" has dropped dramatically.
Drivers CAN see pedestrians if they are looking for them, even if the pedestrian is a small child. If someones car is so huge that they can't see a child over their hood, the car shouldn't be allowed on the road. If drivers aren't looking for pedestrians when they pull out from a stop sign, they are negligent and shouldn't be allowed to drive on public roads.
I know that the driver in this case wasn't cited. What that tells me is that we need stricter laws because the a driver stopped at a stop sign can see children in the intersection even if there is a hedge. The parents should have known that they live in a society where drivers aren't required to watch out for children and they should have protected their son better than they did, but that doesn't excuse the rest of us who tolerate living in a society where children aren't safe walking to school.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:What that tells me is that we need stricter laws because the a driver stopped at a stop sign can see children in the intersection even if there is a hedge.
Not necessarily; I haven't been there, but was the hedge properly maintained?
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yesterday Eve and I were driving down a road at about 25 MPH. There were cars parked on each side. One of them was a cargo van - no windows except the windshield and on the front driver and passenger doors. A man stepped out from the front of this van while the nose of my car was even with the side view mirrors. Had he taken a single extra step, I would have hit him. There was NO time for me to stop. I think I was hitting the brakes when I drew even with him, but I must have still been going 20.
Although obviously a stop sign changes the dynamics, I don't find it hard to imagine a scenario where the driver could not see a child, though.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Not necessarily; I haven't been there, but was the hedge properly maintained?
A hedge can block the view of a child that is on the sidewalk, but it can't block the view of a child that is in the intersection. While I can imagine many circumstances where a pedstrian, especially a child would be blocked from a drivers view until it was too late for the driver to stop, I can't think of any justifiable reason that a driver could hit a pedestrian without seeing them.
Maybe I'm taking the driver too literally when he said he never saw the child. Maybe he was speaking in hyperbole or was misquoted by the paper. If so, I apologize to the driver. I will not however ever concede that a driver can hit a child without ever seeing the child and not be negligent. It is a driver's legal and moral responsibility to see what's on the road in front of him. You can't hit a pedestrian who is still behind a parked car or a hedge, at an absolute minimum you should be able to see them when you hit them.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
