Yet another car is impaled on the bollards in Bartholomew Street.
I am fully in favour of drivers who break the law being fined for the offence. I am not in favour of the penalty being the wanton destruction of that persons motor vehicle by West Berkshire Council.
WBC are not destroying anyone's vehicle. Control of the vehicle is firmly in the hands of it's driver. I am not in favour of unobservant & careless drivers using motor vehicles on public roads.
WBC are not destroying anyone's vehicle. Control of the vehicle is firmly in the hands of it's driver. I am not in favour of unobservant & careless drivers using motor vehicles on public roads.
...but it is wrong that similar offenses are treated so differently.
True, other forms of careless and unobservant driving should be subjected to far harsher punishments than they are at the moment.
Oh yes - lets go with this all round. Graffiti; have your house trashed, Shoplifting; off come the hands. Yep, 'Newbury - eye for eye'. Great slogan too. Its ironic really, WBC getting canned for this mess - because they could have done far better - if only they'd had the forethought to aim the CCTV; they' make a mint on video sales.
That's your way to deal with things punishment, punishment, punishment. Not happy until people are punished.
So you don't want these examples to be punished then? At what point do you decide to take tougher action? When a driver has killed someone perhaps? Bit late then.
Decades of liberal go soft attitudes have led to today's society thinking only of themselves and stuff everyone else and an ever increasing breakdown in law and order. Give an inch take a mile etc.
So you don't want these examples to be punished then?
You're wasting your breath. There is a minority of folk on here that just cant accept that the driver is at fault here. Even though, by default, the bollards are in the raised position, and the offending car drivers would have to wait behind the vehicle that they are tailgating for the bollards to lower. They still cant see what the problem is. All I can think is that the people that are critical of the bollards are the same people that think about trying to get past them before they raise but haven't tried it yet.
Yes, there could be a system of fines in place, but that's not a deterrent in my opinion. That simply says that it's not ok to drive through a pedestrian zone unless you're in a rush and dont mind paying £30.
At what point do you decide to take tougher action? When a driver has killed someone perhaps? Bit late then.
Well, that is the whole point of them being there in the first place isn't it? And judging by the amount of people that have tried to get through into the pedestrian zone, I'm glad the bollards are there. In my opinion it shows premeditation, that, seeing as you cant just drive into the pedestrian zone (bollards being raised), you have to closely follow a vehicle that you know the bollards will lower for. Then (as has been shown in the youtube video I posted a link to) you generally have to try and speed though before they raise. Given that this is a thought out process, I think the result of trashing one's car (let's not forget that control over the car is at all times up to impact in the hands of the driver), is justified.
IF YOU USE A VEHICLE, YOU ARE OBLIGED TO READ THE ROADSIGNS AND OBEY THEM. ANYONE WHO GETS IMAPILED BY THE RISING BOLLARDS DESERVES EVERYTHING THEY GET.
You're wasting your breath. There is a minority of folk on here that just cant accept that the driver is at fault here.
Wrong. The driver is clearly at fault for missing the signs. No one disputes that per se. The problem is that the punishment does not fit the crime. One day somewhere, someone is going to get hurt, miscarry or have a coronary then all the nasty brigade can have a proper laugh.
Logged
Male
