allengeorge
Senior Member
CBC article on the above:
Two cars hit each other. One hit a restaurant. Two pedestrians seriously injured.
Two cars hit each other. One hit a restaurant. Two pedestrians seriously injured.
|
|
|
- Thread starter salsa
- Start date
DirectionNorth
Active Member
That's incredible/insane.
The speed limit is 50 km/h, right? How do you get such results at that speed?
Were they speeding?
Or is 50 km/h too high for downtown streets?
The answer is probably both.
allengeorge
Senior Member
I’ve seen a lot of cars boot it down Richmond and Adelaide because they’re one-way streets and as Ev (in the tweet) stated, the lights feel synchronized.
mike0001
New Member
The speed limit is actually 40 along that stretch. Also I think the road is slight narrowed before or after Yonge due to construction but I may be mistaken
DSC
Superstar
It is 40 and you are wrong about construction - that's west of Yonge, or was.
allengeorge
Senior Member
“Both sides…”
This is why I have zero time for arguments based on TPS changing their behavior. The only thing that will work is hard infrastructure changes. The only thing. Everything else is passing the buck.
Voltz
Senior Member
Well, do you think they should advise pedestrians to walk around with blindfolds on? I don't see that as "both sides"
DirectionNorth
Active Member
Useless post.
Blaming pedestrians for cars running onto the sidewalk is very clear victim blaming.
Voltz
Senior Member
Recommending that people be aware of their surroundings is not blaming pedestrians for cars ending up on the sidewalk, or very clear victim blaming.
crs1026
Superstar
^Sidewalks are not a “shared” part of roadways and it’s more than silly to talk as such for this incident (one could also suggest the need to watch for falling meteors, construction debris, and objects dropped off balconies, never mind out of control vehicle….but really…)
PR incompetence aside, the law does hold motorists responsible for the broader impacts of collisions, which more frequently includes paying for bashed guardrails, smashed lightposts, ect….and in more serious incidents such as the latest, pedestrian injury or fatality. One has to hope that whatever happened here, that collateral damage will weigh on what charges if any are laid. And on civil liability, which is sometimes the bigger forum for righting accountability in driving incidents.
The PR misspeak is regrettable, but the system is not necessarily connected to that spokesperson’s comments. I hope.
- Paul
PS - While we may disagree with the suggestian that pedestrians could and should be alert and ready to dodge flying vehicles, you can be sure that if this issue goes to court, the defendants’ lawyers will advance that very argument. Don’t single out the cop as the villain here….the lawyers will run with stuff this in a heartbeat.
PR incompetence aside, the law does hold motorists responsible for the broader impacts of collisions, which more frequently includes paying for bashed guardrails, smashed lightposts, ect….and in more serious incidents such as the latest, pedestrian injury or fatality. One has to hope that whatever happened here, that collateral damage will weigh on what charges if any are laid. And on civil liability, which is sometimes the bigger forum for righting accountability in driving incidents.
The PR misspeak is regrettable, but the system is not necessarily connected to that spokesperson’s comments. I hope.
- Paul
PS - While we may disagree with the suggestian that pedestrians could and should be alert and ready to dodge flying vehicles, you can be sure that if this issue goes to court, the defendants’ lawyers will advance that very argument. Don’t single out the cop as the villain here….the lawyers will run with stuff this in a heartbeat.
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Don't have your vehicle end up on the sidewalk like in this instance - it's not a "shared responsibility", it's the responsibility of the driver. Saying people need to be aware of their surroundings in reference to this instance is about as stupid as someone saying someone should "dress appropriately" after they had been assaulted.
We shall see whether they will be held responsible in this instance /s laugh.
AoD
Last edited:
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I ride a motorcycle and it’s drummed into us that you can be right or dead. You keep aware of traffic from all directions and assume that no one sees you. I walk the sidewalks with the same mindset. It’s not victim blaming, but instead is acknowledging that Canadian drivers are terrible and thus participating in your own safety.
MegaMax
New Member
You have just proven your qualifications for a traffic services police spokesperson.
allengeorge
Senior Member
Are you on the watch for cars flying into you while you're walking on the sidewalk? What about while eating in a restaurant? (Perhaps the very same restaurant that the car crashed into?)
No one is suggesting that pedestrians walk around with blindfolds - but there's an expectation that you should have an expectation of safety while using public infrastructure appropriately. That's what's so tone-deaf about both this statement and that of the police spokesperson: the idea that you should be on the lookout for the completely unexpected while following the rules. You may as well tell me to be on the watch for stray bullets from the police while I'm in my home typing.
Dollars to doughnuts the driver gets off with a minimum fine - especially given that " all parties involved are cooperating.". Meanwhile, multiple pedestrians are in hospital.
TPS has stopped aggressively enforcing traffic infractions. Council offers thoughts and prayers (and entreaties for driver education and awareness). We're getting the results.
Last edited: