Do *You* Hate Motorists? Take The Test

RudiL wrote:

Alistair Gunn wrote:
mileburner twisted the electrons to say:

The biggest problem (and the one which can most easily be tackled) is
the school eliminating the problem of parents driving their children
right up to the school.

Seems some parents aren't at all happy about not being able to pick their
little darlings up from right outside school :-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/52445...
"Traffic wardens have been told to patrol in pairs outside five schools
after parents became so angry about a parking crackdown that they threw
stones at them."

It seems that for some motorists the term cager is entirely
appropriate as they seem unable to park a few blocks away and walk, or
use public transport, or cycle ...

Whilst walking, one is not a motorist, or PT user, or cyclist.

There's a school a few doors from here. It causes delay at the start and the
end of the day. We have to live with that. But unless parents park directly
across driveways (they don't AFAIK), it isn't difficult to live with. Only a
small minority come by car anyway.

What I would not like to see is the parked cars waiting for the afternoon
"burst" spreading themselves out through the village. That really could cause
chaos which could not be avoided, rather than chaos which can.

"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message
...
mileburner twisted the electrons to say:
The biggest problem (and the one which can most easily be tackled) is
the school eliminating the problem of parents driving their children
right up to the school.

Seems some parents aren't at all happy about not being able to pick their
little darlings up from right outside school :-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/5244543/Traffic-wardens-stoned-by-parents-outside-school.html

"Traffic wardens have been told to patrol in pairs outside five schools
after parents became so angry about a parking crackdown that they threw
stones at them."

Traffic warden/PSCO ticketing has little effect on its own because the
people being ticketed do not understand why. If the school were to educate
firstly the children, but also the parents as to why it is anti-social to
drive up to and park illegally near the school it might not lead to so much
animosity and any ticketing might be better understood. However, most
teachers are **** scared of communicating with parents and would rather
bleat that it's not our fault/problem/responsibility.

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:19:56 +0100, "mileburner"
wrote:


"Mark" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:54:40 +0100, "mileburner"
wrote:


"Mark" wrote in message
...

To me this shows a lack of care, awareness and consideration. All of
which should be present for someone to be allowed to drive IMHO.

(I am a parent and school governor and have been campaigning, with
only minor successes, for many years for road/pavement safety
improvements to be made near the schools so I am particularly
sensitive to Simon's statement.)

I would be interested to know what improvements you would like to see
concerning road/pavement safety.

In this particular case the roads are generally narrow and there are
areas where parking is *not* prohibited. In places the pavements are
very narrow and not continuous. Some of the pavements slope steeply
towards the road. There is a lot of vehicular and pedestrian traffic
due to the 3 large schools nearby and the road is used as a rat run to
avoid traffic lights on the main road (I assume).

The problems we face a
- Cars/lorries mounting the pavement due to the narrowness of the
road. The fact that the pavement is full of children does not seen
to dissuade them of this.
- Dangerous overtakes of parked vehicles.
- A continuous convoy of parents who drive their child to the door of
the school, turn round and leave. Some of them actually block the
pavement or entrance of one school!
- Many more issues that I haven't time to recount.

There were some changes made a few years ago (one pavement widened & a
ped crossing added) but the increase in traffic levels have negated
these IMHO.

So it's a fairly big problem. I'd like to see the road closed (access
only) during school times but I don't think this will happen.

Other things we'd like to see is the pavements fixed and widened. One
of the local councilors has suggested a one way system or traffic
lights to ensure traffic is only flowing one way at a time but I doubt
they would stump up the money for this.

The issues are complex because solving one problem can lead to another. For
example, if you remove the parked cars, (legal or not), you end up with
increased traffic speeds.

Indeed and more traffic too I would suspect. That's one reason we are
in favour of road closure at school times. The main problem is that
there is too much traffic for the narrow roads to cope with. One road
is single lane at one point and this is always a problem area.

There was a huge delivery lorry parked there this morning completely
blocking the pavement and leaving pedestrians and cars to squeeze
through the same small gap (i.e. the road). This is not an unusual
problem. I did not hang around to see what happened but a few months
ago two lorries met head to head there and brought traffic to a
standstill for miles around and the police took about an hour to sort
out the mess.

The biggest problem (and the one which can most
easily be tackled) is the school eliminating the problem of parents driving
their children right up to the school.

This is an argument I frequently hear as an excuse to do nothing IMHO.
Yes, some parents are part of the problem but we have no special
control over the them. Apart from closing the school I cannot see any
way we can stop parents who are determined to drive their kids right
to the school gate. We frequently send out letters reminding them of
the alternatives, warning about specific problems but it has not
helped.

What this *will* do is have a major
impact in the volume of traffic itself. Another thing that has worked well
outside my childrens school is they have painted a cycle lane. This has
stopped parents stopping and parking in it and the pedestrians now use it as
additional footway - oh yes, the cyclists just ride out wider into the ever
narrowing road. As a result of the ever narrowing road, the amount of
traffic which now try to use it as a rat-run has decreased sharply.

There would not be room for a cycle lane in the roads nearest the
schools, they are too narrow.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Fri, 1 May 2009 06:21:00 +0100, "mileburner"
wrote:

Traffic warden/PSCO ticketing has little effect on its own because the
people being ticketed do not understand why. If the school were to educate
firstly the children, but also the parents as to why it is anti-social to
drive up to and park illegally near the school it might not lead to so much
animosity and any ticketing might be better understood. However, most
teachers are **** scared of communicating with parents and would rather
bleat that it's not our fault/problem/responsibility.

You make a fair point, and it's one that applies to a lot of areas -
for example, if a school teaching safe cycling and not at the same
time reminding the parents that the biggest risk to their children is
them and their friends in their cars, then we are back to the 1970s
era of the Tufty Club and training our kids in car supremacism.

And actually the school itself does not need to talk to the parents
very much. The children, if educated carefully, will do a much better
job of that.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Newsgroup may contain nuts.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 May 2009 06:21:00 +0100, "mileburner"
wrote:

Traffic warden/PSCO ticketing has little effect on its own because the
people being ticketed do not understand why. If the school were to educate
firstly the children, but also the parents as to why it is anti-social to
drive up to and park illegally near the school it might not lead to so
much
animosity and any ticketing might be better understood. However, most
teachers are **** scared of communicating with parents and would rather
bleat that it's not our fault/problem/responsibility.

You make a fair point, and it's one that applies to a lot of areas -
for example, if a school teaching safe cycling and not at the same
time reminding the parents that the biggest risk to their children is
them and their friends in their cars, then we are back to the 1970s
era of the Tufty Club and training our kids in car supremacism.

Do you mean the Green Cross Code?

On Fri, 01 May 2009 10:45:40 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:

On Fri, 1 May 2009 06:21:00 +0100, "mileburner"
wrote:

Traffic warden/PSCO ticketing has little effect on its own because the
people being ticketed do not understand why. If the school were to educate
firstly the children, but also the parents as to why it is anti-social to
drive up to and park illegally near the school it might not lead to so much
animosity and any ticketing might be better understood. However, most
teachers are **** scared of communicating with parents and would rather
bleat that it's not our fault/problem/responsibility.

You make a fair point, and it's one that applies to a lot of areas -
for example, if a school teaching safe cycling ..................

Indeed I believe that there are some schools who pretend to teach safe
cycling but if a 5 year old pupil in a group were to ask the teacher:

"Should we wear a helmet when riding our cycles to school?"

- rather than explaining how the pupils' safety would be improved if
they did so - the teacher would offer the advice that they would have
to ask their parents.

I understand Mr Crispin may be in this group.


Some advice.

Some teacher.

--

"Primary position" the middle of a traffic lane. To take the "primary position" : to ride a bike in the middle of the lane in order to obstruct other road vehicles from overtaking.

A term invented by and used by psycholists and not recognised in the Highway Code.

Highway Code Rule 168 : "Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass."

On Fri, 1 May 2009 10:54:45 +0100, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:

if a school teaching safe cycling and not at the same
time reminding the parents that the biggest risk to their children is
them and their friends in their cars, then we are back to the 1970s
era of the Tufty Club and training our kids in car supremacism.

Do you mean the Green Cross Code?

No, I mean the Tufty Club.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc | http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Newsgroup may contain nuts.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 May 2009 10:54:45 +0100, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:

if a school teaching safe cycling and not at the same
time reminding the parents that the biggest risk to their children is
them and their friends in their cars, then we are back to the 1970s
era of the Tufty Club and training our kids in car supremacism.

Do you mean the Green Cross Code?

No, I mean the Tufty Club.

I see. Don't you think that educating children in road safety issues is a
good idea?

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Fri, 1 May 2009 10:54:45 +0100, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:

if a school teaching safe cycling and not at the same
time reminding the parents that the biggest risk to their children is
them and their friends in their cars, then we are back to the 1970s
era of the Tufty Club and training our kids in car supremacism.

Do you mean the Green Cross Code?

No, I mean the Tufty Club.


Blimey, that's a big dose of nostalgia.
see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4690166.stm

quote
"Tufty is a colossus of public information. Though just a small
squirrel, he was a phenomenon who bestrode childhoods from the early
1960s onwards"

Roger Thorpe

Mr Benn wrote:
"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 May 2009 10:54:45 +0100, "Mr Benn" %%%@%.%% wrote:

if a school teaching safe cycling and not at the same
time reminding the parents that the biggest risk to their children
is them and their friends in their cars, then we are back to the
1970s era of the Tufty Club and training our kids in car
supremacism.

Do you mean the Green Cross Code?

No, I mean the Tufty Club.

I see. Don't you think that educating children in road safety issues
is a good idea?

Road safety is one thing, indoctrinating people that the car reigns supreme
is something different.