Cars get owned in protected bus lane

[ufkacbln]

A train hitting an illegal crosser is not a guarantee. A bollard rising is a guarantee. I know we are splitting hairs, but a bollard installation is an intended outcome, planned to damage a stupid motorist. A driver running a red light, crossing a crossing etc is simply a stupid motorist who MAY suffer damage to his car. The outcome is not planned and intended by a town planner.

Wrong!

The rising bollard is not a guarantee, in exactly the same way as the train is not a guarantee.

In both samples there is a fixed point where the driver chooses to put themselves at risk...... then in both cases the driver has chosen to endanger themselves, and the likelihood of colliding with the train or bollard is a consequence of their arrogance and stupidity, NOT the design!

The bollard goes up and down with no consequence whatsoever just as the train passing a crossing has no consequence.

However if some numpty decides to place their vehicle in the path of the bollard / train then there will be damage.

The bollard is no more designed or planned to damage a vehicle than the train is!

 

[BentMikey]

Of course bollards are not intended to damage - you don't see them trying to drive into the bollards when they are up!!! Gavin, slightly hard of thinking, I reckon.

 

[ufkacbln]

Almost as funny as the claims on the SS site about killer bollards stalking the streets killing thousands of (otherwise law abiding) motorists

 

[benb]

Almost as funny as the claims on the SS site about killer bollards stalking the streets killing thousands of (otherwise law abiding) motorists

And marauding gangs of keep left signs!