Crocodiles of small school children out in high-viz tabards

[ComedyPilot]

I drive in towns. I drive at a speed in which I can SAFELY bring my vehicle to a stop in the distance I see to be clear.

I drive EXPECTING a child to run out from between parked cars, when they don't, then it's a bonus.

Trouble is, the vast majority of people (which doesn't make it right) drive in a selfish, blinkered and dangerous manner, and thereby need kids in reflective tabbards to compensate for the shortcomings in their driving.

Teachers dress kids in Hi Viz to please anxious parents, whose own vehicles clogging the roads at school-run time pose the greatest threat to the kids' well-being.

 

[Cubist]

I drive in towns. I drive at a speed in which I can SAFELY bring my vehicle to a stop in the distance I see to be clear.

I drive EXPECTING a child to run out from between parked cars, when they don't, then it's a bonus.

Trouble is, the vast majority of people (which doesn't make it right) drive in a selfish, blinkered and dangerous manner, and thereby need kids in reflective tabbards to compensate for the shortcomings in their driving.

Teachers dress kids in Hi Viz to please anxious parents, whose own vehicles clogging the roads at school-run time pose the greatest threat to the kids' well-being.

Yes. Finally. But the end effect is that the kids are walking, and that's what we should celebrate, otherwise we spend all day tutting because it isn't done on our terms, and end up looking like we disapprove of absolutely f*cking everything.

We should look for the positive in the story. I would bet my mortgage that not one single party involved in the crocodile, or its organisation once thought about the threat to cycling commuters caused by the ignorant and destructive habit of thinking the kids might be safer in hi-viz.

Your disapproval should be aimed at the shoot drivers, not the people who honestly thought that walking them to school would be a good idea.

 

[summerdays]

No, I'm afraid this is all about risk assessments and avoidance of litigation.

I agree - problem is that there are parents out there that will sue at the drop of a hat.

Trouble is, the vast majority of people (which doesn't make it right) drive in a selfish, blinkered and dangerous manner, and thereby need kids in reflective tabbards to compensate for the shortcomings in their driving.

Teachers dress kids in Hi Viz to please anxious parents, whose own vehicles clogging the roads at school-run time pose the greatest threat to the kids' well-being.

Or try walking with a group of kids near a school on sports day.. they are literally screaming at the kids to get out of the way so that they can park on the pavements. Its not their child so no need to worry.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Your disapproval should be aimed at the shoot drivers, not the people who honestly thought that walking them to school would be a good idea.

It is, but can I not opinionate my thoughts on the 'litigation dodgers' that dress the kids in the reflective gear?

Wouldn't a smart tabbard in the school colours, with a nice crested logo be better?

No, because 'how would the speeding, inattentive and selfish car drivers see them?'

Instead of dressing the kids up like a Health and Safety Dept's wet dream, how about demanding safer roads and lower speed limits around schools etc?

Thereby putting the onus on safe driving where it belongs - with the people in charge of tons of metal?

 

[Cubist]

It is, but can I not opinionate my thoughts on the 'litigation dodgers' that dress the kids in the reflective gear?

Wouldn't a smart tabbard in the school colours, with a nice crested logo be better?

No, because 'how would the speeding, inattentive and selfish car drivers see them?'

Instead of dressing the kids up like a Health and Safety Dept's wet dream, how about demanding safer roads and lower speed limits around schools etc?

Thereby putting the onus on safe driving where it belongs - with the people in charge of tons of metal?

No they don't deserve it! The idea of trying to protect children or minimising risk is absolutely embedded in most people's planning process, (Risk Assessment) for a decade now. It isn't the people who abide by it, or genuinely care for the kids who deserve the ire. Rail at the sort of people who would sue them if a child was hurt, or the drivers who would try and claim that they should be allowed to mow down children who DON'T wear hi-viz, or the shitbag lawyers who would try to defend them based on the premis. But whatever you do don't pour scorn on the practitioners who are bound up in this bollocks, they have actually succeeded in getting the kids on their feet.

 

[ComedyPilot]

I have stated my opinion and, in the interests of bon amee (whatever that is) I am leaving this thread.


Bye