Is being reactionary helpful in this situation?
Asked by
Unbroken (
10746
)
September 23rd, 2013
Recently there was a hit and run in our town. As always the city is getting reactionary and will install a new speed bump prior to the intersection. This is just the latest example over the past five years there are several such examples.
One an overpass was installed in the highway and one of the smallers exits was deadended meaning extra travel of about five miles to compensate because one woman was killed trying to cross the highway. At night I believe she was drunk.
Another incident happened when a mother was overmedicated on various pills for pain management and she ran over some kids when she was picking up her own children. This was particularly brutal because after hitting them she backed over them. Who knows what she was thinking.
As a result they speed bumped the entire neighborhood which is sprawling and put in these pathetic roundabouts that are so small a car can barely make it around without going off the pavement as well as painting shadow kids on the road that 9 months out of the year are covered in snow and ice.
This particular situation was an access road for a movie theater a few fast-food restaurants and so forth that lead to a main throughfare and cross road leads to a neighborhood of row duplexes, I.e. children. This neighborhood is has no parking but street parking and barely room for that. It can be difficult to see around the vehicles and shrubs. The adjacent lot is vacant. My idea though it probably couldn’t be funded by the city though perhaps there is a way to do this through special funding. Is to buy the vacant lot and make it a parking lot for the vehicles. There would have to be a electricity installed for the plugins but in the landlords got together and chipped in they could fund it I’d the city deemed it a safety issue. I know I passed on renting units in the area several times because there was no parking. So this would be in their best interest seemingly.
Make no mistake I think the accidents mentioned above are tragic and sad. But accidents do happen and I think being this reactionary is unhelpful and costs the city money. And really other then the overpass all of it was shoddy work. The over pass really kills me even though I only occasionally am in the area because it costs time gas and I fail to see how it alleviated the problem. If it was indeed a problem because there was only one casualty in the area in the past ten years at least.
Side note they don’t always scrape the roads to the pavement esp on side roads so speed bumps in the winter unless giant just become flat.
Are there better solutions? Or do you think these speed bumps are worth it. Or maybe big breath we should just acknowledge that no matter what we do accidents do happen and try to help the victims and their families and move on? Where do you stand?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
9 Answers
Are you sure reactionary is the term you mean?—in other words, conservative and opposed to political or social change? Or do you mean that you think they’re overreacting?
No doubt overreacting is more apt. However as characterized by an action resulting in reaction I think it still applies.
There seem to be an inordinate amount of accidents in your neck of the woods. I wonder why that is?
To me, it’s like beating the horse after it’s dead. The same drunk could have done what she did at any intersection. The same woman could hit more kids, speed bumps or no.
I hate when the highway patrol closes the entire freeway because some deranged person threatens to jump. It happened once in San Diego and traffic was tied up for four hours.
I also hate when they close the freeway because of a small collision in the middle of the road. Oh, and once, they closed the freeway leading to the airport for six hours because the police were looking for evidence in a police shooting, and they had already caught the guy.
In the 50’s and 60’s we used to say “accidents happen” which was why cars were steel deathmobiles without seatbelts that transfered the momentum of collision straight to the driver and occupants, and well as any pedestrians. Roads had no safety features to speak of.
Now death due to vehicle accidents are lower than that of suicide, and the reason is we stopped thinking of accidents as something that just happens, and started doing things to prevent it. Dirver education and enforcement does nothing. Only changing the environment has made a dent a-ha-ha in this problem.
Actually @Dutchess_III I have no idea. I have been in this community long enough to know it. But can’t compare nor do I have any statistics for a comparative town of this size. We are actually pretty unique as some have said we’re the smallest town or the biggest city and we grew up fast. And the roads have not kept up but we also have an statistically speaking a larger then normal drug and alcohol problem as well as the challenges of winter driving conditions.
But I agree locking the paddock after the horses have escaped.
@YARNLADY Reminds me of Japan where they post signs asking people not to jump in front of the trains. The situations you describe are completely foreign to me but I can see them being problematic and more then inconvenient.
@drhat77 I have no first hand knowledge of the 50’s and 60’s so based on my own speculation I would have to say there is a balance in between. Both have valid points. Utopia cannot exist as we are today. The human element is too unpredictable alone not to mention things like weather and events that can’t and shouldn’t be controlled. Titanic is case in point. However I think we should not act for the sake of acting when it serves no purpose and actually has costs. Jumping on these fixes and holding them to be the unquestionable truth is counter to the very purpose they are supposed to strive for. But I do enjoy a good pun and thanks for offering a counter point. I was recently reminded by just how many positive social changes happened in such a brief amount of time. I think we as Americans have made some real definable progress in bettering ourselves in specific ways.
Also if another accident happens in the same spot the municipality may be held liable. Enacting the changes may be less costly than pay out incurred.
Was not aware of that. Though covering asses is aggravating when in this case they really ignored the nature of the problem. Gives a new meaning to willful negligence.
@Unbroken Haven’t you ever heard someone say, “That’s a bad intersection. They need to do something!” I would think that if a bad intersection is a known issue, the municipality is responsible for minimizing the danger as best they can, with signs or stop lights, etc. That’s probably where stop lights even go started. Model A’s n T’s n horses were constantly crashing at the intersections of Main and 1st.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
