The death of Allie Hart and the need for safer streets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the issue is that some of the overly defensive parents in here know that they are being unsafe by letting their kids bike and scoot on busy roads in cities. You shouldn't do that, it's not safe. It doesn't matter whether the driver is charged with a crime or not, your kid is still dead and is not ever coming back.

By the way, this is exactly why people move to quiet suburbs after they have kids.

+1,000. Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't help but feel that a mother would be holding her hand

They were biking, likely the parent led into the intersection and the driver only stopped for the dad while not seeing the child whose height was below the level of the hood.

This doesn't make sense though. If the father stopped, then the daughter should have stopped too. The only way it makes sense is that the father was behind the daughter and the driver didn't see the kid. He saw the father some yards away from the intersection and thought it was clear.

To add to this, if the father stopped at the curb but the daughter kept going, then she would have had right of way and the driver would have been charged.

As a driver, if I see a child anywhere near an intersection where I'm stopping, I make sure I stay stopped long enough to ensure that a child is not setting foot into the intersection.

The parents have posted about van/bus size vs. child size so I stand by that I suspect something about the height of the bus was why the driver did not see the child (but again, I still think the driver was insufficiently paying attention).

My spouse would sometimes bike with elementary age DS just in the few blocks of our neighborhood and when he did so, he would lead into the intersection (i.e. ensure intersection clear, car stopped, proceed with son biking right behind). I made them stop after this story. I suspect that is what happened - parent ahead, van stop was technically "complete stop" for parent, but accelerated as soon as parent past hood, but still in street. It explains why multiple accounts have said parent was in crosswalk with child.

That is not enough. As a father, I would stop in the middle of the crosswalk, stand with the bike, with the car stopped and let my DC cross behind me. Cars will not resume motion, after a stop, if there is a person standing with a bike.

As a parent, i will put my life in front of the cars when DC is crossing.

this!

When you're biking with your kid, YOU need to make sure drivers know your kid is there. That means you block the intersection until kid is across.

100%. I live near the busy downtown of a small city and it is disturbing to see parents biking far behind and letting their small children zip down the sidewalk across driveways with limited visibility for small, fast moving bikes coming. So dangerous. Drivers should be hyper aware on busy streets/situations but so should parents!

DCUM's gonna DCUM, and that means blaming the parents.

DCUM’s gonna DCUM, and that means knee jerk reactions against drivers (who are found by the people who actually investigated not to be at fault) with pterodactyl screeches of “tHrOw hIm iN jAiL!!!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the police did not find fault with the driver's actions and no charges were brought, I think it's very weird that some people are in here insisting the the police report is wrong and they know better.

Accidents happen. Even tragic ones. That doesn't make the driver at fault. Wrong time, wrong place for both people.

If you really want to blame someone, blame the dad who wasn't right beside her making sure she stopped at the curb and didn't dart out into the street. I personally wouldn't but I think he is more at fault than the driver who was not charged by police.

If I have a choice between blaming the father of a dead five year old and the driver of a deadly vehicle who killed a child in the crosswalk I am going to blame the diver every time. Driving is a responsibility and I am sick of people treating it like some god-given right. If you can't operate a vehicle in a manner that allows you to NOT KILL a child in a crosswalk then you should not be driving and I think you should be arrested and thrown in jail if you kill someone. Clearly the system does not agree with me on the latter point but I am so sick of that reality. Blaming the parents does nothing because it isn't their fault- they did not choose to drive a car into a child. The driver did.

Also, if she has the right of way she isn't "darting" into the street. She legally entered a crosswalk. Darting implies she did it with no warning or in a place she should not have been. The warning to the driver is the fact that there is a crosswalk there. Pedestrians are already relegated to only being "allowed" to cross in a crosswalk and it is unconscionable that even when they DO stay in the crosswalk then can be murdered with zero repercussions to the perpetrator.

Yeah it doesn't. LOL. I mean, come on. This is WHY we have traffic rules and laws. The father wasn't abiding by the law. He let his kid scoot out into traffic. This is the result.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean we can throw an innocent driver in jail. Come on.

The law says that a driver has to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk, which the driver did not do. I have never seen a DC laws that says that an adult is breaking a law by "letting " a kid scoot into traffic. She was biking into the crosswalk, not into traffic.

The driver is not innocent - he broke the law and should be in jail, absolutely. As I point out, other people do not agree with me but I have zero issues with putting someone in jail for killing a child in a crosswalk. Apparently the threat of actually killing someone did nothing to deter this driver's behavior so maybe the threat of jail would work.

I think the driver who hit the dad and his two daughters on walk to school day should be in jail.

I think the driver who hit Zaire Joshua in a crosswalk should be in jail.

I will absolutely continue to advocate for this.

You vastly overestimate your own importance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a thread about this article on the DC sub-Reddit. One poster summed up the current situation quite well:

“As a parent of a similar-aged child, in the next neighborhood over, who always rides a bike, this is easily my biggest fear. Its probably the one thing i have actual wake-up-in-the-night nightmares about.

I don't know that this specific accident fits this, but my observation is the issue is entirely cultural and i severely doubt infrastructure improvements will do anything to stop it.

It's not run-of-the-mill speeding or distracted driving. In our area, it feels like about 1 in 100 drivers are absolute garbage human beings. Just complete c*nts. They blow thru cross walks while youre trying to cross with a kid and then yell at you; they pull into the opposite lane to go around cars to take a right on red with someone walking. They blow thru red lights 2 seconds late and flip you off. they accelerate through no left turn intersections and want to fight if you happen to be crossing.

I had some going 50 mph in residential eckington who went around me and then stopped in the middle of the road to fight (no provocation on my part).

a neighbor from a few blocks over got his eye socket broken in a road rage incident where he was a pedestrian.

there was a head-on collision at morning rush hour this Tuesday because some jerkoff was flying the wrong way up a one-way residential trying to get to rhode island ave.

i could go on and on. they almost always have Maryland plates, and they almost always are the most ignorant a**holes I've ever encountered. the main characters in their own stories, seemingly completely oblivious that you can change a families life in a split second because they're insanely irresponsible with a fast moving thousand pound piece of metal.

i really have no solution. but i can say its very taxing to have to be constantly hyper vigilant.”

And this is exactly why you have to have your eyes or hands on your kids at all times. This isn’t going to change anytime soon.

Are you serious?! THIS is the lesson you draw from this?

Yes, it is. And the fact that you didn’t draw that lesson, and posted a childish shock emoji, does not bode well for your children. DP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes accidents happen. It’s certainly possible for there to be a pedestrian/cyclist fatality where the driver isn’t at fault. I am in favor of traffic calming measures, btw.

Which is exactly why we need to call them "crashes" or "collisions", not accidents. "Accidents happen", but crashes are preventable.

Not all “collisions” are preventable. Ask anyone who’s been in a collision with someone who had a medical emergency. Or who hit a deer or had some road debris hit their car. I once was hit by a bouncing tire on the beltway. My roommate hit a bike courier who swerved into her car when someone suddenly opened a car door. Sometimes bad things happen.

"Sometimes bad things happen" is not an attitude we take about workplace accidents, or hospital accidents, or gas explosions, or airplane accidents, or... Just road accidents. I wonder why.

By the way, dooring is 100% preventable.

Household accidents happen all the time. And while dooring is preventable, my roommate the driver who hit the cyclist had no way of preventing it. Your premise is that all drivers are always culpable.

No, my premise is that crashes are preventable.

Household accidents are also preventable. That's why we have, for example, child-resistant tops for medication bottles, GFCI outlets in kitchens and bathrooms, and water heaters that don't go hotter than 140 degrees.

You really think child resistant tops have completely eliminated medication related accidents?
Article right here says it - “child-resistant packaging is it's not childproof. It's actually intended to slow the child down."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-many-children-die-accidental-medicine-poisoning-safe-kids-worldwide-report/

You're reaching. There is not one thing that will prevent 100% of everything. But in general, we focus on prevention. We don't shrug our shoulders and say "accidents happen."

The point is you can do everything possible to help prevent an accident, yet ACCIDENTS STILL HAPPEN.
No one is saying shrug your shoulders. What we are saying is that we need to both make streets safer AND not put our children in dangerous situations.
Those who say accidents are preventable and it’s always the drivers fault are completely delusional.

Sure, but a child on a street is not inherently a dangerous situation. It is only dangerous when you add vehicles and drivers who don't pay attention or care if they hit someone. This is why so many on this thread (and the grief-stricken mother) are advocating for streets that are livable for all and not just drivers.

Um, would you like to join us in reality? I, too, would love for my children to be gamboling in a meadow where the only traffic is Farmer Ted and his kindly horse, but people are living and walking around vehicles and need to act accordingly. We can advocate for 20 mph speed limits and bump outs (andI do!) and still recognize that nobody should step out between cars without looking or allow their young children to bike into crosswalks alone. This magical thinking that a child on a street is not inherently dangerous is bonkers.

Speed limit is already 20mph on residential streets. I agree these posters (or poster) are living in La-La Land by placing all responsibility for keeping kids safe on drivers. If you choose to live in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that there are cars and bikes and trucks and scooters and vans and walkers and everyone has a role in keeping themselves and others safe. You can be both for traffic calming measures and personal responsibility on the part of everyone at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes accidents happen. It’s certainly possible for there to be a pedestrian/cyclist fatality where the driver isn’t at fault. I am in favor of traffic calming measures, btw.

Which is exactly why we need to call them "crashes" or "collisions", not accidents. "Accidents happen", but crashes are preventable.

Not all “collisions” are preventable. Ask anyone who’s been in a collision with someone who had a medical emergency. Or who hit a deer or had some road debris hit their car. I once was hit by a bouncing tire on the beltway. My roommate hit a bike courier who swerved into her car when someone suddenly opened a car door. Sometimes bad things happen.

"Sometimes bad things happen" is not an attitude we take about workplace accidents, or hospital accidents, or gas explosions, or airplane accidents, or... Just road accidents. I wonder why.

By the way, dooring is 100% preventable.

Household accidents happen all the time. And while dooring is preventable, my roommate the driver who hit the cyclist had no way of preventing it. Your premise is that all drivers are always culpable.

No, my premise is that crashes are preventable.

Household accidents are also preventable. That's why we have, for example, child-resistant tops for medication bottles, GFCI outlets in kitchens and bathrooms, and water heaters that don't go hotter than 140 degrees.

You really think child resistant tops have completely eliminated medication related accidents?
Article right here says it - “child-resistant packaging is it's not childproof. It's actually intended to slow the child down."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-many-children-die-accidental-medicine-poisoning-safe-kids-worldwide-report/

You're reaching. There is not one thing that will prevent 100% of everything. But in general, we focus on prevention. We don't shrug our shoulders and say "accidents happen."

The point is you can do everything possible to help prevent an accident, yet ACCIDENTS STILL HAPPEN.
No one is saying shrug your shoulders. What we are saying is that we need to both make streets safer AND not put our children in dangerous situations.
Those who say accidents are preventable and it’s always the drivers fault are completely delusional.

Sure, but a child on a street is not inherently a dangerous situation. It is only dangerous when you add vehicles and drivers who don't pay attention or care if they hit someone. This is why so many on this thread (and the grief-stricken mother) are advocating for streets that are livable for all and not just drivers.

Um, would you like to join us in reality? I, too, would love for my children to be gamboling in a meadow where the only traffic is Farmer Ted and his kindly horse, but people are living and walking around vehicles and need to act accordingly. We can advocate for 20 mph speed limits and bump outs (andI do!) and still recognize that nobody should step out between cars without looking or allow their young children to bike into crosswalks alone. This magical thinking that a child on a street is not inherently dangerous is bonkers.

Speed limit is already 20mph on residential streets. I agree these posters (or poster) are living in La-La Land by placing all responsibility for keeping kids safe on drivers. If you choose to live in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that there are cars and bikes and trucks and scooters and vans and walkers and everyone has a role in keeping themselves and others safe. You can be both for traffic calming measures and personal responsibility on the part of everyone at the same time.

If you choose to drive in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that you have an obligation to not hit people, regardless of what those people might be doing. If you don't like it, you should find another way to get around. The good news is that in a city, there are plenty of ways to get around that don't involve you driving.

As for the speed limit .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids do dart out into the street though. When I walk with my young kids, I hold their hand. I don't let them bike or scooter because of this very scenario.

I feel very bad for her parents but I believe it was a tragic accident and that the driver didn't do anything wrong. You need to hold your young child's hand at all times on busy roads and intersections.

People don't "dart".

Also, as you say, kids are kids. They predictably behave in unpredictable ways. Why should we have to hold our young children's hands at all times, lest they be killed? Why shouldn't it be safe for kids to bike or scooter in their own neighborhoods? Why is it acceptable for streets to be unsafe - deadly - for children?

When you’re near a busy street? Is this a serious question? Wow.

This is the father’s fault. Hold her damn hand.

You don't mean "busy street", you mean "street with lots of cars where drivers drive at dangerous speeds". Why should there be any of those, in a city?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids do dart out into the street though. When I walk with my young kids, I hold their hand. I don't let them bike or scooter because of this very scenario.

I feel very bad for her parents but I believe it was a tragic accident and that the driver didn't do anything wrong. You need to hold your young child's hand at all times on busy roads and intersections.

People don't "dart".

Also, as you say, kids are kids. They predictably behave in unpredictable ways. Why should we have to hold our young children's hands at all times, lest they be killed? Why shouldn't it be safe for kids to bike or scooter in their own neighborhoods? Why is it acceptable for streets to be unsafe - deadly - for children?

When you’re near a busy street? Is this a serious question? Wow.

This is the father’s fault. Hold her damn hand.

You don't mean "busy street", you mean "street with lots of cars where drivers drive at dangerous speeds". Why should there be any of those, in a city?

NO, a busy street is a street with a lot of lanes, maybe turning lanes. Or maybe a street with a lot of cars on it, perhaps also with tight residential parking on one or both sides that makes it hard for drivers to see. There are plenty of streets on Capitol Hill where people are driving slowly but there are a ton of cars and a lot of pedestrians, bikes, strollers and scooters. I am always amazed at how many clueless and entitled drivers AND pedestrians are just bopping along without situational awareness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes accidents happen. It’s certainly possible for there to be a pedestrian/cyclist fatality where the driver isn’t at fault. I am in favor of traffic calming measures, btw.

Which is exactly why we need to call them "crashes" or "collisions", not accidents. "Accidents happen", but crashes are preventable.

Not all “collisions” are preventable. Ask anyone who’s been in a collision with someone who had a medical emergency. Or who hit a deer or had some road debris hit their car. I once was hit by a bouncing tire on the beltway. My roommate hit a bike courier who swerved into her car when someone suddenly opened a car door. Sometimes bad things happen.

"Sometimes bad things happen" is not an attitude we take about workplace accidents, or hospital accidents, or gas explosions, or airplane accidents, or... Just road accidents. I wonder why.

By the way, dooring is 100% preventable.

Household accidents happen all the time. And while dooring is preventable, my roommate the driver who hit the cyclist had no way of preventing it. Your premise is that all drivers are always culpable.

No, my premise is that crashes are preventable.

Household accidents are also preventable. That's why we have, for example, child-resistant tops for medication bottles, GFCI outlets in kitchens and bathrooms, and water heaters that don't go hotter than 140 degrees.

You really think child resistant tops have completely eliminated medication related accidents?
Article right here says it - “child-resistant packaging is it's not childproof. It's actually intended to slow the child down."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-many-children-die-accidental-medicine-poisoning-safe-kids-worldwide-report/

You're reaching. There is not one thing that will prevent 100% of everything. But in general, we focus on prevention. We don't shrug our shoulders and say "accidents happen."

The point is you can do everything possible to help prevent an accident, yet ACCIDENTS STILL HAPPEN.
No one is saying shrug your shoulders. What we are saying is that we need to both make streets safer AND not put our children in dangerous situations.
Those who say accidents are preventable and it’s always the drivers fault are completely delusional.

Sure, but a child on a street is not inherently a dangerous situation. It is only dangerous when you add vehicles and drivers who don't pay attention or care if they hit someone. This is why so many on this thread (and the grief-stricken mother) are advocating for streets that are livable for all and not just drivers.

Um, would you like to join us in reality? I, too, would love for my children to be gamboling in a meadow where the only traffic is Farmer Ted and his kindly horse, but people are living and walking around vehicles and need to act accordingly. We can advocate for 20 mph speed limits and bump outs (andI do!) and still recognize that nobody should step out between cars without looking or allow their young children to bike into crosswalks alone. This magical thinking that a child on a street is not inherently dangerous is bonkers.

Speed limit is already 20mph on residential streets. I agree these posters (or poster) are living in La-La Land by placing all responsibility for keeping kids safe on drivers. If you choose to live in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that there are cars and bikes and trucks and scooters and vans and walkers and everyone has a role in keeping themselves and others safe. You can be both for traffic calming measures and personal responsibility on the part of everyone at the same time.

If you choose to drive in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that you have an obligation to not hit people, regardless of what those people might be doing. If you don't like it, you should find another way to get around. The good news is that in a city, there are plenty of ways to get around that don't involve you driving.

As for the speed limit .

What? That's.. an interesting perspective. And thankfully not one that holds in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids do dart out into the street though. When I walk with my young kids, I hold their hand. I don't let them bike or scooter because of this very scenario.

I feel very bad for her parents but I believe it was a tragic accident and that the driver didn't do anything wrong. You need to hold your young child's hand at all times on busy roads and intersections.

People don't "dart".

Also, as you say, kids are kids. They predictably behave in unpredictable ways. Why should we have to hold our young children's hands at all times, lest they be killed? Why shouldn't it be safe for kids to bike or scooter in their own neighborhoods? Why is it acceptable for streets to be unsafe - deadly - for children?

When you’re near a busy street? Is this a serious question? Wow.

This is the father’s fault. Hold her damn hand.

You don't mean "busy street", you mean "street with lots of cars where drivers drive at dangerous speeds". Why should there be any of those, in a city?

NO, a busy street is a street with a lot of lanes, maybe turning lanes. Or maybe a street with a lot of cars on it, perhaps also with tight residential parking on one or both sides that makes it hard for drivers to see. There are plenty of streets on Capitol Hill where people are driving slowly but there are a ton of cars and a lot of pedestrians, bikes, strollers and scooters. I am always amazed at how many clueless and entitled drivers AND pedestrians are just bopping along without situational awareness.

Yes, it's a completely unrealistic expectation for people to be non-stop high alert whenever they go anywhere, whether they're driving, walking, scooting, or bicycling. It's not going to happen. The traffic engineers like to tell us that their road designs are safe if everyone behaves perfectly at all times, but we know people aren't going to do that. So maybe the traffic engineers should start having road designs that are safe even when people don't behave perfectly. Or we can just keep accepting crashes, injuries, and deaths on the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes accidents happen. It’s certainly possible for there to be a pedestrian/cyclist fatality where the driver isn’t at fault. I am in favor of traffic calming measures, btw.

Which is exactly why we need to call them "crashes" or "collisions", not accidents. "Accidents happen", but crashes are preventable.

Not all “collisions” are preventable. Ask anyone who’s been in a collision with someone who had a medical emergency. Or who hit a deer or had some road debris hit their car. I once was hit by a bouncing tire on the beltway. My roommate hit a bike courier who swerved into her car when someone suddenly opened a car door. Sometimes bad things happen.

"Sometimes bad things happen" is not an attitude we take about workplace accidents, or hospital accidents, or gas explosions, or airplane accidents, or... Just road accidents. I wonder why.

By the way, dooring is 100% preventable.

Household accidents happen all the time. And while dooring is preventable, my roommate the driver who hit the cyclist had no way of preventing it. Your premise is that all drivers are always culpable.

No, my premise is that crashes are preventable.

Household accidents are also preventable. That's why we have, for example, child-resistant tops for medication bottles, GFCI outlets in kitchens and bathrooms, and water heaters that don't go hotter than 140 degrees.

You really think child resistant tops have completely eliminated medication related accidents?
Article right here says it - “child-resistant packaging is it's not childproof. It's actually intended to slow the child down."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-many-children-die-accidental-medicine-poisoning-safe-kids-worldwide-report/

You're reaching. There is not one thing that will prevent 100% of everything. But in general, we focus on prevention. We don't shrug our shoulders and say "accidents happen."

The point is you can do everything possible to help prevent an accident, yet ACCIDENTS STILL HAPPEN.
No one is saying shrug your shoulders. What we are saying is that we need to both make streets safer AND not put our children in dangerous situations.
Those who say accidents are preventable and it’s always the drivers fault are completely delusional.

Sure, but a child on a street is not inherently a dangerous situation. It is only dangerous when you add vehicles and drivers who don't pay attention or care if they hit someone. This is why so many on this thread (and the grief-stricken mother) are advocating for streets that are livable for all and not just drivers.

Um, would you like to join us in reality? I, too, would love for my children to be gamboling in a meadow where the only traffic is Farmer Ted and his kindly horse, but people are living and walking around vehicles and need to act accordingly. We can advocate for 20 mph speed limits and bump outs (andI do!) and still recognize that nobody should step out between cars without looking or allow their young children to bike into crosswalks alone. This magical thinking that a child on a street is not inherently dangerous is bonkers.

Speed limit is already 20mph on residential streets. I agree these posters (or poster) are living in La-La Land by placing all responsibility for keeping kids safe on drivers. If you choose to live in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that there are cars and bikes and trucks and scooters and vans and walkers and everyone has a role in keeping themselves and others safe. You can be both for traffic calming measures and personal responsibility on the part of everyone at the same time.

If you choose to drive in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that you have an obligation to not hit people, regardless of what those people might be doing. If you don't like it, you should find another way to get around. The good news is that in a city, there are plenty of ways to get around that don't involve you driving.

As for the speed limit .

What? That's.. an interesting perspective. And thankfully not one that holds in court.

Have you ever been to traffic court? Have you ever asked yourself why speed cameras in DC unless you're driving at least 11 mph over the speed limit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids do dart out into the street though. When I walk with my young kids, I hold their hand. I don't let them bike or scooter because of this very scenario.

I feel very bad for her parents but I believe it was a tragic accident and that the driver didn't do anything wrong. You need to hold your young child's hand at all times on busy roads and intersections.

People don't "dart".

Also, as you say, kids are kids. They predictably behave in unpredictable ways. Why should we have to hold our young children's hands at all times, lest they be killed? Why shouldn't it be safe for kids to bike or scooter in their own neighborhoods? Why is it acceptable for streets to be unsafe - deadly - for children?

When you’re near a busy street? Is this a serious question? Wow.

This is the father’s fault. Hold her damn hand.

You don't mean "busy street", you mean "street with lots of cars where drivers drive at dangerous speeds". Why should there be any of those, in a city?

NO, a busy street is a street with a lot of lanes, maybe turning lanes. Or maybe a street with a lot of cars on it, perhaps also with tight residential parking on one or both sides that makes it hard for drivers to see. There are plenty of streets on Capitol Hill where people are driving slowly but there are a ton of cars and a lot of pedestrians, bikes, strollers and scooters. I am always amazed at how many clueless and entitled drivers AND pedestrians are just bopping along without situational awareness.

Yes, it's a completely unrealistic expectation for people to be non-stop high alert whenever they go anywhere, whether they're driving, walking, scooting, or bicycling. It's not going to happen. The traffic engineers like to tell us that their road designs are safe if everyone behaves perfectly at all times, but we know people aren't going to do that. So maybe the traffic engineers should start having road designs that are safe even when people don't behave perfectly. Or we can just keep accepting crashes, injuries, and deaths on the road.

I dont think anyone here is saying we shouldn't try to implement more safety features. I used to live near Lincoln park and it is much much safer for pedestrians now. I think those bump outs should be standard around all schools, playgrounds, parks, etc at the very least. My kids went to Mary McLeod Bethune 12 years ago and the traffic, speeding and parking all over the place was a nightmare then, too.

People are pushing back on the idea that kids should expect to run out between cars without risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes accidents happen. It’s certainly possible for there to be a pedestrian/cyclist fatality where the driver isn’t at fault. I am in favor of traffic calming measures, btw.

Which is exactly why we need to call them "crashes" or "collisions", not accidents. "Accidents happen", but crashes are preventable.

Not all “collisions” are preventable. Ask anyone who’s been in a collision with someone who had a medical emergency. Or who hit a deer or had some road debris hit their car. I once was hit by a bouncing tire on the beltway. My roommate hit a bike courier who swerved into her car when someone suddenly opened a car door. Sometimes bad things happen.

"Sometimes bad things happen" is not an attitude we take about workplace accidents, or hospital accidents, or gas explosions, or airplane accidents, or... Just road accidents. I wonder why.

By the way, dooring is 100% preventable.

Household accidents happen all the time. And while dooring is preventable, my roommate the driver who hit the cyclist had no way of preventing it. Your premise is that all drivers are always culpable.

No, my premise is that crashes are preventable.

Household accidents are also preventable. That's why we have, for example, child-resistant tops for medication bottles, GFCI outlets in kitchens and bathrooms, and water heaters that don't go hotter than 140 degrees.

You really think child resistant tops have completely eliminated medication related accidents?
Article right here says it - “child-resistant packaging is it's not childproof. It's actually intended to slow the child down."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-many-children-die-accidental-medicine-poisoning-safe-kids-worldwide-report/

You're reaching. There is not one thing that will prevent 100% of everything. But in general, we focus on prevention. We don't shrug our shoulders and say "accidents happen."

The point is you can do everything possible to help prevent an accident, yet ACCIDENTS STILL HAPPEN.
No one is saying shrug your shoulders. What we are saying is that we need to both make streets safer AND not put our children in dangerous situations.
Those who say accidents are preventable and it’s always the drivers fault are completely delusional.

Sure, but a child on a street is not inherently a dangerous situation. It is only dangerous when you add vehicles and drivers who don't pay attention or care if they hit someone. This is why so many on this thread (and the grief-stricken mother) are advocating for streets that are livable for all and not just drivers.

Um, would you like to join us in reality? I, too, would love for my children to be gamboling in a meadow where the only traffic is Farmer Ted and his kindly horse, but people are living and walking around vehicles and need to act accordingly. We can advocate for 20 mph speed limits and bump outs (andI do!) and still recognize that nobody should step out between cars without looking or allow their young children to bike into crosswalks alone. This magical thinking that a child on a street is not inherently dangerous is bonkers.

Speed limit is already 20mph on residential streets. I agree these posters (or poster) are living in La-La Land by placing all responsibility for keeping kids safe on drivers. If you choose to live in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that there are cars and bikes and trucks and scooters and vans and walkers and everyone has a role in keeping themselves and others safe. You can be both for traffic calming measures and personal responsibility on the part of everyone at the same time.

If you choose to drive in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that you have an obligation to not hit people, regardless of what those people might be doing. If you don't like it, you should find another way to get around. The good news is that in a city, there are plenty of ways to get around that don't involve you driving.

As for the speed limit .

“Obligation not to hit people.” You are completely delusional. There is no rational conversation to be had with this level of cluelessness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids do dart out into the street though. When I walk with my young kids, I hold their hand. I don't let them bike or scooter because of this very scenario.

I feel very bad for her parents but I believe it was a tragic accident and that the driver didn't do anything wrong. You need to hold your young child's hand at all times on busy roads and intersections.

People don't "dart".

Also, as you say, kids are kids. They predictably behave in unpredictable ways. Why should we have to hold our young children's hands at all times, lest they be killed? Why shouldn't it be safe for kids to bike or scooter in their own neighborhoods? Why is it acceptable for streets to be unsafe - deadly - for children?

When you’re near a busy street? Is this a serious question? Wow.

This is the father’s fault. Hold her damn hand.

You don't mean "busy street", you mean "street with lots of cars where drivers drive at dangerous speeds". Why should there be any of those, in a city?

NO, a busy street is a street with a lot of lanes, maybe turning lanes. Or maybe a street with a lot of cars on it, perhaps also with tight residential parking on one or both sides that makes it hard for drivers to see. There are plenty of streets on Capitol Hill where people are driving slowly but there are a ton of cars and a lot of pedestrians, bikes, strollers and scooters. I am always amazed at how many clueless and entitled drivers AND pedestrians are just bopping along without situational awareness.

Yes, it's a completely unrealistic expectation for people to be non-stop high alert whenever they go anywhere, whether they're driving, walking, scooting, or bicycling. It's not going to happen. The traffic engineers like to tell us that their road designs are safe if everyone behaves perfectly at all times, but we know people aren't going to do that. So maybe the traffic engineers should start having road designs that are safe even when people don't behave perfectly. Or we can just keep accepting crashes, injuries, and deaths on the road.

I dont think anyone here is saying we shouldn't try to implement more safety features. I used to live near Lincoln park and it is much much safer for pedestrians now. I think those bump outs should be standard around all schools, playgrounds, parks, etc at the very least. My kids went to Mary McLeod Bethune 12 years ago and the traffic, speeding and parking all over the place was a nightmare then, too.

People are pushing back on the idea that kids should expect to run out between cars without risk.

Nobody expects it. In fact, probably quite the opposite. Any sensible parent is terrified of a driver hitting their children. The point is that it shouldn't be that way, and it doesn't have to be that way. It's a choice we've made as a society. We can make a different choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes accidents happen. It’s certainly possible for there to be a pedestrian/cyclist fatality where the driver isn’t at fault. I am in favor of traffic calming measures, btw.

Which is exactly why we need to call them "crashes" or "collisions", not accidents. "Accidents happen", but crashes are preventable.

Not all “collisions” are preventable. Ask anyone who’s been in a collision with someone who had a medical emergency. Or who hit a deer or had some road debris hit their car. I once was hit by a bouncing tire on the beltway. My roommate hit a bike courier who swerved into her car when someone suddenly opened a car door. Sometimes bad things happen.

"Sometimes bad things happen" is not an attitude we take about workplace accidents, or hospital accidents, or gas explosions, or airplane accidents, or... Just road accidents. I wonder why.

By the way, dooring is 100% preventable.

Household accidents happen all the time. And while dooring is preventable, my roommate the driver who hit the cyclist had no way of preventing it. Your premise is that all drivers are always culpable.

No, my premise is that crashes are preventable.

Household accidents are also preventable. That's why we have, for example, child-resistant tops for medication bottles, GFCI outlets in kitchens and bathrooms, and water heaters that don't go hotter than 140 degrees.

You really think child resistant tops have completely eliminated medication related accidents?
Article right here says it - “child-resistant packaging is it's not childproof. It's actually intended to slow the child down."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-many-children-die-accidental-medicine-poisoning-safe-kids-worldwide-report/

You're reaching. There is not one thing that will prevent 100% of everything. But in general, we focus on prevention. We don't shrug our shoulders and say "accidents happen."

The point is you can do everything possible to help prevent an accident, yet ACCIDENTS STILL HAPPEN.
No one is saying shrug your shoulders. What we are saying is that we need to both make streets safer AND not put our children in dangerous situations.
Those who say accidents are preventable and it’s always the drivers fault are completely delusional.

Sure, but a child on a street is not inherently a dangerous situation. It is only dangerous when you add vehicles and drivers who don't pay attention or care if they hit someone. This is why so many on this thread (and the grief-stricken mother) are advocating for streets that are livable for all and not just drivers.

Um, would you like to join us in reality? I, too, would love for my children to be gamboling in a meadow where the only traffic is Farmer Ted and his kindly horse, but people are living and walking around vehicles and need to act accordingly. We can advocate for 20 mph speed limits and bump outs (andI do!) and still recognize that nobody should step out between cars without looking or allow their young children to bike into crosswalks alone. This magical thinking that a child on a street is not inherently dangerous is bonkers.

Speed limit is already 20mph on residential streets. I agree these posters (or poster) are living in La-La Land by placing all responsibility for keeping kids safe on drivers. If you choose to live in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that there are cars and bikes and trucks and scooters and vans and walkers and everyone has a role in keeping themselves and others safe. You can be both for traffic calming measures and personal responsibility on the part of everyone at the same time.

If you choose to drive in a city, you need to do so with the understanding that you have an obligation to not hit people, regardless of what those people might be doing. If you don't like it, you should find another way to get around. The good news is that in a city, there are plenty of ways to get around that don't involve you driving.

As for the speed limit .

“Obligation not to hit people.” You are completely delusional. There is no rational conversation to be had with this level of cluelessness.

It's literally the law. As a driver, you should be aware of the law.