allengeorge
Senior Member
CBC article on the above:
Two cars hit each other. One hit a restaurant. Two pedestrians seriously injured.
Two cars hit each other. One hit a restaurant. Two pedestrians seriously injured.
That's incredible/insane.CBC article on the above:
Two cars hit each other. One hit a restaurant. Two pedestrians seriously injured.
That's incredible/insane.
The speed limit is 50 km/h, right? How do you get such results at that speed?
Were they speeding?
Or is 50 km/h too high for downtown streets?
The answer is probably both.
It is 40 and you are wrong about construction - that's west of Yonge, or was.The speed limit is actually 40 along that stretch. Also I think the road is slight narrowed before or after Yonge due to construction but I may be mistaken
Richmond and Adelaide are on and off ramps for the Don Valley Parkway. Period.I’ve seen a lot of cars boot it down Richmond and Adelaide because they’re one-way streets and as Ev (in the tweet) stated, the lights feel synchronized.
...in 1958, at the behest of head traffic engineer Robert Burton, the city turned Richmond and Adelaide Streets into one-way miniature urban expressways, although at first, the streetcars remained.
...multiple lanes of fast-moving traffic in one direction weren't so good for other road users, such as pedestrians trying to get across the road, or cyclists. Neither were they any good, many have argued, for businesses along the street.
It seems getting in and out of your city as quickly as possible too often meant hollowing out your downtown, turning the streets into mere ways to get somewhere, instead of places to go in their own right, with shops, restaurants and other attractions.
Useless post.Well, do you think they should advise pedestrians to walk around with blindfolds on? I don't see that as "both sides"
Useless post.
Blaming pedestrians for cars running onto the sidewalk is very clear victim blaming.
Recommending that people be aware of their surroundings is not blaming pedestrians for cars ending up on the sidewalk, or very clear victim blaming.
^Sidewalks are not a “shared” part of roadways and it’s more than silly to talk as such for this incident (one could also suggest the need to watch for falling meteors, construction debris, and objects dropped off balconies, never mind out of control vehicle….but really…)
PR incompetence aside, the law does hold motorists responsible for the broader impacts of collisions, which more frequently includes paying for bashed guardrails, smashed lightposts, ect….and in more serious incidents such as the latest, pedestrian injury or fatality. One has to hope that whatever happened here, that collateral damage will weigh on what charges if any are laid. And on civil liability, which is sometimes the bigger forum for righting accountability in driving incidents.
The PR misspeak is regrettable, but the system is not necessarily connected to that spokesperson’s comments. I hope.
- Paul
PS - While we may disagree with the suggestian that pedestrians could and should be alert and ready to dodge flying vehicles, you can be sure that if this issue goes to court, the defendants’ lawyers will advance that very argument. Don’t single out the cop as the villain here….the lawyers will run with stuff this in a heartbeat.
I ride a motorcycle and it’s drummed into us that you can be right or dead. You keep aware of traffic from all directions and assume that no one sees you. I walk the sidewalks with the same mindset. It’s not victim blaming, but instead is acknowledging that Canadian drivers are terrible and thus participating in your own safety.Useless post.
Blaming pedestrians for cars running onto the sidewalk is very clear victim blaming.
Recommending that people be aware of their surroundings is not blaming pedestrians for cars ending up on the sidewalk, or very clear victim blaming.
Are you on the watch for cars flying into you while you're walking on the sidewalk? What about while eating in a restaurant? (Perhaps the very same restaurant that the car crashed into?)Well, do you think they should advise pedestrians to walk around with blindfolds on? I don't see that as "both sides"
Dollars to doughnuts the driver gets off with a minimum fine - especially given that " all parties involved are cooperating.". Meanwhile, multiple pedestrians are in hospital.PR incompetence aside, the law does hold motorists responsible for the broader impacts of collisions, which more frequently includes paying for bashed guardrails, smashed lightposts, ect….and in more serious incidents such as the latest, pedestrian injury or fatality. One has to hope that whatever happened here, that collateral damage will weigh on what charges if any are laid. And on civil liability, which is sometimes the bigger forum for righting accountability in driving incidents.
TPS has stopped aggressively enforcing traffic infractions. Council offers thoughts and prayers (and entreaties for driver education and awareness). We're getting the results.The PR misspeak is regrettable, but the system is not necessarily connected to that spokesperson’s comments. I hope.