Are mobility scooters and bicycles worse than Toyotas?
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Driving UK roads
Next: Rip off Kwik Fit
From: Adrian on 7 Apr 2010 09:21 Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> I think it has been tweaked. >> Again, I doubt it. > Can't they be tweaked then? Not easily.
From: John Veldman on 7 Apr 2010 09:27 "Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message news:d97c33c8-678b-4a75-b517-6b0a8f3c0dec(a)z4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > Given all the excuses here made for Toyota faults and the deaths they > have caused, everywhere else except the UK seemingly, and given that > there is alleged by some to be an arbitrary threshold below which any > ensuring deaths don't matter one jot and neither do the faults, what > do you think should be done about this threat to life and limb from > mobility scooters? The drivers should have a test and be insured. They should be warned not to race down pavements or through shops too as they are a menace. It depends why a person is in one. If it's a case of "too fat and greedy to walk" then I would take it off them as they will never lose weight. If they have restricted mobility to the latest DSS test standards, maybe they should not be in one or even allowed to drive a car. If movement is restricted to such an extent that they qualify for extra benefits, by their own admission and the diagnosis of a Doctor or two they are not a fit and able person to control a vehicle. That's why I can't understand the Motability Scheme. They send people out in cars knowing that by the very nature of their disabilities that qualifies them to have one - they would not be able to control it to the required standard. If it is n OAP Speed Demon, then we need more mobile speed traps in shopping centres. One insurance company in America even handed out "fat-carts" to obese people to reduce the number of claims. If people can't ride bikes, use skateboards or rollerskates in a shopping centre then fat-carts and motorised scooter devices should also be banned. Fortunately the DSS are cracking down on fraudsters, so we should see the number of scooters dropping. It seems very few cases are genuine and the rest spoil it for the genuine people in need of a bit of extra help. I'm not sure why you compare them to Toyotas, unless you are thinking the same "TYPE" or "AGE GROUP" drive both products.
From: Doug on 7 Apr 2010 12:44 On 7 Apr, 11:30, Anthony Cunningham <anthony.j.cunning...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 7, 7:50 am, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > >what do you think should be done about this threat to life and limb from > > mobility scooters? > > Ban them from pavements: > > "A 90-year-old woman has died in hospital two days after she was hit > by a mobility scooter while on holiday on the Isle of Wight. > > Lillian Macey, of Harlow, Essex, was hit on the pavement as she walked > along High Street, Sandown, on Tuesday. " > > Same goes for cyclists as they can reach much higher speeds than > mobility scooters. > Cars should be banned from pavements too. You often see them parked there and they also crash and kill people on pavements. Nowhere is safe from them. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Doug on 7 Apr 2010 12:48 On 7 Apr, 11:30, Anthony Cunningham <anthony.j.cunning...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 7, 7:50 am, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote: > > >what do you think should be done about this threat to life and limb from > > mobility scooters? > > Ban them from pavements: > How would the disabled do their shopping? Another alternative is to make roads safe for them and for cyclists then they would have less need to use pavements. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Doug on 7 Apr 2010 13:01
On 7 Apr, 14:27, "John Veldman" <john.nos...(a)veldman.net> wrote: > "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message > > news:d97c33c8-678b-4a75-b517-6b0a8f3c0dec(a)z4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > > > Given all the excuses here made for Toyota faults and the deaths they > > have caused, everywhere else except the UK seemingly, and given that > > there is alleged by some to be an arbitrary threshold below which any > > ensuring deaths don't matter one jot and neither do the faults, what > > do you think should be done about this threat to life and limb from > > mobility scooters? > > The drivers should have a test and be insured. They should be warned not > to race down pavements or through shops too as they are a menace. It > depends why a person is in one. If it's a case of "too fat and greedy to > walk" > then I would take it off them as they will never lose weight. If they have > restricted mobility to the latest DSS test standards, maybe they should not > be > in one or even allowed to drive a car. If movement is restricted to such an > extent that they qualify for extra benefits, by their own admission and the > diagnosis of a Doctor or two they are not a fit and able person to control a > vehicle. That's why I can't understand the Motability Scheme. They send > people out in cars knowing that by the very nature of their disabilities > that > qualifies them to have one - they would not be able to control it to the > required standard. If it is n OAP Speed Demon, then we need more mobile > speed traps in shopping centres. One insurance company in America even > handed out "fat-carts" to obese people to reduce the number of claims. > If people can't ride bikes, use skateboards or rollerskates in a shopping > centre then fat-carts and motorised scooter devices should also be banned.. > Fortunately the DSS are cracking down on fraudsters, so we should see the > number of scooters dropping. It seems very few cases are genuine and the > rest spoil it for the genuine people in need of a bit of extra help. > I'm not sure why you compare them to Toyotas, unless you are thinking the > same > "TYPE" or "AGE GROUP" drive both products. > I thought I had explained the connection with Toyotas, its all down to the number iof deaths caused by various modes of transport. Obviously unsafe cars which are allowed to continue using our roads does present a serious problem. The point you seem to be missing is that if the disabled and elderly are confined to their homes for lack of transport they will need carers which will cost the taxpayer like yourself a great deal. That is the main reason why the government tries to encourage them to be as self-sufficient as possible with few restrictions. Pity the same thing is not applied to disabled cyclists though, who are not allowed on pavements. and may have no other way of getting around. In many cases they are able to cycle to a supermarket and there borrow a wheelchair in which to do their shopping. I am not surprised though that the motorists here want to get the disabled, elderly and cyclists off the streets and have the streets all for themselves, for their beloved passing and repassing. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net All public road users are equal but some are more equal than others. |