Roadside Memorials - Should they be removed?

Forums › Off topic › Roadside Memorials - Should they be removed?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#945197 4-Dec-2013 10:29

Klipspringer:
KiwiNZ:
Klipspringer:
KiwiNZ: No they shouldn't. They are a memorial to lives needlessly lost.

Best way to stop their numbers growing is ...

*Slow down
*Drive to the rules and drive to the conditions
*Drink zero alcohol and take zero drugs before driving
*And generally don't prat around on the roads

The problem with those points you listed is that the other driver also needs to abide by them.

That is my point, they apply to everyone, so many seem to think that the rules are optional and the roads a play ground

I would rather see people learn to drive to hazardous conditions, learn to drive to the unexpected, and learn how to control their car in the worst possible scenario.

We use to have an advanced driving course in South Africa which I took. It taught me so much about how to handle a car properly, and how to think about what that other driver may/may not do. Its probably the best course I have ever taken.

There is far more to safe driving than just slowing down, driving sober etc..

You will always have the "other driver". Rather drive to his unexpected behaviour instead of saying he should, should not do this or that.

Our roads are a dangerous place and we should learn to drive to the conditions.

The "Slow Down" point will obviously always prevent crashes. Its a moot point. Because slowing down will always be safer, if we want to prevent road deaths there is a simple solution. Slow down to 0km/h.

I have also done advanced driver training.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#945199 4-Dec-2013 10:30

KiwiNZ:

I have also done advanced driver training.

Good stuff. It helped me heaps.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#945202 4-Dec-2013 10:32

Back to the topic.

I think banning roadside memorials from the main motorways is probably also a good idea.
I know they were talking about doing that in Queensland. Not sure if they actually went ahead with it.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#945210 4-Dec-2013 10:38

I think they serve several purposes, they are a memorial to those who have perished on our roads, they also serve as a reminder to motorists that driving is not a game, and a lot of memorials in a given location can indicate an accident black spot
and hopefully drivers will heed the warning and adjust their driving accordingly.

I find it hard to believe that the memorials do any harm to the living.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Bung

6733 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2926

Subscriber

#945212 4-Dec-2013 10:38

Klipspringer: I would rather see people learn to drive to hazardous conditions, learn to drive to the unexpected, and learn how to control their car in the worst possible scenario.

Our roads are a dangerous place and we should learn to drive to the conditions.

Driving behaviour is important but the road design should try to stop mistakes being death sentences.

Often the memorials are at the base of a pole that is too close to the road or at the end of an overtaking lane that stupidly merges on a corner.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#945222 4-Dec-2013 10:45

andrewNZ: I have 2 issues with them.

1) These things are often in hairy places, and people stop and tend to them. That's a hazard, and the only thing more tragic than someone dying there, would be someone else dying there because they were tending to the decorations.

2) That's what cemeteries are for.

How many accidents have occurred from people 'tending' to these? I'd suspect none, good reason to ban it eh?

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#945225 4-Dec-2013 10:49

surfisup1000:
andrewNZ: I have 2 issues with them.

1) These things are often in hairy places, and people stop and tend to them. That's a hazard, and the only thing more tragic than someone dying there, would be someone else dying there because they were tending to the decorations.

2) That's what cemeteries are for.

How many accidents have occurred from people 'tending' to these? I'd suspect none, good reason to ban it eh?

What about near misses that go unreported?

A near miss has the potential to cause an accident.

ahmad

1937 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 53
Inactive user

#945279 4-Dec-2013 12:10

Unless they are really causing a hazard (if they are well enough off the road I can't see how they could be) then I don't see an issue with them.

There are more "distractions" inside a vehicle than posed by a roadside memorial - if anything they cause a passing driver to drive more carefully if only for a few hundred metres as they try to avoid an accident by being "distracted" by the memorial (ie. taking more care).

timmmay

20858 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5350

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#945323 4-Dec-2013 13:12

I think anything distracting should be removed from the roadside. Flags, anything moving, perhaps even flowers after a short time. You want to be respectful without making things worse.

Dratsab

3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1728

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#945336 4-Dec-2013 13:33

I agree with the train of thought about letting them be placed but removing them after a few months. They serve no useful purpose other than to distract other drivers. The initial placement will let everyone know something tragic occurred at the particular spot but this becomes lost over time, outside of family/friends of the deceased. I think BlueShift pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Cave Creek, Wellington Harbour etc - these are a completely different as they are memorials to mass deaths. They also aren't beside a point in a road which could be a dangerous place and they have open spaces for visitors.

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user

#945338 4-Dec-2013 13:36

If you find them distracting become the guy who pulls over on the side of the road and pulls them up.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Dratsab

3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1728

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#945340 4-Dec-2013 13:37

Meh

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#945345 4-Dec-2013 13:50

Dratsab: I agree with the train of thought about letting them be placed but removing them after a few months. They serve no useful purpose other than to distract other drivers. The initial placement will let everyone know something tragic occurred at the particular spot but this becomes lost over time, outside of family/friends of the deceased. I think BlueShift pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Cave Creek, Wellington Harbour etc - these are a completely different as they are memorials to mass deaths. They also aren't beside a point in a road which could be a dangerous place and they have open spaces for visitors.

If a small cross is distracting to drivers to the extent they should be removed then all Adverting hoardings should go, tree with flowers ...gone, all animals, birds people ....gone. Beautiful scenery must be hidden from view, as with all non safety related road signs.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

scuwp

3927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

#945358 4-Dec-2013 14:02

It doesn't happen too often but I have seen large entourages of family and friends gathered around rather dangerous places on the road paying their respects. I am sure the last thing on their minds is causing another crash but that is a risk. there are plenty of laws around state highway use that protect against distraction and hazards.

I remember a news stories about a cyclist (father) being killed a week or so before his birthday. It didn't hit home until I happened to be driving past the exact spot on what must have been his birthday, and seeing what appeared to be his son and wife placing flowers and a present on the memorial. Certainly prompted some in depth discussion and a couple of changed attitudes for my passengers. So it can be a good thing.

IME most monuments disappear over time, very few get attention year after year infinitum, so attrition will look after most. Those that are dangerous or over the top (i.e. distracting) could be tactfully dealt by authorities and an alternative found. I have seen one with a flashing red light!

Personally I think there needs to be a balanced approach, but by and large they wont be there forever and won't cause a problem in most cases. If that's the case, let them be.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Bung

6733 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2926

Subscriber

#945359 4-Dec-2013 14:03

KiwiNZ: If a small cross is distracting to drivers

If you're that easily distracted it's the licence that should be removed.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6