Daughter hit by car near Claddagh Church

tribesman78

Amhran Nua wrote: »

No, they don't. You have to expect them to do anything including leaping out windmilling their arms and singing the national anthem. This is the reality when there are minors, small children, and people of unstable character walking around.

Yes people do stupid thing like you stated above and from a drivers perspective the best that can be done is to be aware and keep within the speed limit but this will not always be enough depending on reaction time and how quickly the incident happens. I was knocked down when i was younger luckily enough not badly hurt but it was due to me trying to make a brake for it accross the road. The driver could in no way have stoped or avoided me, it was just lucky that he had ampel time to brake and reduce impact.

You might think you haven't got any responsbility if you are driving past a row of cars and a small child leaps out from nowhere - you do have responsibility
I never said you don't have responsibility all i said as a pedestrian you too have some responsibility.

you should have been driving at an appropriate speed to be able to either avoid striking the child or to avoid causing real damage. Going at the speed limit is always not enough, unfortunately. If a person walks out from behind a bus you have a spit second to reduce speed and sometimes there just isn't the time to react/stop, hench the reason why you are taught not to cross behind a bus.....but sure why teach that if its up to the driver to stop, why have traffic lights if its up to the driver to stop/avoid.

will not always If a pedestrian walks out in the middle of a motorway, you do not have the right to mow them down.

Never said you did have that right, all i meant is you wouldn't do it because you no its not safe and you would have a increased chance of been hit by a car.

Only one person in this encounter was driving a one-ton lump of machinery.
True. Only one decided to ignore the green cross code which is taught too everyone during school years.
If you are in a rural area without footpaths, you should walk on the
right-hand side of the road to face oncoming traffic.

If there is a footpath, however, you should use it – but still be aware
of the traffic at all times!.

Amhran Nua

Jesus is it any wonder we've such carnage on the roads.

Happyman42

Great! ...In Amhran Nua's brave new world there will be no need of Zebra Crossings, Traffic Lights, RTA response units etc etc. Children are sacrificed on the altar of their parents stupidity all the time! Teach them common sense, teach them that the world is 'not perfect', not everybody observes the law, or safe procedure all of the time so if you want to survive you have to be aware and make the right decisions. The reason there is so much carnage on our roads is the high percentage of 'it will never happen to me' users!

Amhran Nua

Happyman42 wrote: »

Great! ...In Amhran Nua's brave new world there will be no need of Zebra Crossings, Traffic Lights, RTA response units etc etc. Children are sacrificed on the altar of their parents stupidity all the time! Teach them common sense, teach them that the world is 'not perfect', not everybody observes the law, or safe procedure all of the time so if you want to survive you have to be aware and make the right decisions. The reason there is so much carnage on our roads is the high percentage of 'it will never happen to me' users!

Unbelievable. There's no way you've missed what I'm saying, so I'm going to assume wilful ignorance on the part of yourself and your fellow travellers.

Some people don't have common sense. The minute you start thinking about their responsibility rather than your own, you're creating expectations of their behaviour, which do not exist. If you strike a pedestrian, the chances are extremely good you won't be allowed to drive again, and that's if you're lucky. Now maybe you know better than the law, but I doubt it.

snubbleste

That is ridiculous Happyman42

Happyman42

Amhran Nua wrote: »

If you strike a pedestrian, the chances are extremely good you won't be allowed to drive again, and that's if you're lucky. Now maybe you know better than the law, but I doubt it.

Nonsense, pedestrians are hit all the time...the courts will assess each incident and make a judgement. Automatic bans are not handed down. As regards the rules. Read the bits marked in red...then show it to your daughter. http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/pedestrians/pedestrians_walking-along-the-road.html

mikemac

The daughter learned a lesson. Drivers make mistakes and it's safer to use the footpath instead of walking two abreast on the road

Amhran Nua

Happyman42 wrote: »

Nonsense, pedestrians are hit all the time...the courts will assess each incident and make a judgement. Automatic bans are not handed down. As regards the rules. Read the bits marked in red...then show it to your daughter. http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/pedestrians/pedestrians_walking-along-the-road.html

Just not getting through, eh. To be honest I don't think someone like you should be driving. I just hope some pedestrian doesn't end up paying the price for it someday.

Happyman42

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Just not getting through, eh. To be honest I don't think someone like you should be driving. I just hope some pedestrian doesn't end up paying the price for it someday.

Getting what through? Emotional, hysterical nonsense? Your daughter seems to be the one that paid a price here.

Nonsense, pedestrians are hit all the time...the courts will assess each incident and make a judgement. Automatic bans are not handed down. As regards the rules. Read the bits marked in red...then show it to your daughter. http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-pedestr...-the-road.html

Why don't you disprove both statements above...you who live in the real world?
Btw: Where in the rules of the road does it state that a driver is responsible 'in all instances' if a pedestrian is hit?

tribesman78

So if i go and jump in front of your car tomorrow and you are following the ROTR and been vigilant in your driving, but just cant react in time, you will be at fault and hold your hand up in court, lose your license and pay the settlement.

When it comes to pedestrian accidents in court it is not always black and white, as in the driver is always at fault. The whole scene is taken into account, if it weren't there would be no need for a court case just a ban, fine or jail term.

I am sorry for what happened your daughter and i am not saying she was wrong / right, what i am saying is she could have been more careful and prevented the incident, if she had used a bit more common sense just like the driver could have been more aware and vigilant in her driving.

JohnCleary

Wow this thread has gone a bit nuts.

OP: Hope your daughter is OK and takes it as a lesson learned (I was in a very serious RTA years back and learned from it, so don't that that statement as being judgemental)


What is a little silly in our society is that Case Law will generally rule the driver at fault in almost all (if not all?) incidents involving pedestrians. If some idiot jumps out on the road infront of a car, my understanding is, that the driver will be held liable. Sickening really. I see pedestrians do some awfully stupid things on a daily basis (This is coming from a driver & a pedestrian, I almost always walk within the city centre)

inisboffin

I think people are mixing up who the OP was as these arguments happen. Might be worth looking back. I am still unclear if the OPs daughter is a child or an adult, although people keep referring to a child?

I do take the point that cyclists and pedestrians are less lethal physically in an accident, butI would say that regardless of 'fault', a careless pedestrian *can* cause a fatality. A driver swerving or braking suddenly to avoid a pedestrian who is suddenly on the road, can themselves be injuredor killed as a result of this.

I walk on back roads sometimes, and I see people 'side step' unexpectedly, to avoid a branch or whatever (which a driver can't see). Grand if the driver is going slowly, and the road is clear. But if it is sudden and there is a fast oncoming car to avoid in a small space, anything can happen.

I hope your daughter doesn't have any major problems OP, and that you find the driver. If, for nothing else, than peace of mind. Lesson learned.

tribesman78

I know i mixed up the OP with another poster me culpa . OP sorry for what happened your daughter.

Happyman42

tribesman78 wrote: »

I know i mixed up the OP with another poster me culpa . OP sorry for what happened your daughter.

Me too. Apologies, my argument was with Amhran Nua

paulgalway

In all the discussions here, I seem to have lost a daughter along the way !

Daughter is 19. they were walking along here on the left, both girls were inside the double yellow lines.

Fey!

Was she walking outside the wall and bollards that are there?

At 19, surely she should know better?

I'm not condoning a driver hitting her or driving off.

The law may not lay the blame entirely with the driver (if the driver had stopped), as the pedestrian could be deemed to have put herself in danger, and at 19 she is a responsible adult who should, as I said already, know better. The yellow lines only show where people are not allowed to park, not where the road edge lies.

There is a pedestrian crossing there to allow people to safely cross to the path on the other side.

Regardless of my views on it, I do hope that she is OK. I'd never want to see anyone injured regardless of circumstances.

Zulu

Jesus folks - this isn't about someone "knowing better"; it's about an ignorant dangerous driver who "hit & run".

To those who seem to have forgotten that - cop, the fuck, on & get down off your high horses. Seriously. None of you would bleat on to her father in real life about 'knowing better'.

Bosco boy

Zulu wrote: »

Jesus folks - this isn't about someone "knowing better"; it's about an ignorant dangerous driver who "hit & run".

To those who seem to have forgotten that - cop, the fuck, on & get down off your high horses. Seriously. None of you would bleat on to her father in real life about 'knowing better'.

That's a fine horse you have yourself!

Mrs OBumble

Fey! wrote: »

The law may not lay the blame entirely with the driver (if the driver had stopped), as the pedestrian could be deemed to have put herself in danger, ...

Regardless of my views on it, I do hope that she is OK. I'd never want to see anyone injured regardless of circumstances.

Indeed. Actually, I think you'll find there are laws for how pedestrians are expected to behave in Ireland.

This site has some summary information from "Rules of the Road - 2007
Revision No. 1: February 2008", which includes:

This section covers the rules on walking along and crossing roads.
The most important rule for all pedestrians is to behave responsibly, exercise care and not endanger or inconvenience other users of the road.
Walking beside or along a road

• If there is a footpath you must use it.
• If there is no footpath, you must walk as near as possible to the righthand side of the road (facing oncoming traffic).
• Do not walk more than two abreast. If the road is narrow or carries heavy traffic, you should walk in single file.
• You should always wear reflective clothing at night when walking outside built-up areas.
• You should always carry a torch when walking at night time.

This most certainly isn't legal advice, but I suspect you'll find that technically the OP's daughter was breaking the law, by not using the footpath that is available. The website concerned generally uses the words MUST to show the law, and SHOULD to indicate good practice.

It's a law that I've broken myself in that exact same spot many times - but I'd never do it two abreast.

OP, I hope your daughter's OK, and that she's learned form this experience.

tightropetom

It doesn't matter whether she was on the path or not. At the end of the day, she probably walked (as thousands do daily) along the jetty alongside the river and then cut up onto the left side of the road. For all we know, she may have planned to cross the road onto the footpath.

It doesn't matter - the offender here is the person who fled the scene of a road traffic collision. If she'd stopped and offered assistance that would have been the decent thing to do. Instead she fled a collision, therefore she's in breach of the law. Even if the girl was standing/walking in the middle of the road, the driver is the one who has committed the offence here by driving away

JohnCleary

tightropetom wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether she was on the path or not. At the end of the day, she probably walked (as thousands do daily) along the jetty alongside the river and then cut up onto the left side of the road. For all we know, she may have planned to cross the road onto the footpath.

I often walk this route myself, and common sense tells me (unless it's very windy' to walk between the pier and the bollards, otherwise i'm on the road


I genuinly think that the motorist may have not realised she 'clipped' someone. OP: Was the driver old? I've seen some old people smack into things (scrape off walls etc.) in the past and they didn't bat an eyelid! :eek:

MARTINOZ

OP - hope your daughter is ok. Whether she was in the wrong at the time of the incident or not is a matter for another discussion, but the driver leaving the scene is what should really be discussed here. Hopefully the person in question is caught and reprimanded properly for this. It may save someone else from injury or worse in the future.

Also - fair play to the mods for letting the discussion go on all of this. There was a time (and maybe it still happens) when the thread would have had a mod warning or two to stop any discussion taking place, but this was let run. Good to see.

Svalbard

Nonsense, pedestrians do have to exercise common sense and take responsibility if their actions contribute to an accident. It is not always the driver's fault. Certainly there is an onus on drivers to driver with due care, to be aware that the unexpected may happen at any time, but drivers are only human and they cannot account for every possible circumstance.

As for these calls for the driver to be identified and hauled in front of the courts, unless the girl was actually injured or there was clear evidence of dangerous driving I really don't see the point. There are simply so many possible interpretations of what happened and who was at fault, everyone has their own opinion.

As someone who enjoys both driving and walking the streets of Galway I am well aware of the difficulties and dangers of both means of transport. As for the street in question, i'm just surprised there aren't more similar incidents there, it really is narrow and badly designed.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

It doesn't matter if pedestrians are walking down the middle of the road, motorists have no right to muscle them out of the way or run them down, none whatsoever. The onus is entirely on the driver to be careful, which is part of the responsibility that comes with the privelege of being granted a drivers licence. A privelege which can be taken away.

Likewise anyone that didn't notice striking a person, wing mirror or not, shouldn't be let on the roads.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

No, they don't. You have to expect them to do anything including leaping out windmilling their arms and singing the national anthem. This is the reality when there are minors, small children, and people of unstable character walking around.

You might think you haven't got any responsbility if you are driving past a row of cars and a small child leaps out from nowhere - you do have responsibility, you should have been driving at an appropriate speed to be able to either avoid striking the child or to avoid causing real damage. If a pedestrian walks out in the middle of a motorway, you do not have the right to mow them down. At best all you can do is call the guards and drive slowly behind them, and I sincerely hope you aren't driving with an attitude like that.

Only one person in this encounter was driving a one-ton lump of machinery. These are the facts of the situation and I hope no pity is shown to that motorist in the likely event they are caught.


Then she wasn't paying proper attention. Again, I see no reason why negligence like that should go unpunished.

Svalbard

tightropetom wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether she was on the path or not. At the end of the day, she probably walked (as thousands do daily) along the jetty alongside the river and then cut up onto the left side of the road. For all we know, she may have planned to cross the road onto the footpath.

It doesn't matter - the offender here is the person who fled the scene of a road traffic collision. If she'd stopped and offered assistance that would have been the decent thing to do. Instead she fled a collision, therefore she's in breach of the law. Even if the girl was standing/walking in the middle of the road, the driver is the one who has committed the offence here by driving away

MARTINOZ wrote: »

OP - hope your daughter is ok. Whether she was in the wrong at the time of the incident or not is a matter for another discussion, but the driver leaving the scene is what should really be discussed here. Hopefully the person in question is caught and reprimanded properly for this. It may save someone else from injury or worse in the future.

Also - fair play to the mods for letting the discussion go on all of this. There was a time (and maybe it still happens) when the thread would have had a mod warning or two to stop any discussion taking place, but this was let run. Good to see.

I'm really unconvinced that anyone 'fled' anywhere. Hit and run seems an over-the-top description for this incident.