Advocacy & Safety - Ban 4WDs within 200m of schoolyards: coroner

Not cycling specific but an indication as to the growing attitude towards SUVs in cities.

From The Sydney Morning Herald.



By Geesche Jacobsen
May 17, 2005 - 1:14PM


Four-wheel-drive vehicles should be banned from stopping within 200 metres of schoolyards with primary and infant students, the Deputy State Coroner has recommended, following an inquest into the safety of the vehicles on school grounds.

Four-wheel-drive vehicles should not be allowed to enter school grounds, Magistrate Jacqueline Milledge added.

Ms Milledge also called for the Roads and Traffic Authority to introduce special licences for four-wheel-drives over two tonnes.

She also called for a full review of traffic inside and around schools.

The inquest, at Sydney's Glebe Coroner's Court, was prompted by an accident in which the driver of a four-wheel-drive ran over and killed Bethany Holder, 5, in the grounds of Pittwater House School at Collaroy in 2002.

Earlier today, the driver, Joan Maclennan (formerly known as Joan Waterhouse) told the inquest her life was ruined after she ran over and killed the girl.

Ms Maclennan said she would never drive a four-wheel-drive again.

She told the court she did not see Bethany before the accident. She only felt a "thud" when she hit the girl.

AAP reports:

Outside the court, Ms Maclennan urged city drivers to give up their four-wheel-drives.

"I'll just say [people should] ... really consider owning one in the city unless it's really necessary," she said.

She supported calls from Bethany's parents for all cars to be banned from school grounds.

"Obviously the accident at Pittwater House has had a big influence on my decision, but, having children at school for the last three years and witnessing the way people drive not only in school grounds but around school grounds, there needs to be something done about it," she said.

Ms Maclennan was sentenced in 2003 to 250 hours' community service and disqualified from driving for three years over the incident.

And, Johnny, did you see the NSW government run for cover under the banner of "impractical" when both the school ban and licensing proposals were put to Premier Carr and the Police Minister.

It's the old it-will-happen-to-someone-else syndrome at work. Goodness how many lives were affected by this simply preventable incident.

It's significant that the headline news was Kylie Minogue's bout with breast cancer... and a child's death due to a SUV was relegated down the ladder. Community priorities at work.

There is some hope however. The congregation of motor vehicles at school around my city has led to some to consider "walking buses" -- so that kids *have* to be dropped off at least 200 metres away, and staff walk them in group or "buses" into school grounds.

I have nothing to add. Only sadness.

It's terribly sad, but what the hell does the vehicle being 4WD have to do with anything? This is just a silly conclusion.

It is a bit silly but maybe the reasoning is that in a huge great 4WD you dont have a good view around the car so if a kid gets near your car you won't be able to see her.

There was vision attached to one of the television reports of two SUV/4WDs manouevring (purportedly outside a school) -- one doing a three-point turn, the other waiting right behind to do the same thing. I suppose the conclusion from the vision was that anyone -- child or adult or cyclist -- would not have been seen as an obstacle in the manouevre. I think the point would have gone over the heads of most viewers.

Oh well... it was just a kid, anyway. The coroner made her point. Now it's a political issue. And as we know........................ =>

More and more cars have 4WD/AWD now, like my 2 door Eagle Talon. My parents also own a giant Suburban (ca. 1988 and only used for hauling stuff) that is 2WD yet you wouldn't feel a tree if you ran one over. If there is going to be some vehicle discrimination, it should be based on height/width than how many wheels are driven. I understand that that's the intention but it just comes off wrong.

Just more SUV alarmism.

Yeah, after all, the dinkiest Suburu is still four wheel drive...

Yeah,,,the Subaru Justy...LOL

Most people don't need these huge vehicles to bus a couple of kids to school but I guess they just couldn't keep up with the Jonesses otherwise.

Having said that, blaming the accident on the vehicle alone or for most part is a little too far fetched IMO.. Very sad story, I feel for the parents of the little girl.

This really doesn't have anything to do with 4wd at all. Bad drivers can use any type of transmission, engine, axles, brakes, etc. The vehicle dimensions may be relevant, but I'm sure 2wd would have been more than powerful enough to do the same thing.

It's terribly sad, but what the hell does the vehicle being 4WD have to do with anything? This is just a silly conclusion.

Tend to agree... it is not the vehicle, but the driver and their attitude... I mean after all if the SUV is a problem... how about the school bus? Sheesh.

90% of the time a 4wd is in 2wd mode. leaving it in 4wd mode can cause damage to the car.

awd is the permenant version of 4wd

I think when the article says 4WD it means all SUVS and trucks, although in Australia you see almost no one driving a truck who doesn't need one(at least in brisbane and sydney). You do see a fair number of Ford Falcon's with a pick up bed (like the old chevy el camino).

Studay after study has shown that even though SUV drivers have a better veiw of the road ahead, but that when backing up and changing lanes the visability is much worse. Not much of a family vehicle if you can't see your own kids on your driveway when your pulling out of the garage.

This legislation seems like a bit much, but I appluad the fact that they reconize the safety issues exsist. Now if when could get lawmakers in the states to think like that.

I think you guys are on the right track.

Today, 4X4's. Tomorrow, bicycles.

It's often easier to blame the machines.

Around here a lot of it boils down to parents being to lazy or unable to get their kids up on time (early) to catch the bus to school. So, everybody sleeps in an extra 15 minutes and mummy or daddy drives the kiddies 2 miles to school. Then, mummy or daddy is still running behind and gets all whacked out trying to get out of the parking lot.

The schools should ban all vehicles other than busses and staff vehicles from the school grounds. If you have to drop the kid off, do it out on the street. Or you could just get up on time....

Why do you hate freedom?

Nobody hates freedom. But, with freedom comes responsibility

Earlier today, the driver, Joan Maclennan (formerly known as Joan Waterhouse) told the inquest her life was ruined after she ran over and killed the girl.

Ms Maclennan said she would never drive a four-wheel-drive again.

She told the court she did not see Bethany before the accident. She only felt a "thud" when she hit the girl.
Translation: :cry: "It's not my fault I wasn't paying attention and killed her. It's the vehicle's fault. It's not my fault, really!" :cry:



Most people don't need these huge vehicles to bus a couple of kids to school but I guess they just couldn't keep up with the Jonesses otherwise.
Big vehicles can do little jobs. Little vehicles cannot do big jobs. So I guess instead of bicycles as a primary vehicle and one big vehicle that can do almost everything I would normally need a vehicle for, I should get one big vehicle and two small cars for the wife and I. This would make the auto and oil industries happy. We'll have three cars instead of one. The good Lord knows I wouldn't want to upset somebody because I felt like taking the Land Cruiser to the convience store for a gallon of milk. :rolleyes:

I think when the article says 4WD it means all SUVS and trucks, although in Australia you see almost no one driving a truck who doesn't need one(at least in brisbane and sydney). You do see a fair number of Ford Falcon's with a pick up bed (like the old chevy el camino).

Studay after study has shown that even though SUV drivers have a better veiw of the road ahead, but that when backing up and changing lanes the visability is much worse. Not much of a family vehicle if you can't see your own kids on your driveway when your pulling out of the garage.

This legislation seems like a bit much, but I appluad the fact that they reconize the safety issues exsist. Now if when could get lawmakers in the states to think like that.

The ute's that you refer to are everywhere, as are Landcruisers, Prados, Patrols, and the like. Rather than try to make a school parking lot or drop off zone safer, (a good idea) the government here will simply over-regulate. They already want to charge more rego for SUV type vehicles, so why not charge more for a special license? I'm sure the NSW gov't would love that. Will it change anything? No. Will it bring back this little girl? No. Would extra fees be spent on road or safety programs? No.

Today, 4X4's. Tomorrow, bicycles.

Many school districts have already banned bike riding to school because of the safety issue of too many parents driving their children to school.

Too many cars unnecessarily creating congestion at the school is the problem, so the solution is to encourage more driving?

RFM

I agree that 4WD seems to mean SUV.

There is actually a similar movement in the US, but the people involved want to have better SUV driver visibility to the rear, as with remote cameras. The spokesperson I've seen (in press and on TV) advocating this is a California doctor who ran over his own child. The driver couldn't see that his child was behind the SUV and backed the vehicle over her.

See what you started, Johnny?

The only cure for the SUV disease is $7.50 per gallon gas.

Or maybe the surburbanites should all just be taken out and shot, that would keep most of the morons-in-SUVs out of the city and off the streets; it would sure be a whole lot cheaper than venturing half way around the world to kill arabs, and the result would be about the same. ;)

It doesn't address SUVs. It says 4WD. My mother's Legacy is 4WD. Many SUVs aren't. The people quoted are unthinking, reactionary, idiots. This is a safety issue that has nothing to do with either 4WD or SUVs, and everything to do with driver awareness, competency, and responsibility, as well as the congestion caused around the schools by parents that insist on taking their little darlings to the front door, thereby teaching their children to be as lazy as they are.

For what it's worth, my vision in all directions, including to the rear, is better in my SUV than in my Corolla, although the Corolla turns better.

Comments about gas consumption and other environmental impacts of SUVs are completely out of place in this thread.

It doesn't address SUVs. It says 4WD.
The article's from down under. Perhaps their lingo differs somewhat from the USA! USA! USA! USA! All the way! :rolleyes:

...everything to do with driver awareness, competency, and responsibility, as well as the congestion caused around the schools by parents that insist on taking their little darlings to the front door, thereby teaching their children to be as lazy as they are.
For what it's worth, I totally agree with this ....



For what it's worth, my vision in all directions, including to the rear, is better in my SUV than in my Corolla, although the Corolla turns better.
This has everything to do with good design, some vehicles have better visibility than others, it doesn't matter what kind of vehicle it is.



Comments about gas consumption and other environmental impacts of SUVs are completely out of place in this thread.
I totally disagree. This issue gets to the core root of personal responsibility, and will always be a valid criticism whenever SUVs are the topic.

Is the woman that killed the girl still allowed to drive even after proving in the most convincing manner that she is not capable to do so?

How about the doctor that didn't look behind his vehicle or know where his child was before backing up?

The vehicles involved in these deaths aren't the hazards.

"This has everything to do with good design, some vehicles have better visibility than others, it doesn't matter what kind of vehicle it is."

Corolla's have a high beltline which is excellent for occupant safety although they are harder to see out of. All design is a compromise.

Just to clarify, the Australian lingo for SUV is 4WD. Sedans with all-wheel-drive are not generally considered as 4WDs... they are sedans (the Subarus and Audis and so on).

Toyota is in the process of Americanising it, however, by introducing a big new Hilux and calling it an AUV... with the slogan: "Get in or get out of the way".

The Coroner delivered her recommendations based on the legal presentation of facts to her Court. She did her job in assessing the cause and blame. They're likely go-nowhere recommendations because the governmental solutions are too unpalatable.

Life goes on... or not.

Is the woman that killed the girl still allowed to drive even after proving in the most convincing manner that she is not capable to do so?

How about the doctor that didn't look behind his vehicle or know where his child was before backing up?

The vehicles involved in these deaths aren't the hazards.
Motoring kills more people annually in the US than gunshots do...and the vehicles are accessories to the fact. W/o the unnecessary trips in the vehicle to the school, store, etc., etc., that could be done on foot, by bicycle or by public transit, those children would probably still be alive. IMO, smaller motor vehicles and lower speed limits would help, too.

IMO, smaller motor vehicles and lower speed limits would help, too.

I may shock you by agreeing with you on this. I'm not a strict follower of speed limits when I'm out on the open road, but I'm damn close to it in anything that could be remotely considered residential. I was amazed today at the number of cars that just had to go around me, when I was cruising at the posted 25 MPH speed limit on my bike. None were overly dangerous mind you, they all made clean passes with adequate room, but I was doing just a hair over the speed limit. Are we really in that much of a hurry? Could technology help out in the future? Maybe some sort of chip in the car that could read a grid in urban areas so that the car couldn't exceed to posted speeds by any significant degree?

As for size...well, if my writing career takes off I may give up the woodworking, and in so doing could make do with a smaller vehicle. For now I can't. I need the size, and the SUV was a better compromise than a pickup.

If they're worried about vision, then they need to take a really good look at vans. You can see out front and to the sides, but even an adult standing behind one usually isn't visible.

Big vehicles can do little jobs. Little vehicles cannot do big jobs. So I guess instead of bicycles as a primary vehicle and one big vehicle that can do almost everything I would normally need a vehicle for, I should get one big vehicle and two small cars for the wife and I. This would make the auto and oil industries happy. We'll have three cars instead of one. The good Lord knows I wouldn't want to upset somebody because I felt like taking the Land Cruiser to the convience store for a gallon of milk. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

I'm quite curious as to what "big" jobs you're using your Land Cruiser for? Why not get a Camry that can haul 98% of what the SUV can, and rent a truck for $25 for the probably seldom days you really need one?

Sorry about the quote that got messed up - it was from CommuterRun. My portion is only the bottom two lines.

I too observe the speed limits and especially in residential areas, because (a) they're there for a reason and you get things like kids, dogs, grannies, etc and residential areas are where people LIVE not racetracks. And (b) because it's interesting to see how many other people go faster than the speed limit in residential areas, maybe having to go around those of us who obey the limits will make them think about what they're doing.

I'm quite curious as to what "big" jobs you're using your Land Cruiser for? Why not get a Camry that can haul 98% of what the SUV can, and rent a truck for $25 for the probably seldom days you really need one?

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I can offer a lot examples to answer the question. I regularly haul rough cut lumber. Walnut isn't too bad, but oak is heavy. I can get 8' boards in my SUV. I buy small quantities at a time, normally no more than 50 lineal feet. Now if you wanted to put rough cut oak in a Camry, I guess you could, but driving it with the front wheels making intermitant contact with the road would constitute a hazard. Forget the plywood and acrylic sheets, won't go. This is weekly use type stuff for me, and then finished product has to get shipped. Most of the time my shadow boxes could fit in a Camry, or in my case Corolla, but since my wife drives more miles weekly than I do, she uses it to take advantage of the better mileage.
When it's the 4 of us, I try to take the Corolla, unless we are hauling bikes.

Some of us do have "big jobs" that couldn't be done with a car. A Camry might be able to haul 98% of what an SUV can, but it can't haul 98% of what I haul in my SUV.

That's a good reply. I just wish more people with SUVs were like you.

twahl, you seem to have sound reason to have the car set-up you use. It seems to me to be a legitimate use of the SUV's capabilities, particularly in relation to you business activities.

I think most would agree, however, that ownership of an SUV as a status symbol, or on the premise that it is inherently safer because it is bigger, is not what the world needs. Least of all to drop kids off at school.

I agree entirely, but it's hard for me to say things like that, it sounds too much like "it's ok for me, but not for anybody else" and I don't like being hypocritical. For what it's worth, mine is a V-6 and I average about 18 MPG (I can coax 20+ out of it on the highway) so it's not completely horrible. I work out of my dad's shop which is about 10 miles from home. I try to buy materials all in one day and will ride the bike if I know I won't have to do anything but go to the shop and work on a particular day, which works well, means I get at least 20 miles in that day if I ride direct, but he's on the loop I like to do so if I have the time I stretch it to the loop and make it about 32. I also realize that surely some of the people I see driving larger SUVs have a reason, but when you see an H2 parked in front of the cell phone store every day, you know they don't. It's too easy to judge others without knowing what their situation is, so I have tried to mellow out a little before I hit 40 and avoid it.

The only cure for the SUV disease is $7.50 per gallon gas.

That will affect people that can only afford a Civic or Corolla, not someone who can afford an guzzler, whether it's a Suburban or a Crown Vic.


It doesn't address SUVs. It says 4WD. My mother's Legacy is 4WD. Many SUVs aren't. The people quoted are unthinking, reactionary, idiots. This is a safety issue that has nothing to do with either 4WD or SUVs, and everything to do with driver awareness, competency, and responsibility, as well as the congestion caused around the schools by parents that insist on taking their little darlings to the front door, thereby teaching their children to be as lazy as they are.



As Rowan pointed out, down under a 4WD is a proper 4WD. All wheel drive vehicles are not considered the same as 4WD. The Coroner's suggestion was typical reactionary BS. The driver in question was a qualified rally driver, so she has been able to demonstrate basic driving skills. Not in her defense in any way, but if this was a busy parking lot, with large vehicles, shouldn't the parent have been holding the kid's hand? The issue is 3 years old now, I think we can stop trying to point the blame here. I'm not sure this discussion belongs on a bike forum.

The article's from down under. Perhaps their lingo differs somewhat from the USA! USA! USA! USA! All the way! :rolleyes:

Thanks randya. You are correct. Down here we have 4WDs which are Prado's, Pajeros, Landcruisers, Rang Rovers etc, we don't call them SUVs. And virtually the only people that drive cars bigger than this are tradesmen.

CHEERS.

Mark

BTW almost all 4WDs have BULLBARS.

Could technology help out in the future? Maybe some sort of chip in the car that could read a grid in urban areas so that the car couldn't exceed to posted speeds by any significant degree?.

A GPS system of speed limiting has been in trials in England for a few a years now.

CHEERS.

Mark

I'm quite curious as to what "big" jobs you're using your Land Cruiser for? Why not get a Camry that can haul 98% of what the SUV can, and rent a truck for $25 for the probably seldom days you really need one?

I feel no need to justify the vehicle style that fits my lifestyle.

Renting a truck would be an option, but for as often as I need one buying is cheaper.

It's enough that you know I use a bicycle for the majority of my transportation needs.

That is true, CR. I suppose the questions that could be posed to SUV owners, based on their experience:

1. Do you require a degree of awareness and skill to drive an SUV/4WD compared with smaller vehicles such as sedans?

2. Would you accept training and a licence test to drive your vehicle (as is required for some types of vehicles in Australia that are close to the largest 4WD/SUV specifications)?

Please don't shoot the messenger -- I am only reflecting questions that arise out of this coroner's findings.

I don't think so. The driver of any vehicle should be alert, aware and responsible. Unfortunately, as we've all seen, this happens too infrequently with all vehicles, even bicycles. Something that more SUV and light truck owners do need to realize, and it seems many don't, is that this vehicle type is not a sports car and will not handle like one no matter what aftermarket modifications are made.

As for the second question. Some SUVs and light trucks in the U.S. do require a license up-grade, depending on the state of residence. In Florida I believe it goes by the vehicle's overall width. Unfortunately many owners/operators are not aware of this, but then, most law enforcement agencies are equally unaware.

I used my Landcruiser for making Jeep trails wider. :D I could afford a toy just for play. And I also hauled stuff for remodelling my home. But I had 2 other vehicles at the time, so it's not like I drove the thing every day.

People should be allowed to drive whatever they can afford as long as the vehicle meets safety standards. If statistics indicate that a class of vehicles are over represented in certain types of accidents (like running over children) than some action (tiered licensing?) may be necessary.

A Prius can be used to crush a child just as dead as an SUV and with it's high trunk profile (+800 lbs of batteries) is just as likely to.

The profit margins on the SUV class of vehicle is staggering. The big three typically lose money on economy cars but way more than make up for it on SUV's. Look at it as a wealth redistribution system applied to the vain and stupid.

Let's just ban all SUVs and "Bubba" Trucks (monster trucks)... It won't effect me in the least! I don't want to start down the path where only certain types of vehicles can be bought and sold... but it seems to me that these SUVs and other big monster trucks are of no real value to society... only a plague.

Why only 250 hours of "community service"? Shouldn't she be serving some "hard time" Crazy! She would get more for holding up a liquer store!

Guess School Kids are now the new "speed bump".

my .02

I'm no fan of SUVs. When I was growing up, the only people seen driving 4WDs were drunks with a lot of missing teeth. I used to be pissed at Pontiac for calling their barge a "GTO" -- hell, compared to today's SUVs, a Pontiac might as well BE a Ferrari. Those are my prejudices. However, I think people have a right to drive what they want to -- bikes, SUVs, cars, whatever. Some people would like to ban SUVs -- well, some would like to ban bicycles.

I can't see how an SUV, repulsive and trailer-trashy as it may seem to me, is any less safe than a real car if driven properly. Discriminating against a particular vehicle type is simply unfair. In this case, I suspect that the underlying motive is a dislike of SUVs. However, the death in question was caused by an incompetant driver, not a bad vehicle. Ban them, instead.

Paul