They said the warning sign was too small.... 16:52 - Oct 16 with 4857 views | hampstead_blue | I'd say her intellect was sadly smaller. Who in their right mind would stick their head out of a train like that! How on earth can you blame the rail company for such a stupid and random act. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-50067073 | |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 16:56 - Oct 16 with 4158 views | BigManBlue | I mean, yeah, can't really argue otherwise, tragic as it still is... And I'd assume the windows had some sort of warning too, all the ones I've been on recently have. [Post edited 16 Oct 2019 16:56]
| |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 16:57 - Oct 16 with 4152 views | wkj | The sooner rolling stock are uniformally updated to allow internal operation of door controls inside the carriage the better. Safety aside nothing I hate more than someone else interfering with my hand on the outside of the train as I am trying to open the door. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 17:02 - Oct 16 with 4131 views | BackToRussia | Yes it's stupid, but it's also incredibly easy to have a large and prominent sign to warn those not as smart as you or me. So why not, if it saves lives. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 19:15 - Oct 16 with 3947 views | Pendejo | This apparently is insufficient This is the replacement one Neither are any good if people simply ignore them... There are multiple historical incidences of similar things having occurred, I can't believe that there are still trains where you can open the window, I'm sure the trains I've traveled on in recent years all have push button door opening. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 19:31 - Oct 16 with 3923 views | ZedRodgers | Pretty obvious to anyone that’s ever watched The Young Ones or knows what trains are. Sad though. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:24 - Oct 16 with 3854 views | Oxford_Blue | Disagree. The company itself considered that the warning signs were not sufficient and was supposed to have replaced them months before the accident but didn’t. The train sells alcohol on board, and the windows are easy to open. It is reasonably foreseeable that someone could open them and not see the sign. Also the trees hadn’t been maintained. I doubt what you say represents a complete defence for the company since they are in breach of their own risk assessments. Any damages would be reduced for contributory negligence - reflecting her own culpability as well. [Post edited 16 Oct 2019 20:36]
| | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:33 - Oct 16 with 3832 views | Oxford_Blue | Also the act might be stupid but it is not random given the fact that the windows are there to be opened and there is a small and ineffective sign which contemplates just that type of thing. Providers of trains need to guard against reasonably foreseeable risks. Someone putting their head out of a widow is reasonably foreseeable and their own risk assessment came to this view and also to the view that the warning was not fit for purpose and had to be replaced - which they failed to do. | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:54 - Oct 16 with 3790 views | jaykay |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:24 - Oct 16 by Oxford_Blue | Disagree. The company itself considered that the warning signs were not sufficient and was supposed to have replaced them months before the accident but didn’t. The train sells alcohol on board, and the windows are easy to open. It is reasonably foreseeable that someone could open them and not see the sign. Also the trees hadn’t been maintained. I doubt what you say represents a complete defence for the company since they are in breach of their own risk assessments. Any damages would be reduced for contributory negligence - reflecting her own culpability as well. [Post edited 16 Oct 2019 20:36]
|
yeah but she was a young socialist | |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| | Login to get fewer ads
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 21:41 - Oct 16 with 3735 views | Oxford_Blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:54 - Oct 16 by jaykay | yeah but she was a young socialist |
What, so she deserved to die? | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 22:06 - Oct 16 with 3703 views | m14_blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:33 - Oct 16 by Oxford_Blue | Also the act might be stupid but it is not random given the fact that the windows are there to be opened and there is a small and ineffective sign which contemplates just that type of thing. Providers of trains need to guard against reasonably foreseeable risks. Someone putting their head out of a widow is reasonably foreseeable and their own risk assessment came to this view and also to the view that the warning was not fit for purpose and had to be replaced - which they failed to do. |
Good posts and very interesting perspective. | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 22:13 - Oct 16 with 3691 views | Swansea_Blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 20:24 - Oct 16 by Oxford_Blue | Disagree. The company itself considered that the warning signs were not sufficient and was supposed to have replaced them months before the accident but didn’t. The train sells alcohol on board, and the windows are easy to open. It is reasonably foreseeable that someone could open them and not see the sign. Also the trees hadn’t been maintained. I doubt what you say represents a complete defence for the company since they are in breach of their own risk assessments. Any damages would be reduced for contributory negligence - reflecting her own culpability as well. [Post edited 16 Oct 2019 20:36]
|
It’s “reasonably foreseeable” that you can get twonked over the head if you go round sticking it out of the windows of trains moving at 70mph+. By that logic we need signs above every car window too. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 22:23 - Oct 16 with 3672 views | jaykay |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 21:41 - Oct 16 by Oxford_Blue | What, so she deserved to die? |
whoosh | |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 09:06 - Oct 17 with 3500 views | Oxford_Blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 22:23 - Oct 16 by jaykay | whoosh |
Do explain the witty intelligent undercurrent then. I suspect there isn’t one | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 10:11 - Oct 17 with 3474 views | linhdi |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 16:56 - Oct 16 by BigManBlue | I mean, yeah, can't really argue otherwise, tragic as it still is... And I'd assume the windows had some sort of warning too, all the ones I've been on recently have. [Post edited 16 Oct 2019 16:56]
|
Every inter-city train between Ipswich and London has door windows that open. It is only dangerous if you're prepared to take a big risk. And the earnings are big enough and clear enough. There have been been calls to ban any train with this kind of door... Which would shut down every heritage railway... | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 10:32 - Oct 17 with 3449 views | BlueNomad |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 19:31 - Oct 16 by ZedRodgers | Pretty obvious to anyone that’s ever watched The Young Ones or knows what trains are. Sad though. |
Yeah but Vivian still made it to University Challenge | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:12 - Oct 17 with 3416 views | jjblue84 |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 17:02 - Oct 16 by BackToRussia | Yes it's stupid, but it's also incredibly easy to have a large and prominent sign to warn those not as smart as you or me. So why not, if it saves lives. |
Signs are not there to protect the public, but to protect companies against litigation! Surely everybody know that?? | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:13 - Oct 17 with 3415 views | Swansea_Blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:12 - Oct 17 by jjblue84 | Signs are not there to protect the public, but to protect companies against litigation! Surely everybody know that?? |
We're going to need another sign... | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:14 - Oct 17 with 3411 views | BackToRussia |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:12 - Oct 17 by jjblue84 | Signs are not there to protect the public, but to protect companies against litigation! Surely everybody know that?? |
They clearly do both. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:17 - Oct 17 with 3405 views | hampstead_blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:14 - Oct 17 by BackToRussia | They clearly do both. |
no amount of signage can halt stupidity.. | |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:18 - Oct 17 with 3402 views | jjblue84 |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:14 - Oct 17 by BackToRussia | They clearly do both. |
Really?? How do they ‘clearly’ protect the public, long ago grown weary of large numbers of pointless signs and bombarded with meaningless messages at stations?? | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:24 - Oct 17 with 3393 views | BackToRussia |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:18 - Oct 17 by jjblue84 | Really?? How do they ‘clearly’ protect the public, long ago grown weary of large numbers of pointless signs and bombarded with meaningless messages at stations?? |
That many people don't read the sign, because they already are aware that it's a dangerous thing to do, is irrelevant. How many people need to have read a sign that could potentially save their life for you to put it up? 100? 10? 1? The point is that you may as well, especially when people sticking their heads out of the trains and dying is actually relatively common. | |
| |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:34 - Oct 17 with 3376 views | jjblue84 |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:24 - Oct 17 by BackToRussia | That many people don't read the sign, because they already are aware that it's a dangerous thing to do, is irrelevant. How many people need to have read a sign that could potentially save their life for you to put it up? 100? 10? 1? The point is that you may as well, especially when people sticking their heads out of the trains and dying is actually relatively common. |
You shouldn’t say things then you can’t back up! They are worse than useless! | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:38 - Oct 17 with 3367 views | Sikamikanico | Tragic but its hard to be sympathetic. Common sense really seems to be absent nowadays | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:43 - Oct 17 with 3354 views | Oxford_Blue |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:38 - Oct 17 by Sikamikanico | Tragic but its hard to be sympathetic. Common sense really seems to be absent nowadays |
The difficulty is that the train company admitted the sign wasn’t good enough in its own risk assessment and yet didn’t replace it in the timeframe they said they would. Plus Railtrack appear to have been negligent in not dealing with the tree | | | |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 12:48 - Oct 17 with 3314 views | SouperJim |
They said the warning sign was too small.... on 11:12 - Oct 17 by jjblue84 | Signs are not there to protect the public, but to protect companies against litigation! Surely everybody know that?? |
Actually signs can make you more vulnerable to litigation, if not enough risk-reducing measures are in place. The presence of a sign proves they have identified a hazard and therefore need to have done enough to prevent an accident. Which in this case, they clearly didn't. | |
| |
| |