nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Truck drivers weekend ruined

riemann

Truck drivers weekend ruined, all because some irresponsible parents let their children roam free in the streets at 9. 30am.

Why weren't they in school? Parents too busy working to keep an eye on their offspring?

Passenger on a tricycle, with stabilisers?

Link

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Roger Hassenforder

"They were riding a small orange bike with stabilisers when they came in contact with the lorry."

The monster..They could have killed somone..

FFS ya *****?. George Hook wouldnt steep that low. Not a whit of a care expressed for the poor kid.

CPTM

I've seen a lot of cyclists on the roads at that time of day who cycle with less intelligence than a toddler. Could have been any of them.

retro:electro

Edgy

Alrigghtythen

It's time for seperate cycle lanes, proper ones

riemann

retro:electro wrote: »

Edgy

Lord Edge, if you will.

prinzeugen

Its highly likely the kid hit the truck. You see it around my area daily.

Kid charging down the road on a wee bike and when they get to a bend or obstacle, they either try to stop using their feet or hit the obstacle because the haven't worked out how to turn the handlebars yet.

Same with those bloody scooters.

Pherekydes

Am I a swine for being more concerned about the absence of the apostrophe in the title?

Like, how many truck drivers?

Mrs OBumble

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

It's time for seperate cycle lanes, proper ones

I totally agree.

Even then, people who need to use bicycles that small should be playing with them in the park, not on any vehicle lanes.

LessOutragePlz

Parents are 100% to blame for this

Seth Brundle

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Parents are 100% to blame for this

Truck driver was obviously turning onto a street so may not have had right of way but still took it. We don't know.

Seth Brundle

riemann wrote: »

Truck drivers weekend ruined, all because some irresponsible parents let their children roam free in the streets at 9. 30am.

Why weren't they in school? Parents too busy working to keep an eye on their offspring?

How do you know the parents weren't there?
How do you know the children were of school going age?

Kevin Finnerty

Hope the poor kid's ok. :-(

Hammer89

Kevin Finnerty wrote: »

Hope the poor kid's ok. :-(

F*ck him what about the truck driver? His entire weekend is ruined.

TheValeyard

Pherekydes wrote: »

Am I a swine for being more concerned about the absence of the apostrophe in the title?

Like, how many truck drivers?

All of them. Everywhere.

Hurrache

Op, you're an asshole with that post.

andekwarhola

What a cesspit this forum is becoming

ted1

Hammer89 wrote: »

F*ck him what about the truck driver? His entire weekend is ruined.

You absolutely horrible person

Roger Hassenforder

ted1 wrote: »

You absolutely horrible person

I think he was being sarcastic

ZX7R

Reading the article, something doesn't make sense,how could the child have been a passenger on the bicycle unless there were two kids on the bike,yet it states they were cycling it.

[Deleted User]

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

It's time for seperate cycle lanes, proper ones

We already have them. They're called footpaths.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

We already have them. They're called footpaths.

Bollocks. Footpaths are for pedestrians.

alchemist33

ZX7R wrote: »

Reading the article, something doesn't make sense,how could the child have been a passenger on the bicycle unless there were two kids on the bike,yet it states they were cycling it.

I suspect describing the kid on the bike as a passenger is that odd dialect known as "Gardaspeak"

ZX7R

alchemist33 wrote: »

I suspect describing the kid on the bike as a passenger is that odd dialect known as "Gardaspeak"

It's that type of gardaspeak ,that help people get away with criminal acts on technicalities.

riemann

Kevin Finnerty wrote: »

Hope the poor kid's ok. :-(

Why does no-one seem to care that a working man or woman, going about their daily business now has their means of income off the road for an unknown period of time. Presumably had to spend the day talking to the gardai, their insurance company or worse still their employer. Will have almost running over two kids weighing on their conscience for the foreseeable future.

Why? All because some parents don't want to parent and their poor life choices result in a toddler, on a tricycle, with a passenger, in the middle of the road, in the city centre, at 9.30am under a bloody truck?

It's almost as if they churn out kids for a different purpose and leave society to clean up the damage.

For the record I don't wish any ill will on the kid, apparently they're doing fine so fair play to all the do gooders on here for their thoughts and prayers. I wouldn't worry, presumably they'll have a little cash windfall on their 18th birthday.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Swing and a miss, OP.

bigar

Deleted User wrote: »

Bollocks. Footpaths are for pedestrians.

Really, when did this happen? In my street they are used for parking cars on.

Seth Brundle

riemann wrote: »

Why does no-one seem to care that a working man or woman, going about their daily business now has their means of income off the road for an unknown period of time. Presumably had to spend the day talking to the gardai, their insurance company or worse still their employer. Will have almost running over two kids weighing on their conscience for the foreseeable future.

Why? All because some parents don't want to parent and their poor life choices result in a toddler, on a tricycle, with a passenger, in the middle of the road, in the city centre, at 9.30am under a bloody truck?

It's almost as if they churn out kids for a different purpose and leave society to clean up the damage.

For the record I don't wish any ill will on the kid, apparently they're doing fine so fair play to all the do gooders on here for their thoughts and prayers. I wouldn't worry, presumably they'll have a little cash windfall on their 18th birthday.

The most obvious scenario is that the kid was crossing the road and the driver failed to see them. That paints a very different picture to what you're posting!

antodeco

Scramblers are used in parks, trikes are used on roads.

Happy opposite world!

[Deleted User]

andekwarhola wrote: »

What a cesspit this forum is becoming

Becoming? Some ones a newb!

erica74

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How do you know the parents weren't there?
How do you know the children were of school going age?

I'd hope if the parents were actually there they would have told the child to get out of the middle of the road. If the parents weren't there, why was the child outside unsupervised playing on the road.

Something similar happened in Waterford a few years ago, a woman was crossing the road with her children (if I remember correctly, she had 2 children with her), one in a pram and the other one was walking beside her. She has the pram sticking out onto the road a bit (notably not crossing at the pedestrian crossing further up the road), the child in the pram wasn't strapped in and fell out of the pram, in under a lorry and was obviously killed. That lorry driver's life was unimaginably affected by that accident, all because that woman wasn't crossing at a pedestrian crossing and didn't have her child strapped in the pram. And I'm not for one second saying that woman wasn't affected in a horrific way herself but that child dying could have been easily avoided.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The most obvious scenario is that the kid was crossing the road and the driver failed to see them.

Because every vehicle has blind spots, worse in large vehicles like the one this man was driving.

Teach your children road safety, teach them about blind spots and not to play in the middle of the road (common sense), teach yourselves that, even if the driver is at fault (which may well be the case here), the child is still going to be the one to come off worst. Is being right more important than being safe??