A kid on the sidewalk could get hurt by a sliding vehicle

christineka · Feb 10, 2010

And so, it would be better to give that kid a ride home without a booster rather than let them walk home.

I checked the charts. They say that motor vehicle accidents are the number 1 cause of accidental death for children 5-14. Accidents on the sidewalk aren't even on the chart.

How do you retort to those people who retort that walking on the sidewalk isn't safe, life isn't safe, so on, and therefore we are all damned anyway because we can't live in a bubble? Or do you just decide it is a lost cause?

InternationalMama · Feb 10, 2010

Can you link to the chart you are looking at? It is my understanding that driving in a car is statistically safer than walking. The reason there are far fewer deaths is because children in the US make far fewer journeys and travel much shorter distances walking than driving in cars.

That doesn't mean it makes sense to avoid walking, which obviously has many benefits that driving doesn't have for the person's health, the environment etc. It also doesn't explain why a person would choose to ride without a booster if the child needed one. Are you referring to a particular situation or a hypothetical one? Why wouldn't the parent in question use a booster for the car trip? What kind of streets/neighborhoods would the child be walking on/in? Would they be alone or with an adult if they walked? Do you have any other details about the situation?

christineka · Feb 10, 2010

This is the argument for the proposed law change that would allow children over age 4 to ride in vehicles without a booster seat for short trips.

If it is snowing, freezing, or raining and the driver sees a kid they know walking home, they could give them a ride without having to have a spare $13.50 booster in their backseat. That is much better than if the mom slips on some snow and runs into the child who was forced to walk on the sidewalk. It has therefore been concluded by this particular person that it is more dangerous to walk than to ride without a booster. The rest of the argument I've heard before from similar people and dh among others.

I have only as yet found a chart in wikepedia which is for the top causes of accidental death for children 5-14 in the world. It shows motor vehicle accidents as number 1 and drowning as number 2.

InternationalMama · Feb 10, 2010

Well, I don't think you can reason with someone who wants to make a law change for all children based on this one unlikely/limited scenario.

Maybe you could argue that someone who wants to pick up a child walking down the sidewalk who has not planned the pick-up in advance (and thus known they would need a booster) is probably not a person that the child should be riding in the car with (a stranger or unauthorized aquaintence) and the child should be counseled never to get into such a person's car anyway?? You are definitely safer walking on the sidewalk than in the car of someone planning to do you harm.

tanyaandallie · Feb 10, 2010

Those are all just excuses. Statistics tell us that riding in the car is dangerous and accidents the number 1 killer of our kids. When folks start spouting off crap like that they are generally a lost cause.

I know so many people that would never dream of allowing their child to do certain things because they may get sick, may get kidnapped, etc but they will allow their child to ride un-boostered or unrestrained. It just does not make sense to me since the risk of those other things are low while the risk of an accident is very high.

Babywearing Meghan · Feb 10, 2010

right over my dead body is my kid riding home on an icey road with out a booster, I mean seriously? never.

4boysmom · Feb 10, 2010

If getting into an accident on an icy road at any given moment is 1 in xxxxxx (and therefore safe to transport a child w/o booster) the chances of a car hitting the exact spot a child is walking is expotentially less because not only do you have to crash but the pedestrian has to be at exactly the "right" place at the right time.

TechnoGranola · Feb 10, 2010

With regards to accidents on sidewalks, I believe that an accident with a vehicle and a pedestrian is considered an MVA. So a table like this would be more what you are looking for http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

And if I am interpreting it correctly (if I'm not someone please tell me) then nationally, in 2008, there were 19,200 drivers, 7397 passengers and 4378 pedestrians killed in 34,017 MVAs. In addition to the aforementioned deaths, there were also motorcyclists, pedal cyslists and other/unknown people killed.

InternationalMama · Feb 10, 2010

If it's true that walking is more dangerous than riding in a car even without a booster then I would say that this argument is similar to people who say we shouldn't require car seats on planes because flying is safer than driving.

I do know personally pedestrians who have been killed or seriously injured by cars. I don't think it is that uncommon in places where people walk a lot. I still don't think it makes the law makes sense, but I see the argument.

A kid on the sidewalk could get hurt by a sliding vehicle

christineka

New member

InternationalMama

New member

christineka

New member

InternationalMama

New member

tanyaandallie

Senior Community Member

Babywearing Meghan

New member

4boysmom

New member

TechnoGranola

Forum Ambassador

InternationalMama

New member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics