escalade accident october 1st 2007

the driver of this escalade died also

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...y.html?ref=rss

Crash with school bus critically injures SUV driver
Last Updated: Monday, October 1, 2007 | 12:26 PM CT
CBC News
An accident on a Saskatchewan grid road involving a school bus full of
children and a sport utility vehicle sent a man to hospital in
critical condition Monday.

The collision happened around 8:40 a.m. on the Grandora grid road
about 25 kilometres southwest of Saskatoon, a spokesperson from MD
Ambulance said.

The bus was travelling south on the grid road when it was in the
collision with the Cadillac SUV, which was heading east on another
rural road.

There weren't any stop signs or yield signs at the corner, the RCMP
said.

The 45-year-old driver of the SUV wasn't wearing a seatbelt and was
taken to Royal University Hospital, RCMP said.

On board the bus were 22 children and a driver. They were assessed by
paramedics at the scene, and although none was considered seriously
injured, one had some cuts caused by broken glass and was taken to
hospital.

Relatives of the bus driver, a 60-year-old woman, took her to hospital
for a checkup.

The RCMP were still investigating. No charges have been laid.

> wrote in message
...
> the driver of this escalade died also
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...y.html?ref=rss
>
> There weren't any stop signs or yield signs at the corner, the RCMP
> said.
>
> The RCMP were still investigating. No charges have been laid.

If there weren't any stop or yield signs, and there wasn't any other means
(eg road markings) by which one stream of traffic knew it had to give way to
the other, it sounds as if the road designers should be the ones charged by
the police on the grounds that the junction was inherently dangerous.

"Mortimer" > wrote in
et:

> > wrote in message
> .
> ..
>> the driver of this escalade died also
>>
>> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...rash-injury.ht
>> ml?ref=rss
>>
>> There weren't any stop signs or yield signs at the corner, the RCMP
>> said.
>>
>> The RCMP were still investigating. No charges have been laid.
>
> If there weren't any stop or yield signs, and there wasn't any other
> means (eg road markings) by which one stream of traffic knew it had to
> give way to the other, it sounds as if the road designers should be
> the ones charged by the police on the grounds that the junction was
> inherently dangerous.
>
>
>


Don't know about Saskatchewan, but such intersections are common in rural
Manitoba. Each corner is instead marked by a green and white reflective
pole. I think it's expected that you will treat each intersection as a 4-
way stop, but traffic on those roads is so light (i.e.: nonexistent) that
you get complacent and just give a cursory glance before cruising through.

--
Tegger

"Tegger" > wrote in message
...
>> If there weren't any stop or yield signs, and there wasn't any other
>> means (eg road markings) by which one stream of traffic knew it had to
>> give way to the other, it sounds as if the road designers should be
>> the ones charged by the police on the grounds that the junction was
>> inherently dangerous.
>
> Don't know about Saskatchewan, but such intersections are common in rural
> Manitoba. Each corner is instead marked by a green and white reflective
> pole. I think it's expected that you will treat each intersection as a 4-
> way stop, but traffic on those roads is so light (i.e.: nonexistent) that
> you get complacent and just give a cursory glance before cruising through.

Ah, so there was at least a "sign" of sorts - I presume that the green and
white pole is described in the local highway code so that drivers know what
it signifies.

I suppose I'm a bit spoiled being from the UK where (almost) all junctions
have a well-defined major and minor road, with the minor road having Give
Way signs and/or dashed white lines across the road - apart from driveways
and farm tracks leading onto a road where it's obvious that the drive/track
gives way to the road. The only exception is a roundabout (rotary, traffic
circle) where the defined rule is that traffic joining the roundabout gives
way to traffic from the right which is already on the roundabout (in the US
and Canada, you'd give way to traffic from the left in this situation).

Interestingly, four-way-stop junctions haven't made it over the the UK: our
rules or precedence are based on *where* different streams or traffic are in
relation to each other, rather than the order in which they arrive at the
junction.

Tegger > wrote:
>"Mortimer" > wrote in
>>
>> If there weren't any stop or yield signs, and there wasn't any other
>> means (eg road markings) by which one stream of traffic knew it had to
>> give way to the other, it sounds as if the road designers should be
>> the ones charged by the police on the grounds that the junction was
>> inherently dangerous.
>
>Don't know about Saskatchewan, but such intersections are common in rural
>Manitoba. Each corner is instead marked by a green and white reflective
>pole. I think it's expected that you will treat each intersection as a 4-
>way stop, but traffic on those roads is so light (i.e.: nonexistent) that
>you get complacent and just give a cursory glance before cruising through.

They are very common in rural Virginia as well. Not marked with stop signs
when the terrain is very flat and you could easily see drivers coming in
the other direction. But people don't pay attention.

There's a road in Chesapeake that is marked 35 mph, with a very sharp
curve that has a ditch on the outside, and a sign marking the curve for
15 mph maximum. People get killed there all the time, usually driving
in excess of 60 mph around the 15 mph curve. What can I say? People don't
pay attention to the terrain and they don't read the signs, they're going to
get hurt. Doesn't anyone learn ANYTHING in driver's education class?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

This article got me thinking about the legal issues associated with
unmarked intersections. I saw a few interesting references:

http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Sep/1/130542.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...1977okcivapp54

The North Carolina statute seems clear enough:

.....
§ 20-155. Right-of-way.

(a) When two vehicles approach or enter an intersection from
different highways at approximately the same time, the driver of the
vehicle on the left shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the
right.

(b) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left within
an intersection or into an alley, private road, or driveway shall
yield the right-of-way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite
direction which is within the intersection or so close as to
constitute an immediate hazard.

(c) The driver of any vehicle upon a highway within a business
or residence district shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian
crossing such highway within any clearly marked crosswalk, or any
regular pedestrian crossing included in the prolongation of the
lateral boundary lines of the adjacent sidewalk at the end of a block,
except at intersections where the movement of traffic is being
regulated by traffic officers or traffic direction devices.

(d) The driver of any vehicle approaching but not having entered
a traffic circle shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle already
within such traffic circle. (1937, c. 407, s. 117; 1949, c. 1016, s.
2; 1955, c. 913, ss. 6, 7; 1967, c. 1053; 1973, c. 1330, s. 20.)

.....

"Mortimer" > wrote in
et:

> "Tegger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> If there weren't any stop or yield signs, and there wasn't any other
>>> means (eg road markings) by which one stream of traffic knew it had
>>> to give way to the other, it sounds as if the road designers should
>>> be the ones charged by the police on the grounds that the junction
>>> was inherently dangerous.
>>
>> Don't know about Saskatchewan, but such intersections are common in
>> rural Manitoba. Each corner is instead marked by a green and white
>> reflective pole. I think it's expected that you will treat each
>> intersection as a 4- way stop, but traffic on those roads is so light
>> (i.e.: nonexistent) that you get complacent and just give a cursory
>> glance before cruising through.
>
> Ah, so there was at least a "sign" of sorts - I presume that the green
> and white pole is described in the local highway code so that drivers
> know what it signifies.
>
> I suppose I'm a bit spoiled being from the UK where (almost) all
> junctions have a well-defined major and minor road, with the minor
> road having Give Way signs and/or dashed white lines across the road -



Rural Canada (and I mean REALLY rural...) has vast tracts of land with
almost no population at all. And I mean tracts of thousands (millions?) of
acres where you can drive for two hours at 60mph and encounter maybe one
farm pickup truck the entire time.
The roads are the same as when they were surveyed in the 19th century, laid
out in dead-straight 1x2 mile rectangles. There isn't really any major or
minor road in those cases. No lighting either, not even at intersections,
and railroad crossings are marked with a simple white "X" sign.

Good booze cruise territory. ;^)

Once you do hit a "major" road (e.g.: provincial highway) you usually have
stop signs for the minor road intersecting it.



> apart from driveways and farm tracks leading onto a road where it's
> obvious that the drive/track gives way to the road. The only exception
> is a roundabout (rotary, traffic circle) where the defined rule is
> that traffic joining the roundabout gives way to traffic from the
> right which is already on the roundabout (in the US and Canada, you'd
> give way to traffic from the left in this situation).
>
> Interestingly, four-way-stop junctions haven't made it over the the
> UK: our rules or precedence are based on *where* different streams or
> traffic are in relation to each other, rather than the order in which
> they arrive at the junction.
>


"Roundabouts" are extremely rare in Canada. I've seen a few in Calgary, in
the new "planned" towns they're erecting with haste over thousands of acres
at once. There are none in Ontario, to my knowledge.

--
Tegger

"Mortimer" > wrote in message
et...
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > the driver of this escalade died also
> >
> >
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...y.html?ref=rss
> >
> > There weren't any stop signs or yield signs at the corner, the RCMP
> > said.
> >
> > The RCMP were still investigating. No charges have been laid.
>
> If there weren't any stop or yield signs, and there wasn't any other means
> (eg road markings) by which one stream of traffic knew it had to give way
to
> the other, it sounds as if the road designers should be the ones charged
by
> the police on the grounds that the junction was inherently dangerous.
>
>

In Saskatchewan (and many other places, probably) if there are no signs, the
default is to yield to the vehicle approaching from the right.

According to the report:

"The bus was travelling south on the grid road when it was in the collision
with the Cadillac SUV, which was heading east on another rural road'

The SUV was approaching from the right, so barrring some unusual
circumstances, the bus driver is at fault.