should trains have seat belts.

No. I think they researched this already. It makes rescue more difficult (if that's what you're getting at)

Thats really strange cos I was thinking the same thing last night.

Would they make any difference in an 100mph crash or maybe cause more injuries?

Mat:(

Funny how these incidents always have us focused on the train. Why is nobody questioning what we can do about the ****wits with driving licences? (Sorry, but this is a subject too close to home for me.)

On the same day of the Hatfield crash, twice as many people died in a RTA involving a minibus. Where were the cameras and 24 hour coverage for that 'disaster'? Did those lives not count?

edit: If we want to be reactionary, perhaps every road in the country that crosses the tracks via a level crossing should be closed until an investigation has been carried out?

wot do you mean ?there is only 1 way to rescue if alive help them if dead say no more'''''' if i was in anything that was doing 125mph i want to be fastened in?????

Funny how these incidents always have us focused on the train. Why is nobody questioning what we can do about the f***wits with driving licences? (Sorry, but this is a subject too close to home for me.)

On the same day of the Hatfield crash, twice as many people died in a RTA involving a minibus. Where were the cameras and 24 hour coverage for that 'disaster'? Did those lives not count?

Its a very interesting point........ perhaps the media cant 'blame' the government, privatisation, etc etc etc in an RTA??

Originally posted by mat1978
Its a very interesting point........ perhaps the media cant 'blame' the government, privatisation, etc etc etc in an RTA??
We all want to hang, draw and quarter an individual within a company if we think it's feasible, but an individual in a car is fireproof.

What's the difference between 'manslaughter' and 'death by dangerous driving'? Answer: a car. And we're all so aware of how dangerous cars are. 'Drop' a kitchen knife through somebody and we'll virtually burn you at the stake, but oblitterate a child by charging through a residential area with a ton of metal and it's an 'accident'.

Rant over :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Strix
We all want to hang, draw and quarter an individual within a company if we think it's feasible, but an individual in a car is fireproof.

What's the difference between 'manslaughter' and 'death by dangerous driving'? Answer: a car. And we're all so aware of how dangerous cars are. 'Drop' a kitchen knife through somebody and we'll virtually burn you at the stake, but oblitterate a child by charging through a residential area with a ton of metal and it's an 'accident'.

Rant over :rolleyes: 125 mph get seat belts ive seen end results

Originally posted by ianl
125 mph get seat belts ive seen end results You don't travel by train, do you? No trips to the buffet car? or the toilet? and you'll stay in your seat 'til the train grinds to a halt at the platform?

It's still statistically the safest form of travel. And I still maintain that the most effective 'safety device' on a car would be a six inch spike in the middle of the steering wheel.

And tread carefully when you answer. I had a friend on the train at Great Heck. And both my sister and Mr Strix were involved in the clear up.

Originally posted by ianl
125 mph get seat belts ive seen end results I hope you're not suggesting you've driven througha residential area at 125mph? :huh: No, don't answer that. I know, I know.

what do you call the clean up?>?

I said clear up. I hope you're not insinuating? It looked a bit untidy with two trains scattered about the place, and it took quite a few people and a bit of lifting equipment to rectify . Are you really trying to be funny? And before you start - it had already been handed over as an engineering site, the passengers already having vacated the site, so my terminology is not inappropriate.

my terminolgy is see it ,to believe it

You're odd. Why would you want to see a train crash?
Do you wear a seatbelt for the whole of a plane flight, by the way? You're only required to wear the seatbelt for landing and turbulence.
What would the train conductor announce if you needed to apply your seatbelt on a train?
Oh forget it. You've no idea, and as you're not a passenger your opinion is irrelevant.

Say what you like now. I'm done with this thread.

I would like to see seatbelts on trains. I know you have trips to the buffet cart and the toilet, but I think there should be an option there for those that want to use them.

If a train I was travelling on hit something (say a cow) and derailed, I would like to be held in by something rather than be tossed around the carriage like a tic tac in its box.

Cars, coaches and planes have them, so why not trains too. Not for compulsory use, but optional.

but oblitterate a child by charging through a residential area with a ton of metal and it's an 'accident'

Its difficult this, as too often, the child is at fault for not looking where they are going and the driver doesn't have to be speeding to 'obliterate' the kid. Why must the driver be at fault?

Originally posted by dinp
Its difficult this, as too often, the child is at fault for not looking where they are going and the driver doesn't have to be speeding to 'obliterate' the kid. Why must the driver be at fault?
You've never stood by a relative's graveside and asked 'why?', have you? I hope you never have to.

I don't think seat belts are necesary on trains. Rail still seems to be by far the safest way to travel.

I believe the only reason every train crash gets mentioned on the news is because crashes are still comparatively rare. There are many more people killed in car crashes, but these rarely get reported on the national news because they are so frequent.

Originally posted by dinp
Its difficult this, as too often, the child is at fault for not looking where they are going and the driver doesn't have to be speeding to 'obliterate' the kid. Why must the driver be at fault?

However, when the child/person is on the pavements, waiting at a bus stop for example, I don't think they can be to blame, though the driver will still only get a 6 month ban and a telling-off.

I have often thought that if I wanted to murder someone and get away with it,a car is the perfect way to do it.

the goverment has just said. seat belts should be avail able 4 those that want them.

That's okay if they're paying for them.

Hey, don't shout at me!

If the train companies pay it will be reflected in ticket prices. This will reduce passenger numbers, who will take the more dangerous 'road' option. Self defeating really?

cool but i would still like option to

Originally posted by Strix
but oblitterate a child by charging through a residential area with a ton of metal and it's an 'accident'.

Just for info, the police have stopped calling them accidents now. Road Traffic Accidents (RTA'S) have now become Road Traffic Collisions (RTC'S), I think for the reason that you've pointed out. Because they aren't always accidents.

Originally posted by BoroughGal
Just for info, the police have stopped calling them accidents now. Road Traffic Accidents (RTA'S) have now become Road Traffic Collisions (RTC'S), I think for the reason that you've pointed out. Because they aren't always accidents. Oh good. :thumbsup:

Would the cost of the seat belts be worth it?

The questions I would ask:
Would anyone actually use them?
What if the train crashes when people are on the toilet or at the bar?
Would we make reservations compulsory to make sure everyone had a seat - so no turn up and go service or standing room anymore?
What about those disabled people travelling in their wheelchair?
Would it actually save any more lives?