Very disturbing advert!

[s2_bo]

Has any one seen that horribly disturbing speeding advert on tv?
It features a Young girl lying dead and pail next to a tree with blood running down the side of her face.

It then says that she has a 80% chance of death. If you hit her at 40MPH.

The advert then starts plying backwards and hear bones snap back in to place... After she gets up of the ground she says that if she is hit at 30MPH she has a 80% chance of survival.

All together quite disturbing...

[S2 Ant]

yeh seen it.

[T2Andy]

very dramatic she wouldnt stand a chance if you were on overboost in 4th gear.

[stevieyid]

i have seen it. But to be honest i think the new is even more disturbing, the one where the kids are mucking about on camera then one walks across the road and is hit full on. Not a speeding advert but still very disturbing

[S2-racer]

best to stick to quiet, open country A roads me thinks........... no kids!!

but watch out for sheep, they do more damage

[Keeper of The Kitten]

Has any one seen that horribly disturbing speeding advert on tv?
It features a Young girl lying dead and pail next to a tree with blood running down the side of her face.

It then says that she has a 80% chance of death. If you hit her at 40MPH.

The advert then starts plying backwards and hear bones snap back in to place... After she gets up of the ground she says that if she is hit at 30MPH she has a 80% chance of survival.

All together quite disturbing...

When this message originally came to the screens, many months ago, the wording was encouraging a reduction to 20mph, when they say almost 100% survival rate is likely. This is not a new piece of film, but the message was revised to the 30mph now mentioned, presumably the 20mph was just too much for most people.

What they fail to tell you is that they mean 20mph impacts are very survivable, not that you need to drive at 20mph (or 30mph as it is now), clearly the only reason you would hit anyone at the full speed is if they ran out immediately ahead of you - otherwise you would jump on the brakes and do all possible to avoid an impact of any kind, and if the worst happened it would most likely be a lot less than a 20mph impact.

The message is, frankly, flawed - and uses the emotive aspect of a child that is apparently close to death.

Nobody these days seems interested in educating younger children of the dangers of roads, or educating parents that young children should be supervised near to roads up to a certain age - the onus has been placed squarely on the shoulders of the driver, as usual.

I am not advocating that we all drive irresponsibly in busy areas, that would be foolish to say the least, but it is about time that a bit of balance is applied to these sort of messages.

__MDC__

[merlin's S4]

best to stick to quiet, open country A roads me thinks........... no kids!!

but watch out for sheep, they do more damage

And Badgers!!! They're solid built little F***ers!

[DJones]

When this message originally came to the screens, many months ago, the wording was encouraging a reduction to 20mph, when they say almost 100% survival rate is likely. This is not a new piece of film, but the message was revised to the 30mph now mentioned, presumably the 20mph was just too much for most people.

What they fail to tell you is that they mean 20mph impacts are very survivable, not that you need to drive at 20mph (or 30mph as it is now), clearly the only reason you would hit anyone at the full speed is if they ran out immediately ahead of you - otherwise you would jump on the brakes and do all possible to avoid an impact of any kind, and if the worst happened it would most likely be a lot less than a 20mph impact.

The message is, frankly, flawed - and uses the emotive aspect of a child that is apparently close to death.

Nobody these days seems interested in educating younger children of the dangers of roads, or educating parents that young children should be supervised near to roads up to a certain age - the onus has been placed squarely on the shoulders of the driver, as usual.

I am not advocating that we all drive irresponsibly in busy areas, that would be foolish to say the least, but it is about time that a bit of balance is applied to these sort of messages.

__MDC__

Totally agree, i have the same problem with parents blaming me for their kids playing on my building sites, i fence them provide security guards, what do they do blame me.....

[willy]

very dramatic she wouldnt stand a chance if you were on overboost in 4th gear.

She would stand an even better chance if she wasn't playing on the road!!

[Chris5044]

exactly ... her fault to be in road in first place!! .... ok ... also its not good to speed in built up areas .... which is why i slow down ..... time and place for things really

[s2_bo]

When this message originally came to the screens, many months ago, the wording was encouraging a reduction to 20mph, when they say almost 100% survival rate is likely. This is not a new piece of film, but the message was revised to the 30mph now mentioned, presumably the 20mph was just too much for most people.

What they fail to tell you is that they mean 20mph impacts are very survivable, not that you need to drive at 20mph (or 30mph as it is now), clearly the only reason you would hit anyone at the full speed is if they ran out immediately ahead of you - otherwise you would jump on the brakes and do all possible to avoid an impact of any kind, and if the worst happened it would most likely be a lot less than a 20mph impact.

The message is, frankly, flawed - and uses the emotive aspect of a child that is apparently close to death.

Nobody these days seems interested in educating younger children of the dangers of roads, or educating parents that young children should be supervised near to roads up to a certain age - the onus has been placed squarely on the shoulders of the driver, as usual.

I am not advocating that we all drive irresponsibly in busy areas, that would be foolish to say the least, but it is about time that a bit of balance is applied to these sort of messages.

__MDC__

I completely agree with your view on this subject...

[AUDI9020V]

good ad but the limit should be down at 20 in built up areas,where kids might be,sometimes the roads and streets are the safest place of em.
they cant go it the parks as there might be pervs about,woods n stuff are the same at least if mum n dad can hear em they know there ok.

[s2driveruk]

and dont even get me started on the bike awareness ads.......as i pointed out to a biker who moaned it was my fault that he ripped my wing mirror off my old astra you show me the 3rd f**king lane on a dual carriageway and i'll accept responsibility

[AUDI9020V]

3 lanes on a dual carriageway????,if ya a biker there is 3.some and i mean SOME bikers are nuts n shoulnt be even on a push bike.

[s2driveruk]

yeah thats what i said.....show me the 3rd lane