-
• #177
I guess lorries can't read signs, thats why it got angry and hit the bridge?
-
• #178
I think a bridge is a structure. Wikipedia says:
A building or (Edifice), is a man-made structure with a roof and walls standing more or less permanently in one place, such as a house or factory.
Dictionary definitions variously define a building as something for human habitation or use, or a structure with a roof and walls.
To me a building should have a roof and walls, at least of sorts. I concede your point on the shopfront though.
-
• #179
Headline good, first paragraph needs work:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-34044588 -
• #181
Two of the passengers dead.
“The driver got out of the car and was on fire – he was bleeding on his back and came shouting that he was going to get scars."
I hate scars.
-
• #182
That is horrible. I think we've had this before, that there's a real risk of serious injury or death only if the car catches fire.
-
• #183
I think a bridge is a structure. Wikipedia says:
A building or (Edifice), is a man-made structure with a roof and walls standing more or less permanently in one place, such as a house or factory.
Dictionary definitions variously define a building as something for human habitation or use, or a structure with a roof and walls.
To me a building should have a roof and walls, at least of sorts. I concede your point on the shopfront though.
Oops, missed this--I don't think the distinction is that clear-cut. Lots of bridges have rooms in them, even if it's only a control room for electrics etc., or consider a bridge like Tower Bridge, which is clearly a building (with structural elements :) ).
In the case of London bridges, we're talking mostly about bridges which are part of viaducts that at some point or other have had their arches converted into industrial/retail units and are very much buildings, even if the span of the bridge over a road may itself be roomless. But I think I changed my mind about including bridges mainly because it seemed silly to have a separate thread for these events, which I find interesting, too. Happy to change the thread title to '... buildings and structures'. :)
-
• #184
I'm sure this thread should also include non-man made fixed objects such as trees and rivers. Please ensure any edits to the thread title does not cause these interesting phenomenon to feel excluded.
I'm assuming that since we are accepting the sentient nature of cars within this thread then we are also accepting that trees and rocks have feelings.
-
• #185
Seems the Doncaster lot didn't actually crash into a building, thanks to the heroic actions of a rockery.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/26/doncaster-car-crash-house-police-hunt-two-men
-
• #186
“We saw there were two cars, possibly three cars, racing side-by-side and ... they were hitting one another. The wing mirrors and so-forth were flying off and dust from the edge of the road. After that they sped past and there was an almighty crash and that was out of sight.”
5 people suffer horrible injuries or die because... oh they were a pack of cunts that got what they deserved and were lucky not to kill someone innocent.
-
• #188
Not a building but people and eventually a tree:
-
• #189
Trees don't count for the purposes of this thread. York Way is a crap road, though, and it's obviously a terrible collision regardless.
Here's a bit of a crash types omnibus (not the road-going type), eventually involving a building:
What are the odds?
-
• #190
Trees don't count for the purposes of this thread
What about treehouses? If you're allowed bridges with rooms in I'm claiming trees are buildings.
I'm not sure about how this thread is going though, I preferred it when it was buildings getting hurt not people.
-
• #191
Surely the police officer collided with the vehicle? I thought that was how it worked, for "fairness"?
-
• #192
What about treehouses? If you're allowed bridges with rooms in I'm claiming trees are buildings.
Treehouses are definitely buildings.
I'm not sure about how this thread is going though, I preferred it when it was buildings getting hurt not people.
Agreed, that was part of the point, and it's been lost a bit. There are quite a few crashes like the one above which are just chaotic and involve innocent bystanders but in which the crash into the building is a bit of an irrelevance. The worst crash of this kind was obviously the one in Scotland where six people were killed. I think I said at the time that this wasn't primarily a crash into a building.
-
• #194
Charged under some terrorist laws or is messing with trains ok if you use a car?
-
• #195
Seemed to have totalled some bits of wall, glad no houses on the corner.
-
• #197
There's a video of immediately after doing the fb rounds quite quickly, Abul Hossain if you want to watch. Quite graphic in that it shows the passengers facial injuries, avoid if squeamish etc.
-
• #199
I'll probably avoid then.
-
• #200
The driver was in shock I think, she's scrabbling on the floor for her spilt change as bleeding passengers wait to get off the bus.
Yes, bridges are buildings. Why shouldn't they be? (Admittedly, when I started the thread I initially meant to exclude bridges, but I later decided that they should be included and edited the OP.)
The article says that the driver reversed into the shopfront:
As there doesn't seem to have been much damage to the building, naturally this didn't get as much attention in the article as the lifting.