Started By
Message

Mom wants a "Blind Child at Play" sign posted near her home

Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:39 pm
Posted by AnonymousTiger
Franklin, TN
Member since Jan 2012
4863 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:39 pm
LINK

What do you say OT? Good proactive parent who is looking out for their child in any way possible, or too much?

quote:

A [Tennessee] mom wants a "Blind Child at Play" sign posted near her home, warning drivers to watch out for her child, who is visually impaired.

But, despite her request, she says city leaders refuse to put up a sign on Montgomery Way where the family lives.

quote:

Carla Curley's four-year-old daughter, Jocelyn, is blind in her left eye and has poor peripheral vision in her right eye, making it difficult to see cars when she is playing outside.

While her parents don't leave her outside unattended, her mom says they would like the sign posted as an extra precaution to let others know to go slow and watch out for their daughter.

quote:

Curley first contacted officials about the sign on Tuesday when an employee told her the city wouldn't put one up because it is "too much of a liability," according to Curley.

The mother then spoke to the city attorney who she says told her the sign would be "a distraction to drivers."



Cute kid. What would you do?
Posted by rondo
Worst. Poster. Evar.
Member since Jan 2004
77416 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:40 pm to
They have similar signs for deaf kids


I dont see how this isnt doable.
Posted by constant cough
Lafayette
Member since Jun 2007
44788 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:41 pm to
Kids shouldn't playing in the road anyway even if they can see. That's what backyards are for.
Posted by BRgetthenet
Member since Oct 2011
117760 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:41 pm to
I always saw a deaf child at play sign growing up around Harrison Avenue.

I used to wonder how his mom called him in for dinner.
Posted by IMJ127
Death Valley
Member since Jul 2011
3345 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:41 pm to
Very cute.

Put the damn sign up!
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
69288 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:42 pm to
not too far for me there is a sign for a hearing impaired child. I am sure there are blind signs already.

Posted by arseinclarse
Algiers Purnt
Member since Apr 2007
34502 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:42 pm to
quote:

because it is "too much of a liability,"


Huh?
Posted by upgrayedd
Lifting at Tobin's house
Member since Mar 2013
135141 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:43 pm to
I can see how the city is wary of the liability in this day and age. Why doesn't she talk to her neighbors and ask if she can put signs in one of their yards to warn people in the neighborhood?
Posted by boom roasted
Member since Sep 2010
28039 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:43 pm to
I fail to see the harm.
Posted by wheelr
Member since Jul 2012
5149 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:43 pm to
quote:

Curley first contacted officials about the sign on Tuesday when an employee told her the city wouldn't put one up because it is "too much of a liability," according to Curley.

The mother then spoke to the city attorney who she says told her the sign would be "a distraction to drivers."


Sounds like bullshite. All of the other signage isn't?

Posted by MrTwoBits
Member since Oct 2013
657 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:45 pm to
Why does it have to specify "blind child" at play? Like drivers are going to be heading around the bend doing 80 in search of small children to plow over, but WAIT, this one is blind. Ok well NOW I'll be careful.

Why not just "child at play" or SLOW or something.
Posted by MRTigerFan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
4312 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:46 pm to
I just don't see it. What's the problem?
Posted by Pettifogger
Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
Member since Feb 2012
79416 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:49 pm to
We waste money on all kinds of shite, I don't know why we couldn't come up with the resources to get this done.
Posted by junkfunky
Member since Jan 2011
33997 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:51 pm to
quote:

told her the sign would be "a distraction to drivers."
Posted by Camp Randall
The Shadow of the Valley of Death
Member since Nov 2005
15610 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 3:53 pm to
I've seen similar signs over the years. I don't understand how it's a liability.
Posted by dewster
Chicago
Member since Aug 2006
25426 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 4:00 pm to
Don't see a problem. There's a sign for a deaf child near my house.
Posted by RBWilliams8
Member since Oct 2009
53419 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 4:05 pm to
Should be an issue to put up in case she were to wander.

Sure she shouldn't be left unattended but she it would be very easy for her to get out and walk into the street.
Posted by Tigah in the ATL
Atlanta
Member since Feb 2005
27539 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 4:06 pm to
These signs have been shown to be ineffective.

More signs = more apathy about them
Posted by saltybulldog
MS Gulf Coast
Member since Aug 2007
1144 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 4:07 pm to
They should put up the sign.

City's are generally have limited liability anyway, so I dont see how they are being exposed to added risk with the sign.

Those saying kids shouldnt play in the street must not live in an urban/suburban neighborhood. Hell, we played all kinds of games in the streets when I was a kid. Also, kids have just as much right to be in the public right-of-way as a driver.

Too many of our cities have screwed up streets that mix residential areas with high speed streets.

Oh, and the cost of the sign would be under $200.
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124752 posts
Posted on 2/19/14 at 4:13 pm to
I've got a soft spot for the blindies, but this seems a little...well, how is the kid gonna see the sign anyway?

Roads are not anywhere blind kids should be around.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram