←back to thread

Helsinki records zero traffic deaths for full year

(www.helsinkitimes.fi)
1163 points DaveZale | 7 comments | 30 Jul 25 16:08 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
PaulRobinson ◴[02 Aug 25 20:49 UTC] No.44771331[source]▶
I was in Helsinki for work a couple of years ago, walking back to my hotel with some colleagues after a few hours drinking (incredibly expensive, but quite nice), beer.

It was around midnight and we happened to come across a very large mobile crane on the pavement blocking our way. As we stepped out (carefully), into the road to go around it, one of my Finnish colleagues started bemoaning that no cones or barriers had been put out to safely shepherd pedestrians around it. I was very much "yeah, they're probably only here for a quick job, probably didn't have time for that", because I'm a Londoner and, well, that's what we do in London.

My colleague is like "No, that's not acceptable", and he literally pulls out his phone and calls the police. As we carry on on our way, a police car comes up the road and pulls over to have a word with the contractors.

They take the basics safely over there in a way I've not seen anywhere else. When you do that, you get the benefits.

replies(17): >>44771465 #>>44771583 #>>44772900 #>>44774007 #>>44774211 #>>44774583 #>>44774760 #>>44774868 #>>44774957 #>>44776742 #>>44777216 #>>44777444 #>>44777641 #>>44777855 #>>44777898 #>>44778836 #>>44798382 #
1. repeekad ◴[03 Aug 25 16:53 UTC] No.44777898[source]▶
That’s not basic safety, if you walk into a crane not in use that’s on you not the contractors. It’s paternalism, not safety, and the American in me groans at the idea of at midnight the cops showing up and causing a ruckus over that. A big hole you might fall into, yeah you need some cones
replies(3): >>44777936 #>>44778042 #>>44778057 #
2. tsimionescu ◴[03 Aug 25 16:57 UTC] No.44777936[source]▶
This is not about walking into the crane, it's about cones on the road to ensure that pedestrians can safely walk around the crane onto the road without walking into traffic. Basically, the crane operators, if they're going to take up the whole sidewalk, have to ensure that pedestrians have a safe way to pass around them, and that means they have to work to close a part of the road and mark that.
replies(1): >>44778687 #
3. mazugrin2 ◴[03 Aug 25 17:10 UTC] No.44778042[source]▶
The cones aren't to alert the pedestrians the the crane. The cones are to mark out a path in the road for pedestrians and to alert auto drivers to that path. As an American I get that you don't typically walk anywhere but I can't believe you've never ever encountered a set of high visibility cones marking out a temporary path around construction equipment on a roadway.
replies(1): >>44778461 #
4. firstofmany ◴[03 Aug 25 17:12 UTC] No.44778057[source]▶
The problem wasn't some drunk idiot walking into a crane at night, it was that the contractors had blocked the footpath, forcing pedestrians - including the disabled, small children and people with babies in strollers - to walk into the road unprotected. I mean, would you think it was over-reavhing paternalism if the police intervened because some contractors set up a crane in a lane of the freeway without setting up cones, etc.? It's the same basic issue.
5. bobthepanda ◴[03 Aug 25 18:13 UTC] No.44778461[source]▶
In much of the US the default is to close the sidewalk if it exists and require pedestrians to use the other side of the road.
replies(1): >>44779064 #
6. ◴[03 Aug 25 18:42 UTC] No.44778687[source]▶
7. Symbiote ◴[03 Aug 25 19:34 UTC] No.44779064{3}[source]▶
I've found this very annoying on a recent trip to the USA.

There's 3+ lanes of road. Close one of these lanes to cars and let the pedestrians use it!