More 4B bashing...

Yes I think that sort of reporting is irresponsible as it should have read "Mother accidentally hits her child with her vehicle"

The fact that it was a 4WD or Ford Territory is irrelevant. Safe driving rules apply no matter the vehicle. Having said that extra care must be taken when reversing large vehicles.

Reversing cameras are a luxury but don't replace "Duty of Care".

yep. more chance in a Dunnydore wagon to do that same tragic thing. In fact they have worse rear view than a Playota Landsnoozer.

I just went out and asked our daughter(aged 4) to stand by the boot of my Madza 121 bubble, and she is exactly the height of the boot, and from the inside I can't see her at all!! Glad I did that, I've always been careful, but more so in our Prado, good reminder to be careful in any car!!

sandy

I have the Cruiser locked in a security cage so it doesn't back itself over the kids when I'm not looking. It's worked so far :-)

Cheers
John
Hermannsburg

MrBitchi, i can see where you're coming from calling this 4B bashing but i don't think it is. All this article does is state facts. Should they have withheld what car it was? It doesn't say 4wds are dangerous or anything along those lines. If someone is hit by a truck they say "hit by truck", they don't say "hit by vehicle".

A lot of journalism is sensationalised rubbish where they try to make boring news look interesting, or make stories out of nothing. But this article merely states facts.

Barnesy

Noticed on commercial TV, not that I watch commercial TV much that the term SVU is being used buy some advertisers and also All wheel drive. Is this done to appease or confuse Mr Scooby Doo (if that is the name of that bloke over east who tries to condem 4WDs)

Boy, four, hit by family four-wheel-drive

I would consider that headline 4B bashing. The AWD Ford Territory is not a true four-wheel drive, and the majority are only 2WD, but it’s not so much the technical argument – it is the way the headline comes across. Like all news articles it has to look sensational. These days any 4B accident is makes the news. If it had have been Steve's Mazda 121, the article probably would not have gone to print.

Written to News.com
----------------------------------

Site Link

Referring to the above press release.

I wish to bring it to your attention that it is seldom the vehicle that is at fault (unless due to some mechanical failure), it is usually the driver or pedestrian at fault. You wonder why there is so much road rage when you insist on "marginalising" one section of the driving community (in particular "4WD's" meaning anything from a Rav4 to a Patrol). This sort of press can't help. The bulk of "true" 4WDers ("Patrol" end of the scale) are far more "in tune" with their vehicles than most car drivers are with theirs.

May I suggest that in future, unless the type of vehicle has actually played a significant part in the accident that they be referred to as "a car" or "a vehcle" or "a truck" or some other generic term (avoids any DISCRIMINATION). In particular, you would actually have to get under a Ford Territory to ascertain whether it was a AWD or 2WD variant of the vehicle, and apart from the extra weight, there is no difference in ride height, etc and there would have been NO DIFFERENCE in the outcome, if it was a 2WD or AWD. The bulk of Territory's on the road are of the 2WD variant anyway (= Ford Falcon Wagon). Unfortunately most of the hype is about the AWD version.

Regards,

Gary Campbell