Road side memorials for accident victims

[va32h]

For those of you that do not agree with marking a site with some sort of plaque, or flowers, or whatever may be there, is it acceptable then to mark places that battles took place, or perhaps catastrophes? Why is it acceptable to mark a battle ground, or more specifically someplace like Pearl Harbor, or even more recently, the twin towers site in NY, but not to mark a car crash site. Just because a large number of people died with these other examples, why are they remembered at those sites but someone in a car accident is not? If the site is not on private property, why do others that see it care? Yes, some can be distracting, but most are done tastefully. And again, as stated many times before, if you don't like the sight of them, then don't look!

For those of you who do agree with marking every spot where somebody ever died, why is this limited to outdoor locations? Everybody has to die somewhere, if this philosophy were to be extended, we wouldn't be able to take two steps without tripping over an impromptu memorial. And hospitals would be impossible to navigate.

Is this type of demonstration of grief only for accidental, outdoor, deaths? If so, aren't these people being insensitive to those whose loved ones died expectedly, from old age or illness, and indoors to boot? After all, my grief for my grandfather, who died at home from an illness, is no less valid than the grief of someone whose grandfather died in a car accident on the side of the road.

 

[Rollercoaster13]

There is no comparison between a place like Pearl Harbor and a highway. Highways are designed in specific ways and do not allow for people to make their own additions. These memorials only increase the chance that there will be another accident there in the future.

Some plcaes allow for official memorials (official signs and the like). I have no problem with those. They were put there with the design of the hgihway in mind.

You are obviously mistaken by what I was saying. No where did I say a place like Pearl Harbor and a highway should be compared. I stated that why do the memories of people lost there mean more than someone lost in a car accident.

 

[DawnCt1]

You are obviously mistaken by what I was saying. No where did I say a place like Pearl Harbor and a highway should be compared. I stated that why do the memories of people lost there mean more than someone lost in a car accident.

Because those types of tragedies are attacks on a nation. While highway deaths are indeed tragic, they are seen as accidents, not deliberate acts of war that often change the course of a nation.

 

[mickeyfan2]

For those of you who do agree with marking every spot where somebody ever died, why is this limited to outdoor locations? Everybody has to die somewhere, if this philosophy were to be extended, we wouldn't be able to take two steps without tripping over an impromptu memorial. And hospitals would be impossible to navigate.

Is this type of demonstration of grief only for accidental, outdoor, deaths? If so, aren't these people being insensitive to those whose loved ones died expectedly, from old age or illness, and indoors to boot? After all, my grief for my grandfather, who died at home from an illness, is no less valid than the grief of someone whose grandfather died in a car accident on the side of the road.

I agree with you 100%. We invented cemetaries for this purpose. Please us them.

 

[puffkin]

I am bowing out of this thread now as it is extremely hurtful to those who have lost a close family member in a car accident......

I just hope many of you never find yourself in the position of needing a roadside memorial. A life is a life no matter what the cirumstances were surrounding their death and people should be free to memorialize them in any way they see fit (obviously within the law). You may not like the memorials, you may not see the need, but please don't begrudge those that do. If it isn't on your property, if it doesn't cause you harm, just look the other way or ignore it.

Ok, bowing out now........

 

[skiwee1]

I am bowing out of this thread now as it is extremely hurtful to those who have lost a close family member in a car accident......

I just hope many of you never find yourself in the position of needing a roadside memorial. A life is a life no matter what the cirumstances were surrounding their death and people should be free to memorialize them in any way they see fit (obviously within the law). You may not like the memorials, you may not see the need, but please don't begrudge those that do. If it isn't on your property, if it doesn't cause you harm, just look the other way or ignore it.

Ok, bowing out now........

I've lost a close family member in an accident and I don't find this thread hurtful. I agree with everyone who thinks it's ridiculous to have a road side memorial.

 

[Marseeya]

And again, as stated many times before, if you don't like the sight of them, then don't look!

Are you serious???

A roadside memorial isn't a television channel you can change at will, or a radio station you can switch off. Any decent driver will scan the sides of the roads for something that could dart out in front of them, and that little flash of color can be a big distraction. I'm sorry, but when I'm driving, I don't need to be distracted by anything other than what is absolutely necessary to post a message, such as speed limit signs, construction signs, etc.

 

[Rollercoaster13]

Are you serious???

A roadside memorial isn't a television channel you can change at will, or a radio station you can switch off. Any decent driver will scan the sides of the roads for something that could dart out in front of them, and that little flash of color can be a big distraction. I'm sorry, but when I'm driving, I don't need to be distracted by anything other than what is absolutely necessary to post a message, such as speed limit signs, construction signs, etc.

Give me a break, a little flash of color can be a big distraction? Last time I checked, we live in a world of color, so anything can be a distraction. Street signs are in color, are they a distraction to you to?

 

[Marseeya]

Give me a break, a little flash of color can be a big distraction? Last time I checked, we live in a world of color, so anything can be a distraction. Street signs are in color, are they a distraction to you to?

Street signs are expected and necessary. They are also up near our line of sight.

Memorials, on the other hand, are down on the ground where you would expect to see an animal or child darting out in front of you. If that little flash happened to be your little white dog, wouldn't you be glad I looked at it?

 

[Rollercoaster13]

Street signs are expected and necessary. They are also up near our line of sight.

Memorials, on the other hand, are down on the ground where you would expect to see an animal or child darting out in front of you. If that little flash happened to be your little white dog, wouldn't you be glad I looked at it?

I'm sorry you cannot distinguish between a animal or child and a roadside memorial.

I tend to side with those that feel sometimes roadside memorials are a nice way to remember a lost loved one. As long as it is done tastefully, in a non distracting manner, and not on private property. I think I've said what my opinion was now on the subject. Thanks to everyone for their feedback as well, sigining off on the matter.

 

[Joanna71985]

People please. The OP was just asking a question. We don't have to attack the OP. Let's not flame others here, just put your opinions. As for me, I think they're very sad. People who lost a loved one should be allowed to put something there to remember their loved one. But I do think that there should be a limit of how long it is up. It wil get damaged by weather, ect. So that can be the best of both sides.

 

[Rock'n Robin]

I think these are fine to an extent with two caveats: First, they should not stay up when they start looking ratty, etc. We had a graduate killed last November when he hit a tree. There were flowers, etc. for a few months, but then they disappeared. I don't know if the family was responsible or the business that owned the tree. There is another one locally for a girl who got hit on her bike and it still looks OK, but the stuffed animals are looking really tired and worn. I think perhaps if they took those away the site would still look good, and I did use it to talk to my kids about bicycle safety.
Another thing is the time issue. There is one on my way to work where another graduate of my school was killed in his car--7 1/2 years ago! I realize people grieve differently and there is no time limit on grief, but by this time I think the cemetary should be the place for that.
Robin M.

 

[coolmom99]

If the site is not on private property, why do others that see it care? Yes, some can be distracting, but most are done tastefully.

I don't know what memorials you are looking at but most of the ones around here are anything BUT tastefully done. They look like a big mess for the most part with dirty, moldy stuffed animals and dead flowers. If a member of my family died in a car accident I would definitely not do this and if I were the one in the accident I wouldn't want it done for me.

 

[Tigger&Belle]

Most of the ones that are done in this area are just off a road and not something that most people walk by. Maybe some of them are ratty looking if I were able to get close enough to them to see them better. All I typically see is a cross with flowers, sometimes a stuffed animal or 2, balloons, etc. I'll pay more attention next time and see if I can tell how ratty they look. When I see them I'm not really looking at that, but instead imagining the pain of losing a loved one in a traffic accident.

 

[glass-slipper]

I generally don't mind them, and I also don't find them distracting. I do notice them and feel sad that someone lost a loved one in such a violent manner. There is one certain memorial in my area that sticks out as disturbing.
A little boy was killed in front of his roadside home about 6 yrs. ago. He was playing with a ball that had rolled into the road and ran out after it. He was hit and killed by a speeder going 55 in a 25mph zone. After the accident, the mother erected this huge cross in her front yard along with a sign that read "Over 55 killed my son". It wasn't so much the sign or even the large cross that was upsetting, but the fact that his Mom would stand out in the yard everyday, holding another duplicate sign and yell at everyone who drove past whether they were speeding or not. It was really sad. She did this for several weeks before she eventually stopped, but she has left the cross up and decorates it for every holiday.

I really can't say how I would react if that happened to my child, you just don't know until you are personally faced with that situation I guess.

 

[va32h]

As long as it is done tastefully, in a non distracting manner,

Tasteful according to whose standards? Sorry, but I think it is far more insensitive to establish tastefullness guidelines for such memorials, than to simply ponder why they need to be there in the first place.

I can just imagine a scenario in which the grieving {friend, relative} is informed that their memorial is simply too tacky to be permitted.

If such displays are to be embraced as each mourners' personal expression of grief, the tacky ones must be included, along with the "tasteful".

 

[brerrabbit]

In Texas the white roadside crosses were originally instituted in the case of drunk drivers killing someone. Part of the sentence for the drunk driver was that they had to pay for and install the memorial at the site where the accident occured. Maybe this has changed but at least when it started it was only to mark the site of deaths related to drunk driving. As time went by I think people just assumed they were to mark any traffic fatality and then people started adding flowers and stuffed animals, etc. Any traffic incident is tragic but I always felt that the place to memorialize the person was in your heart and in your memory of them. If flowers and other items were to be left I would think that they should be at the gravesite, not the place where they died. I kind of wish that the idea would return to its roots and mark the site of fatalities caused by drunk drivers as a reminder to all to not drink and drive.

 

[KAMLEM]

I was driving down the road today and on a tree by the road there was a giant sign -I'd say about 6 feet square- that had the picture of a guy with his birth date and the date he died. It said something like "In memory of so and so". I thought it was very odd because people passing by have no idea if he died there or if he lived in that house. I have never seen anything like that before.