• This topic has 59 replies, 43 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by poly.
Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 60 total)
  • New driving offences and sentencing on the cards?
  • Kamakazie
    Full Member

    As above really, more enforcement not necessarily more severe possible punishment, though better application of current guidelines would be good too.

    As the roads get more congested people are driving more and more erratically, badly and just dangerously. Not enough chance of being caught to think twice about their behaviour.
    Then others see the going un-punished and think it’s OK to do the same.

    Larry_Lamb
    Free Member

    It’s simple. If you kill someone with your car, you were driving too fast. I don’t care if you were doing 7, 17, 70 or 700mph, the fact you killed someone by hitting them with your car means you were driving dangerously.

    Bet you wont say that when someone runs into you through no fault of your own and you end up killing them.

    Off with your head.

    simmy
    Free Member

    For all those wanting compulsory retests every X years, where we live they can’t even organise enough instructors for those just taking their tests, 6 month waiting lists..

    Do you mean Driving Instructors or Examiners ?

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    dovebiker
    Full Member

    Legislation and enforcement requires both political will and resources. Government will not pursue legislation that potentially disenfranchises the majority of the population who in the main consider motoring offenses to be trivial. We also have the bizarre interpretation of the judiciary who consider the removal or a driving licence to be in breach of the drivers human rights and a societal attitude that road casualties and fatalities to be some form of acceptable collateral damage. Just wait for the likes of the AA to bleat on about how hard-done drivers will be due to the risk – meanwhile, vulnerable road users will continue to be killed. Roll-on autonomous vehicles…I have more faith in technology than humans to operate safely.

    simons_nicolai-uk
    Free Member

    Bet you wont say that when someone runs into you through no fault of your own and you end up killing them.

    Isn’t that the point – laws should be for the greater good, even if potentially inconveniences you as an individual at some point?

    Quite apart from the fact that ‘someone runs into you through no fault of your own’ is really very rare (the suicide by truck that was documented on here being one of the few exceptions) – if you’re around pedestrians who ‘might run into your path at any time’ you shouldn’t be driving at a speed that will kill them. Hence 20mph limit in urban areas.

    The focus on prison time is wrong as well – it’s not a effective deterrent. It should be driving bans/retests for dangerous driving but should all all bans should come with a suspended jail sentence. Drive while banned and you do prison time.

    joefm
    Full Member

    Prison isn’t constructive as it is. But having the person in prison is better than them serving a driving ban with suspended sentence tbqfh! You’re not thinking of the victims families.

    br
    Free Member

    Do you mean Driving Instructors or Examiners ?

    Sorry, meant Examiners.

    br
    Free Member

    Quite apart from the fact that ‘someone runs into you through no fault of your own’ is really very rare (the suicide by truck that was documented on here being one of the few exceptions) – if you’re around pedestrians who ‘might run into your path at any time’ you shouldn’t be driving at a speed that will kill them. Hence 20mph limit in urban areas.[/I]

    Chap just stepped out on me as I was riding up the Finchley Road on my m/c one morning, he was looking the other way as he ran out. Luckily (for me) I didn’t fall off, he on the other hand had a trip in an ambulance.

    rickmeister
    Full Member

    Read all this again, how about we flip the technology…

    Rather than promote connectivity of Bluetooth, use technology so it’s not possible to use a phone with the engine running, 999 excepted?

    simmy
    Free Member

    Do you mean Driving Instructors or Examiners ?

    Sorry, meant Examiners.

    Exactly, there aren’t enough examiners to get learners through in a reasonable timeframe also, every Driving Instructor I know is booked solid so in theory it would be a good idea but, unless there is massive investment in Examiners and loads more people become instructors, it would be completely unworkable.

    That’s why it will never happen.

    simons_nicolai-uk
    Free Member

    Prison isn’t constructive as it is. But having the person in prison is better than them serving a driving ban with suspended sentence tbqfh! You’re not thinking of the victims families.

    It depends what you’re trying to achieve. We generally only jail people when they’re a risk to the public – it’s a very expensive and destructive thing to do to lock someone up. Few deaths caused by driving aren’t deliberate – ie they’re not ‘murder’. If someone shows themselves unfit to operate an industrial machine we don’t lock them up we stop them using it (or make sure they’re trained to do it safely).

    butcher
    Full Member

    If 14 years in prison isn’t enough of a deterrent, then neither will be 20 years, 30 years, or any other arbitrary figure.

    Raising sentences like that seems a complete waste of time, which will only result in paying more into the prison system: money that could be spent on better policing. That’s if anyone was ever given anywhere close to the maximum sentence.

    I don’t really agree either, that one person distracted by their phone should be sentenced to life imprisonment, whilst another equally distracted person gets 6 points and a small fine. It’s the same crime. The rest is down to shit luck. And that’s part of the whole problem: the attitude is that it’s fine, as long as you’re ‘doing no harm’.

    And the whole thing with touch screens in cars, connecting to your phone and loading apps…that’s crazy. In my opinion that kind of technology needs banned, otherwise it makes the whole mobile phone thing unenforceable. It’s a complete joke.

    The whole thing is just worrying really. Guy behind me on the A1 the other week, transit van, speed varying between 20 and 60mph in heavy traffic, cup of coffee in one hand, texting away on mobile phone in the other….the WHOLE TIME, until I turned off about 45 minutes later. Couple of weeks ago, crawling along in a queue, woman in front facebooking the entire time, watched her veer off into the oncoming traffic. So many people think it’s safe at traffic lights, sitting in queues, etc. It really isn’t.

    Would be interesting to see accident statistics actually, because it’s a very modern problem which is still growing.

    aracer
    Free Member

    Hmm, presumably you’d also suggest disabling data so people can’t play on FB – in which case no more live traffic and re-routing for those of us using a phone as a satnav.

    mattsccm
    Free Member

    A) whilst its best if more people are detected stiifer sentences will deter some and that’s better than nothing. I think that all driving offences need at least two zeros on the end of a fine and mandatory ban. No judicial involvement. Make it legislation. Ultimately we need phones that block cars engines. No one needs them that much. Just pull over. Want to navigate? Use as map or a satnav.
    Why the hell would you want FB? You are driving. Individual needs are not important.

    mattsccm
    Free Member

    Lock them up. They have proved they don’t respect society so remove them from it. A criminals feelings are subservient to anything else involved in their crime.

    aracer
    Free Member

    I don’t want FB – I was simply suggesting that just disabling voice calls misses a lot of the dangerous use.

    butcher
    Full Member

    …in which case no more live traffic and re-routing for those of us using a phone as a satnav.

    This seems to be a bit of a grey area tbh, and using your phone as a sat-nav could already be considered illegal depending on how you interpret the law. You are essentially using a ‘handheld device’ and risking 6 points by doing so.

    I just looked this up myself because I have used a phone as sat-nav on occasion – I’m not trying to get on any high horses or anything. I would however be happy to go out and spend £50 on a real sat-nav if I thought it would make the roads safer, and would wholeheartedly support the outright banning of mobile devices for this use. But it seems such a ban may already be in place!?

    simons_nicolai-uk
    Free Member

    You are essentially using a ‘handheld device’ and risking 6 points by doing so.

    It’s not a handheld device if you have it mounted in a holder on your screen or dash (like a satnav). Equally, you could legally use your phone mounted in this was in handsfree speakerphone mode.

    If you are holding your phone in your hand it’s a handheld device.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    Deterrant with high punishments doesn’t really work with motoring because nobody is thinking “Well it’s worth the risk since it’s only 7 years if I kill someone”- they’re thinking it’s safe, I won’t hit anyone, and I won’t get caught. And mostly they’re right- dangerous driving is incredibly commonplace but rarely has consequences.

    Dangerous and careless driving is normalised, people just don’t think they’re doing anything wrong. Many dangerous drivers will think this is a great idea because of course, they’re not dangerous drivers.

    Attitudes can be changed- it was done with seatbelts and with drink driving. Education and enforcement, not just token “making an example”

    Place I’d start, personally, is with letting people off because they need to drive for work. What’s that all about? I need to work with kids for my job, I wouldn’t expect to be let off with possessing child porn “But yer ‘onor, I’ll lose me livelihood!” “Oh well in that case…”. Makes no sense. If you depend on your licence to work, drive appropriately. People who drive for work should be held to a higher standard, not lower.

    butcher – Member

    This seems to be a bit of a grey area tbh, and using your phone as a sat-nav could already be considered illegal depending on how you interpret the law. You are essentially using a ‘handheld device’ and risking 6 points by doing so.

    Does a phone remain a “handheld device” when it’s in a cradle?

    poly
    Free Member

    “Does a phone remain a “handheld device” when it’s in a cradle?”

    No – it is only hand-held if it is literally held in the hand.

    For the purposes of this regulation—
    (a)a mobile telephone or other device is to be treated as hand-held if it is, or must be, held at some point during the course of making or receiving a call or performing any other interactive communication function;

Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 60 total)

The topic ‘New driving offences and sentencing on the cards?’ is closed to new replies.