Another crap sentence ?

Absolutely ridiculous 

Both below the legal limit. Also stayed at the scene and seems to be genuinely remorseful.

Not sure what would be served by sending him to prison for a relatively short term.

That's really, really upset me.

He was speeding and it sounds like understeered around a bend in the dry, which caused him to lose control hence hitting the cyclist. Travelling at up to 51 in a 30. Other witnesses saw the car speeding too so it wasn’t just a one off excursion over the limit.

“ his standard of driving on the day was just below the threshold for the more serious offence of dangerous driving.”

How the *%*^ is driving fast enough to understeer around a bend in the dry on a decent car then losing control not dangerous driving ?!?!? What do actually have to do to count as dangerous driving ?

I don't no what to say about this, except that when I cycle on the road I worry about being taken out by someone who is drunk, reckless, not paying attention on the phoe doing their hair marking an exam paper etc etc.
I think in terms of when rather than if.

when I cycle on the road I worry about being taken out by someone who is drunk, reckless, not paying attention on the phoe doing their hair marking an exam paper etc etc.
I think in terms of when rather than if.

I gave up worrying about it a long time ago. I can only do what I can do to avoid it being me, after that it's in the lap of the gods.

But if I quit riding on the road, the bastards will have beaten me. Better to die a free man, doing what i love.

What do actually have to do to count as dangerous driving ?

just in case it was a genuine question, it’s a two part test:

1. you must drive far below the standard of a careful and competent driver AND

2. it must be obvious that driving that way would be dangerous.

ask yourself this - were it not that a cyclist was there, and sadly killed as a result would the driving have been so bad that you would genuinely expect it to have been prosecuted as Dangerous Driving rather than Careless Driving.  [Dangerous driving where no death/injury is involved carries a minimum 12 month ban and extended retest].  Many people make the same mistake and officer discretion says “learned their lesson by writing off car - no need to prosecute”.

This really upsets me too. The speed limit will have been determined by looking at the local conditions including potential as well as actual hazards.

The additional energy in a vehicle travelling at 50 mph compared with 30mph is huge.

I'm at a loss about why some people consider speeding to be such a trivial matter.

The additional energy in a vehicle travelling at 50 mph compared with 30mph is huge.
I’m at a loss about why some people consider speeding to be such a trivial matter.

This needs to part of driver education and it should take precednce over braking distances.

I was amazed regarding the impact of collisions in 20 mph zones re 30 mph limits.

1. you must drive far below the standard of a careful and competent driver AND

2. it must be obvious that driving that way would be dangerous.

Not sure what would be served by sending him to prison for a relatively short term.

ask yourself this – were it not that a cyclist was there, and sadly killed as a result would the driving have been so bad that you would genuinely expect it to have been prosecuted as Dangerous Driving rather than Careless Driving.

This is the thing a lot of folk don't get about driving offence sentencing. The sentence is often based on the original offence not the final outcome because often the outcome is pure chance.

@Polly

Driving with impaired judgement due to drinking 2 beers and having taken class a drugs is dangerous.

Then exceeding the speed by 20 mph such that the car can't drive round a bend.

I would class this as very  dangerous.

If every body drove like this it would be carnage.

I would class both of these as very dsngerous

Agreed. Getting the courts (and therefore society) to see it like that is seemingly impossible, however.

Lifetime ban for anyone convicted of serious driving offences, in my opinion. If you kill someone due to your recklessness, or as in this case, deliberate intent to not follow the rules, then I couldn't care less if it affects your work options. I'd get home that little bit safer without them on the road, thanks.

ask yourself this – were it not that a cyclist was there, and sadly killed as a result would the driving have been so bad that you would genuinely expect it to have been prosecuted as Dangerous Driving rather than Careless Driving.

But he was there.

The sentence is often based on the original offence not the final outcome because often the outcome is pure chance.

Not it isnt. If he wasnt driving dangerously, he wouldnt have hit him. Chance doesnt come into it

 seems to be genuinely remorseful. -  Bennett told police: "For f****s sake, prison sentence here I come."

Remorseful for the implication to his own inconvenience.

I dont think locking people up is productive when it comes to traffic stuff. (unless they have demonstrably used the vehicle with malicious intent, ie: as a weapon), but i have always been 100% behind permanant and lengthy (10,20, 30 years) bans.

hand a few perma bans out and i think a lot of people might wind their driving style in.

Sorry but nah, commending him for not fleeing the scene is a crock, and its probably cos he couldn't, all his other actions shout scumbag pos, such a pathetically weak sentence will have him behind the wheel again in no time, probably just after his probation ends and before his ban is up. Ridiculous sentence, a man is dead, hit at 50mph, flung through the air like a ragdoll by an early 20's coke head in a BMW, he ain't losing sleep despite what his bs lawyer says about his character, some judges fall for any old sod story.