Latest driver-cyclist death sentence joke

Viewing 31 posts - 81 through 111 (of 111 total)
  • Latest driver-cyclist death sentence joke
  • Cant be too long before the tec is easily available and cheap enough to record all driving. Imagine the shit storm from the (careless/uncaring) driving lobby when its seriously suggested.

    Age shouldn’t come into it. You can have 40 year olds who are incapable of driving and 70 year olds who can drive fine.

    About that word ‘shouldn’t’…

    Simple reaction time improves from childhood until the late 20s. After the late 20s, reaction times increase, but very slowly, until people reach their early fifties. As people reach their late sixties and seventies, reaction times increase markedly.

    Men and women differ in their reaction times. As might be expected, men are faster, but women make fewer errors during the learning phase. After the task has been learned, males make the same number of errors as women, but their reaction times remain faster. As women age, their reaction times increase more rapidly than do those of men.

    Article with study references

    Premier Icon scaredypants
    Subscriber

    The criteria for getting a driver’s license is very low,

    Don’t agree, I think the test is pretty good. The fact that you can just forget it all the day after passing is the problem. If you had an examiner sitting next to you on every drive with ability to remove your license if your standard wasn’t good enough I am sure everyones driving would be at a much higher standard

    The test is a piece of piss really though, isn’t it, and typically done in a car with a massive sign on the top that results in most other drivers making life easier for you.  It’s an absolute **** minimum and yet people can fail it as often as they like before a single pass lets us drive essentially for life.

    In the absence of credible ongoing testing, I’ll take failure to see a cyclist in the conditions as reported as strongly suggestive evidence that this individual is incapable of driving safely, even if they could pass a “normal” test tomorrow (as long as it didn’t replicate the same or very similar circumstances). I’d say the same for accumulating loads of points in multiple smaller instances (probably more so).  These people need to be tested more thoroughly before getting their driving privilege returned to them, IMO.  It’s not simple retribution; it’s quality assurance/control.

    Course, I may also be incapable of driving safely in some circumstances but there is minimal corresponding evidence and so the greatest urgency to retest and disqualify if necessary lies with their case, not mine.

    Premier Icon molgrips
    Subscriber

    Testing isn’t really the issue IMO. It’s general contempt for the task drivers are undertaking. It matters, it IS life and death. So pay attention and do it properly and safely. Yes, that’s hard mental work, but that’s too bad.

    I’ve seen industrial workers take HSE seriously, because it’s drummed into them that this matters. But not really drivers. Where’s the training on causes of accidents and how to avoid them? Where’s the road craft training? The test doesn’t go far enough beyond basic car control and the rules of the road.

    Driver training should be far longer, and state funded. And mandatory.

    kcr
    Member

    I don’t find the deterrence argument persuasive in this particular instance.

    Punishment can be pragmatic too.
    I don’t see any purpose in a prison sentence for the specific case discussed here, but removing the driver’s license for a much longer period would keep her off the road. She denied causing the death, didn’t see the cyclist and had no idea how the incident occurred. That all suggests to me that the roads would be a bit safer if she wasn’t driving.

    hols2
    Member

    That all suggests to me that the roads would be a bit safer if she wasn’t driving.

    Preventative sentencing isn’t really intended as punishment, it’s to protect the public. Otherwise refusing to give a license to someone who failed the test would be punishment, which would not be justified because the person hasn’t committed any offense.

    Where’s the road craft training?

    IAM, pass plus etc. But then that isn’t taken seriously either, road craft and it’s advocates are routinely mocked on here see “making progress” and all the “safe drivers” that feel unable to drive up to the posted limit in good conditions or just like to sit back and relax rather than focusing on the task at hand. But don’t dare criticise their driving if you have the audacity to drive at a speed appropriate to the conditions at the time.

    kcr
    Member

    null

    The passenger in the car is Neil Greig, Director of Policy and Research at the IAM. You’d think he would have made sure the car was stopped behind the dotted line when he’s helping to launch a road safety campaign. Are details like that not important when you are an advanced motorist?

    Perhaps you could explain, with references to the highway code, why he would be in the wrong given the pedestrian would be exiting the crossing at that point. Of course as such a knowledgeable driver yourself I’m sure you could easily do that.

    And if you’re going to be a pedant to make some imaginary point, perhaps give some consideration to artistic licence, it would be pretty difficult to frame that shot otherwise.

    Cant be too long before the tec is easily available and cheap enough to record all driving. Imagine the shit storm from the (careless/uncaring) driving lobby when its seriously suggested.

    Already here. Some insurance companies offer a discount if you connect their black box to your car. Police routinely get access to the version if the black box that is in most new cars.

    Age shouldn’t come into it. You can have 40 year olds who are incapable of driving and 70 year olds who can drive fine.

    Age is only a factor in that you must account for your differing abilities as you age in order to drive safely. Slowing down, for instance and increasing following distance compensates for changes in reaction times and visual processing changes. It also gets you cut up by all the people with important things to do.

    easily
    Member

    “Perhaps you could explain, with references to the highway code, why he would be in the wrong given”
    He’s in the wrong because he’s not obeying the rule. We don’t get to choose when to obey them, or interpret them as we’d like, we have to obey them or we’re in the wrong.

    … I’ll give you the ‘artistic licence’ thing though.

    kcr
    Member

    I think I’m supposed to stop before the dotted line, not straddling it. I’m not an advanced motorist, though.

    No points for either of you. I’ll help you out though, it was a trick question.

    Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing

    look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
    you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
    allow more time for stopping on wet or icy roads
    do not wave or use your horn to invite pedestrians across; this could be dangerous if another vehicle is approaching
    be aware of pedestrians approaching from the side of the crossing.

    A zebra crossing with a central island is two separate crossings (see pictures in Crossings (18 to 30)).
    Law ZPPPCRGD reg 25

    So from the picture he may well be moving off having previously given way to the pedestrian. Unlike light controlled crossings drivers are not compelled to allow pedestrians to completely cross before moving off.

    So he’s not in the wrong.

    But thanks for gloriously illustrating my point. As a reward I’d recommend a refresher of the Highway Code and if you want to push the boat out an advanced driving session 😉

    easily
    Member

    Do you think you just scored some sort of point? Ok.

    Yes. My point being that there is a sizeable number of people on here that think they are better drivers even than those that have taken further training. But in fact their knowledge is sadly lacking and they are too stubborn or proud to admit it, preferring to belittle or distort the opinions of others.

    Now, would you say that’s a safe attitude to take onto the roads? I wouldn’t, just sounds like the other side of the same coin to me.

    kcr
    Member

    I’m no advanced motorist, and I know I’m nothing special as a driver. I just thought it was funny (and disappointing) that someone representing an organisation which promotes road craft and driver awareness didn’t think about where the car was positioned when helping to launch a road safety campaign. You’d think his training would make him think more carefully about stuff like that. Of course, he could really be going next level and enacting a scenario where the car is moving off after slowing for a pedestrian, as suggested above,.. Does the IAM not have any guidance about passengers leaning out of open windows while the car is moving, though?

    I think IAM is a bit of a sideshow when it comes to road safety, and we need to get people to take heed of the basic stuff first. Part of that should be lengthy removal of licences, where appropriate, to take people off the roads and deter other careless drivers.

    Premier Icon cynic-al
    Subscriber

    Blimey this thread has brought some new Big Hitters out!

    squirrelking pm me.

    Premier Icon bails
    Subscriber

    So from the picture he may well be moving off having previously given way to the pedestrian. Unlike light controlled crossings drivers are not compelled to allow pedestrians to completely cross before moving off.

    So he’s not in the wrong.

    If he’s moving off then he’s overtaking the clearly stationary (foot on the ground) cyclist.

    Rule 165:

    You MUST NOT overtake

    -if you would have to cross or straddle double white lines with a solid line nearest to you (but see Rule 129)
    -if you would have to enter an area designed to divide traffic, if it is surrounded by a solid white line
    -the nearest vehicle to a pedestrian crossing, especially when it has stopped to let pedestrians cross

    Yes. My point being that there is a sizeable number of people on here that think they are better drivers even than those that have taken further training. But in fact their knowledge is sadly lacking and they are too stubborn or proud to admit it, preferring to belittle or distort the opinions of others.

    Quite.

    TurnerGuy
    Member

    I just thought it was funny (and disappointing) that someone representing an organisation which promotes road craft and driver awareness didn’t think about where the car was positioned when helping to launch a road safety campaign.

    or the car was properly stopped but the photographer wanted him to move into the frame a bit more, as he didn’t want to move because he wanted to remain in line with the center of the crossing?

    If the car had been behind, or inline with the line, the cyclist would have blocked the passenger and driver from view…

    Premier Icon Bez
    Subscriber

    That image is from the legendary Niceway Code. When it comes to flaws in the messaging of that campaign, you’re arguing over one piece of hay in a very large stack.

    kcr
    Member

    That image is from the legendary Niceway Code. When it comes to flaws in the messaging of that campaign, you’re arguing over one piece of hay in a very large stack.

    Yes, I concede this is a very minor flaw in the dogs breakfast that was the Nice Way Code.

    Ha! I had that coming.

    But it just proves my point, none of us are above learning so why rubbish it?

    Al – I don’t know what to say…

    Just, thank you!

    Premier Icon DezB
    Subscriber

    So to round off this thread about the sentencing of someone who killed a person with their car, you chaps have been arguing about the rights and wrongs of an obviously posed, publicity still. Awesome.

    Premier Icon cynic-al
    Subscriber

    Not all of us have big willies Dez 🙂

    Premier Icon DezB
    Subscriber
    Premier Icon Cougar
    Subscriber

    Just spotted this thread.

    All other things aside, a 71-year old has just killed someone through their driving incompetence. I have to question the wisdom in then revoking their licence for a year so they get completely out of practice at day-to-day driving and then just handing them their licence back without further training or testing. Isn’t that, like, an utterly insane thing to be doing?

    Yup.

    I’d apply that to anybody to be honest.

    Premier Icon scaredypants
    Subscriber

    Cougar, you’ve missed the point completely – a 71-year old has just killed someone through your complacency

    Sort that attitude out

    Premier Icon Cougar
    Subscriber

    I would but I can’t be bothered.

Viewing 31 posts - 81 through 111 (of 111 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.