With the many examples of ‘light’ sentences when it comes to drivers Vs cyclist deaths and injuries, might this stiffer sentencing actually make a difference?

Of course it’s after the fact, and half the numpties on our roads don’t know the basics of the law, let alone politeness and care, so won’t be reading this and thinking ‘know what, I’ll take more care now’.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61940351

No. You’re making the assumption that drivers are charged with DD and that it can be proved in Court

No

Its fear of getting caught that drives behaviour not the level of punishment. There has been research on this. To change driving behaviour you need to increase the odds of being caught.

Found it… https://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.com/2009/11/cycling-against-car-culture.html
“3. Conduct which might be regarded as dangerous in any other walk of life is, in a motorist, merely careless and that which would otherwise be careless is excusable. This tenet is coloured by a sense of ‘There but for the grace of God, go I’ in the mind of the individual scrutinising the conduct in question.”

Judges will be able to hand down life sentences to dangerous drivers who kill and careless drivers who kill while under the influence of drink or drugs.

The current penalty for each crime is a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.

Nobody deliberately drives dangerously because the maximum penalty is 14 years, but would change their behaviour if there is the possibility of a life sentence. It will not make any difference.

It will make no difference. What changes behaviour is things like better designed roads that encourage slower more considerate driving.

Its fear of getting caught that drives behaviour not the level of punishment. There has been research on this. To change driving behaviour you need to increase the odds of being caught.

for once I agree with TJ. Cameras and fines aren’t a substitute for traffic police.

I’d like to think so, but don’t believe it will. Based on the ignorance of a lot of road-users, cyclists included, (evident on my morning pedal just today) there’s a lot of educating to do and unfortunately I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

Hmm. I kind of agree with all of the above.

But I guess it might help change attitudes. For example how often on here does someone come out with the “i wasn’t speeding because I was doing 70+10%” Thats an attitude that makes drivers worse.

If being on your phone and knocking someone over means your pal ends up in jail rather than a slap on the wrists it might make you think about not using your phone.

Will it stop the A9 driving gods that reckon 6cars a lorry and a caravan with a rapidly ending dualcarriageway is still good for a 100mph overtake… unlikely. will it make people atleast think about the low level daft stuff… possibly. improvements don’t come from the extreme but all improvements are good.

I stopped using my phone while drivign when it was made illegal. Not that i went out of my way to use it before hand but it made me think about what it meant to drive while chatting on the phone for sure and i realised its bloody stupid and inconsiderate.

ITs pretty easy to focus on the “it won’t stop wallopers being wallopers” but normal considerate sensible people might think again.

Its fear of getting caught that drives behaviour not the level of punishment. There has been research on this. To change driving behaviour you need to increase the odds of being caught.

Absolutely this, and it applies to all motoring and non-motoring offences.

The current sentence would be sufficient if:

More people were caught and charged
More people got sentences at the higher end of the current scale
When the use of a car as a weapon is recognised and people are charged as such.

Sadly, the “there but for the grace of God” argument is an issue with getting juries to convict, easily played on by a defence.

Given how infrequently the higher sentences are applied even in the worst cases, I can’t see a lifetime one ever being applied in the first place or, if it is, it’d soon be quashed on appeal.

The thing is that the current sentencing allows for 14 years. When was the last time you saw anyone get any near that custodial sentence for killing someone whilst driving? A lifetime sentence is going to make no difference.

Anecdotally when I walk the kids to school there are loads of people stuck in traffic not very subtley looking at their phones on their laps. Dickhead.

Anecdotally when I walk the kids to school there are loads of people stuck in traffic not very subtley looking at their phones on their laps. Dickhead.

this is one I struggle to care about. Sure, while moving but stationary?

I can only bloody hope so. Sorry for the roadcc link, but if it gives complete jebends like this a proper prison sentence all the better

https://road.cc/content/news/driver-spared-jail-after-killing-cyclist-inexplicably-293887

Momentary lapse in concentration…absolute bullshit. No excuse. Poor girl treated like roadkill. Range Rover driving **** monkey.

this is one I struggle to care about. Sure, while moving but stationary?

Bit it’s not just while stationary is it? You see it all the time, drivers have their phones in their laps, stop, head down, traffic moves, they don’t notice, head bobs up, car moves forward, head glances down…..

I can only bloody hope so. Sorry for the roadcc link, but if it gives complete jebends like this a proper prison sentence all the better

https://road.cc/content/news/driver-spared-jail-after-killing-cyclist-inexplicably-293887

Momentary lapse in concentration…absolute bullshit. No excuse. Poor girl treated like roadkill. Range Rover driving **** monkey.

that wasn’t charged as death by dangerous and alchohol/drugs weren’t present so this change to sentancing will make no difference.

Momentary lapse in concentration…absolute bullshit. No excuse. Poor girl treated like roadkill. Range Rover driving **** monkey.

Every single one of us who drives has had momentary lapses in concentration, anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves – talking with a passenger, listening to the radio, adjusting the heating controls….hell, even as a cyclist I’ve misjudged things and put myself and others at risk.

Six month suspended jail sentence, 2 year ban, which I think requires an extended retest, maybe not enough. But this wasn’t a hit and run, or a drunk driver, or a punishment pass. Over emotional language and responses tends not to lead to a “fair” sentence either, the only “fair” or equivalent sentence for taking a life would have to be the death sentence?

might this stiffer sentencing actually make a difference?

Given how rarely dangerous driving is used vs lesser offences I doubt it would make any difference and, if anything, result in even fewer charges of dangerous driving being used.

It will make zero difference for 5 x reasons:

1. No-one has ever received the maximum permitted sentence when it was 5 years and then 10 years
2. The sentencing guidelines give too much relief for trivial factors
3. People’s behaviour will only change when the police show more interest in detecting cases in which cyclists are seriously j hired or killed
4. We need to build 5-6 new prisons to ensure the maximum tariff can be given to all of those convicted
5. General society sees motoring offences as trivial and the majority standard of driving reflects that.

Every single one of us who drives has had momentary lapses in concentration, anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves

Not enough of a lapse to run somebody over. One of the things that annoys me about this sort of issue is the way terrible driving behaviour is excused by “well everyone does it at some point”. No they absolutely don’t. Maybe I’m a driving god, but I pay attention to what I’m doing when I’m in control of two tonnes of metal travelling at speeds that could kill people.

I certainly wont make thing worse, so there’s that.

Living in Switzerland for 7 months, the police here is absolutely ruthless with speed tickets, even a couple of km/h above the limite will get you a a fine of several hundreds of francs and they enjoy catching people in the most unsuspecting places. This seems to work to a degree, as I’ve never seen so much compliance with the speed limits, definitely feels safer than anywhere else I’ve been on a bike, except maybe Dutch cities.

One word of advice though, drivers will stick to the speed limit, but if the limit is 80km/h you bet everyone will be driving at 80km/h, even if it is a twisty road while snow if falling

Not enough of a lapse to run somebody over

A lapse in concentration is a reason not to charge. Using this in a Court immediately lowers the degree of culpability, leading to a lower sentence. It shouldn’t be used; the lapse of concentration has already been discounted IMHO

“Examples of lower culpability on the part of the driver may include errors of judgement such as a failure to look properly before turning at a junction, due to a momentary lapse of attention; or a genuine mistake on the part of the driver such as a mistaken belief that he or she was insured to drive the car.” https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-charging

 One of the things that annoys me about this sort of issue is the way terrible driving behaviour is excused by “well everyone does it at some point”. No they absolutely don’t

Everyone has those lapses of concentration. If you are lucky, no one gets hurt as a result.

Saying everybody does it is not the same as excusing it. If my lapse of concentration kills someone, throw the book at me.

Adequate roads policing would see more of these lapses caught and dealt with, so people either learn or lose their licenses.

We don’t need more laws or penalties, we need the ones we’ve got to be properly and consistently enforced.

this is one I struggle to care about. Sure, while moving but stationary?

It’s about focusing on what you are doing (being in charge of a vehicle) all the time not just dipping in and out when you fancy. I saw a driver a while back waiting at a red traffic light at a crossing, the light went green and they pulled away, then had to do an emergency stop as the elderly person crossing hadn’t made it all the way across. They’d been in front of the driver’s car for a good 30 seconds but apparently that wasn’t enough. I’ve also seen several people thinking their car is stationary when it is actually moving, recently in a busy car park while they driver rummaged in back.

Its fear of getting caught that drives behaviour not the level of punishment

Can’t say I agree with that. Go for drive at speed and it is reasonably likely you’ll get caught. The problem is that mostly nothing happens, eg 72 on the motorway won’t trigger a fine, and even if you do get done it’ll be some points and a token fine (which for most is basically no punishment).

Contrary to having larger punishment for larger offences I’d like to see more smaller punishments. There should be a ban for every offence. A day or two for a first offence, a week or two for a second. When it actually impacts you day to day I think it’ll make a difference.

No

Its fear of getting caught that drives behaviour not the level of punishment. There has been research on this. To change driving behaviour you need to increase the odds of being caught.

Mostly this, but also Dangerous driving is often bartered down to a guilty plea for careless driving, knowing the sentencing isn’t as heavy and that the CPS will take the win rather than relying on the merits of their case and/or the bias of those hearing it…

this is one I struggle to care about. Sure, while moving but stationary?

I’m sure you’re just trolling but I’ll play along; From what I’ve seen, those having a little play with their phone at the lights generally carry on for bit once they pull away. Coming back to TJs point, it’s the lack of fear of being caught/feeling any consequences that keeps people doing these things. If people minimise an offence through discussions (it’s only a little playing with a phone at the lights, right), keep detection minimal (it would be pretty easy for the police to catch an awful lot of phone drivers TBH) and then barely punish it when the worst does actually happen, what’s really the point in having these laws?