ADUK Archive

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article ... 57,00.html

Does this send out the wrong message?





Stu

The message was always wrong. Wehave perfectly adequate laws to deal with people who purposely kill on our roads.

People who make an error of judgement who sadly kill are in a completely different ball game. This legislation is simply based on revenge, nothing more.

Which is the bigger problem?

slowsider wrote:Which is the bigger problem?

Do you mean those who make a genuine error of judgment resulting in death, or those who blatently ignore the rules and regulations?

slowsider wrote:Which is the bigger problem?

You tell me. I'd guess that most people involved in fatal RTC's are there probably because of a segree of carelessness by one of more parties.

I cannot believe that 10 people per day set off to kill another road user.

The problem is that can we do about it, before the collision occurs? To my mind that means more TrafPol, better targetted education and an increase in driving standards. That said, I am not in favour of compulsion per se simply because it is a scatter gun approach.

I wish the Government would stump up more cash for Traffic Police!

Renny wrote:

slowsider wrote:Which is the bigger problem?

Do you mean those who make a genuine error of judgment resulting in death, or those who blatently ignore the rules and regulations?

I mean, of the annual death toll on the road, how many are intentional (following glf's comment) ?
I'd say few enough - maybe 1%?. So, the bigger problem is the unintentional, responsible for the remainder of the c3200 deaths pa..

Does this, for example:
"Cases leading to death after a driver's "momentary inattention" could even be dealt with by low-level community order, the council said."send out the right message? What if the victim was a loved-one of yours?

Not trying to be emotive here. Most people don't do much else in their daily lives with the potential to kill people if their concentration lapses, but few realise that.

OTOH, would the threat of prison make drivers pay attention more? Probably not. Self preservation is my primary motivator.

slowsider wrote:OTOH, would the threat of prison make drivers pay attention more?

The problem is I don't think the majority of people have any concept of what prison is like so it's not actually a realistic punishment. Hitting the wallet and driving licence would be a far more effective deterrent imho....

Chris

slowsider wrote:I mean, of the annual death toll on the road, how many are intentional (following glf's comment) ?
I'd say few enough - maybe 1%?. So, the bigger problem is the unintentional, responsible for the remainder of the c3200 deaths pa..

Realistically, virtually no road fatalities are intentional, and those that are would be prosecuted as murder rather than causing death by dangerous/careless driving.

However, a clear distinction can be drawn between fatalities that result from behaviour that is self-evidently reckless or negligent, and those that result from isolated mistakes and errors of judgment.

Sending people to prison simply for making mistakes serves no worthwhile purpose as, by definition, nobody makes a conscious decision to make a mistake. As ipsg.glf has said, it is simply an act of revenge, nothing more.

ScoobyChris wrote:

slowsider wrote:OTOH, would the threat of prison make drivers pay attention more?

The problem is I don't think the majority of people have any concept of what prison is like so it's not actually a realistic punishment. Hitting the wallet and driving licence would be a far more effective deterrent imho....

Chris

Funnily enough Leeming in his book "Road Accidents - Prevent or Punish" reckons we should not take away the licenses of people who cause accidents since it will deprive them of the experience they need to drive better in the future.

I wonder if a small news item at the end of every day's News At Ten detailing the days fatal collisions (and the ordinary every day reasons that cause them) would be useful?

This story has been badly misreported in all the media. It has been reported as though the news is that those who kill by careless driving may escape gaol, whereas of course the real news story is that a new offence of causing death by careless driving has been created, for which there is a maximum penalty of 5 years gaol.

I do not agree with the new offence. I think that it is unreasonable to send people to gaol for driving which is not bad enough to pass the test of 'death by dangerous', whatever the consequences. Most of us are guilty of momentary inattention from time to time, and in general we get away with these lapses for several lifetimes of driving without adverse consequences. All that seperates such lapses from lapses which result in a tragic outcome is pure luck. I feel that a community service order is already an excessive penalty for such a momentary lapse.

Society should be trained not to look for revenge in justice, but only for justice. The Blair government pandered to a mob mentality in introducing this new offence.

I can't help but think that "Death by Careless Driving" will be used as a plea bargain against "Death by Dangerous Driving". ie When the evidence to convict as Dangerous is not absolute.

PeterE wrote:Realistically, virtually no road fatalities are intentional, and those that are would be prosecuted as murder rather than causing death by dangerous/careless driving.

However, a clear distinction can be drawn between fatalities that result from behaviour that is self-evidently reckless or negligent, and those that result from isolated mistakes and errors of judgment.

Sending people to prison simply for making mistakes serves no worthwhile purpose as, by definition, nobody makes a conscious decision to make a mistake. As ipsg.glf has said, it is simply an act of revenge, nothing more.

Why murder, and not manslaughter? I don't recall hearing about drivers being prosecuted for manslaughter, which is presumably why the 'death by DD' legislation was enacted.

There is some concern that 'suicide by car' is becoming more prevalent; although they are likely to be single vehicle, they may take out other drivers too.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_17150135

For the isolated mistakes and errors of judgement to cause a fatality there must be aggravating circumstances, surely - digging in the glove box for CD's while driving past a school, or something similar. I disagree that luck is the only factor in the equation. Lack of concentration when doing something of high risk is negligent. If we agree that 'Speed Kills' is an oversimplification, isn't it more accurate to say that 'Driver Error Kills' and treat it seriously? Surely as advanced drivers we are making a conscious decision to make fewer mistakes.
People are treated differently if they kill when in their car than when they are not. Why is that?

</Devil's advocate off>

Interestingly enough, road fatalities are mentioned on the evening news in Ireland. The annual figure is about a tenth of that in Britain, (although the rate is about twice as bad) but it is a high-profile topic.[/url]