UK and Europe · Public discussion

A small step in the right direction

Started by Tony Raven · · Last activity · 48 posts · 1,271 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
31 October 2005
Last activity
5 November 2005
Original author
Tony Raven
Posts
48
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,271
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 48
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm

    Death driving offences announced

    Drivers who cause death by careless driving could face five years in
    prison under a string of new driving offences announced by the government.

    They have been tabled as amendments to the Road Safety Bill and would
    apply in England, Wales and Scotland.

    The measures also create a new offence of "causing death when driving
    while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured", carrying a sentence of up
    to two years.

    Road charity Brake said the proposals were a "step in the right direction".

    BBC transport correspondent Tom Symonds said the new offence of death by
    careless driving was a toughening of the law that road safety groups had
    been demanding for a long time.

    Current laws mean that someone convicted of death by dangerous driving
    can be sentenced to 14 years in prison, while the penalty for careless
    driving has a maximum penalty of a £2,500 fine.

    Tom Symonds said: "The problem is, if you kill someone when you've only
    driven carelessly, then you can't be sent to prison - you can only have
    a fine.

    "This new offence will make it a lot more difficult for people to get
    away with that lower level of penalty."

    The new measures also include a statutory definition of careless driving.

    'Overdue' changes

    Brake spokesperson Aimee Bowen said: "Changes to the system of charges
    and penalties for driving offences are long overdue.

    "All too often we see killer drivers, who devastate families and
    communities through reckless and selfish behaviour behind the wheel,
    getting away with little more than a fine."

    But, while welcoming the proposals, she said: "They fail to address the
    ongoing lack of justice for many drivers who cause serious injury on the
    roads."

    Criminal Justice Minister Fiona MacTaggart told BBC Radio Five Live that
    the offence of death by careless driving would allow courts to take into
    account the fatal consequence of careless driving.

    "At present you can get such a sentence if someone is drunk, but you
    can't if someone is sober and just driving carelessly," she said.

    "What we're doing is - we're on the side of the victim, we're making
    sure that people who kill on the road can get proper prison sentences.

    "We're making sure that if someone kills when they're driving carelessly
    - even if they didn't mean to - then they can be sent to prison."

    'Horrendous' sentence

    Tony Leigh's 14-year-old daughter Jessica was killed instantly by a
    motorist speeding at 60mph.

    He told Five Live: "[The driver] went to court and pleaded not guilty
    and then, when he finally got into court after about a year-and-a-half,
    all he got was a £300 fine and six penalty points."

    Mr Leigh said he believed the punishment - after hearing the graphic
    details of his daughter's death in court - was "horrendous" in its
    inadequacy.

    But he said the new measures would address his concerns: "In a car, I
    must admit, you don't go out on that day saying I'm going to run someone
    over.

    "So up to five years in his case - where it was a tragic accident, which
    could have been avoided if he had been driving more sensibly - then I
    reckon five years is quite good."

    --
    Tony

    "The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
    right."
    - Lord Hailsham

  2. Tony Raven said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm

    Death driving offences announced

    Drivers who cause death by careless driving could face five years in
    prison under a string of new driving offences announced by the government.

    Yes, it's starting to head in the right direction.

    IMO, though, the "causing death when driving while unlicensed,
    disqualified or unisured" is grossly lenient, and they /still/ haven't
    addressed the fact that it's "cheaper" to hit and run than to stop at
    the scene - particularly if you've been drinking.

    R.

  3. Many are not convinced that this IS a step in the right direction. What
    will probably happen is that many drivers who would have faced (and
    have been found guilty of) a 'causing death by dangerous driving'
    charge will face the new lesser charge instead. What was really needed
    was a redefinition of 'dangerous driving' so it included far more
    examples of objectively dangerous driving! For example until recently
    hurtling around a street corner to fast to be able to stop in the
    distance which could be seen to be clear and mowing down and killing a
    pedestrian who was crossing a side-street perfectly correctly was
    actually given as an example of where the driver should only face a
    'driving without due care' charge. Madness!

    As J.S. Dean of the Pedestrians Association wrote back in 1947:

    'The "less" offence of "careless driving"- introduced On the insistence
    of the motor interests to provide a part-escape for offenders- should
    be abolished in the existing circumstances careless driving is of
    course always also dangerous driving.'

  4. Quoted message said:

    Many are not convinced that this IS a step in the right direction. What
    will probably happen is that many drivers who would have faced (and
    have been found guilty of) a 'causing death by dangerous driving'
    charge will face the new lesser charge instead.

    And how many get charged with that vs the lesser charge? IME the vast
    majority are under the careless driving charge and then they get off
    with a fine and wrap on the knuckles. Anything to make the punishment
    closer to fitting the crime is a step in the right direction although I
    was careful to call it only a small step.

    --
    Tony

    "The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
    right."
    - Lord Hailsham

  5. Tony Raven said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm

    Death driving offences announced

    Drivers who cause death by careless driving could face five years in
    prison under a string of new driving offences announced by the government.

    They have been tabled as amendments to the Road Safety Bill and would
    apply in England, Wales and Scotland.

    The measures also create a new offence of "causing death when driving
    while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured", carrying a sentence of up
    to two years.

    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified be
    treated as severely as dangerous driving. It seems absolutely bonkers
    to me that causing death due to driving without a licence (especially
    if already disqualified) is treated more leniently than causing death due
    to careless driving.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

  6. Tony Raven said:


    And how many get charged with that vs the lesser charge?

    I guess that the devil will be in the detail. (I note that a statutory
    definition of what constitutes 'dangerous' driving will be given).
    However, it will doubtlessly remain the case that in many instances
    someone's driving will so deficient that it causes a death (or deaths)
    and yet in law will not be held to be 'dangerous', which does seen
    illogical!

  7. "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm


    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified be
    treated as severely as dangerous driving.

    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper which
    bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather dangerous
    driving was judged regardless of whether a technical offence was also being
    committed.

    Quoted message said:

    It seems absolutely bonkers
    to me that causing death due to driving without a licence (especially
    if already disqualified) is treated more leniently than causing death due
    to careless driving.

    Surely the only valid measure is the quality of the driving. Many (most?)
    accidents are caused by bad/careless/dangerous driving. Having had ones
    licence removed, for whatever reason, does not automatically make one a
    worse or more dangerous driver than any of the millions still with a
    licence.

    --
    Matt B

  8. Matt B said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Tony Raven said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm


    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified
    be treated as severely as dangerous driving.

    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper
    which bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather
    dangerous driving was judged regardless of whether a technical
    offence was also being committed.

    I should be intrigued to learn what manner of driving causes death and yet
    would still be deemed "not dangerous"?

    --
    Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
    Never tie your shoelaces in a revolving door.

  9. Dave Larrington said:
    Matt B said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven
    <[email hidden]> wrote:
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm
    >
    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified
    be treated as severely as dangerous driving.


    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper
    which bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather
    dangerous driving was judged regardless of whether a technical
    offence was also being committed.

    I should be intrigued to learn what manner of driving causes death and yet
    would still be deemed "not dangerous"?

    Load falling off a lorry through being poorly secured/securing failure,
    swerving to avoid something or someone and hitting another vehicle.
    There are lots of situations which are of themselves not dangerous but
    lead to danger through the unexpected happening.

    --
    Tony

    "The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
    right."
    - Lord Hailsham

  10. "Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Matt B said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven
    <[email hidden]> wrote:
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm
    >
    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified
    be treated as severely as dangerous driving.

    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper
    which bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather
    dangerous driving was judged regardless of whether a technical
    offence was also being committed.

    I should be intrigued to learn what manner of driving causes death and yet
    would still be deemed "not dangerous"?

    You agree that the existence of a licence is not the key issue?

    --
    Matt B

  11. Matt B said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm


    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified be
    treated as severely as dangerous driving.

    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper which
    bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather dangerous
    driving was judged regardless of whether a technical offence was also being
    committed.

    I would say that driving whilst disqualified or without passing a test
    is showing gross disregard to the laws of the land and is likely to
    indicate a similar disregard to the well-being of other road users.

    In the case of driving whilst disqualified it also shows that the driver
    has previously (and usually within the past year) been committing enough
    driving offences (which bring their own risks) that it was deemed that
    the privilege of a driving licence should be removed.

    Basically I am of the opinion that the sentence for driving whilst
    disqualified should be harsh regardless of whether they have an accident
    or not.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

  12. "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:12:04 -0000, Matt B <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>
    wrote:
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm
    >
    I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified be
    treated as severely as dangerous driving.

    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper
    which
    bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather dangerous
    driving was judged regardless of whether a technical offence was also
    being
    committed.

    I would say that driving whilst disqualified or without passing a test
    is showing gross disregard to the laws of the land and is likely to
    indicate a similar disregard to the well-being of other road users.

    Do you think it displays any more contempt for the law and your fellow
    citizens than, say, having no tv licence, or cycling on the pavement, or
    dropping litter?

    Quoted message said:

    In the case of driving whilst disqualified it also shows that the driver
    has previously (and usually within the past year) been committing enough
    driving offences (which bring their own risks) that it was deemed that
    the privilege of a driving licence should be removed.

    A disqualification can result from an offence or offences which were not
    related to driving at all.

    Quoted message said:

    Basically I am of the opinion that the sentence for driving whilst
    disqualified should be harsh regardless of whether they have an accident
    or not.

    Should other everyday activities be licensed so that those licences too can
    be endorsed/revoked thus enabling the holders to be discriminated against if
    they have a motoring accident?

    --
    Matt B

  13. Dave Larrington said:
    Quoted message said:

    I should be intrigued to learn what manner of driving causes death and yet
    would still be deemed "not dangerous"?

    and Tony Raven responded:

    Quoted message said:

    Load falling off a lorry through being poorly secured/securing failure,

    Sounds like dangerous driving to me. The driver is responsible for
    making sure the load is properly secured. What charge would be brought
    for driving with an improperly secured load, if not dangerous driving?

    Quoted message said:

    swerving to avoid something or someone and hitting another vehicle.

    I believe serving to avoid something when there are other vehicles
    around would usually be considered dangerous (that's what I was taught,
    anyway). Swerving to avoid someone is equally dangerous, although
    somewhat more justifiable. (I could argue that the driver should be
    able to stop in the distance he can see to be clear ahead, which would
    avoid the need to swerve, but I'm aware of the practicalities of driving
    near parked cars).

    Quoted message said:

    There are lots of situations which are of themselves not dangerous but
    lead to danger through the unexpected happening.

    --
    Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
    <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
    Subscribe to PlusNet <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/referral/>
    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

  14. Matt B said:


    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:

    In the case of driving whilst disqualified it also shows that the driver
    has previously (and usually within the past year) been committing enough
    driving offences (which bring their own risks) that it was deemed that
    the privilege of a driving licence should be removed.

    A disqualification can result from an offence or offences which were not
    related to driving at all.

    Out of interest what could cause disqualification that wasn't related to
    driving?

    James

  15. Matt B said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:12:04 -0000, Matt B <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...
    > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>
    > wrote:
    >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm
    >>
    > I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified be
    > treated as severely as dangerous driving.

    Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper
    which
    bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather dangerous
    driving was judged regardless of whether a technical offence was also
    being
    committed.

    I would say that driving whilst disqualified or without passing a test
    is showing gross disregard to the laws of the land and is likely to
    indicate a similar disregard to the well-being of other road users.

    Do you think it displays any more contempt for the law and your fellow
    citizens than, say, having no tv licence, or cycling on the pavement, or
    dropping litter?

    All those display a contempt for the law. However not all of them
    display the same degree of contempt for the well-being of my fellow citizens.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    In the case of driving whilst disqualified it also shows that the driver
    has previously (and usually within the past year) been committing enough
    driving offences (which bring their own risks) that it was deemed that
    the privilege of a driving licence should be removed.

    A disqualification can result from an offence or offences which were not
    related to driving at all.

    Fair enough (I knew that) - I will correct my previous statement to read
    the vast majority.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Basically I am of the opinion that the sentence for driving whilst
    disqualified should be harsh regardless of whether they have an accident
    or not.

    Should other everyday activities be licensed so that those licences too can
    be endorsed/revoked thus enabling the holders to be discriminated against if
    they have a motoring accident?

    Not at all. Your point about licensing other activities is a diversionary
    tactic - a driving licence is applicable to driving. If you lose that
    licence and then continue driving then you deserve to be dealt with by the
    law. Simple. I find your use of the word discrimination offensive.
    To punish a law-breaker is not discrimination.

    If you feel that people should not need a licence in order to drive on
    the roads then maybe you should campaign for the law to be changed in
    your favour.

    --
    Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
    "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
    - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

  16. Tony Raven said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm

    Death driving offences announced

    Drivers who cause death by careless driving could face five years in
    prison under a string of new driving offences announced by the government.

    I think we should introduce a new offence of murder with extreme
    prejudice in a motor vehicle, carrying a 30 pound fine. Then all the
    drivers who kill anyone can get charged with it, they'll willingly plead
    guilty anyway, and Justice Will Be Done.

    James
    --
    James Annan
    see web pages for email
    http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
    http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/

  17. "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:22:21 -0000, Matt B <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 16:12:04 -0000, Matt B <[email hidden]>
    wrote:
    > "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    > news:[email hidden]...
    >> On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:36:45 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>
    >> wrote:
    >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4392584.stm
    >>>
    >> I would prefer death when driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified be
    >> treated as severely as dangerous driving.
    >
    > Even if the driving wasn't dangerous? A licence is a piece of paper
    > which
    > bears no relation to how well one can drive. I would rather dangerous
    > driving was judged regardless of whether a technical offence was also
    > being
    > committed.

    I would say that driving whilst disqualified or without passing a test
    is showing gross disregard to the laws of the land and is likely to
    indicate a similar disregard to the well-being of other road users.

    Do you think it displays any more contempt for the law and your fellow
    citizens than, say, having no tv licence, or cycling on the pavement, or
    dropping litter?

    All those display a contempt for the law. However not all of them
    display the same degree of contempt for the well-being of my fellow
    citizens.

    Elaborate. Surely it depends upon which offence(s) the disqualification is
    for?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    ...
    Basically I am of the opinion that the sentence for driving whilst
    disqualified should be harsh regardless of whether they have an accident
    or not.

    Should other everyday activities be licensed so that those licences too
    can
    be endorsed/revoked thus enabling the holders to be discriminated against
    if
    they have a motoring accident?

    Not at all. Your point about licensing other activities is a diversionary
    tactic - a driving licence is applicable to driving.

    But, if the disqualification is not driving related, why should a further
    driving offence be construed differently because of that disqualification?

    Quoted message said:

    If you lose that licence and then continue driving then you deserve to be
    dealt
    with by the law. Simple.

    Yes, for driving whilst disqualified - nothing else.

    Quoted message said:

    I find your use of the word discrimination offensive.

    You misunderstood my point then, I'm sorry.

    Quoted message said:

    To punish a law-breaker is not discrimination.

    I never said it was. The discrimination is in selection of the offence,
    based, not not upon the facts of the incident, but on whether the offender
    has had his licence revoked for any reason. There will be an unjust
    distinction in the treatment of different categories of people.

    Quoted message said:

    If you feel that people should not need a licence in order to drive on
    the roads then maybe you should campaign for the law to be changed in
    your favour.

    He he.

    --
    Matt B

  18. "James Grabowski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Matt B said:


    "Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:

    In the case of driving whilst disqualified it also shows that the
    driver
    has previously (and usually within the past year) been committing
    enough
    driving offences (which bring their own risks) that it was deemed that
    the privilege of a driving licence should be removed.

    A disqualification can result from an offence or offences which were not
    related to driving at all.

    Out of interest what could cause disqualification that wasn't related to
    driving?

    Take your pick:
    http://www.dvla.gov.uk/drivers/endorsem.htm#7. Endorsement Offence Codes

    --
    Matt B

  19. Matt B said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    A disqualification can result from an offence or offences which were not
    related to driving at all.

    Out of interest what could cause disqualification that wasn't related to
    driving?

    Take your pick:
    http://www.dvla.gov.uk/drivers/endorsem.htm#7. Endorsement Offence Codes

    There is DR60 which is the only non-driving related one there.

    ...d

  20. James Grabowski <[email hidden]> wrote:
    ....
    | Out of interest what could cause disqualification that wasn't related to
    | driving?

    Medical conditions e.g. diabetes usually results in degraded eyesight,
    at some point they disqualify you from driving. Some would say old age
    should do this too...

    --
    Patrick Herring, http://www.anweald.co.uk/ph

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.