Another cyclist jailed for killing pedestrian

[Time Waster]

Can anyone clarify something for me? Is this raising the issue of dangerous car drivers when there's a thread about a dangerous cyclist a case of whataboutery or is there another type of debate technique that better covers this deflection of the thread?

I think it does cover it but I'm vaguely remembering there is some other term that better suits this approach.

 

[DaveReading]

Is "comparison", or even "contrast", the word you're looking for ?

 

[kingrollo]

Bit of common sense this wouldn't have happened.

 

[Alex321]

"In 2016, 157 people were sentenced for causing death by dangerous driving, with a further 32 convicted of causing death by careless driving whilst under the influence." According to gov.uk

Has it really increased to "several hundred" all sentenced to jail in 5 years? (The 179 above is conviction, not only jailed.)

Over 400 pedestrians are killed in collisions with motor vehicles each year. Even if half of the motorists involved are now jailed, that still seems a much lower rate than the few killer cyclists who seem to almost all get jailed. Is that fair?

This one seems fair enough, though: reportedly, a repeated reckless bit of illegal cycling that eventually caused a fatal collision.

I suppose not really "several" hundred, but between 198 (2020 - low because of Covid) and 253 (2017) between 2017 and 2021.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...1076459/outcomes-by-offence-tool-2021-v2.xlsx

That is the combination of offence codes 4.2 (Causing death by Dangerous Driving), 4.4 (Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs), 4.8 Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving), where the result has been an immediate custodial sentence. There were another 59-95 given a suspended sentence.

The average length of custodial sentence for those same 3 offences was around 4 years.

 

[Alex321]

Can anyone clarify something for me? Is this raising the issue of dangerous car drivers when there's a thread about a dangerous cyclist a case of whataboutery or is there another type of debate technique that better covers this deflection of the thread?

I think it does cover it but I'm vaguely remembering there is some other term that better suits this approach.

There may be. It certainly isn't whataboutery.

 

[mjr]

I suppose not really "several" hundred, but between 198 (2020 - low because of Covid) and 253 (2017) between 2017 and 2021.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...1076459/outcomes-by-offence-tool-2021-v2.xlsx

That is the combination of offence codes 4.2 (Causing death by Dangerous Driving), 4.4 (Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs), 4.8 Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving), where the result has been an immediate custodial sentence. There were another 59-95 given a suspended sentence.

The average length of custodial sentence for those same 3 offences was around 4 years.

So no, then. I don't think it's fair to add drink/drug driving to the original claim.

 

[Alex321]

So no, then. I don't think it's fair to add drink/drug driving to the original claim.

Doesn't make that much difference. Around 20 per year. It changes the immediate custody ranges to 181-233.

You had included it in the post I responded to, which is why I did as well.

I'd remembered seeing figures of 300-400, but looking at that table, those seem to be total convictions, only about 60% of which result in jail.

 

[Arrowfoot]

No two collisions are the same and neither are the contributing factors. The data does not provide these details. These sort of data are helpful in identifying changes in trends for authorities to raise necessary measures. Marked increase in collisions would requires studies in where these occur and the what remedies can be applied such a speed limit reduction etc.

Personally I don't see specific bias towards cyclists. I however see inconsistencies in sentencing across the board. Alcohol consumption somehow seems to a be mitigating factor in some cases for sentencing.

 

[steveindenmark]

12 months is not enough. He should have got that just not for stopping. For me, the not stopping is more disturbing than being an idiot and not being able to stop when riding round a blind corner on a pavement.

Its a ridiculous sentence and is not a deterrent to anyone. It certainly is not justice for her family.

 

[Profpointy]

Can anyone clarify something for me? Is this raising the issue of dangerous car drivers when there's a thread about a dangerous cyclist a case of whataboutery or is there another type of debate technique that better covers this deflection of the thread?

I think it does cover it but I'm vaguely remembering there is some other term that better suits this approach.

Whilst I am one of the culprits, I should stress
I did not make my comment in the sense of "whataboutery" ie cyclists should be let off because motorists do worse, but do think it's fair to comment that it appalling that often enough deliberate use of a car as a weapon is treated very mildly if the victim is a cyclist

 

[figbat]

Sad. 😔

In terms of reporting and perception, this is another case where we could do with a different word for “cyclist”, one which describes a person using a bicycle but not an enthusiast. I look to the difference between “pedestrian” and “walker” as an example - the first merely describes a person’s mode of movement at a given time whereas the second implies someone who walks for leisure and exercise. The broad use of “cyclist” to describe everyone on a bike, IMHO, fuels the anti-cycling sentiment when it includes this knob.

 

[teeonethousand]

Cycle-Rider V Cycle-ista ? 😄

 

[Cycleops]

Sad. 😔

In terms of reporting and perception, this is another case where we could do with a different word for “cyclist”, one which describes a person using a bicycle but not an enthusiast. I look to the difference between “pedestrian” and “walker” as an example - the first merely describes a person’s mode of movement at a given time whereas the second implies someone who walks for leisure and exercise. The broad use of “cyclist” to describe everyone on a bike, IMHO, fuels the anti-cycling sentiment when it includes this knob.

Unfortunately in the minds of most who don't cycle a cyclist is still a cyclist whoever they are, there's not much you can do about that.

 

[DaveReading]

In terms of reporting and perception, this is another case where we could do with a different word for “cyclist”, one which describes a person using a bicycle but not an enthusiast. I look to the difference between “pedestrian” and “walker” as an example - the first merely describes a person’s mode of movement at a given time whereas the second implies someone who walks for leisure and exercise. The broad use of “cyclist” to describe everyone on a bike, IMHO, fuels the anti-cycling sentiment when it includes this knob.

Isn't that why "MAMIL" was invented?

 

[PK99]

Sad. 😔

In terms of reporting and perception, this is another case where we could do with a different word for “cyclist”, one which describes a person using a bicycle but not an enthusiast. I look to the difference between “pedestrian” and “walker” as an example - the first merely describes a person’s mode of movement at a given time whereas the second implies someone who walks for leisure and exercise. The broad use of “cyclist” to describe everyone on a bike, IMHO, fuels the anti-cycling sentiment when it includes this knob.

How about cyclist and cycling enthusiast