Disgruntled Goat
New Member
- Location
- On top of the World
Sorry , but the kid jumped a red light. He was partly to blame and unfortunately paid with his life. I'm no fan of speeders and twats on mobiles but this seems harsh.
Four years for killer driver on a mobile.
- Thread starter spindrift
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
andy_wrx
Über Member
The cyclist ran a red light and was hit by a car going through it.
Someone suggests that she was speeding and he misjudged her speed ??
So it's OK to go though a red light, gauging the speed of traffic going through the junction and slot through it, is it ?
No. Obviously not - at least to me....
(I don't buy the misjudged-it argument either, she was doing 45 not 75, so you'd be equally likely to judge or misjudge 45 as 30 and get yourself killed...)
Or is it OK to go though a red light and assume that anyone going the other way will see you and avoid you ?
No. Obviously not - at least to me....
Red means stop.
In this case, he jumped a Red and was killed - that's why you don't do it !
However, the motorist was also in the wrong - big-time !
Speeding is wrong, particularly speeding though a junction where you're likely to encounter other road users, pedestrians, people turning, changing direction and speed, etc.
But worst of all is sending a bl**dy text - how could anyone imagine it's OK to be looking at a phone screen and spelling-out a message as you drive along ???
Someone suggests that she was speeding and he misjudged her speed ??
So it's OK to go though a red light, gauging the speed of traffic going through the junction and slot through it, is it ?
No. Obviously not - at least to me....
(I don't buy the misjudged-it argument either, she was doing 45 not 75, so you'd be equally likely to judge or misjudge 45 as 30 and get yourself killed...)
Or is it OK to go though a red light and assume that anyone going the other way will see you and avoid you ?
No. Obviously not - at least to me....
Red means stop.
In this case, he jumped a Red and was killed - that's why you don't do it !
However, the motorist was also in the wrong - big-time !
Speeding is wrong, particularly speeding though a junction where you're likely to encounter other road users, pedestrians, people turning, changing direction and speed, etc.
But worst of all is sending a bl**dy text - how could anyone imagine it's OK to be looking at a phone screen and spelling-out a message as you drive along ???
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
It is not uncommon for criminals to re-offend, just as it is not uncommon for people to drive while disqualified.Bad Company said:
It never fails to amaze me this place - the majority are not in support of the cyclist;
FACT: Cyclist killed
FACT: Driver speeding
FACT: Inattentiveness on both parts
FACT: Car Driver in control of a vehicle capable of killing (more so than a cycle will ever wish to be)
FACT: Car Driver due to inattentiveness & driving a CAR (which places the occupants in a seperate atmosphere compared to the 'outside') collides with cyclist who went through red stop light.
FACT: Car Driver is sentenced to a jail sentence.
JUSTICE PRESIDES !
MY VIEW: Driver of car should have got longer. Driver is in a better position to view the road than a cyclist FACT.
Why do so many round here have such difficulty seeing this
FACT: Cyclist killed
FACT: Driver speeding
FACT: Inattentiveness on both parts
FACT: Car Driver in control of a vehicle capable of killing (more so than a cycle will ever wish to be)
FACT: Car Driver due to inattentiveness & driving a CAR (which places the occupants in a seperate atmosphere compared to the 'outside') collides with cyclist who went through red stop light.
FACT: Car Driver is sentenced to a jail sentence.
JUSTICE PRESIDES !
MY VIEW: Driver of car should have got longer. Driver is in a better position to view the road than a cyclist FACT.
Why do so many round here have such difficulty seeing this
tdr1nka
Taking the biscuit
- Location
- SE London, Bandit Country
Bad Company said:Four years seems like an awfully long sentance. The way I see it this woman is unlikely to re-commit so the purpose of the sentance is to send out a message to other drivers. Fair enough but most would shoot themselves at the thought of a 1 year sentance - never mind 4.
IMO people use phonestext etc., because they do not think they will get caught and they do not think an accident can happen to them
The solution IMO is more traffic police not longer sentances.
TBH I'd rather see her bannned from driving for life rather than given a custodial sentence that we have to pay for.
The day that people learn that driving as only they see fit is not an absolute right, the better by me.
T x
tdr1nka
Taking the biscuit
- Location
- SE London, Bandit Country
Bad Company said:IMO people use phonestext etc., because they do not think they will get caught and they do not think an accident can happen to them
*Ahem*
BM, the above statment is surprisingly close the point I was trying put across on the Ss thread about speeding!
Sorry that thread was locked, I was enjoying having a debate without all the name calling, until Sp*nne*r lost all control and decency that is.
T
Interesting angle from Hampshire Police......
A Green Light means you may proceed "if the way to do so is clear".....not an autonatic right to proceed
Not mitigating the actions of the cyclist, btt hey are arguing that if she was not texting, she would have been able to see that the way was not clear, and acted accordingly.
A Green Light means you may proceed "if the way to do so is clear".....not an autonatic right to proceed
Not mitigating the actions of the cyclist, btt hey are arguing that if she was not texting, she would have been able to see that the way was not clear, and acted accordingly.
andygates
New Member
With three other speeding convictions, her speeding the moment before the crash would have made four and her automatic ban. So she had absolutely no right to be on the road at all...
How many such incompetent, selfish idiots do we have on the roads? And why do people tolerate it?
How many such incompetent, selfish idiots do we have on the roads? And why do people tolerate it?
andy_wrx
Über Member
yenrod said:
Actually I think this thread is quite promising.
There is an attitude from some people on here of two-wheels-good-four-wheels-bad and the immediate assumption in any confrontation between a cyclist and car (or cyclist and pedestrian, cyclist and horserider, etc - between cyclist and anybody else basically...) is that the other party was automatically in the wrong and the cyclist in the right, whatever the facts of the case.
But in this case, he wasn't !
So No, I'm not going to support the cyclist.
- he went through a red light.
I'm certainly not saying 'he deserved it', but he decided to go though the Red.
The fact that I'm not in support of the cyclist does not mean I'm in support of the driver.
She was texting on her phone, as she drove through a junction, in a built-up area, in excess of the speed limit.
Quite a list there, so of course she deserves to be jailed -as punishment, as deterrent to others, and simply to keep her off the roads.
But neither party was 'in the right', I'm not going to 'support' either of them
(although quite what 'support' a posting on this forum is, I don't know...)
The driver also had a record of speeding/traffic citations in the area. She obviously learned nothing.
I don't know UK law, but US law, just going within the speed limit through an intersection is no absolution. And speeding as she was is dangerous enough even without the texting. One must approach and enter intersections with caution.
Lots of blame to go around here through.
I don't know UK law, but US law, just going within the speed limit through an intersection is no absolution. And speeding as she was is dangerous enough even without the texting. One must approach and enter intersections with caution.
Lots of blame to go around here through.
MartinC
Über Member
- Location
- Cheltenham
When I look at the way some car drivers behave in this country it seems to me that they believe it's OK to kill other vulnerable road users who have, in their view, transgressed the 'rules' of the road. For example the inattentive child, the slow elderly person or in this case a cyclist who has stopped at a red light and then decided to proceed because he neglected to allow for a speeding, texting motorist.
This attitude isn't supported by the Highway Code or by the law and it's gobsmacking to see it parroted here.
The law is that a green light means you can proceed if the way is clear. Exceeding the speed limit by 50% when approaching a junction is criminally stupid and so is texting while you're doing it.
Given that she also has 2 previous speeding convictions and that killing another human being is a serious matter as far as most of us are concerned 4 years doesn't seem excessive.
The 'unlikely to re-offend' argument seems fairly specious too. This is the third time she's been caught speeding in this area. If one of the killed person's relatives decide to exact retribution in kind by killing her should they be let off because they were unlikely to re-offend?
As for the cyclist - yes, RLJ'ing is a criminal offence and people should be prosecuted for it. As far as I'm aware dead people aren't prosecuted in the UK.
This attitude isn't supported by the Highway Code or by the law and it's gobsmacking to see it parroted here.
The law is that a green light means you can proceed if the way is clear. Exceeding the speed limit by 50% when approaching a junction is criminally stupid and so is texting while you're doing it.
Given that she also has 2 previous speeding convictions and that killing another human being is a serious matter as far as most of us are concerned 4 years doesn't seem excessive.
The 'unlikely to re-offend' argument seems fairly specious too. This is the third time she's been caught speeding in this area. If one of the killed person's relatives decide to exact retribution in kind by killing her should they be let off because they were unlikely to re-offend?
As for the cyclist - yes, RLJ'ing is a criminal offence and people should be prosecuted for it. As far as I'm aware dead people aren't prosecuted in the UK.
Fab Foodie
hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
- Location
- Kirton, Devon.
2 road users chose to break the law. Both were reckless.
The most vunerable paid with his life.
The other will pay with her liberty (albeit for a while).
None of this is good.
There are valuable lessons to be learnt...but they won't be.
The most vunerable paid with his life.
The other will pay with her liberty (albeit for a while).
None of this is good.
There are valuable lessons to be learnt...but they won't be.
simon l& and a half
New Member
- Location
- Streatham Hill
to go back to the beginning (and to agree with Tdrinka) - prison sentences don't make people into better people, but driving is a privelige that can be withdrawn. In this case a lifetime ban would be appropriate.
tdr1nka
Taking the biscuit
- Location
- SE London, Bandit Country
TY Simon,
Knowing how some disqualified drivers will still risk driving while not entitled, I would like to ammend my call for a lifetime ban, in this example to also include a mandetory 10 year minimum sentence for those found breaking the ban.
Tx
Knowing how some disqualified drivers will still risk driving while not entitled, I would like to ammend my call for a lifetime ban, in this example to also include a mandetory 10 year minimum sentence for those found breaking the ban.
Tx
