Diplomatic Immunity?

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by thirdcrank »

I remember the switch in Sweden, but if I'd been trying to remember when it happened, I'd have guessed at longer ago than 1967. My own, completely unevidenced feeling with something like this is that the more care a driver is taking over the manner of their driving, the more they are likely to make glaring errors like forgetting they are in a different system.

In any case, the longer we have persisted with driving on the left, the less feasible a change has become and that must be reinforced by being out of Europe: if we didn't give much consideration to switching when we were in, it's unlikely now we're out.

I've no knowledge of this American base so I can't comment on local solutions.
Mike Sales
Posts: 7883
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Mike Sales »

thirdcrank wrote:I remember the switch in Sweden, but if I'd been trying to remember when it happened, I'd have guessed at longer ago than 1967. My own, completely unevidenced feeling with something like this is that the more care a driver is taking over the manner of their driving, the more they are likely to make glaring errors like forgetting they are in a different system.

In any case, the longer we have persisted with driving on the left, the less feasible a change has become and that must be reinforced by being out of Europe: if we didn't give much consideration to switching when we were in, it's unlikely now we're out.

I've no knowledge of this American base so I can't comment on local solutions.


I agree that the changes needed to the road system etc. would make GB switching unlikely, to say the least. It would certainly annoy the Faragistes!
The evidence though from Sweden is that deaths on the road reduced considerably, though temporarily, which I feel is interesting and not well known.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by thirdcrank »

I'm conscious of a bit of thread drift but IMO the significant figure might be how many crashes there were in the first couple of years after the Swedish switch which were attributable to it. A secondary issue here might be whether people were prosecuted for forgetting or whether the Swedish authorities just held tight and waited for everybody to get used to the new rule of the road.

Two inescapable bits of data are that in the intervening half century plus since Sweden decided short-term pain was outweighed by long-term gain, traffic levels have increased considerably and much more of our road infrastructure is specific to driving on the left.
Mike Sales
Posts: 7883
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Mike Sales »

thirdcrank wrote:I'm conscious of a bit of thread drift but IMO the significant figure might be how many crashes there were in the first couple of years after the Swedish switch which were attributable to it.


The reduction was only for the month of September after the switch, and a lesser reduction in the November. There is no attribution of cause, it is more of the nature of excess deaths as in the current pandemic.
I take the the evidence from John Adams's book Risk pps 143,144, which is downloadable from his website.

http://www.john-adams.co.uk/books/

The graph is striking.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Vorpal »

As someone who has driven both long and short term on either side of the road, and taken a European car to Great Britain and vice versa, I will say that driving on the wrong side of the road is a known hazard. Someone who is doing such a thing needs to be conscious of it at all times. An incident like this can only be produced by either inattention or driving in an unsafe state through tiredness, drink, medication, etc.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Jdsk
Posts: 24640
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Jdsk »

merseymouth
Posts: 2519
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 11:16am

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by merseymouth »

Hi again, But surely there is no justification for the U.S. authorities to maintain their rear before face practise of driving on-base as though they were in Texas or Tennessee. If our service personnel drove on the wrong side when in the USofA they would kick up a right old stink!
If we switched to driving on the other side of the road here my OWD trike would have to have much Wonga spent on it and to ruin its historic integrity :twisted: .
To switch over here would require the roads to be closed for more than a few hours to switch the infrastructure over, can you see that happening here? The Lock-down Resistors would still drive on!
Just read up the history of countries and their original side of preference, even the USA where they drove on the right from day one started out making their cars with the steering wheel on the right, i.e. wrong side!
Also the motor industry would still cock things up, remember when LH steered cars were imported into North America they only had an actual key operated lock on the wrong side. You couldn't make it up. :oops: :oops: :oops: MM
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by thirdcrank »

Vorpal wrote:As someone who has driven both long and short term on either side of the road, and taken a European car to Great Britain and vice versa, I will say that driving on the wrong side of the road is a known hazard. Someone who is doing such a thing needs to be conscious of it at all times. An incident like this can only be produced by either inattention or driving in an unsafe state through tiredness, drink, medication, etc.
(My emphasis)


The bit I've emphasised seems unusually opinionated (?) for you.

I think we all know that driving on the wrong side of the road is a known hazard in such circumstances and it's just one more thing to be conscious of, but perhaps that's the point here. If the suspect's vehicle had been fitted with a dashcam, we might know about the only thing which we'll probably never know: ie was she trying to catch up with her husband who I believe had gone ahead? I'll assume it wasn't an attempt to keep in convoy - the cause of quite a lot of silly overtaking - as her husband's car would have been a clue about keeping left. (I know my assumptions are not conclusive.) IIRC, the police who attended eliminated booze as a cause and shortage-of-sleep type tiredness is something I'd associate with early morning rather than late afternoon and we've not many tests to establish it.

I've posted before that more should be done in driving tests to check suitability to be allowed to drive. eg Some people seem incapable of having a conversation without regular eye contact, even when driving. If I ruled the World, such people would never get near a steering wheel, RHD, LHD or in the middle
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Vorpal »

I understood that Sacoolas was driving on the wrong side of the road, rather than overtaking. Perhaps I have misunderstood the incident? If so, could you please point me to something that she was overtaking.

edited to add: Wikipedia seems to agree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by thirdcrank »

Vorpal wrote:I understood that Sacoolas was driving on the wrong side of the road, rather than overtaking. Perhaps I have misunderstood the incident? If so, could you please point me to something that she was overtaking.

edited to add: Wikipedia seems to agree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn


Sorry: I've not made myself clear.

I've understood all along that this was a case of driving on the wrong side of the road as though it was the correct side of the road. That's been the basis of everything I've posted. The bits and pieces of supposition in my post were explanations - apparently poor ones - of how sitting here in the role of armchair trafficman of how I've eliminated other possibilities.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Vorpal »

What I posted seemed to me to be logic rather than opinion. Well, I suppose there are a few other possible explanations, such as a medical episode, but I don't think they apply in this case. The American air bases have programmes in place to educate drivers, and prevent this sort of incident. She had not been long in the UK, so should have been very aware of the potential for this to occur. That her lawyers said she "instinctively" drove on the wrong side suggests that it was not a conscious choice. How else would you describe it when someone drives dangerously as a direct result of not thinking about how they are driving?

I cannot come to any conclusion other than it is a result of either inattention or impairment. If you have other thoughts on this, I'd be happy to hear them.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by thirdcrank »

I only know what I've read in the media about the case itself and I put it in the context of my own experience. I hope that's clear from what I've posted on the thread in the last couple of days.

We've now reached the point where investigations of fatal crashes are discontinued by the police at a fairly junior level and that's pretty much it. The investigations may generally be extremely thorough, but careless driving on its own ie without clear aggravation such as intoxication or prolonged mobile phone use doesn't necessarily lead to prosecution.

The big difference in this case is that the suspect is American with a hint of spying. That's kept the case in the media. That leaves me feeling uncomfortable.
Tangled Metal
Posts: 9505
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by Tangled Metal »

Oldjohnw wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:
tatanab wrote:It is not just the UK that drives on the left, several countries do so. Something like 30% versus 70% for on the right.

Most of the countries we would get caught out in and from where people could get caught out here are right hand drive though. IIRC closest left hand drive is Malta, Cyprus then there's Australia and Japan, but which other country does UK have strong enough links with that a change would cause more of this kind of issue than the current situation should we change to right hand drive? I'm guessing most Brits visiting Japan won't be driving! Malta perhaps? As to Manx, channel Islands, Falklands, etc, I reckon they'd likely change with the the 4 nations of the UK.

Of course India, Pakistan, Southern Africa too. India puts the population ratio higher than the land mass of course. Third of the global population live in lh drive countries but in land area it's a sixth.

Compare that to whole of Europe that's not part of Britain or dependents, USA, Canada, whole of the Americas TBH. More countries are switching to rhd or thinking about it I believe. If India switched to rhd there would be a huge drop off in land area and population in rhd countries.

Irrespective of what other countries do I think the case of supported by our proximity to most of Europe which are mostly rhd countries, our strong links to USA who operates bases in the UK as part of the USA.



When you say “rhd “ I assume you mean “drive on the right”.

I should have used the more accurate RHT AKA right hand traffic. I know what I mean and it seems you worked my meaning out too. :D
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by thirdcrank »

I was wondering why the compo claim was being pursued in the US. I presume that the driver's insurers have offered only the usual going rate for English cases which won't be huge as the deceased had no dependents and his death means no continuing medical and personal costs, which could have been big for a young man.

It sounds as though the insurers are taking the same line defending the claim in Virginia.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... neral.html

IIRC, somebody above suggested that bringing the claim in the USA would increase public awareness of this fatal crash over there. I wonder whose side the American public might be on.
slowster
Moderator
Posts: 4629
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Diplomatic Immunity?

Post by slowster »

thirdcrank wrote:I was wondering why the compo claim was being pursued in the US. I presume that the driver's insurers have offered only the usual going rate for English cases which won't be huge as the deceased had no dependents and his death means no continuing medical and personal costs, which could have been big for a young man.

It sounds as though the insurers are taking the same line defending the claim in Virginia.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... neral.html

I think you are doing the Dunn family a disservice if you are implying that they are forum shopping to get a higher payout. They have been fighting since their son was killed in August 2019 for Sacoolas to face trial in the UK on the appropriate criminal charge of causing death by dangerous driving. They appear to have exhausted all other options, and the civil case appears to be the final resort.

As for insurers, I suspect that Sacoolas has no insurance cover against any award for damages in a US civil court. The motor insurance cover she would have had when she killed Harry Dunn would have been issued by a UK authorised insurer, and the policy would not cover damages awarded by a foreign court. Sacoolas therefore is either having to pay for her US lawyer(s) out of her own pocket, or her employer (the CIA?) is paying their fees. Similarly Sacoolas would be personally liable for any court award, and I doubt many people would feel any sympathy for her if an award were large enough to seriously financially hurt or even bankrupt her. If the CIA were to pay an award on her behalf, such a misuse of "taxpayers' money" would probably draw more attention to the case in the US media (and make Sacoolas feel some consequences for her actions), than the fact of her killing Harry Dunn and fleeing justice.
Post Reply