Disqualified drivers

[Psamathe]

That is a good idea, even if it is not the banned drivers car (really, don't interpret that as any indirect dig). If somebody borrows their mate's car when banned and gets caught their mate loses their car and the banned driver becomes liable to the person they borrowed it off. OK, maybe a bit tough but include it as punishment the lender has also committed an offence. Or, I suspect that as driving when banned is an offence, just also prosecute the lender as an "accessory".

What happens if they'd 'stolen' your car? Or simply took your keys without asking?

If you were unhappy about that what happens if they simply claim they took it without permission?
Proving stuff is often not that easy and I can't imagine a country where it was OK for the authorities to deprive you of your goods without proof.

I agree, there are complications (if you just "took the keys" they you would be prosecuted for theft - so does your mate accuse you of theft or lose their car ?). I suppose I'm thinking more as finding some way of preventing "mates" from helping the banned driver from driving on the roads. But you are right in that there are too many problems - I suppose I'm just frustrated that there are issues and we wont increase punishment or increase enforcement (and I think that increasing either would help the situation).

I think we do have the technology to prevent a banned driver from driving; trouble is it would take quite a lot of years to install in all vehicles by which time it would be well out of date, etc. and it would cost something which would ensure motor manufacturers start the "impacts on profits/jobs/etc. lobbying" and it would never happen. I do think I'm getting cynical these days (about our failure to even try and address problems we are well aware of and well aware of the solutions to and yet still do nothing because of "vested interests").

Ian

[reohn2]

At risk of sounding like a broken record,the fault of disqualified drivers can all be traced back to detection.
If the disqualified driver thought they could be detected and the punishment hurt them enough,they wouldn't do the crime in the first place.
As I drive and cycle around I see more blatant and simple to detect vehicle violations such as illegal lighting,tyres and reg plate faults,that's without even mentioning mobile phone use,that leads me to conclude the chances of detection are minimal,so what chance someone driving whilst disqualified if the car is insured in someone else's name?

The whole problem is one a lack of effective policing and meaningful penalties.

[kwackers]

I suppose I'm just frustrated that there are issues and we wont increase punishment or increase enforcement (and I think that increasing either would help the situation).

For the most part it seems to me that the laws concerning 'minor' crimes are only effective against law abiding citizens. Your average street educated villain is well aware of their shortfalls and how ineffective the police can be.

It's a bit circular too, the more ineffective they are, the less respect they get from the public and without respect and help the police simply can't function.

IME for most crimes the police could be dispensed with by having an online form that issues crime numbers for insurance purposes. In the future for serious cases we'll probably just extend this so you can use the insurance money to start civil proceedings (or your survivors can)...

[Shootist]

For the most part it seems to me that the laws concerning 'minor' crimes are only effective against law abiding citizens. Your average street educated villain is well aware of their shortfalls and how ineffective the police can be.

It's a bit circular too, the more ineffective they are, the less respect they get from the public and without respect and help the police simply can't function.

Absolutely spot on. After 22 years as a police officer and a further 10 years working with them, I am ashamed at just how ineffective and arrogant the police have allowed themselves to become.

IME for most crimes the police could be dispensed with by having an online form that issues crime numbers for insurance purposes. In the future for serious cases we'll probably just extend this so you can use the insurance money to start civil proceedings (or your survivors can)...

That is pretty much the situation now.

[reohn2]

For the most part it seems to me that the laws concerning 'minor' crimes are only effective against law abiding citizens. Your average street educated villain is well aware of their shortfalls and how ineffective the police can be.

It's a bit circular too, the more ineffective they are, the less respect they get from the public and without respect and help the police simply can't function.

Absolutely spot on. After 22 years as a police officer and a further 10 years working with them, I am ashamed at just how ineffective and arrogant the police have allowed themselves to become.........

When I report a crime such as I did with dangerous parking at a junction where primary school children cross regularly,and I'm told by a sergeant who phoned me back,to use my digital camera to photograph the children crossing the road where the offending vehicles are parked so he could send them a letter,didn't seem to appreciate the problem of a 60 year old man taking photos of children walking home from school
He also didn't like me telling him that he was the policeman not me and that I thought it was enough for me to report it,it was up to the police to do the rest
How can I have any respect for the police?

[Psamathe]

... didn't seem to appreciate the problem of a 60 year old man taking photos of children walking home from school :?....

But you would have helped get their arrest figures up and arresting an old man photographing school kids would have been much higher profile than stopping illegal parking!

Ian

[hamster]

I have to disagree with the negative views expressed here.
Hampshire Police have taken my case where I was left-hooked by a driver very seriously - he refused to give details. It appears that he is one of their 'regular customers'. In the words of the PC: 'people who drive when disqualified usually have a careless attitude to other bits of the law.'

Many ANPR checks reveal people who the police want to catch up with for other matters.

[Psamathe]

....
Many ANPR checks reveal people who the police want to catch up with for other matters.

I have always been unsure about ANPR checks as they might catch an un-MOT'd vehicle or even an untaxed vehicle but with banned or un-insured drivers they only identify a vehicle rather than a driver. The owner might not be insured or might no even have a license but I'd always thought that insurance and license was separate from vehicle. And driver might be banned but tax/insurance might have been taken out before the ban and whilst insurance might have been impacted (e.g. the insured driver might have been excluded form being able to drive, does that void the complete policy and thus void the tax, etc. effectively forcing the vehicles owned by the banned driver SORN ? (and in the days I had a company car, I was never listed as the owner but was covered by my company insurance ...)

Or have I missed some critical requirement somewhere or some major capability of ANPR.

Ian

[reohn2]

I have to disagree with the negative views expressed here.
Hampshire Police have taken my case where I was left-hooked by a driver very seriously - he refused to give details. It appears that he is one of their 'regular customers'. In the words of the PC: 'people who drive when disqualified usually have a careless attitude to other bits of the law.'

Many ANPR checks reveal people who the police want to catch up with for other matters.

Whilst I agree with the police outlook on criminals being careless about other aspects of the law,every time I use the roads I spot light faults on vehicles the last time I counted,on a ten mile journey I saw 17! predominantly one eyed monster headlights but some tailights too.
It's every time I go on the road,with mobile use being endemic.
The police are overwhelmed,however vigilant they are,they simply don't have the manpower to tackle the sheer numbers of offenders,and when they do the penalties aren't harsh enough to deter.

[Toffee]

I have to disagree with the negative views expressed here.
Hampshire Police have taken my case where I was left-hooked by a driver very seriously - he refused to give details. It appears that he is one of their 'regular customers'. In the words of the PC: 'people who drive when disqualified usually have a careless attitude to other bits of the law.'

Many ANPR checks reveal people who the police want to catch up with for other matters.

Whilst I agree with the police outlook on criminals being careless about other aspects of the law,every time I use the roads I spot light faults on vehicles the last time I counted,on a ten mile journey I saw 17! predominantly one eyed monster headlights but some tailights too.
It's every time I go on the road,with mobile use being endemic.
The police are overwhelmed,however vigilant they are,they simply don't have the manpower to tackle the sheer numbers of offenders,and when they do the penalties aren't harsh enough to deter.

I don't actually think the number of cars that have a light out is high. I did an unscientific survey the other week on my 28 mile drive home. Yes I counted around 10- 12 cars with a light out but I must have gone past at least 1500 cars, that less than 0.8% of cars. I myself have had two headlight bulbs go on the way home in the last year, which I have put right when I have got home, I am not changing a bulb at the side of a country road or dual carriageway.

[Barks]

So some 600 murders are committed in the UK most by obvious protaginists such as family members or criminal associates. Yet some 3500 cyclists are killed or seriously injured (and by definition many of the latter could easily have died but for the grace of god) by motorists who, generally, are at fault, some by just crass carelessness, some because they are aggressive. The obvious answer is that the Police should switch resources from sexy high profile murder investigations to properly enforcing day to day unlawful behaviour on the roads.

[Cyril Haearn]

So some 600 murders are committed in the UK most by obvious protaginists such as family members or criminal associates. Yet some 3500 cyclists are killed or seriously injured (and by definition many of the latter could easily have died but for the grace of god) by motorists who, generally, are at fault, some by just crass carelessness, some because they are aggressive. The obvious answer is that the Police should switch resources from sexy high profile murder investigations to properly enforcing day to day unlawful behaviour on the roads.

The police (or society) should do both. Much traffic law enforcement can be done by machines, the cops could do a bit too. The BMA made a good suggestion a few years ago - ban sharp knives! A bread knife for example does not need a sharp point.

KSI: some of the SI die later, after months or years of suffering. Some of the SI make a full recovery

[Tizme]

A few years ago a lady my wife worked for went to court for a series of traffic offences (mainly speeding I believe) and received a 12 month driving ban. When she left the court she promptly got in her car and drove home, and continued to do so for the next 12 months!

[Shootist]

So some 600 murders are committed in the UK most by obvious protaginists such as family members or criminal associates. Yet some 3500 cyclists are killed or seriously injured (and by definition many of the latter could easily have died but for the grace of god) by motorists who, generally, are at fault, some by just crass carelessness, some because they are aggressive. The obvious answer is that the Police should switch resources from sexy high profile murder investigations to properly enforcing day to day unlawful behaviour on the roads.

I might have mentioned this before, but I once attended a homicide where a 60 year old man had beaten his wife to death. When told he was under arrest on suspicion of murder he replied "It wasn't murder, it was manslaughter. I didn't mean to kill her." A probationer constable could have dealt with this incident, with the help of a reasonably experienced detective constable. It was a domestic with complications. This was around midnight, but within an hour there was present on the scene a detective superintendent, a detective chief inspector, a detective inspector, a detective sergeant, and two detective constables who were between them directing the actions of a half dozen constables.

By contrast, the first fatal traffic incident involved a car colliding with a tree, killing the four passengers and seriously injuring the driver, who was drunk, but for technically unable to be tested. I was given a few days to deal with this, with the assistance of another traffic bobby to help out. The inquest alone had seven lawyers lined up asking questions of witnesses. A charge of manslaughter on the driver wasn't even seriously discussed. It was an 'accident' but four people, aged from 18 to about 45 died.

You have a point, but I disagree with your analysis of drivers. For every knobhead driver you can find a knobhead cyclist. It serves people well to not be knobheads if they are the ones most likely to come second in an encounter, which makes the stupidity of some cyclists all the more amazing.

[thirdcrank]

Let's accept that prevention is better than any amount of detection (and there's a case to be made that part of the importance of detection is it may act as a deterrent.) A lot of offences are committed in private, undeterred by police patrols, so there has always been a need for detection. It's never been easy to measure how much offending is prevented by uniformed police patrolling but it seems to work with bad driving. Some time ago, a decision was taken that the police would prioritise the investigation of so-called KSI accidents. That was accepted by many road safety campaigners and IIRC that included the CTC who believed that this would mean only a welcome increase in resources devoted to the worst effects of bad driving. They could not see that this really meant that apart from investigating fatal crashes, the rest of traffic policing - the deterrent part - would collapse ( a collapse masked by the introduction of enforcement cameras.)

FWIW, I don't think the detective effort applied to crimes like murder is the big issue in that they always received it, even in the days of fully-staffed traffic departments. One big shift in resources has been to lesser offences of violence eg when the law in respect of common assault was changed to make it a police responsibility. I'm not questioning that, just observing that if the police investigate every reported common assault, the personnel to do it have to come from somewhere. Reducing the requirement for corroboration of evidence in sexual offences has also resulted in changes including a lot of resources devoted to a backlog of historic cases.

All that has been aggravated by recent reductions in establishments.