Bonefishblues wrote: ... We can't really make a judgement tbh. It's only where there's a fatality that we can a 'proper' investigation that would tell us.
Yes, but as most cases don't result in death, when they do, dangerous/ careless driving tends to be measured against this day-to-day standard. Although the death triggers a more thorough investigation, if it shows that the driving was what now passes as OK, then a conviction is that much less likely. Then, the fact that any given impact is more likely to kill a pedestrian or cyclist than the occupant of a motor vehicle means that the casualties are seen as the problem.
Not driving within the distance you can see to be clear is a pretty obvious error of driving, but as long as it's acceptable, it's not going to be seen as an offence. Also, as the roads become busier, doing this is more likely to lead to a crash on the laws of chance. If you are driving the only vehicle on the road, you won't meet one coming the other way, but even remote roads now carry much more traffic in the form of couriers, commuters etc. It's a bit of a paradox that as more traffic makes a crash more likely, so driving in this manner is considered OK.
driving at 60mph around a blind bend - I reiterate he is an idiot and arrogant to boot. He is not fit to drive a car on the public highway and the police in this case have let us down.
