6 month suspended sentance for death by dangerous driving

[1982john]

happened across this article about a man who was driving 60mph in a 40 zone crashed and killed a cyclist.

The sentence was banned from driving for 2 years some unpaid work and a suspended sentence so no jail time.

I guess this dismal sentence is pretty standard for these incidents? I try not to look for this type of news. This one was a couple of miles from where I live.

tbh it wants me to pack in leisure cycling all together - if I had young kids I'd almost certainly stop road cycling.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-b ... m-54029127

[Jdsk]

He was convicted of causing death by careless driving, not by dangerous driving.

I guess this dismal sentence is pretty standard for these incidents?

"Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving": Sentencing Guidelines
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/causing-death-by-careless-or-inconsiderate-driving/

Jonathan

[Barks]

Losing control on a bend because you are going faster than the speed limit is dangerous driving not merely careless - that is the big problem with the legal framework in this area, it needs to be more proscriptive.

[[XAP]Bob]

All driving is dangerous...

[peetee]

All driving is dangerous...

Then so is all cycling.

[Stradageek]

The guy may be very remorseful, it may be a one off, he may have a clean driving record, the Boxter may have been a recent mi-life-crisis purchase and he may not be an irresponsible petrol head - but he still drove too fast and killed someone.

I wouldnt argue for jail time but I'd like to see him off the road for at least 10yrs

[Jdsk]

Similar thoughts. And only driving again after psychological assessment, a deeper test, and with lifetime supervision.

Jonathan

[thirdcrank]

A more detailed report in the local rag:-

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/m ... l-18879187

[PaulS]

I wouldnt argue for jail time but I'd like to see him off the road for at least 10yrs

There is a lot to be said for that. Proving dangerous driving, beyond reasonable doubt, to a jury with a fair number of car drivers, is very hard to do. Convincing a jury or judge to send an otherwise "good" person to prison, is also very hard to do. On the other hand, taking the driver's licence away for a long time, or even taking it away forever, feels entirely reasonable. After all, his driving killed a person. That much is proven.

[[XAP]Bob]

All driving is dangerous...

Then so is all cycling.

Far less so - There is significantly less energy involved, as well as significantly less isolation from the (much more limited) dangers.

So not only is the danger orders of magnitude smaller but the risk is also much better shared between a cyclist and other road users.
A motorist carries humanly unachievable amounts of energy, and is almost completely isolated from any risk, so in general have a much reduced perception of the risk they are imposing on others.

[greyingbeard]

Perhaps someone should complain to the attourney general and request an unduly lenient sentence review. anyone can.

[Mike Sales]

All driving is dangerous...

Then so is all cycling.

Be careful not to confuse the transitive and intransitive forms of the verb.

[peetee]

All driving is dangerous...

Then so is all cycling.

Be careful not to confuse the transitive and intransitive forms of the verb.

Ok, I will certainly bear that in mind in future.
BTW. Would not your statement be more accurately constructed without the first ‘the’?
I was merely attempting to draw attention to the conclusion we were expected to draw from the inclusion of the word ‘all’.
Does ‘dangerous’ imply that there is potential for danger or that danger IS present and you will be harmed to some degree or other?

[[XAP]Bob]

Then so is all cycling.

Be careful not to confuse the transitive and intransitive forms of the verb.

Ok, I will certainly bear that in mind in future.
BTW. Would not your statement be more accurately constructed without the first ‘the’?
I was merely attempting to draw attention to the conclusion we were expected to draw from the inclusion of the word ‘all’.
Does ‘dangerous’ imply that there is potential for danger or that danger IS present and you will be harmed to some degree or other?

Danger and risk are two different things.

They are often confused.

The dangers involved should I contract COVID are basically unchanged (though we know more about treating it now), but the risk is much lower since there are many fewer people around in a contagious state.

Still limiting my excursions heavily.

[Mike Sales]

Then so is all cycling.

Be careful not to confuse the transitive and intransitive forms of the verb.

Ok, I will certainly bear that in mind in future.
BTW. Would not your statement be more accurately constructed without the first ‘the’?
I was merely attempting to draw attention to the conclusion we were expected to draw from the inclusion of the word ‘all’.
Does ‘dangerous’ imply that there is potential for danger or that danger IS present and you will be harmed to some degree or other?

I quite agree. Like others posting I was just stressing that driving is dangerous in the sense it endangers others, but cycling is dangerous in the sense that it is vulnerable to the acts of others. Two different ways of saying an action is dangerous.
I am not clear why you want to leave out "the".