Is jail really the smart solution for speeding?
Discussion
vonhosen said:
Because a decision still has to be made as to whether it amounted to dangerous driving.
It's just that the court have to look at it through the eyes of the notional competent & careful driver & then rule on how that driver would view it.
Rather than how they might personally view it due to their own beliefs. Each case is looked at through that same lens against one common standard for a consistent approach.
If it were a common standard it wouldn't require a court to debate the point. An oxymoron wouldn't you say? It's just that the court have to look at it through the eyes of the notional competent & careful driver & then rule on how that driver would view it.
Rather than how they might personally view it due to their own beliefs. Each case is looked at through that same lens against one common standard for a consistent approach.
vonhosen said:
I may be wrong, but it read like his point was sentencing this biker to imprisonment will have a wider effect that will make others, who might put single coil's loved ones at risk, alter their behavioural choice.
He was trying to link this action of speeding to danger, there was zero in the context he provided. It's no better than the judgement which cites 'potential risk'. Jailing this guy will have no effect on anyone's safety. Perhaps we can all stick to reality?
singlecoil said:
In your opinion.
In my opinion it will have a positive effect on safety. Other people will hear about it and modify their choices accordingly.
Doubtful, it's not the first time that 'speeding' has led to a jail term in Scotland. Your opinions is totally hipocritical really as you speed, we all do.In my opinion it will have a positive effect on safety. Other people will hear about it and modify their choices accordingly.
Back OT, the smart solution to incarceration is education. Making by an example of, or 'lynching' as it should be called is something that should be left at secondary school.
singlecoil said:
Your post is unpleasant and aggressive, which is a shame because recently this discussion has been carried out in a gentlemanly manner.
Two points in reply, the first is that even if I do speed, I haven't driven at 149 mph on a single carriageway public road, the second, that if you are going to call someone's post, and therefore the poster himself, hypocritical then you should first decide whether that's a fair and reasonable thing to do, and secondly you should learn how to spell it.
But we all speed, that's a fact of life, and in every limit I'd wager. Even the judge that sentenced this guy. How fast have you travelled on a single carriageway, enough for a slap on the wrists maybe? Two points in reply, the first is that even if I do speed, I haven't driven at 149 mph on a single carriageway public road, the second, that if you are going to call someone's post, and therefore the poster himself, hypocritical then you should first decide whether that's a fair and reasonable thing to do, and secondly you should learn how to spell it.
Given that surelya couple of things need to happen. One, the laws need to change somewhat in the way that speeding is prosecuted and two, the public need a better education as to what is responsible. This headline ticket isn't the real killer on our roads?
singlecoil said:
So you're sticking with the hypocritical line. You've dropped below the level of a person that is worth arguing with.
If you are seeking to be offended there's not much I can do about that, but the fact of the matter is 'we' are debating the merits of jailing someone for speeding, whilst partaking in the very same activity ourselves. Have you never exceeded the speed limit. A simple yes or no, if you can recover from being outraged for a brief time
vonhosen said:
We're not, we are talking about someone being jailed for dangerous driving.
As I have said previously, what is the actual reason? I believe the facts are it is speeding. No one was in danger, apart from himself. He pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and the only connection between that, and the charge are some arbitrary standards. There is no line in the sand.
The Surveyor said:
I think the massive point you are missing here is that people are NOT jailed for the normal speeding which goes on everyday around us. The sort of minor transgression we all own up to doing. There is a gulf between that, and doing 149mph on a public road which the Scottish courts have deemed not only Dangerous, but sufficiently dangerous to justify a prison sentence.
I fully understand there is a difference. But when people start talking down to others and suggesting that only their opinion counts, whilst never actually answering the original point, a point which I made, it is somewhat irritating.Where is the line between this arbitrary set of rules for 'dangerous driving' and 'speeding'
Is 99.9 mph acceptable in this instance, 75 mph?
JNW1 said:
That's really a bit of a cop-out answer isn't it? Surely you have an opinion on what's worse, driving carelessly to the point of killing two people or riding well beyond the speed limit but with no other consequences? So come on, who do you think should receive the harsher punishment? I'm not saying either necessarily deserves a custodial sentence but if you had to pick one to go to jail which would it be?
Agreed. If you applied a standard risk assessment to this scenario would you treat both parties the same. Of course not.vonhosen said:
When you drive carelessly or dangerous you are now relying on luck, if you are lucky you don't have a collision if not you can.
Somebody isn't sentenced on the basis of how unlucky they were, they are sentenced in relation to the action they committed that resulted in them relying on luck. The actions regarded as more serious/dangerous/committed resulting in a dangerous driving offence & the more minor/lapses resulting in a careless offence.
But you don't personally believe that jail is the best solution to this?Somebody isn't sentenced on the basis of how unlucky they were, they are sentenced in relation to the action they committed that resulted in them relying on luck. The actions regarded as more serious/dangerous/committed resulting in a dangerous driving offence & the more minor/lapses resulting in a careless offence.
Wow Singlecoil, I can't recall a more hypocritical comment from anyone on Pistonheads.......ever.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff