So what should they get?
Discussion
OK folks just to ask the opinion of you learned folks on a tale of crass stupidity.
Our driver comes out of a city centre restaurant after enjoying 'a good meal' and gets into a high ish profile car.
Built up area - (lots of houses and people around)
Racing start, loses the car almost immediately (2 spins hitting street furniture coming to rest in the front of a domestic garage). Just missing a pedestrian standing close by.
Air Bags popped the driver and passenger are injured but nothing life threatening.
As it was a built up area residents (lots of irate witnesses) called the police who arrived very soon after the crash. Breath test revealed 47mg of alcohol in driver.
Amazingly the idiot thinks it might get off with a warning!
Personally I think they will go for dangerous driving and drunk driving - but what do you think the penalties will be apart from the basic 12 month minimum?
What should they be?
I will post what they are when it goes to court.
Our driver comes out of a city centre restaurant after enjoying 'a good meal' and gets into a high ish profile car.
Built up area - (lots of houses and people around)
Racing start, loses the car almost immediately (2 spins hitting street furniture coming to rest in the front of a domestic garage). Just missing a pedestrian standing close by.
Air Bags popped the driver and passenger are injured but nothing life threatening.
As it was a built up area residents (lots of irate witnesses) called the police who arrived very soon after the crash. Breath test revealed 47mg of alcohol in driver.
Amazingly the idiot thinks it might get off with a warning!
Personally I think they will go for dangerous driving and drunk driving - but what do you think the penalties will be apart from the basic 12 month minimum?
What should they be?
I will post what they are when it goes to court.
gone said:
They will not go for dangerous driving if he was over the limit and only himself and his passenger were injured and in a minor way. They will probably just charge DD and that will be the end of it.
Even with clear intent to drive like a tw@t from the off with people around?
Just making a comparison with the chap doing doughnuts in a Tesco carpark who was nailed for D Driving.
Unfortunatley I guess you are right!
Not only that, his mates at work will slap him on the back and say well done. So, when the Justice System lets us down (which it does far too often) we can take it upon ourselves. Shun 'em. Stop speaking to 'em. Let everybody know what they've done. Stop going out for meals with 'em.
DUI - Lock 'em up. DUI and hit someone - Lock 'em up double. DUI and kill someone - Life.
Easy innit.
DUI - Lock 'em up. DUI and hit someone - Lock 'em up double. DUI and kill someone - Life.
Easy innit.
busa_rush said:
DUI should always carry a prison sentence, no exceptions.
Suppose a family live in the middle of nowhere and they have a 1 week old baby. Father has been for 3 pints to wet the baby's head and is awoken by the mother in the middle of the night because the baby is having difficulty breathing.
A quick assessment suggests that it will take about 13 minutes for an ambulance to get there but there is an A+E about 6-7 minutes away.
Is it totally out of the question for that driver to drive that car?
If you say, yes, then let us consider this. I am led to believe that alcohol gives people extra confidence when behind the wheel. Now, suppose the father is, by profession, a police class 1 driving instructor.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that PC Rookie with 10 pints in him who fancies a bit of food and decides to jump in his car to drive to the next town, should be exempt. But there has to be circumstances when, on balance, an offence has been committed but it didn't injure anyone and it was for the 'greater good'.
The problem with having fixed punishments is that there is no way for flexibility when the circumstances require it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff