Should people who crash be punished more

[jimmybobby]

maurauth said:

jimmybobby said:

Yes beyond doubt. I think a mandatory 6 points and £250 fine would be a good starting place. The fact of the matter is if you crash you deserve to be punished. As it stands no one learns anything from crashing as there insurance will sort it al out and they will just have to pay a little more the next year in insurance.

If i can drive a couple hundred thousand miles without crashing and I am not the brightest then others should be able to do the same. I have always been utterly baffled by people crashing on motorways. Is it really that hard to drive on a wide open piece of road without running into the objects around you???

Sorry, just picked your post at random buy this response is to everyone that says "so what the accident wasn't your fault, you could have avoided it if you were bring prepared".

Last year I was driving along a main road, I indicated right to turn into a side road.

There was a driver waiting to pull out of that side road and travel in the direction I was going. The traffic was light and there's loads of visibility on that junction.

As I was getting closer to the junction it was clear the other driver was looking, she looked left, right, left, right. We made eye contact as I was slowing down preparing to turn in.

She looked the other way again and then whilst looking in the wrong direction she pulled out straight into my drivers door as I was turning into the side road (whilst I was still on the main road!).

Is slowing down, waiting for eye contact and indicating well in advance not good enough?

What about many years ago when I was rear ended at a set of traffic lights that had been red for a good 10 seconds with me stopped there in a queue of traffic? Luckily I had left a gap and had my foot on the brake, if I was just sat there in first with clutch in / drive in auto on hold mode or were any closer to the car in front I would have gone barrelling into the back of the next car as well.

What should I have been doing that time, hand at the ready on the horn and been prepared to swerve out into the oncoming lane to avoid being hit?

Incidences such as those you describe could be quite clear to police to work out and as such those responsible would be penalised accordingly. Reality is if someone has gone into the back of you in the majority of cases its their fault. Likewise if someone drives into the side of your car odds are they were at fault. It wont be perfect and sometimes the wrong person will be punished something I learnt a long time ago when given the cane at school for something I hadnt done is life is not always fair or even.

[jimmybobby]

maurauth said:

The only possible way this could fairly be implemented would be legally requiring both vehicles not to move until a police officer arrives at the scene to apportion blame in every RTC ever.

Sounds like a waste of police time. Also imagine how many claims will be made against the police officer's decision / appeals procedures. Requirements for further training on collision scene assessment etc

Bonkers.

Not quite. There would be no appeals process. The judgement is final. Reality is what will most likely happen is in car cameras will become common place like in Russia. I think that if it was a law it would need to be worded in such a way that the no motoring law offence viewed on in car camera device could be pursued other than to prosecute the driver responsible for the accident.

[GT03ROB]

maurauth said:

The only possible way this could fairly be implemented would be legally requiring both vehicles not to move until a police officer arrives at the scene to apportion blame in every RTC ever.

Sounds like a waste of police time. Also imagine how many claims will be made against the police officer's decision / appeals procedures. Requirements for further training on collision scene assessment etc

Bonkers.

We have that here, driving is still bonkers. Plus it causes absolute bedlam during the rush hour as two cars run into each other in the middle lane of a motorway & nobody moves until the police arrive.

[xRIEx]

maurauth said:

The only possible way this could fairly be implemented would be legally requiring both vehicles not to move until a police officer arrives at the scene to apportion blame in every RTC ever.

Sounds like a waste of police time. Also imagine how many claims will be made against the police officer's decision / appeals procedures. Requirements for further training on collision scene assessment etc

Bonkers.

That wouldn't be needed at all. Insurer motor claims departments routinely establish fault for every single motor claim they deal with. The only necessary change would be to pass the conclusion to the police/CPS/courts.

[maurauth]

xRIEx said:

That wouldn't be needed at all. Insurer motor claims departments routinely establish fault for every single motor claim they deal with. The only necessary change would be to pass the conclusion to the police/CPS/courts.

Sounds a bit dodgy to have private companies apportioning blame to people who are then charged with an offence. Maybe I'm just being cynical.

[Bill]

xRIEx said:

That wouldn't be needed at all. Insurer motor claims departments routinely establish fault for every single motor claim they deal with. The only necessary change would be to pass the conclusion to the police/CPS/courts.

And how often do they get it right?

Bonkers.

We have some of the safest roads in the world here and, while I agree driving standards are far from great, wanting people punished because their accident cause a delay is a bit first world problem.

[kiseca]

Bill said:

We have some of the safest roads in the world here and, while I agree driving standards are far from great, wanting people punished because their accident cause a delay is a bit first world problem.

I completely agree.

[V8 FOU]

As has been said, education has to be the answer. I took my test in 1971 - would I pass today?

It would be difficult to do a huge re test program - but if everyone had to do a theory and awareness test every 5 years, that, I believe, would make a huge difference. Plus make people take said test after any RTC.

Self financing too.

[Moonhawk]

I agree with the OP - depending on the circumstances of course.

If you cause a crash - you only suffer repercussions (from a driving licence perspective) if you are prosecuted for driving dangerously, without due care etc.

Surely collisions which involve clear fault on behalf of the driver (like driving up the arse of a queue of stationary traffic) should attract 3 points - even if the collision is fairly minor?

How can it be right that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times - but you can go up the arse of a car sat in a stationary queue of traffic as many times as you like and never have to worry that your licence may be in jeopardy.

[Pete317]

Moonhawk said:

How can it be right that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times - but you can go up the arse of a car sat in a stationary queue of traffic as many times as you like and never have to worry that your licence may be in jeopardy.

I seriously doubt that there are many people who have done that more than once.

And prosecuting people for having a bump isn't going to make it any less wrong that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times.

[Moonhawk]

Pete317 said:

And prosecuting people for having a bump isn't going to make it any less wrong that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times.

Didn't say it would - but surely "actually causing an accident" should be treated more seriously that "potential to cause an accident".

[Pete317]

Moonhawk said:

Pete317 said:

And prosecuting people for having a bump isn't going to make it any less wrong that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times.

Didn't say it would - but surely "actually causing an accident" should be treated more seriously that "potential to cause an accident".

Do we really want a whole raft of new offences of the type: "Causing damage by careless driving", etc?

[surveyor]

Pete317 said:

Moonhawk said:

Pete317 said:

And prosecuting people for having a bump isn't going to make it any less wrong that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times.

Didn't say it would - but surely "actually causing an accident" should be treated more seriously that "potential to cause an accident".

Do we really want a whole raft of new offences of the type: "Causing damage by careless driving", etc?

How about a crash involvement dictates 2 hours of advanced instruction?

[jamieduff1981]

I would much rather share the roads with people who have had accidents than anyone thick enough to believe they were above it.

[surveyor]

jamieduff1981 said:

I would much rather share the roads with people who have had accidents than anyone thick enough to believe they were above it.

Who said that?

[Seesure]

Having just come back from Turkey, all I can say was what a pleasure it was driving on their roads...

Tractors, cars, mopeds, bicycles coming at you from all directions even using the hard shoulder driving against the traffic on the main arterial routes, park where you want and follow the rules of the road...

Simply put don't hit anything, and guess what in two weeks of driving, in towns, on highways and in the mountains I saw not one accident.

It would appear that because of the lax road rules people are much more careful, courteous and relaxed on the roads.

There was no "coffee shakers" there was no angry red faced cretins trying to overtake at every opportunity, and everyone just got on and made sure they didn't hit each other... (another pleasure was the lack of SUV type vehicles, it would appear that a standard saloon / estate car was big enough for the whole of the extended family, a couple of goats and the odd bicycle)

Perhaps this country should try it, wake up people who are safely cocooned in their NCAP approved rated tin boxes where all the thinking is done for them and the nanny state has taken over with rules for everything and warnings of doom and danger plastered everywhere...

Perhaps if people thought for themselves a bit more we wouldn't need to punish people who crash and perhaps the level of crashes might drop...

There again.... with the attitudes of people on this island who think they are driving gods it's a forlorn hope

[kiseca]

surveyor said:

Pete317 said:

Moonhawk said:

Pete317 said:

And prosecuting people for having a bump isn't going to make it any less wrong that you can lose your licence for going a few MPH over an arbitrary limit 4 times.

Didn't say it would - but surely "actually causing an accident" should be treated more seriously that "potential to cause an accident".

Do we really want a whole raft of new offences of the type: "Causing damage by careless driving", etc?

How about a crash involvement dictates 2 hours of advanced instruction?

How effective are those speed awareness courses that drivers convicted of speeding attend? Would similar courses for careless driving work? Are they already a thing?

[jamieduff1981]

surveyor said:

jamieduff1981 said:

I would much rather share the roads with people who have had accidents than anyone thick enough to believe they were above it.

Who said that?

Isn't that the general gist?

[surveyor]

jamieduff1981 said:

surveyor said:

jamieduff1981 said:

I would much rather share the roads with people who have had accidents than anyone thick enough to believe they were above it.

Who said that?

Isn't that the general gist?

Nope. Just that perhaps people who have been involved a crash a) depending on where it happens inconvenience a lot of people and b) see few ramifications beyond an insurance claim.

Consequently should the ramifications be greater in either punishment or re-education.

[jamieduff1981]

Why not pop over to the Show Us Your Crash Pics thread and try telling all the PHers in there that they all need punishment and/or mandatory retraining.



My tone has maybe seemed hostile. It shouldn't have done. What I'm saying is that anyone who believes that all accidents can be avoided from whichever side of the blame fence you end up has a great deal to learn. Insurance claims are a big enough pain in the arse as it is without waiting around for some tt to decide whether you have to go and be lectured by some other tt.