Discussion
Having just read another article about a scum bag terrorising a woman and two young kids in a "road rage" incident no mention was made of any motoring offences or any penalties or restrictions to his licence .
So whats the likely charges? , why no motoring convictions ?
I would have thought a very long driving ban would be the least to expect on top of any other convictions like assault , threatening behaviour etc .
So whats the likely charges? , why no motoring convictions ?
I would have thought a very long driving ban would be the least to expect on top of any other convictions like assault , threatening behaviour etc .
Because unless you link to the article we have no way of knownig whether he deserves your comments or not?
She may not have been terrorised at all, but simply using road rage in the same way some people use speeding as a descriptor to try and throw blame off herself or toward someone else.
She may not have been terrorised at all, but simply using road rage in the same way some people use speeding as a descriptor to try and throw blame off herself or toward someone else.
its not currently covered by any specific driving offences, however the usual assault type charges can be and are used, the guy that decided to kick sh@t out of my car terrifying my daughter to the extent she refused to get in any car jfor a year just because he thought I'd held him up got a custodial sentence. Cant remember what the charge was but he elected for a trial as opposed to magistrates.
julian64 said:
Because unless you link to the article we have no way of knownig whether he deserves your comments or not?
She may not have been terrorised at all, but simply using road rage in the same way some people use speeding as a descriptor to try and throw blame off herself or toward someone else.
Yep, how on earth are we expected to hold a trial by PH without at least a few of the facts.She may not have been terrorised at all, but simply using road rage in the same way some people use speeding as a descriptor to try and throw blame off herself or toward someone else.
My interest is not so much about the particular case but more about why the fact that the offences are committed on the road but if convicted they are still allowed back on the road .
Briefly he chased the woman for 20 minutes ,trying to force her to stop ,eventually attacking her car and threatening to kill her and the two children in the car .
All because he thought she used a phone while driving .
He was dealt with by an off duty policeman .
Later charged while in custody for other offences ,and when convicted had addition time added for over 2k worth of unpaid fines .
Briefly he chased the woman for 20 minutes ,trying to force her to stop ,eventually attacking her car and threatening to kill her and the two children in the car .
All because he thought she used a phone while driving .
He was dealt with by an off duty policeman .
Later charged while in custody for other offences ,and when convicted had addition time added for over 2k worth of unpaid fines .
Why do you need special laws for road rage?
If someone does something dangerous or threatening while behind the wheel, there are plenty of existing laws which cover that, and can result in a driving ban.
If someone gets out the car after a driving incident and makes threats or commits acts of violence, why do they need to be banned from driving, any more than someone who is violent/threatening after having a drink should be banned from drinking, which is a far more significant problem than road rage.
If someone does something dangerous or threatening while behind the wheel, there are plenty of existing laws which cover that, and can result in a driving ban.
If someone gets out the car after a driving incident and makes threats or commits acts of violence, why do they need to be banned from driving, any more than someone who is violent/threatening after having a drink should be banned from drinking, which is a far more significant problem than road rage.
ging84 said:
Why do you need special laws for road rage?
If someone does something dangerous or threatening while behind the wheel, there are plenty of existing laws which cover that, and can result in a driving ban.
If someone gets out the car after a driving incident and makes threats or commits acts of violence, why do they need to be banned from driving, any more than someone who is violent/threatening after having a drink should be banned from drinking, which is a far more significant problem than road rage.
I think it's a pertinent question given that someone received points on their licence for warning other drivers of a speed camera they were approaching.If someone does something dangerous or threatening while behind the wheel, there are plenty of existing laws which cover that, and can result in a driving ban.
If someone gets out the car after a driving incident and makes threats or commits acts of violence, why do they need to be banned from driving, any more than someone who is violent/threatening after having a drink should be banned from drinking, which is a far more significant problem than road rage.
Do we need specific laws ?
I'd suggest not - like the mobile phone stuff that was just put in as a crowd pleaser , but it also made the points to prove somewhat easier although the sandwich / banana/ bottle of pop cases for DWDCA since have suggested it just needed a bit of thought in evidence gathering and charging .
There's the full gamut of driving offences if either party has done something prosecutably stupid.
There's then assault and all its variations , criminal damage , public order etc for the behaviours directed towards people or vehicles by the aggressor ...
I'd suggest not - like the mobile phone stuff that was just put in as a crowd pleaser , but it also made the points to prove somewhat easier although the sandwich / banana/ bottle of pop cases for DWDCA since have suggested it just needed a bit of thought in evidence gathering and charging .
There's the full gamut of driving offences if either party has done something prosecutably stupid.
There's then assault and all its variations , criminal damage , public order etc for the behaviours directed towards people or vehicles by the aggressor ...
Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 16th May 10:11
I think my point may not have been put very well .In most cases we only see the criminal charges but any motoring offences are never reported .
If they weren't driving in the first place the rest wouldn't have followed.
The few incidents I have been subjected to all started from very poor driving on the others part which lead to a reaction from them out of guilt ,non have lead to much else because when they spot my size they tend to just rev up and wheel spin away .
Those people commiting road rage are probably not suitable to be behind the wheel but even if prosecuted many still have their licence intact at the end .
If they weren't driving in the first place the rest wouldn't have followed.
The few incidents I have been subjected to all started from very poor driving on the others part which lead to a reaction from them out of guilt ,non have lead to much else because when they spot my size they tend to just rev up and wheel spin away .
Those people commiting road rage are probably not suitable to be behind the wheel but even if prosecuted many still have their licence intact at the end .
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff