Speed = Dangerous driving unless what???
Discussion
2priestsferrari said:
You'd think driver skill would be the factor but I'm being told not...
The question you're asking is really not adequately defined. What is 'speed'?
Speed can be...
- A 'big number', for example 200mph. We cannot tell if that's dangerous without a proper description of the circumstances. In a very high spec vehicle on an empty runway, 200mph isn't anything special.
- A 'small number', for example 10mph. Someone was recently jailed for causing death by dangerous driving because he drove into pedestrians at 10mph. That was dangerously fast.
- 'Appropriate for the circumstances'. Now we're considering the circumstances we're including the risk in the definition of the word 'speed'. Appropriate speed isn't dangerous.
- 'Inappropriate for the circumstances'. This is a way of saying that the speed is dangerous. We're considering the crcumstances in the definition of speed.
Notice that the only sort of speed that's dangerous is speed that isn't appropriate for the circumstances. So the next question is: How do we get inappropriate speed?
- Recklessly. Someone knowingly disregards risk and public safety and drives above safe speeds for the circumstances.
- Through a judgement error. Someone making an effort to drive safely mistakenly thinks a speed is safe, but it turns out not to be.
- Through the inability to make a suitable judgement. Someone drives too fast because he knows no better.
So back to the original question. Someone who is skilled may be reckless and hence dangerous. Someone who is skilled may make a serious judgement error and become dangerous. And someone who ISN'T skilled or able to make a judgement may stay below dangerous thresholds by luck.
But someone who is skilled and who has the right attitude and who makes few errors of judgement is unlikely to be found driving at an inappropriate speed.
2priestsferrari said:
You'd think driver skill would be the factor but I'm being told not...
Driver skill is a factor in whether the driving is dangerous, as is vehicle condition and circumstances. The courts won't find that speed automatically is dangerous in England, but driving too fast for the circumstances may well be.
7db said:
2priestsferrari said:
You'd think driver skill would be the factor but I'm being told not...
Driver skill is a factor in whether the driving is dangerous, as is vehicle condition and circumstances. The courts won't find that speed automatically is dangerous in England, but driving too fast for the circumstances may well be.
Is'nt it also based on the average numpties opinion? or that something else
safespeed said:
2priestsferrari said:
You'd think driver skill would be the factor but I'm being told not...
The question you're asking is really not adequately defined. What is 'speed'?
Speed can be...
- A 'big number', for example 200mph. We cannot tell if that's dangerous without a proper description of the circumstances. In a very high spec vehicle on an empty runway, 200mph isn't anything special.
- A 'small number', for example 10mph. Someone was recently jailed for causing death by dangerous driving because he drove into pedestrians at 10mph. That was dangerously fast.
- 'Appropriate for the circumstances'. Now we're considering the circumstances we're including the risk in the definition of the word 'speed'. Appropriate speed isn't dangerous.
- 'Inappropriate for the circumstances'. This is a way of saying that the speed is dangerous. We're considering the crcumstances in the definition of speed.
Notice that the only sort of speed that's dangerous is speed that isn't appropriate for the circumstances. So the next question is: How do we get inappropriate speed?
- Recklessly. Someone knowingly disregards risk and public safety and drives above safe speeds for the circumstances.
- Through a judgement error. Someone making an effort to drive safely mistakenly thinks a speed is safe, but it turns out not to be.
- Through the inability to make a suitable judgement. Someone drives too fast because he knows no better.
So back to the original question. Someone who is skilled may be reckless and hence dangerous. Someone who is skilled may make a serious judgement error and become dangerous. And someone who ISN'T skilled or able to make a judgement may stay below dangerous thresholds by luck.
But someone who is skilled and who has the right attitude and who makes few errors of judgement is unlikely to be found driving at an inappropriate speed.
Yeah thanks for that - but I think you are overstating this given that the real life situations are where drivers have been doing very big speed with no other circumstances - just speed.
cptsideways said:
7db said:
2priestsferrari said:
You'd think driver skill would be the factor but I'm being told not...
Driver skill is a factor in whether the driving is dangerous, as is vehicle condition and circumstances. The courts won't find that speed automatically is dangerous in England, but driving too fast for the circumstances may well be.
Is'nt it also based on the average numpties opinion? or that something else
It's the view of a careful and competent driver, knowing all that would be obvious to him (including about the state of the vehicle and driver), and anything shown to be known to the accused (although not the accused's unfounded beliefs).
The test is whether, given that knowledge, the C&CD thinks it falls far below the driving standard and is obviously dangerous.
Since suppliers of C&CDs are hard to find, in practice, an ADI may testify as the C&CD's view.
2priestsferrari said:
Yeah thanks for that - but I think you are overstating this given that the real life situations are where drivers have been doing very big speed with no other circumstances - just speed.
Are you asking about dangerous driving in law?
If so, then so far numerical speed alone has not been proved to be dangerous driving.
Someone hereabouts was suggesting that that's the question driving the CPS in the Mark Milton case. They hope to get a ruling that says speed alone is sufficient to prove dangerous driving (the theory goes).
I think they will fail in that because, actually, it's just plain wrong.
7db said:
It's the view of a careful and competent driver, knowing all that would be obvious to him (including about the state of the vehicle and driver), and anything shown to be known to the accused (although not the accused's unfounded beliefs).
The awkward thing about that is that somebody with greater competence than the typical careful and competent driver may be in a position to know that something is safe (for them, given their capabilities), which the typical careful and competent driver would view as dangerous. Yet it is the view of the typical careful and competent driver which would be determine whether they were guilty.
Go and visit China. There you will see very low speeds mainly due to speed enforcement that makes ours look very very liberal by comparison. They have cameras set just above the limit every 1000 meters on some roads. Yet when ever I am there I always see plenty of nasty accidents often 3 in a day. Their standard of driving is worse than a nine year old whos just failed their cycling proficiency. I always dread going there and being driven around, it's like a motoring warzone! But according to UK safety campaigners it must be the safest place in the world to drive because everyone is driving slowly and theres 1000s of cameras!
Could be interesting don't you think?? After all there are very many who drive in the UK without the need to take a UK driving test - or for that matter have any form of driver education.
Now given Germany has a great many roads where speed limits don't exist, as is also the case on the IoM - would these people suggest that speed means dangerous driving?
Now given Germany has a great many roads where speed limits don't exist, as is also the case on the IoM - would these people suggest that speed means dangerous driving?
2priestsferrari said:
Could be interesting don't you think?? After all there are very many who drive in the UK without the need to take a UK driving test - or for that matter have any form of driver education.
Now given Germany has a great many roads where speed limits don't exist, as is also the case on the IoM - would these people suggest that speed means dangerous driving?
Now given Germany has a great many roads where speed limits don't exist, as is also the case on the IoM - would these people suggest that speed means dangerous driving?
We've already been here.
Being above the speed limit doesn't mean it's dangerous driving.
It's an objective test of danger & it can be above or below the posted limit.
2priestsferrari said:
Right so what is your take on how that gets proven beyond reasonable doubt?
Who are these people that have this wonderful insight into life at around 150mph?
Who are these people that have this wonderful insight into life at around 150mph?
Those doing the judging have to apply the reasonable driver test. Would it be obvious to our careful competent driver with the full knowledge of the circumstances (& the accused's knowledge) that it fell far below the standard expected. If they apply that test & find you guilty, that's it beyond reasonable doubt.
vonhosen said:
2priestsferrari said:
Right so what is your take on how that gets proven beyond reasonable doubt?
Who are these people that have this wonderful insight into life at around 150mph?
Who are these people that have this wonderful insight into life at around 150mph?
Those doing the judging have to apply the reasonable driver test. Would it be obvious to our careful competent driver with the full knowledge of the circumstances (& the accused's knowledge) that it fell far below the standard expected. If they apply that test & find you guilty, that's it beyond reasonable doubt.
Seems quite a few amiguities (spell?) and many contraditions in that para.
Careful competant driver and below the standard expected... So if I apply that to not guilty we are saying that... Driver X was travelling at 170mph but thats OK because our careful driver judges that this was within the standard expected...
So on what experience is our careful driver drawing upon to make this judgement?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff