Senior Lincs police officer crash - driving without due care
Discussion
Oh dear.
https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-ne...
Got offered a place on a driver improvement course, but was late.
Sounds like a responsible person to me.
https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-ne...
Got offered a place on a driver improvement course, but was late.
Sounds like a responsible person to me.
funkyrobot said:
Can't understand how anyone can let this happen....
So you've never been distracted whilst driving, and taken your eye off the road for a couple of seconds, to make a change to your radio, or to adjust your aircon setting, to check the kids in the back seat are okay, or maybe to look at a scantily clad woman (or man - I don't know your preferences) walking along the pavement, or to look at a nice car being driven on the road, or to take a sneaky peak at an accident as you pass?I bet there has been quite a few times when you haven't been looking at the road for a couple of seconds - It's easily done.
999 times out of 1000, nothing happens, and all is fine, but there's always that 1 time out of a 1000 when you suddenly realise that a car in front of you has suddenly stopped, or you suddenly realise you drifted in your lane, and need to make an urgent correction.
(Cue you to claim that you've never been distracted whilst driving ever! - Shyeah!, right
- Pull the other one, we've done it!) funkyrobot said:
....especially someone with responsibility.
Because someone "with responsibility" is beyond being just another human being, and is trained to drive to a higher level than people without responsibility? 
funkyrobot said:
Why didn't she just pull over?
Because she thought she'd be okay using the hands free in her new car? funkyrobot said:
Seems like she shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel.
Based on one accident caused by being distracted? - That's a bit draconian isn't it?If you applied that theory to all accidents, there'd be hardly anybody allowed to drive!
What this case shows, is that people in positions of responsibility are just as fallible as those who are not in a position of responsibility, hands free devices are not automatically safer than using a mobile phone directly, and that it only takes a couple of seconds of distraction to end in an accident, regardless of who you are, or what job you do!
I'm not trying to defend what happened, merely pointing out that all human beings are not perfect!
(Well, apart from funkyrobot of course!
)4rephill said:
funkyrobot said:
Can't understand how anyone can let this happen....
So you've never been distracted whilst driving, and taken your eye off the road for a couple of seconds, to make a change to your radio, or to adjust your aircon setting, to check the kids in the back seat are okay, or maybe to look at a scantily clad woman (or man - I don't know your preferences) walking along the pavement, or to look at a nice car being driven on the road, or to take a sneaky peak at an accident as you pass?I bet there has been quite a few times when you haven't been looking at the road for a couple of seconds - It's easily done.
999 times out of 1000, nothing happens, and all is fine, but there's always that 1 time out of a 1000 when you suddenly realise that a car in front of you has suddenly stopped, or you suddenly realise you drifted in your lane, and need to make an urgent correction.
(Cue you to claim that you've never been distracted whilst driving ever! - Shyeah!, right
- Pull the other one, we've done it!) funkyrobot said:
....especially someone with responsibility.
Because someone "with responsibility" is beyond being just another human being, and is trained to drive to a higher level than people without responsibility? funkyrobot said:
Why didn't she just pull over?
Because she thought she'd be okay using the hands free in her new car? funkyrobot said:
Seems like she shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel.
Based on one accident caused by being distracted? - That's a bit draconian isn't it?If you applied that theory to all accidents, there'd be hardly anybody allowed to drive!
What this case shows, is that people in positions of responsibility are just as fallible as those who are not in a position of responsibility, hands free devices are not automatically safer than using a mobile phone directly, and that it only takes a couple of seconds of distraction to end in an accident, regardless of who you are, or what job you do!
I'm not trying to defend what happened, merely pointing out that all human beings are not perfect!
(Well, apart from funkyrobot of course!
)
Oh dear.
flashbang said:
So anyone caught crashing while using a mobile is offered a course? I thought it was a straight 6 points 100 fine if caught just for using the phone.
The course is different to one that you used to be able to do if caught using your phone. Costs more and has an assessment i believe. Normally get offered it after being involved in a RTC. La Liga said:
flashbang said:
OverSteery said:
She was using hands free.
And crashed. An offence that can be dealt with via a course, as per the article.
Phone was hands free so the 6 points and fine is irrelevant . She crashed because she wasn’t paying full attention to her driving so it’s driving without due care and attention.
Seems right to me.
Wow that hurt, come on La Liga let’s discuss PC Savage (only kidding meant in jest). :-)
TR4man said:
I think this policewoman is married to the local MP (not that it would have had any bearing on the sentence of course).
There wouldn't have been a sentence had she turned up for the course on time - she turned up 10 minutes late* and the correctly told her to FO and then ended up in court as a result.'*like most senior management she probably always turns up 10 minutes late for every meeting and expects everyone to wait before it starts.
What I find encouraging was she was actually taken to court. If you read the whole article( which by some of the responses on here, some haven't) she was actually offered an awareness course. (so there would have been no prosecution) But turned up late, so she ended up in court.
So the fact that the whole incident was "swept under the carpet" I for one find it encouraging.
So the fact that the whole incident was "swept under the carpet" I for one find it encouraging.
Drumroll said:
What I find encouraging was she was actually taken to court. If you read the whole article( which by some of the responses on here, some haven't) she was actually offered an awareness course. (so there would have been no prosecution) But turned up late, so she ended up in court.
So the fact that the whole incident was "swept under the carpet" I for one find it encouraging.
Exactly - I would be astonished if there was not an episode of "don't you know who I am" when she was 10 minutes late and turned away.So the fact that the whole incident was "swept under the carpet" I for one find it encouraging.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff