Driving like a madman.

[Polarbert]

Say that one of your family members was in a great deal of pain for one reason or another, or somebody was about die. Basically something really bad, would you be allowed to drive like a nutter to get to a hospital, or would you be prosicuted as if there was no reason for it?


Just a wonder really, obviously I don't condone this sort of thing, but if one of family members was like going to snuff it or something and the difference was made by a few minutes then I'd do anything possible.


Ta.

[fidgits]

I think your asking the wrong question there.


The question is - if a family member is dying or in need of serious help - would you actually give a crap about road laws and/or prosecution?

I know i certainly wouldn't - i'd be driving to the limit of my abilities/car/road conditions regardless of any laws - and i would deal with the consequences afterwards!

[Hollywood Wheels]

Driving like a 'madman' will more than likely result in an accident. You are no good to your ill or injured family member then. Exceeding a speed limit? Different story. I think most people (myself included) would think nothing of setting off a gatso or whatever if it really was a life altering or threatening situation. Too many people try this excuse when there is nothing more than a minor illness or injury.

[M5Dave]

I think that a dire emergency might exempt you from speeding laws etc, but if you caused an accident you would still be held responsible.

[cooperman]

I have a good friend who's daughter was very seriously ill and needed a liver transplant. She got the call that a suitable liver was arrving at Addenbrookes Hospital in Cambridge and to get there as soon as possible from Milton Keynes. Her partner really got a move on in his Subaru and tripped a camera on the way at VERY high speed. However, the situation was explained to the CPS and supported by the transplant unit by way of letters and a doctor's report and the prosecution was dropped. Sensible, too, in the opinion of most people. This was about 3 years ago.

[chrisgr31]

Hollywood Wheels said:

Driving like a 'madman' will more than likely result in an accident. You are no good to your ill or injured family member then. Exceeding a speed limit? Different story. I think most people (myself included) would think nothing of setting off a gatso or whatever if it really was a life altering or threatening situation. Too many people try this excuse when there is nothing more than a minor illness or injury.

Fair enough comment and this subject has been discussed before, often in relation to getting women in labour to the hospital.

Generally the concensus has been that it is dependent on the circumstances and there are a number of cases where people have been let off, or found guilty dependent on the facts. There was in particular a case where someone was found guilty having driven miles to go home collect the ill person then take them to hospital. Had the person been truly ill surely the quickest action would have been to call an ambulance and for the driver to have meet them at the hospital?

[esselte]

cooperman said:

I have a good friend who's daughter was very seriously ill and needed a liver transplant. She got the call that a suitable liver was arrving at Addenbrookes Hospital in Cambridge and to get there as soon as possible from Milton Keynes. Her partner really got a move on in his Subaru and tripped a camera on the way at VERY high speed. However, the situation was explained to the CPS and supported by the transplant unit by way of letters and a doctor's report and the prosecution was dropped. Sensible, too, in the opinion of most people. This was about 3 years ago.

Ironically wasn't there a case a couple of years ago where a guy in a car was carrying a donor something or other got flashed and fined?

[Bingoid]

M5Dave said:

I think that a dire emergency might exempt you from speeding laws etc, but if you caused an accident you would still be held responsible.

I remember Sir Alex of Man Yoo getting let off for driving down the hard shoulder cos he had the two bob bits a few years ago.

I think that you should drive swiftly but safely, not like a madman, and taking out inocent bystanders is not worthwhile...

[Don]

Hollywood Wheels said:

Driving like a 'madman' will more than likely result in an accident. You are no good to your ill or injured family member then. Exceeding a speed limit? Different story. I think most people (myself included) would think nothing of setting off a gatso or whatever if it really was a life altering or threatening situation. Too many people try this excuse when there is nothing more than a minor illness or injury.

Exactly. If it really, really mattered and I was the best driver available I would risk prosecution and drive as fast as my talents allowed me in order to save a life. And I'd just accept my lumps if I got caught.

I would not drive at a high speed in complex environments and put others at risk unless the reason was very, very dire, though.

How bad would you feel if whilst getting the person to hospital you caused an accident that killed? Because of this - yes I'd drive fast. Like a nutter? No. Or, at least, I seriously hope not..

[cooperman]

The case in question was in Lincolnshire where an organ was being rushed to Addenbrookes.
Cambridgeshire have both Papworth and Addenbrookes which are world renowned transplant units, so the Cambridgeshire scammers are aware of 'the need for speed' in getting transplantees into those units when organs become available.
In the Leics case, the public uproar led to the charges being abandoned and, one might hope, a change in attitude, but who knows?

[LongQ]

chrisgr31 said:

There was in particular a case where someone was found guilty having driven miles to go home collect the ill person then take them to hospital. Had the person been truly ill surely the quickest action would have been to call an ambulance and for the driver to have meet them at the hospital?

But what happens if the sick person appear very sick at the time but it turns out to be something not too serious? Then where do you stand?

As for calling an ambulance, hmm. Doesn't always work. My youngest had been having some serious bouts of abdominal pain - about 24 to 36 hours each time, at irregularly spaced times over a period of about 2 years. We had got her into hospital once thanks to a GP friend. This resulted in several months of tests for various things which turned up nothing. After a gap of some months she had another bout and after 48 hours - longer than usual - we decided a doctor visit was required.

Try getting one of those at the weekend. After a number of conversations with a call operator at NHS direct (no chance of any proper local support) we gave up in frustration and called for an ambulance. After another series of fruitless conversations with a call operator we abandoned that as well and managed to get her downstairs and into a car and drove her to A&E. Not fast in this case but under slightly different circumstances it might have been.

After about 10 days in hospital with no improvement in condition, despite checking for just about everything, apparently, it was decided that a laparoscopy might be a good idea just to see what was what. Turned out to be an infected appendix which could of course have been rather serious, especially if we had left things for another 24 hours whilst we battled through the red tape of getting an ambulance.

There are times when you have to make decisions which seem valid then but may not appear so convincing later on. Your own common sense may be stretched to its limits and relying on the common sense of others to protect you from technical infringements is probably not very advisable. Quite how you can judge whether the circumstances justify the action with any degree of certainty I have no idea. I suspect you cannot. In which case the only 'safe' decision is to be sure not to do anything rash, no matter what the circumstances.

Might be a tough call though.

[jasandjules]

Polarbert said:

Say that one of your family members was in a great deal of pain for one reason or another, or somebody was about die. Basically something really bad, would you be allowed to drive like a nutter to get to a hospital, or would you be prosicuted as if there was no reason for it?

The CPS are entitled to prosecute, but if it was life threatening etc.. then I suspect that a quick involvement of the BBC/Local rag would soon get the Public Interest test removed.. And the charges dropped.

[heebeegeetee]

There are the mentalists out there, Brake and the like, that say no emergency vehicle, or any vehicle at all, should ever break the speed limit. They reckon there's no justification at all for it.

I guess if you believe that speed kills, then perhaps they think that whenever a vehicle breaks a speed limit, somebody somewhere in the world dies.

[monkeyhanger]

heebeegeetee said:

There are the mentalists out there, Brake and the like, that say no emergency vehicle, or any vehicle at all, should ever break the speed limit. They reckon there's no justification at all for it.

I guess if you believe that speed kills, then perhaps they think that whenever a vehicle breaks a speed limit, somebody somewhere in the world dies.

In which case such people should have a flag applied to their address. When a 999 call is made from their address, the operator in the control room can make the crew of the Police Car / Ambulance / Fire Appliance aware that there is no rush and can they stop off at the chippy on the way and pick up Cod&Chips for 10.

Edited by monkeyhanger on Monday 18th December 18:20

[turbobloke]

heebeegeetee said:

I guess if you believe that speed kills, then perhaps they (Brake) think that whenever a vehicle breaks a speed limit, somebody somewhere in the world dies.

Allegedly Brake were given this on good authority by the easter bunny who got it from santa via the tooth fairy.

[bigdods]

Been there done that. From what I understand you can drive fast (not like a nutter) well in excess of the speed limit provided you are fulfilling the role of an ambulance. I.e. you call an ambulance, they say it will be 20 mins and it is likely that in this time frame the person will die or come to serious harm. They will still prosecute you if caught but provided you dont drive dangerously you should be acquitted.

In the first case for me we are at home , doctor says (and I quote here) - 'your wife is seriously ill she could die within the hour. She needs to get to hospital now. Ambulance are giving 15 min eta I suggest you drive her yourself and dont hang around'. This was late at night ambulance would take about 20 mins to get to hospital as they cant go that fast . On the empty road I did it in significantly less without putting myself, my wife or other road users at (IMHO) significant risk.

Second occasion perhaps more marginal - 3 year old cut his thumb off (long story). I am sat with said child, thumb in my hand blood everywhere. Ambulance giving 10 min eta. I know from prior experience I can have him in A&E in less time than that and improve the chances of having it re-attached (in my non medical opinion). No brainer but I suspect in this case I might not have got away with it had I been caught.

In all cases I would always dial 999 first - they are best equipped to deal with the problem on the spot and get you safely to hospital. Only if the eta is a long one do you then consider the alternatives. As we live not far from the hospital, and it can take the ambulance anything up to 20 minutes to get here I always consider plan b. In fact we live about 100yds from the ambulance station and on teh occasions when I have had to call them I can tlel within about 30 seconds of making the call if we are on or not as I can hear the sirens start up. No sirens usually = a long wait.

It looks like I call a lot of ambulances doesnt it ! But I dont, 6 times in 8 years since I have lived here, 3 for me and mine the rest for strangers while out and about.

Edited by bigdods on Monday 18th December 18:57

[Don]

bigdods said:

In the first case for me we are at home , doctor says (and I quote here) - 'your wife is seriously ill she could die within the hour. She needs to get to hospital now. Ambulance are giving 15 min eta I suggest you drive her yourself and dont hang around'. This was late at night ambulance would take about 20 mins to get to hospital as they cant go that fast . On the empty road I did it in significantly less without putting myself, my wife or other road users at (IMHO) significant risk.

Faced with your situation? I would have driven her to the hospital in the same way you did. Without a shadow of a doubt. If I had to face the consequences afterwards I would do it with a clear concience.

[Major Bloodnok]

heebeegeetee said:

There are the mentalists out there, Brake and the like, that say no emergency vehicle, or any vehicle at all, should ever break the speed limit. They reckon there's no justification at all for it.

I guess if you believe that speed kills, then perhaps they think that whenever a vehicle breaks a speed limit, somebody somewhere in the world dies.

And, quite probably, someone does die, somewhere, whenever a car exceeds the speed limit. Proof positive, I think everyone will agree - how can you all live with yourselves?

[jasandjules]

Major Bloodnok said:

I guess if you believe that speed kills, then perhaps they think that whenever a vehicle breaks a speed limit, somebody somewhere in the world dies.

And, quite probably, someone does die, somewhere, whenever a car exceeds the speed limit. Proof positive, I think everyone will agree - how can you all live with yourselves?[/quote]

Uh, one less person breathing = less CO2 = less global warming??!?!?

[Balmoral Green]

Rob, at the next meet, ask me to tell you about a dying alsation and a 316 rolling road block on a dual carriageway, and an arsey copper who physically assaulted me whilst his mate cleared off in shame.