Dangerous Driving or Careless Driving?
Discussion
Evening chaps,
We've been having a debate among us over the last couple of days and thought it might be interesting to open it out to the PH Brethren!
A common scenario, and one which I can certainly relate to, involves driving behind a long line of slow-moving cars, perhaps following a horse box or something similar, where the first car in the queue apparently doesn't want to overtake, perhaps being there to shield the slowcoach in front.
So the road opens up, nice straight ahead and you go for it....you pass one car, two cars..., three cars....oh what the hell, you can do another one too.....only to realise that this was perhaps one too many, as indicated by the whites of the eyes of the oncoming driver!
An error of judgment is made, rather than a premeditated attempt to drive in a manner that would be likely to endanger lives or property.
Is this dangerous driving or is it careless driving?
Could it be either of these, depending on the interpretation of others?
Could it in fact be neither of these??
We're not sure!!!
Jazzer
We've been having a debate among us over the last couple of days and thought it might be interesting to open it out to the PH Brethren!
A common scenario, and one which I can certainly relate to, involves driving behind a long line of slow-moving cars, perhaps following a horse box or something similar, where the first car in the queue apparently doesn't want to overtake, perhaps being there to shield the slowcoach in front.
So the road opens up, nice straight ahead and you go for it....you pass one car, two cars..., three cars....oh what the hell, you can do another one too.....only to realise that this was perhaps one too many, as indicated by the whites of the eyes of the oncoming driver!
An error of judgment is made, rather than a premeditated attempt to drive in a manner that would be likely to endanger lives or property.
Is this dangerous driving or is it careless driving?
Could it be either of these, depending on the interpretation of others?
Could it in fact be neither of these??
We're not sure!!!
Jazzer
Edited by Jazzer on Monday 22 December 18:34
I'm guessing it would meet the standard of careless driving but fail to meet the standard of dangerous driving.
If you are going to do a multi vehicle overtake you need to be sure, before you commit to overtaking, that you can to all the way past all the vehicles or alternatively pick a return spot between vehicles, which means a pair of vehicles with a large gap between them. Unless of course you are on a bike, 'cos bikes can overtake everything and fit in everywhere
If you are going to do a multi vehicle overtake you need to be sure, before you commit to overtaking, that you can to all the way past all the vehicles or alternatively pick a return spot between vehicles, which means a pair of vehicles with a large gap between them. Unless of course you are on a bike, 'cos bikes can overtake everything and fit in everywhere
Careless driving - "falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver"
Dangerous driving - "falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous"
I suspect it'd be difficult to get a "guilty" for dangerous from a jury, but careless should be fairly straightforward, so they'd probably just go straight for that. Unless, of course, there were other circumstances...
Dangerous driving - "falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous"
I suspect it'd be difficult to get a "guilty" for dangerous from a jury, but careless should be fairly straightforward, so they'd probably just go straight for that. Unless, of course, there were other circumstances...
No other circumstances.....and I've not been a naughty boy!
One of us is a traffic plod and thinks it's not necessarily either offence.....would depend on circumstances, with a telling off being sufficient if they believe an honest error has been made.
Interesting one though, certainly gets people talking!
One of us is a traffic plod and thinks it's not necessarily either offence.....would depend on circumstances, with a telling off being sufficient if they believe an honest error has been made.
Interesting one though, certainly gets people talking!
It depends entirely on the circumstances. It may be dangerous, it may not. It doesn't matter what the intention of the driver is, as there is no need to prove intent. It is a matter of fact.
If it's still the same, inappropriate overtaking is listed by the CPS as an item that may constitute a charge of dangerous driving.
If it's still the same, inappropriate overtaking is listed by the CPS as an item that may constitute a charge of dangerous driving.
allergictocheese said:
It depends entirely on the circumstances. It may be dangerous, it may not. It doesn't matter what the intention of the driver is, as there is no need to prove intent. It is a matter of fact.
If it's still the same, inappropriate overtaking is listed by the CPS as an item that may constitute a charge of dangerous driving.
This.^^^^If it's still the same, inappropriate overtaking is listed by the CPS as an item that may constitute a charge of dangerous driving.
And yes, its still shown in the CPS list under Dangerous Driving:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_traffic_of...
"overtaking which could not have been carried out safely;"
y selfish driving from the slow coach at the front, they're the one who should really be given points.there's a reasonable proportion of drivers who seem to flash their lights when they see a perfectly safely executed over take, and presumably believe it was ludicrously dangerous, so for an over take where even the driver thought it was a bit too close to for comfort, the average witness would probably declare it suicidal.
This is a very good point. A lot of people have never driven anything fast, judging all situations as if dealing with people driving the likes of a Honda Jazz, meaning that they construe perfectly safe manoeuvres as dangerous. Some even flash when overtaken because the noise gives them a fright....maybe it wakes them up from their 40 mph stupor!
Jazzer said:
I wasn't actually talking about myself.
Are you suggesting that a driver should not overtake a Honda Jazz in case it gives its driver a fright?
Oh dear!
What I am suggesting is that one consideration you should always have, is how your driving will be perceived by others (irrespective of whether you believe your driving is legal). If you know or suspect you driving is going to shock or upset others (even if legal), you are putting yourself at risk of adverse witness statements in the event of an incident.Are you suggesting that a driver should not overtake a Honda Jazz in case it gives its driver a fright?
Oh dear!
Aside from the fact that decency includes consideration for other people, alienating other road users may bite you later if you are at the mercy of witness statements they give to the Police.
Why do you keep referring to "You"?
I understand what you are saying, but don't think any of us need adjust perfectly safe and legal driving practices to appease people who often have no clue what they're doing and who in fact cause countless accidents and fatalities up and down the country.
The horse box convoy crew is a case in point, with vehicles behind the lead vehicle driving in such a way as to slow down and frustrate legal drivers behind them, goading them into long overtake manoeuvres to get by and move on safely.
As for me, I give these fools a wide bearth and completely ignore their ignorant flashes.
Driver training for these idiots, especially in the business of considerate driving, is what's really required.
I understand what you are saying, but don't think any of us need adjust perfectly safe and legal driving practices to appease people who often have no clue what they're doing and who in fact cause countless accidents and fatalities up and down the country.
The horse box convoy crew is a case in point, with vehicles behind the lead vehicle driving in such a way as to slow down and frustrate legal drivers behind them, goading them into long overtake manoeuvres to get by and move on safely.
As for me, I give these fools a wide bearth and completely ignore their ignorant flashes.
Driver training for these idiots, especially in the business of considerate driving, is what's really required.
You, as in 'you'. And driving considerately works both ways. The 'clueless idiots' may feel that your driving is dangerous and idiotic. You may feel its perfectly safe.
In the event of an accident you might find yourself at the mercy of these people as jurors or magistrates when they judge your driving. Their opinion of whether you driving fell below or far below the objective standard might not match yours. Which is why you shouldn't just take into account your own definition of legality when interacting with other road users.
In the event of an accident you might find yourself at the mercy of these people as jurors or magistrates when they judge your driving. Their opinion of whether you driving fell below or far below the objective standard might not match yours. Which is why you shouldn't just take into account your own definition of legality when interacting with other road users.
You miss my point about "You", either that or you're perverse.
The Law is the Law.
Interpretation of The Law can be subjective, that's why we have Judges and Magistrates to moderate and inform decision making.
Most people would agree on what constitutes dangerous driving.
The idiots who in essence think you can only safely overtake on a runway with no oncoming jets are in the minority thankfully.
The Law is the Law.
Interpretation of The Law can be subjective, that's why we have Judges and Magistrates to moderate and inform decision making.
Most people would agree on what constitutes dangerous driving.
The idiots who in essence think you can only safely overtake on a runway with no oncoming jets are in the minority thankfully.
Jazzer said:
Most people would agree on what constitutes dangerous driving.
According to your opening post, that isn't the case.On any given occasion you may think your driving is lawful. Others may disagree. If their opinion is used against you, calling them idiots isn't going to cut the mustard.
So to bring it back on topic, if you overtake and affect oncoming traffic, you're likely to be guilty of s3. If the circumstances are that it was sufficiently foolhardy and likely to lead to an accident, it may be that it's Dangerous. It will depend on the circumstances.
To maintain arrogance and say 'I am right and the others are all wrong' because they take a different view of your driving is leaving you open to a big fall one day.
Ah, so you are perverse then!
Is there something going wrong at your end, are you bored already with your holiday?
I'm off jogging now, but will take a horn with me to warn slower joggers of my imminent overtaking manoeuvre....wouldn't want to frighten them or be at the mercy of their litigious raptures.
Exercise is good for the mind, endorphins and all that.
You should try it, get you away from trolling for a few minutes.
Is there something going wrong at your end, are you bored already with your holiday?
I'm off jogging now, but will take a horn with me to warn slower joggers of my imminent overtaking manoeuvre....wouldn't want to frighten them or be at the mercy of their litigious raptures.
Exercise is good for the mind, endorphins and all that.
You should try it, get you away from trolling for a few minutes.
Jazzer said:
You miss my point about "You", either that or you're perverse.
The Law is the Law.
Interpretation of The Law can be subjective, that's why we have Judges and Magistrates to moderate and inform decision making.
Most people would agree on what constitutes dangerous driving.
The idiots who in essence think you can only safely overtake on a runway with no oncoming jets are in the minority thankfully.
People have all different ideas of what constitutes dangerous driving, but that's neither here nor there.The Law is the Law.
Interpretation of The Law can be subjective, that's why we have Judges and Magistrates to moderate and inform decision making.
Most people would agree on what constitutes dangerous driving.
The idiots who in essence think you can only safely overtake on a runway with no oncoming jets are in the minority thankfully.
What matters is how the authorities/courts interpret dangerous driving legislation.
Those sharing the roads with you are potentially hostile witnesses.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 23 December 11:09
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff