BMW M2 Accident

[st4]

ninepoint2 said:

I imagine getting Insurance on anything other than a pushbike could prove difficult once his ban is over

It won't - after 5 years you don't even declare it for insurance purposes. The question is have you had any convictions in the last 5 years? They ask for the date of conviction. By the time he's driving the 5yrs will be up and he won't have an NCB after that shunt.

I got a DD40 just over 5 years back. After 20 months I was on the road and the premiums were by no means that bad - and by not paying for insurance for nearly 2 years the extra premiums were more than offset by the costs of not running a car. I kept my NCB as I was insuring a car within 2 years of holding fully comp insurance (I sold the car the day of the court hearing (Oct 13) and cancelled the policy then) and was on the road in a car by August 15.

Also he won't have a criminal record for life - under the rehabilitation of offenders act it will be deemed a spent conviction within a decade. He'll be able to move on and put it behind him.

[zarjaz1991]

st4 said:

He'll be able to move on and put it behind him.

Unfortunate.

[st4]

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/cou...

"He was also handed an eight-month restriction of liberty order and was ordered to carry out 150 hours of unpaid work."

https://www.south-ayrshire.gov.uk/social-work-just...

No Jail time - basically house arrest for 8 months and a long long ban of 7yrs.

I am surprised at a) the ban length being so long for a first offence b) he didn't get jail.

On point b) he might be quite badly injured and prison really isn't a place for a crime like this - it's careless, albeit extremely so, not malicious. Crimes of deliberate malice deserve jail - this - despite the consequences doesn't (in my view) but that isn't the standard approach of the law. I suspect he'll be too injured to do the jail time in reality.

There was no intention to injure or kill here, just a complete lack of thought and too much youthful exuberance. The ban, injuries sustained ought to be enough to make him see the error of his ways.

zarjaz1991 said:

Unfortunate.

Why?

Edited by st4 on Sunday 10th February 15:59

[TheJimi]

zarjaz1991 said:

st4 said:

He'll be able to move on and put it behind him.

Unfortunate.

No-one was killed.

He was physically fked up.

His girlfriend was physically fked up .

The guilt of the pain he inadvertently inflicted on his girlfriend is in and of itself a prison sentence.

Your really are snivelling, pathetic, condescending, vindictive liittle human.

Also, for the third time, fancy responding to my post?

You really are

[zarjaz1991]

st4 said:

Why?

Because it feels wrong that, having done what he did and proved himself untrustworthy behind the wheel, he will be able to effectively pretend it never happened.

An insurer might be interested to learn of what happened on his immediately preceding journey, even if was many years ago by that time, but he will not have to tell them.

It also means that, without any further training or improvement of driver skills and attitude, he's free to get a car and put the unsuspecting public at further risk.

I know we don't have life bans, but there's a certain type of idiot for whom they'd be appropriate, and this is one such. In their absence, I'd prefer there to be at least SOME impediment to him simply obtaining any sort of performance car and repeating his little 'watch this' antic. As things stand, there will be none, and the public will have to take a chance on whether he's grown up and learned his lesson, or takes to the road full of resentment and not believing he did anything wrong. People with his attitude rarely change, they just get bitter and more determined.

As I have said previously, if he any sense of decency, having crippled his girlfriend in this sorry incident, he would have made a statement at court to the effect that the length of the ban didn't matter as he was handing back his licence and would never drive again. It would have been the least he could have done given what he did to that poor girl.

Edited by zarjaz1991 on Sunday 10th February 16:40

[zarjaz1991]

TheJimi said:

No-one was killed.

Pure luck

TheJimi said:

He was physically fked up.

Entirely his own fault.

TheJimi said:

His girlfriend was physically fked up .

Also entirely his own fault.

TheJimi said:

The guilt of the pain he inadvertently inflicted on his girlfriend is in and of itself a prison sentence.

How do you know he's even bothered? If he was, why didn't he do the decent thing and announce he'd never drive again?

TheJimi said:

Your really are <abuse abuse abuse snip snip snip>

TheJimi said:

Also, for the third time, fancy responding to my post?

No I don;t, because all I get from you is abuse. Grow up and I'll give you some consideration.

[J4CKO]

zarjaz1991 said:

just get bitter

Ironic....

[st4]

zarjaz1991 said:

Because it feels wrong that, having done what he did and proved himself untrustworthy behind the wheel, he will be able to effectively pretend it never happened.

An insurer might be interested to learn of what happened on his immediately preceding journey, even if was many years ago by that time, but he will not have to tell them.

It also means that, without any further training or improvement of driver skills and attitude, he's free to get a car and put the unsuspecting public at further risk.

He'll have to pass the extended test. Seven years is a long time and it's the insurance industry who make the questions. He hopefully has learned from his mistake.

zarjaz1991 said:

I know we don't have life bans, but there's a certain type of idiot for whom they'd be appropriate, and this is one such. In their absence, I'd prefer there to be at least SOME impediment to him simply any sort of performance car and repeating his little 'watch this' antic. As things stand, there will be none, and the public will have to take a chance on whether he's grown up and learned his lesson, or takes to the road full of resentment and not believing he did anything wrong. People with his attitude rarely change, they just get bitter and more determined.

As I have said previously, if he any sense of decency, having crippled his girlfriend in this sorry incident, he would have made a statement at court to the effect that the length of the ban didn't matter as he was handing back his licence and would never drive again. It would have been the least he could have done given what he did to that poor girl.

It's the same with all offending - violent criminals are let out of jail, drug dealers etc get let out. The public are exposed to these nutters all the time as they do F all jail time. If he likes cars and driving, he knows what not to do as he have lived through 7 years of not getting to do it.

It was an accident, a moment of folly and madness - no way should that determine the rest of his life whatever that will be like.

[st4]

Also - lets say he did this speed and didn't crash - the punishment would be less - but really why should it because his actions and crime is the same. Undoubtately the driving is dangerous - no question but the punishment should fit the actual action of driving dangerously rather than consider the outcome of that. To me that is the fair way to deal with these crimes.

I fully expect had he not crashed and no-one was injured if he was caught he'd be facing a much smaller ban. In that sense I think he's still been quite harshly dealt with.

[zarjaz1991]

st4 said:

It was an accident, a moment of folly and madness - no way should that determine the rest of his life whatever that will be like.

Why shouldn't it? Why do we have to keep giving idiots like this second chances?
This is true of many other offences, not just this one.

It's not like there hasn't been a lot of publicity regarding the risks of this type of activity. Yet he carried on doing it anyway. I don't doubt this wasn't the first time he'd done it, merely the first time it went wrong.
Why should halfwits like this get a second chance? Often they kill people, and their victims do not get any second chance.
If his life is screwed up as a result, there is only ONE person he need blame for that.

Driving should be a privilege, not a right. Everyone makes mistakes, but this was not a mistake as such, it was a deliberate act of incredibly stupid driving that anyone with any intelligence would have known wasn't worth the risk. He either knew that and proceeded anyway, or he didn't know that in which case he's too stupid to be allowed to drive a car at all.

I really don't want to sound like some sort of BRAKE campaigner, I am not, but this bloke has got off incredibly lightly and it is no deterrent at all to others.

[zarjaz1991]

Buzypea said:

You need a deterrent in place, otherwise it would be a free for all with young well educated tts having free reign to blast around at will without much repercussion. It this tt in the M2 was put away for a few years then it would make others think twice before doing something similar, therefore saving more people from serious injury and death. He deserves a criminal record, he made the choice and should pay the price. He’s lucky it didn’t turn out worse than it did. There is place to drive like that and it is not on a public road. I’ve had fun on the road in a car when younger but not to the extent this drove. I really cannot fathom why you think he should be not made a criminal, his actions could have resulted in many deaths, it’s only by luck it didn’t.

Absolutely right.

And additionally, what aaron_2000 *appears* to be suggesting is that well educated people should be given more lenient sentences otherwise it's a waste! Really? So one should be sent to prison for longer if you have no qualifications, because, hey, your're just worthless! Nice.

Besides which, I don't why aaron_2000 brought that into it, as there's no evidence the bloke involved in this incident was well educated at all. His Instagram posts prior to the incident certainly didn't give that impression, I'm afraid.

[st4]

zarjaz1991 said:

Why shouldn't it? Why do we have to keep giving idiots like this second chances?
This is true of many other offences, not just this one.

It's not like there hasn't been a lot of publicity regarding the risks of this type of activity. Yet he carried on doing it anyway. I don't doubt this wasn't the first time he'd done it, merely the first time it went wrong.
Why should halfwits like this get a second chance? Often they kill people, and their victims do not get any second chance.
If his life is screwed up as a result, there is only ONE person he need blame for that.

Driving should be a privilege, not a right. Everyone makes mistakes, but this was not a mistake as such, it was a deliberate act of incredibly stupid driving that anyone with any intelligence would have known wasn't worth the risk. He either knew that and proceeded anyway, or he didn't know that in which case he's too stupid to be allowed to drive a car at all.

I really don't want to sound like some sort of BRAKE campaigner, I am not, but this bloke has got off incredibly lightly and it is no deterrent at all to others.

If acid attackers can get a second chance a young buck with too much money and not enough sense surely can.They let convicted nonces out on the street - surely a 22yr old who stacks a car can get a second bite at the apple.

Hopefully the ban will be enough to make him correct his behaviour. I agree a second similar act/crime should be dealt with much much more harshly.

[BlackLabel]

zarjaz1991 said:

I really don't want to sound like some sort of BRAKE campaigner, I am not, but this bloke has got off incredibly lightly and it is no deterrent at all to others.

In your opinion.

Most on this thread, whilst accepting that he was driving like a knob, think that the sentence handed out was an appropriate one.

[aaron_2000]

zarjaz1991 said:

aaron_2000 said:

However you justify yourself. I'll put it a different way. Take someone who's probably well educated, probably has quite a good career ahead of him, someone who's evidently been raised in a rich family and given nice things, someone who drove like a to show off to people and lost control of the car he probably should't have had, and you'd like to take that person and turn them into a criminal with absolutely no prospects because he did something stupid like everyone young driver? Except you of course, from what we can see you've probably never had an ounce of fun in your life. Thankfully, the judge had a little more insight that you.

He turned himself into a criminal by his criminal act of driving in a criminal fashion.

Have you always been a 61 year old trapped in a young body? Driving ban is plenty, no reason to waste taxpayer money and take away his future over dangerous driving. If he'd killed someone then it'd be different. Not sure why I'm wasting my time, you're obviously not open to basic reasoning.

[toppstuff]

aaron_2000 said:

zarjaz1991 said:

aaron_2000 said:

However you justify yourself. I'll put it a different way. Take someone who's probably well educated, probably has quite a good career ahead of him, someone who's evidently been raised in a rich family and given nice things, someone who drove like a to show off to people and lost control of the car he probably should't have had, and you'd like to take that person and turn them into a criminal with absolutely no prospects because he did something stupid like everyone young driver? Except you of course, from what we can see you've probably never had an ounce of fun in your life. Thankfully, the judge had a little more insight that you.

He turned himself into a criminal by his criminal act of driving in a criminal fashion.

Have you always been a 61 year old trapped in a young body? Driving ban is plenty, no reason to waste taxpayer money and take away his future over dangerous driving. If he'd killed someone then it'd be different. Not sure why I'm wasting my time, you're obviously not open to basic reasoning.

Nope. I think you're wrong.

This idiot was let off lightly. Your line of " if he had killed someone it'd be different" is the key here - the only reason no-one died is pure luck. Unless this idiot is absolutely stopped in his mindset - forced to change his attitude / brain - then this could happen again and someone could die - maybe your loved ones. It is absolutely right that this moron will not drive again for a very long time.

[aaron_2000]

toppstuff said:

aaron_2000 said:

zarjaz1991 said:

aaron_2000 said:

However you justify yourself. I'll put it a different way. Take someone who's probably well educated, probably has quite a good career ahead of him, someone who's evidently been raised in a rich family and given nice things, someone who drove like a to show off to people and lost control of the car he probably should't have had, and you'd like to take that person and turn them into a criminal with absolutely no prospects because he did something stupid like everyone young driver? Except you of course, from what we can see you've probably never had an ounce of fun in your life. Thankfully, the judge had a little more insight that you.

He turned himself into a criminal by his criminal act of driving in a criminal fashion.

Have you always been a 61 year old trapped in a young body? Driving ban is plenty, no reason to waste taxpayer money and take away his future over dangerous driving. If he'd killed someone then it'd be different. Not sure why I'm wasting my time, you're obviously not open to basic reasoning.

Nope. I think you're wrong.

This idiot was let off lightly. Your line of " if he had killed someone it'd be different" is the key here - the only reason no-one died is pure luck. Unless this idiot is absolutely stopped in his mindset - forced to change his attitude / brain - then this could happen again and someone could die - maybe your loved ones. It is absolutely right that this moron will not drive again for a very long time.

Wait, do you think I'm arguing that he shouldn't have been banned?

[toppstuff]

aaron_2000 said:

toppstuff said:

aaron_2000 said:

zarjaz1991 said:

aaron_2000 said:

However you justify yourself. I'll put it a different way. Take someone who's probably well educated, probably has quite a good career ahead of him, someone who's evidently been raised in a rich family and given nice things, someone who drove like a to show off to people and lost control of the car he probably should't have had, and you'd like to take that person and turn them into a criminal with absolutely no prospects because he did something stupid like everyone young driver? Except you of course, from what we can see you've probably never had an ounce of fun in your life. Thankfully, the judge had a little more insight that you.

He turned himself into a criminal by his criminal act of driving in a criminal fashion.

Have you always been a 61 year old trapped in a young body? Driving ban is plenty, no reason to waste taxpayer money and take away his future over dangerous driving. If he'd killed someone then it'd be different. Not sure why I'm wasting my time, you're obviously not open to basic reasoning.

Nope. I think you're wrong.

This idiot was let off lightly. Your line of " if he had killed someone it'd be different" is the key here - the only reason no-one died is pure luck. Unless this idiot is absolutely stopped in his mindset - forced to change his attitude / brain - then this could happen again and someone could die - maybe your loved ones. It is absolutely right that this moron will not drive again for a very long time.

Wait, do you think I'm arguing that he shouldn't have been banned?

So many snips in the thread I may have misread you

Are we agreed the guy is a cretin who got what he deserved and if anything was let off lightly? If so, then we agree

[aaron_2000]

toppstuff said:

aaron_2000 said:

toppstuff said:

aaron_2000 said:

zarjaz1991 said:

aaron_2000 said:

However you justify yourself. I'll put it a different way. Take someone who's probably well educated, probably has quite a good career ahead of him, someone who's evidently been raised in a rich family and given nice things, someone who drove like a to show off to people and lost control of the car he probably should't have had, and you'd like to take that person and turn them into a criminal with absolutely no prospects because he did something stupid like everyone young driver? Except you of course, from what we can see you've probably never had an ounce of fun in your life. Thankfully, the judge had a little more insight that you.

He turned himself into a criminal by his criminal act of driving in a criminal fashion.

Have you always been a 61 year old trapped in a young body? Driving ban is plenty, no reason to waste taxpayer money and take away his future over dangerous driving. If he'd killed someone then it'd be different. Not sure why I'm wasting my time, you're obviously not open to basic reasoning.

Nope. I think you're wrong.

This idiot was let off lightly. Your line of " if he had killed someone it'd be different" is the key here - the only reason no-one died is pure luck. Unless this idiot is absolutely stopped in his mindset - forced to change his attitude / brain - then this could happen again and someone could die - maybe your loved ones. It is absolutely right that this moron will not drive again for a very long time.

Wait, do you think I'm arguing that he shouldn't have been banned?

So many snips in the thread I may have misread you

Are we agreed the guy is a cretin who got what he deserved and if anything was let off lightly? If so, then we agree

Absolutely we are. I'm arguing that prison would've been a waste of time, that the driving ban is a far better punishment for him

[toppstuff]

aaron_2000 said:

Absolutely we are. I'm arguing that prison would've been a waste of time, that the driving ban is a far better punishment for him

Maybe. Mind you, if he breaks his driving ban ( which I think carries a high a probability ) then he should go to prison and possibly for more than a year or two, because it would tell us he has learned nothing.

[aaron_2000]

toppstuff said:

aaron_2000 said:

Absolutely we are. I'm arguing that prison would've been a waste of time, that the driving ban is a far better punishment for him

Maybe. Mind you, if he breaks his driving ban ( which I think carries a high a probability ) then he should go to prison and possibly for more than a year or two, because it would tell us he has learned nothing.

I agree with that. But prison was (rightfully) not the first port of call.