Three jailed for dangerous driving
Discussion
V8RX7 said:
A few years ago they reduced all the NSL near me to 50
In the last few weeks they have been repainting the white lines - lots have changed to double whites.
Frankly I'm surprised any bikers have readable plates
I remember those flip number plates, what a marvelous invention they were. It did not take long for legislation to be brought in to ban them.In the last few weeks they have been repainting the white lines - lots have changed to double whites.
Frankly I'm surprised any bikers have readable plates
I think the guy who invented/manufactired them used to post on this site.
I’ve just read through the thread from postings over the last couple of days. I’d just repeat my earlier comment, that we don’t know whether or not jail time is/was fair, as we don’t know the previous convictions (if any) for the riders involved. It could be the tenth time they’ve been done, it could be the first.
I’m still in the “the riding was pretty s
tty” camp, whatever the outcome. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve broken speed limits/not concentrated/done overtakes without proper planning, both on a bike and in a car (not at the same time, obvs). I do tend to stick to red ringed speed limits (mostly), but 2x the speed limit, around other traffic and hazards, on the back wheel? Definitely not (Leaving aside the quite important fact I can’t wheelie anyway).
I get the argument “Nobody died/was hurt”, but as with any crime/offence, there has to be a deterrent component, otherwise there would be lots more people riding like that, which would obviously increase the risk/chance of it actually going wrong.
I’m still in the “the riding was pretty s
tty” camp, whatever the outcome. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve broken speed limits/not concentrated/done overtakes without proper planning, both on a bike and in a car (not at the same time, obvs). I do tend to stick to red ringed speed limits (mostly), but 2x the speed limit, around other traffic and hazards, on the back wheel? Definitely not (Leaving aside the quite important fact I can’t wheelie anyway). I get the argument “Nobody died/was hurt”, but as with any crime/offence, there has to be a deterrent component, otherwise there would be lots more people riding like that, which would obviously increase the risk/chance of it actually going wrong.
Dibble said:
I get the argument “Nobody died/was hurt”, but as with any crime/offence, there has to be a deterrent component, otherwise there would be lots more people riding like that, which would obviously increase the risk/chance of it actually going wrong.
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
I think the riding was pretty poor. Don't get me wrong, I've done my share of speeding, overtakes on sold whites and filtering at speed but I'd like to think the time/place/execution was better than in the video. I also don't film myself riding in a manor that might be interpreted as illegal.For doing that, they were dicks and getting caught and done was only a matter of time.
Did they deserve a custodial? On the face of it and without further detail, it does look a little harsh, especially considering some of the other decisions seen in the press and on reality TV. However, the law, as always, is stacked against those who have something to lose.
Did they deserve a custodial? On the face of it and without further detail, it does look a little harsh, especially considering some of the other decisions seen in the press and on reality TV. However, the law, as always, is stacked against those who have something to lose.
Solocle said:
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
Different offences, different potential sentences & sentencing guidelines.
vonhosen said:
Solocle said:
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
Different offences, different potential sentences & sentencing guidelines.
Repeatedly drink driving while disqualified, ramming cars and threatening people should mean prison.
No one is defending the 3 guys riding, they just shouldn't be going to jail while driver's who have injured and killed are free.
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/cou...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9160265/police-offic...
Ed. said:
vonhosen said:
Solocle said:
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
Different offences, different potential sentences & sentencing guidelines.
Repeatedly drink driving while disqualified, ramming cars and threatening people should mean prison.
No one is defending the 3 guys riding, they just shouldn't be going to jail while driver's who have injured and killed are free.
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/cou...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9160265/police-offic...
You can, for instance, repeatedly drive whilst disqualified, but it doesn't mean the driving actions whilst disqualified satisfies dangerous driving.
You can, for instance, drive without insurance, but it doesn't mean the driving actions whilst uninsured satisfies dangerous driving.
You can, for instance, exceed speed limits, but that doesn't mean the driving whilst in excess of the speed limit satisfies dangerous driving.
You can, for instance, be involved in a collision that results in a death, but it doesn't mean the driving leading up to it amounted to dangerous driving.
You have to look at the full circumstances & charge with the most appropriate offence capable of proof.
We can't go making up & applying our own definitions for these offences, or decide what is the most appropriate offence in an individual case without full knowledge of the individual circumstances of that case.
bks. You'd still get into big trouble riding like that in 30 and 40 limits and undertaking on zebra crossings. The only thing not illegal in the IOM is the speed but the rest of the riding would still be classed as dangerous.
ks. You'd still get into big trouble riding like that in 30 and 40 limits and undertaking on zebra crossings. The only thing not illegal in the IOM is the speed but the rest of the riding would still be classed as dangerous.RemyMartin81D said:
Funny old world. Go to Isle of Man which is part of the UK bar it's self determination and it's all good.
Do it in England and it's send them to jail and kill them a 100 times.
Agreed hypocrisy on here by some is lolworthy.
Do it in England and it's send them to jail and kill them a 100 times.
Agreed hypocrisy on here by some is lolworthy.
Edited by JimbobVFR on Tuesday 3rd December 17:34
vonhosen said:
Solocle said:
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
Different offences, different potential sentences & sentencing guidelines.
Sentencing guidelines where 'showing off, excessive speed in built up area' reckons a mandatory custodial sentence of 10 weeks.
As for the other cases, the M2 I guess got lucky and the other one, well that just seems plain wrong.
End of the day, don't film yourself breaking the law ffs
Edited by TommyBuoy on Tuesday 3rd December 17:32
TommyBuoy said:
vonhosen said:
Solocle said:
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
Different offences, different potential sentences & sentencing guidelines.
Sentencing guidelines where 'showing off, excessive speed in built up area' reckons a mandatory custodial sentence of 10 weeks.
Dangerous is the description attributed to his driving by the author, not the statutory definition of it.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd December 17:40
vonhosen said:
TommyBuoy said:
vonhosen said:
Solocle said:
TommyBuoy said:
I was under the impression that dangerous driving where there was risk of injury was a mandatory custodial sentence anyway?
I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
I mean, I'd say that, by definition, dangerous driving involves "risk of injury". And I'd be totally up for mandatory custodial sentencing for all DD (bar severe mitigating circumstances like trying to avoid someone trying to run you off the road).I haven't read that much of the thread tbh as watching their riding, twice the speed limit in residential areas, plus other elements of the ride, should be fairly obvious that the sentence would be imprisonment.
Whether it should be or not from a 'fairness' perspective is too subjective as we have all no doubt pushed the limits (and law) at times.
Just can't not think 'right time right place' and why you would film it!
What doesn't sit well is that the sentencing for this is so severe when you hear cases like these - https://metro.co.uk/2004/03/16/dangerous-driver-es...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-wes...
At the end of the day, the danger posed to others by a motorcyclist is significantly less than the equivalent nonsense performed in a car.
Different offences, different potential sentences & sentencing guidelines.
Sentencing guidelines where 'showing off, excessive speed in built up area' reckons a mandatory custodial sentence of 10 weeks.
Dangerous is the description attributed to his driving by the author, not the statutory definition of it.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd December 17:40
Just re read it, how did he not get time for that!
These type of threads tend to be the same. Bunch of blokes who habitually break speeding limits (and may indulge in other behaviour considered illegal eg wheelies, overtaking on double white lines) get outraged at people being sentenced for doing just that. Like listening to a bunch of professional thieves moaning about harsh sentencing for a bit of light pilfering!
Esceptico said:
These type of threads tend to be the same. Bunch of blokes who habitually break speeding limits (and may indulge in other behaviour considered illegal eg wheelies, overtaking on double white lines) get outraged at people being sentenced for doing just that. Like listening to a bunch of professional thieves moaning about harsh sentencing for a bit of light pilfering!
Mumsnet for you as well. I guess you don’t actually ride a bike, with that snowflake attitude? yonex said:
Esceptico said:
These type of threads tend to be the same. Bunch of blokes who habitually break speeding limits (and may indulge in other behaviour considered illegal eg wheelies, overtaking on double white lines) get outraged at people being sentenced for doing just that. Like listening to a bunch of professional thieves moaning about harsh sentencing for a bit of light pilfering!
Mumsnet for you as well. I guess you don’t actually ride a bike, with that snowflake attitude? There's plenty of ground to occupy between snowflake &
riding. vonhosen said:
You can ride a bike, without approaching anything near a saint like attitude & without resorting to the sort of riding that was displayed in the video.
There's plenty of ground to occupy between snowflake & riding.
Ah, so there’s a middle ground between that video and other things? Do you pull small wheelies Von, or is that just a naughty fantasy? It’s ok to break the law, on your terms? There's plenty of ground to occupy between snowflake &
riding. Hilarious
yonex said:
vonhosen said:
You can ride a bike, without approaching anything near a saint like attitude & without resorting to the sort of riding that was displayed in the video.
There's plenty of ground to occupy between snowflake & riding.
Ah, so there’s a middle ground between that video and other things? Do you pull small wheelies Von, or is that just a naughty fantasy? There's plenty of ground to occupy between snowflake &
riding. riding end of the road.That's why they are in prison guilty of dangerous driving.
It could of course have been worse riding still & so could the sentences as a result.
vonhosen said:
The video was at the riding end of the road.
That's why they are in prison guilty of dangerous driving.
It could of course have been worse riding still & so could the sentences as a result.
That’s not what I asked, Mr Sensible. What part of your own personal ‘not riding like a saint’ is outside of the law? riding end of the road.That's why they are in prison guilty of dangerous driving.
It could of course have been worse riding still & so could the sentences as a result.
Are you a complete hypocrite?
I think I know the answer already anyway
Stop digging.
yonex said:
vonhosen said:
The video was at the riding end of the road.
That's why they are in prison guilty of dangerous driving.
It could of course have been worse riding still & so could the sentences as a result.
That’s not what I asked, Mr Sensible. What part of your own personal ‘not riding like a saint’ is outside of the law? riding end of the road.That's why they are in prison guilty of dangerous driving.
It could of course have been worse riding still & so could the sentences as a result.
Are you a complete hypocrite?
I think I know the answer already anyway
Stop digging.
As I also said if you don't feel you can be critical because you do ride like that, then more fool you.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff