Killer driver accepts he was driving too fast.

dondare · June 2007

The law is a bit odd here, and probably needs to be changed. But isn't "Causing death by dangerous driving" a specific offence?

"da sapienti et addetur ei sapientia doce iustum et festinabit accipere."

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

Same sort of luck that faces you if you discharge a firearm in a public place.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's a criminal offence itself. Driving isn't.

habibi · June 2007

Ahh.. the haunted remorse of Mr Harris. Well, i wonder if he's already back behind the wheel of a motor car, and just how long after the tragic event it took him to get round to it.

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

Same sort of luck that faces you if you discharge a firearm in a public place.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's a criminal offence itself. Driving isn't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Indeed. I was more referring to the luck or not of killing someone rather than legality or punishment.

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

CometGirl · June 2007

It's regrettable that he chose to say he "wished he hadn't gone to work" as though this was inevitable. Someone elsewhere said they'd rather he wished he'd driven sensibly and had his tyres changed. I would tend to agree - at least that would suggest some form of learning outcome.

seventy2 · June 2007

What exactly is this post campaigning for, though?

Have any of you ever cycled to work when you knew your brakes needed attention?

People do stupid things, and it's often just luck that they get away with it (and yes of course cycling without brakes isn't so likely to kill someone else, I realise that before you flame me for even suggesting it).

It sounds more like he is hoping for forgiveness by his comments rather than to justify his actions, it worries me that so many people seem keen to lynch him for something that anyone could do if they weren't expecting to kill four people that day.

rothbook · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">it worries me that so many people seem keen to lynch him for something that anyone could do if they weren't expecting to kill four people that day. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Who said lynch Harris please?

_Bonj_ · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

Same sort of luck that faces you if you discharge a firearm in a public place.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's a criminal offence itself. Driving isn't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Indeed. I was more referring to the luck or not of killing someone rather than legality or punishment.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
But a gun's intended to kill someone - a car isn't, so shooting a gun is far more likely to kill someone. Therefore it's an invalid analogy.

Archcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

Same sort of luck that faces you if you discharge a firearm in a public place.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's a criminal offence itself. Driving isn't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Indeed. I was more referring to the luck or not of killing someone rather than legality or punishment.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
But a gun's intended to kill someone - a car isn't, so shooting a gun is far more likely to kill someone. Therefore it's an invalid analogy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No. Just because a gun is designed to be lethal, doesn't mean it's more likely to kill. In my hands, a gun might just as well fire over someone's head, because I'm not a shooter. If I drove a car with the same level of skill (ie none), I think I'd be much more likely to kill someone...

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.

_Bonj_ · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Arch

No. Just because a gun is designed to be lethal, doesn't mean it's more likely to kill. In my hands, a gun might just as well fire over someone's head, because I'm not a shooter. If I drove a car with the same level of skill (ie none), I think I'd be much more likely to kill someone...

If I had a baby elephant, it could help me clean the car. If I had a car.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
If you drove a car without ANY level of skill, then you probably wouldn't even be able to set off as you'd just stall, so you wouldn't kill anyone.

_Bonj_ · June 2007

Just another point - not to suggest he wasn't driving too fast, but where does it actually say he accepts he was driving too fast?

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
But a gun's intended to kill someone - a car isn't, so shooting a gun is far more likely to kill someone. Therefore it's an invalid analogy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Actually, surprisingly few guns are actually designed to kill someone. Most are designed for target shooting or killing animals or birds. A single shot prone target rifle is a highly specialised piece of kit that is thoroughly unsuitable for anything other than its design purpose. Military weapons are designed to inflict a nasty wound that could be fatal if the victim is not treated immediately, thus tying up several people on the battlefield.

Guns are tools like chainsaws, knives and cars - needing responsible ownership and great care in use.

Crooky · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by seventy2

What exactly is this post campaigning for, though?

Have any of you ever cycled to work when you knew your brakes needed attention?

People do stupid things, and it's often just luck that they get away with it (and yes of course cycling without brakes isn't so likely to kill someone else, I realise that before you flame me for even suggesting it). 

It sounds more like he is hoping for forgiveness by his comments rather than to justify his actions, it worries me that so many people seem keen to lynch him for something that anyone could do if they weren't expecting to kill four people that day.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

If you know it's a pathetic analogy them why use it?

_Bonj_ · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

Actually, surprisingly few guns are actually designed to kill someone. Most are designed for target shooting<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes, but target shooting is just practice to become good at it ready for actually shooting someone.
<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

or killing animals or birds.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Well, just killing anything generally. Animal, bird, person - whoever gets shot is going down - that's the point in a gun.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

A single shot prone target rifle is a highly specialised piece of kit that is thoroughly unsuitable for anything other than its design purpose. Military weapons are designed to inflict a nasty wound that could be fatal if the victim is not treated immediately, thus tying up several people on the battlefield.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Most guns are probably used by insurgents in the middle east or drug gangs in south america, who don't use such obscure battlefield tactics, they're just either militants who love violence or gangsters who need to protect their territory.

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

Actually, surprisingly few guns are actually designed to kill someone. Most are designed for target shooting<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes, but target shooting is just practice to become good at it ready for actually shooting someone.

Not really, target shooting and military shooting training are entirely different.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

or killing animals or birds.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Well, just killing anything generally. Animal, bird, person - whoever gets shot is going down - that's the point in a gun.

Certainly in the case of game or vermin - but your earlier post had referred to "someone."

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Patrick Stevens

A single shot prone target rifle is a highly specialised piece of kit that is thoroughly unsuitable for anything other than its design purpose. Military weapons are designed to inflict a nasty wound that could be fatal if the victim is not treated immediately, thus tying up several people on the battlefield.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Most guns are probably used by insurgents in the middle east or drug gangs in south america, who don't use such obscure battlefield tactics, they're just either militants who love violence or gangsters who need to protect their territory.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I'd like to see your figures for gun useage, but I certainly agree that they'd use one of the guns designed purely for killing - the AK 47. However, this does not detract from my argument that surprisingly few guns are designed to kill people.

Yorkshireman · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_

Just another point - not to suggest he wasn't driving too fast, but where does it actually say he accepts he was driving too fast?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
In the first post on this topic (in the news report copy) - about half way down :-
"Mr Harris accepted he was driving too fast and the statement described how the rear end of the car had slid on the icy road."
OK? [;)]

Colin N.

Lincolnshire is mostly flat... but the wind is mostly in your face!

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Yorkshireman

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_

Just another point - not to suggest he wasn't driving too fast, but where does it actually say he accepts he was driving too fast?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
In the first post on this topic (in the news report copy) - about half way down :-
"Mr Harris accepted he was driving too fast and the statement described how the rear end of the car had slid on the icy road."
OK? [;)]

Colin N.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

See, _Bonj_, I said being a Googling Journalist would be too demanding for you. [:D]

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

rothbook · June 2007

There may be some newspapers where journalists don't ned to have very good reading and comprehension skills banjo.

Try the Sunday Sport mate.

_Bonj_ · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Yorkshireman

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_

Just another point - not to suggest he wasn't driving too fast, but where does it actually say he accepts he was driving too fast?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
In the first post on this topic (in the news report copy) - about half way down :-
"Mr Harris accepted he was driving too fast and the statement described how the rear end of the car had slid on the icy road."
OK? [;)]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Erm... no, not quite ok. Clicked BBC link, Ctrl-F to bring up find window, typed in word 'accepted' - no results found.
Is it just me or has rothbook inserted that line?

rothbook · June 2007

At the inquest, North-East Wales coroner John Hughes asked Mr Harris if he had been going too fast for the conditions.

"Very possibly," Mr Harris replied.

Forget what I said, not even the Sport would take you on matey.

Howardcp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by _Bonj_ Erm... no, not quite ok. Clicked BBC link, Ctrl-F to bring up find window, typed in word 'accepted' - no results found. Is it just me or has rothbook inserted that line? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I have a copy of the story as the BBC originally posted it, and they have subsequently edited it. The original version is as posted at the beginning of this thread.

_Bonj_ · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by rothbook

At the inquest, North-East Wales coroner John Hughes asked Mr Harris if he had been going too fast for the conditions.

"Very possibly," Mr Harris replied.

Forget what I said, not even the Sport would take you on matey.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

What do you mean, "not even" the Sport? Did you not know tabloid journalists cut their teeth on the broadsheets then move up to the more lucrative jobs on the red-tops, not the other way round?!

rothbook · June 2007

And according to the BBC, although no further detail is given, "An
inquest jury has heard how a car which struck and killed four cycling
club members may have been travelling at between 60 and 70mph." That
speed was estimated by one of the cyclists while the driver following
the car described it as travelling at "at least 50mph".

The driver himself admits he was going too fast:

"Mr Harris said he noticed frosty conditions, but thought the roads were
safe. He did, however, admit he briefly considered whether he should
take possible road conditions into account.

When asked if he was travelling too quickly for the conditions, he said:
"Obviously, in hindsight, yes - but at the time I didn't think I was."

William Hoskins, representing the families, told Mr Harris: "On an icy,
clear day, this is not the kind of road you should be driving anywhere
near the kind of speed you were driving at, is it?"

Mr Harris replied: "That is correct."

He admitted doing between 50mph and 55mph before the crash - below the
speed limit - but denied speeding."
http://preview.tinyurl.com/33wgkw

Cretin · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Howard

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by linfordlunchbox

He was driving too fast for the conditions (as were the other vehicles who also crashed at the same point that morning), that is what caused the accident. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No other vehicle crashed at the same spot that morning! There was just one other crash on that particular road the whole morning, and that was several miles away..

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Not all accidents are reported, and who would bother reporting a skid once corrected?

Poppadoppaloppa Copper · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cretin

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Howard

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by linfordlunchbox

He was driving too fast for the conditions (as were the other vehicles who also crashed at the same point that morning), that is what caused the accident. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

No other vehicle crashed at the same spot that morning! There was just one other crash on that particular road the whole morning, and that was several miles away..

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Not all accidents are reported, and who would bother reporting a skid once corrected?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I wouldn't bother complicating the matter with awkward facts. They just ignore anything that doesn't fit in with their dogma, and try to smear the source of the facts. It's all part of their agenda to persecute motorists despite the lives that are being lost every day as a result. It's their religion, and on one level the campaign is indistinguishable from that of Al-Qaeda: "lives must be lost so that we can get our message across that Allah [persecution of motorists] is the greatest".

They have blood on their hands and how they sleep at night is beyond me, unless they are drugged and/or ill.

Tourist Tony · June 2007

I think you'll find that dear Simon gas already suggested that more people should die. You'll find it in the brainstorming section of the playpen.
Bye, troll.

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

Mick Cornickcp · June 2007

They have blood on their hands and how they sleep at night is beyond me, unless they are drugged and/or ill.

I thought that the driver was the one with blood on his hands?

seventy2 · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Crooky
If you know it's a pathetic analogy them why use it?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It was an attempt at anticipating the one person who just can't help but get pedantic about choice of wording rather than discussing the issue the thread is about.

Congratulations though.

Nevertheless I'll stick to the pure cycling bits of the forum in future. I'm not looking for insults, regardless of how keen you may be to give them out.

If I was more critical in my original post than I thought, then you have my apologies.

Killer driver accepts he was driving too fast.

Comments

Categories