You be the Jury.

tailwindhome

There are a couple of threads going at the minute which have drifted into the discussion of 'tolerance of accidents', driver punishment and drivers making mistakes.

Lets hear your views on this semi hypothetical scenario.


In December, during that really cold spell, I was driving downhill towards a T junction. I was in a 30 mph zone but would estimate my speed to have been around 15mph, a speed I *thought* was appropriate to the circumstances (untreated packed ice and snow). About 10 yards from the T junction I began to slid, in the split second I applied the brake (maybe a moments panic) and lost control of the car which slid across the T junction and into a neighbours garden wall. With just enough force to knock it over. Damage to my car was minimal, the mechanic who looked at the body work actually remarked that I must have been doing "no speed at all".

Luckily no one was hurt.


Let's adapt this scenario. Let's say a cyclist was on the T Junction and was hit and killed.



What should my punshment have been?

Would I have deserved jail time?

Would I have deserved a ban?

robz400

I consider that to be a horrible accident with no factors to say otherwise, wasn't drunk, racing etc...

Crap driving definitely but also clearly an unfortunate accident, would something like driving without due care and attention cover it.....?

I'd say no jail, but a ban and some form of improvement course......

Too soft...??

mudcow007

i slid down a hill/ bridge during the snow and ice, i had just about made it up the hill, as i went over the top i seen the road was litrally like a mirror were cars had been polishing the ice by wheelspinning. so my brakes were useless, i left the car in first gear, broke as much as i could.

as i got near to the bottom of the hill (i was only going about 10mph) i was still not stopping so the only thing i was left to do was turn into the kerb and bounce along that, luckily it stopped just before the junction!

one of the scariest moments of my driving career.

getting back to yours, it would surely be an accident? so what offence could you have commited?

Wallace1492

You were obviously wrong in thinking the speed was appropriate. In fact you should probably not have been driving in such conditions, the fact is you alone chose to so must be responsible for your actions.

Why did the cyclist die, well because you chose to drive in conditions that were clearly extremely dangerous, and you could not control your vehicle.

For me, a lifetime driving ban should be appropriate, along with a large fine.

No point in jail, the public does not need protection from you and you will hopefully be wracked with guilt over the incident.

Pufftmw

The problem is with this scenario that you lost control of the car, ergo you were driving without due care and attention. A charge of causing death by careless driving could be levied and a non-custodial sentence applied, alongside guidelines.

Kieran_Burns

Where did you hide the body?

The Rookie

The trouble is that we long had a principle in English law that you were tried and convicted for your actions, not the results, then we slowly introduced manslaughter and then death by dangerous and death by careless driving.

No cyclict there, for careless driving, probably no action (weather considerations) at worst 3 points and a small fine, cyclist there and its death by careless and likely prison sentance (often suspended). From a road safety point of view the driver comittedthe same driving error, so how can anyone justify the huge disparity in sentancing just because the hypothetical cyclist (or pedestrian, no reason a cyclist should make it unique) happened to be in the 'wrong place at the wrong time'. Should the penalty for all careless be the same (not publicly acceptable I dare say) or do wecontinue with penalising people further due to events totally outside there control (the prescense of a potential victim)?

Simon

plowmar

In the first scenario, who would be liable to pay for the car damage and that to the wall? You or the home owner for having his wall just where you slid across the road ?

Second scenario - see first scenario. As said previously your description of the road conditions say you were driving too fast, no matter how slowly, therefore your fault. Level of fault - driving without due care and attention.

Probably would lead to another thread of the 'motorist gets slap on wrist after killing cyclist'
type and who's to say that it wouldn't be appropriate?.

suzyb

No ban, no fine but a course on how to drive in adverse conditions

imho every new driver should have to take advanced lessons and learn how to drive on the motorway and in adverse conditions.

Maxticate

Wallace1492 wrote:

Why did the cyclist die, well because you chose to drive in conditions that were clearly extremely dangerous, and you could not control your vehicle.
t.

Couldn't you just as easily say that the cyclist took to the road in highly adverse weather conditions where they knew that there could be a high possibility of cars being out of control due to black ice? At least one of the posters on here has remarked that they chose not to risk cycling in the snow with the possibility of out of control cars.

It may be that people are advised not to travel unless absolutely necessary but the reality can be quite different. Especially in time where jobs are being cut all over.

zanes

Maxticate wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Why did the cyclist die, well because you chose to drive in conditions that were clearly extremely dangerous, and you could not control your vehicle.
t.

Couldn't you just as easily say that the cyclist took to the road in highly adverse weather conditions where they knew that there could be a high possibility of cars being out of control due to black ice? At least one of the posters on here has remarked that they chose not to risk cycling in the snow with the possibility of out of control cars.

It may be that people are advised not to travel unless absolutely necessary but the reality can be quite different. Especially in time where jobs are being cut all over.

+1

bails87

suzyb wrote:

No ban, no fine but a course on how to drive in adverse conditions

imho every new driver should have to take advanced lessons and learn how to drive on the motorway and in adverse conditions.

I've say every driver, not just new ones, seeing as the test is getting more comprehensive and tougher.

Wallace1492

Maxticate wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Why did the cyclist die, well because you chose to drive in conditions that were clearly extremely dangerous, and you could not control your vehicle.
t.

Couldn't you just as easily say that the cyclist took to the road in highly adverse weather conditions where they knew that there could be a high possibility of cars being out of control due to black ice? At least one of the posters on here has remarked that they chose not to risk cycling in the snow with the possibility of out of control cars.

It may be that people are advised not to travel unless absolutely necessary but the reality can be quite different. Especially in time where jobs are being cut all over.

Very valid point, but it does seem like blaming the innocent victim for the crime/incident. Only 1 person is to blame - the person who decided that they knew how to drive in the conditions but clearly did not. Remember, the victim need not be a cyclist, but perhaps a pedestrian, who decided it was too dangerous to drive and were walking to the station.

ride_whenever

Maxticate wrote:

Couldn't you just as easily say that the cyclist took to the road in highly adverse weather conditions where they knew that there could be a high possibility of cars being out of control due to black ice?

I think that is a somewhat slippery slope, if you are capable of handling the conditions then there is no reason not to head out. By refusing to go out because others are idiots then you're effectively punishing the cautious and sensible and not doing anything against the reckless and irresponsible.

I can understand the view that there are idiots and morons everywhere, but with that mentality then you're only a shortish step from never riding your bike on the roads.

tailwindhome

ride_whenever wrote:

I think that is a somewhat slippery slope

Well done

suzyb

Wallace1492 wrote:

Very valid point, but it does seem like blaming the innocent victim for the crime/incident. Only 1 person is to blame - the person who decided that they knew how to drive in the conditions but clearly did not. Remember, the victim need not be a cyclist, but perhaps a pedestrian, who decided it was too dangerous to drive and were walking to the station.

So the driver is to blame for taking to the road in order to not loose their job or at least not to loose one of their holidays or that days wages. That is just as unfair as blaming the cyclist/pedestrian who were (presumably) also out and about that day to get somewhere important like work.

As surprising as it may seem in this blame culture, sometimes no one is to blame.

pst88

Have you ever driven in snow/ice before? I think you've now realised that 10 yards isn't enough to stop from that speed in those conditions. It'd probably be alright in ideal situations but you have to realise stopping distances can increase by up to 10 times on ice. I hope you realise this now and start braking gently a lot further back to avoid locking the wheels.

Limburger

You cannot say it was bad or careless driving if you skid on ice. You could only say it was ill advised or negligent of the council not to get the gritter out - which it is their job to do.

Modify the scenario, some wacky races type dodge pot has covered the hill in oil, you arrive at said hill and now there is not enough grip to be able to stop any car on that hill. if you skid and run over some unfortunate at the bottom it is no more the drivers fault than the person you hit.

Similarly I have been on a european motorway in winter that was clear but has some snow either side. The carriageway however was clear and dry. I passed though a cutting on a corner onto a bridge across a valley at somewhere bellow the speed limit. The bridge was totally covered in in an inch or ice with snow on top. I Had to do some serious counter steering and some very gentle braking not to bin it. Could I have foreseen that - I didn't, so No. If I had caused some horrific accident or crashed off the bridge into the valley bellow who's fault would it be. Anybodies? Is it just one of those freak unfortunate things.

notsoblue

suzyb wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Very valid point, but it does seem like blaming the innocent victim for the crime/incident. Only 1 person is to blame - the person who decided that they knew how to drive in the conditions but clearly did not. Remember, the victim need not be a cyclist, but perhaps a pedestrian, who decided it was too dangerous to drive and were walking to the station.

So the driver is to blame for taking to the road in order to not loose their job or at least not to loose one of their holidays or that days wages. That is just as unfair as blaming the cyclist/pedestrian who were (presumably) also out and about that day to get somewhere important like work.

As surprising as it may seem in this blame culture, sometimes no one is to blame.

Well it be fair it would be the driver's fault for taking their car out on snowy, icey, untreated roads in a hilly area without putting chains on. I suppose it would be the same as going out knowing that your brakes were faulty.

Wallace1492

suzyb wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Very valid point, but it does seem like blaming the innocent victim for the crime/incident. Only 1 person is to blame - the person who decided that they knew how to drive in the conditions but clearly did not. Remember, the victim need not be a cyclist, but perhaps a pedestrian, who decided it was too dangerous to drive and were walking to the station.

So the driver is to blame for taking to the road in order to not loose their job or at least not to loose one of their holidays or that days wages. That is just as unfair as blaming the cyclist/pedestrian who were (presumably) also out and about that day to get somewhere important like work.

As surprising as it may seem in this blame culture, sometimes no one is to blame.

It is very rare that no-one is to blame. In this instance the driver could not control the car. What we have to realise is that a car is a potentially lethal weapon when not controlled properly, as was proved in this case, therefore the blame lies soley with the driver for not being able to control it. He/she made the choices that led directly to the death of the innocent pedestrian/cyclist. It was not an act of nature. I do not doubt that the driver meant no harm at all, but they alone are responsible.

Kieran_Burns

The only problem I see is that you really only learn from making mistakes. You *think* you are in control but then find out you're not as you are driving outside of your ability (or your cars)

I learnt this lesson in my 1st Winter of driving (BAD Winter) and ended up with my car beautifully parked in a hedge on a left hand bend.

Had a car been coming the other way there would've been a collision. I got away with it and learned the lesson (plus cleaning bill) but I may have faced a due care charge.

I'm of the "sh*t happens" school of thought and know that in life, things cause bumps along the road. I try not to let them bother me - if I am compensated for any loss I accrue due to someone elses actions then that's fine.

People make mistakes, they just do. Sometimes there are tragic consequences and I think it is up to a disinterested party to judge the level of mistake / incompetence / wilfulness before deciding on punitive measures.

I think the severity of the error not the consequences should be the deciding factor in determining punishment

suzyb

Kieran_Burns wrote:

The only problem I see is that you really only learn from making mistakes. You *think* you are in control but then find out you're not as you are driving outside of your ability (or your cars)

I learnt this lesson in my 1st Winter of driving (BAD Winter) and ended up with my car beautifully parked in a hedge on a left hand bend.

I learnt a similar lesson my first bad winter, similar situation to TWH but coming down a hill. Luckily I managed to stop before hitting anything. I most definitely learnt from that mistake though and got through the past two winters skid free.

Anyway, yes it is rare that no one is to blame. But in this type of situation blaming the driver for taking their car out in adverse condition when their livelihood may be at stake is wrong imho.

rolf_f

suzyb wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Very valid point, but it does seem like blaming the innocent victim for the crime/incident. Only 1 person is to blame - the person who decided that they knew how to drive in the conditions but clearly did not. Remember, the victim need not be a cyclist, but perhaps a pedestrian, who decided it was too dangerous to drive and were walking to the station.

So the driver is to blame for taking to the road in order to not loose their job or at least not to loose one of their holidays or that days wages. That is just as unfair as blaming the cyclist/pedestrian who were (presumably) also out and about that day to get somewhere important like work.

As surprising as it may seem in this blame culture, sometimes no one is to blame.

Yes - in this case the driver is clearly to blame. The driver can choose to find an alternative, safer means to go to work; nobody is forced to drive (if driving is the only practical means to commute, it was still the drivers own choice to live where they live). The driver can choose to use winter tyres, chains or tyre blanket thingys to suit the conditions. If they don't, and they lose control, they need to accept that the blame is on themselves and the consequences. Why should the cyclist, perhaps using studded tyres to take account of the conditions, not be within their rights to be a bit peeved at being killed by a driver who chose not to?!

jedster

I'm in the "points and a fine" camp for careless driving.
It's clear that you should not have been on that road without chains or winter tyres. You knew that the road was untreated but you took the car out anyway. That is your responsibility.

On the other hand, we seldom get conditions like that so we lack experience. We don't get any training on how to deal with them (even if that is to stay at home). I think that this means that making the error (of choosing to drive without the proper kit) is not behaviour way beyond what a reasonable UK driver would do and that this mitigates against something mmore serious like dangerous driving.

It is (IMO) not a defence to argue (for example) that you had to travel because you were worried about your job security - responsibility for other poeple's lives trumps that. By miles.

J

davmaggs

suzyb wrote:

No ban, no fine but a course on how to drive in adverse conditions

imho every new driver should have to take advanced lessons and learn how to drive on the motorway and in adverse conditions.

Can you point me to who/where those courses are run please?

Wallace1492

Kieran_Burns wrote:

I think the severity of the error not the consequences should be the deciding factor in determining punishment

Surely however, it is the potential consequences of the error that will prove how serious it is. Example, distracted while slowly driving along in heavy town traffic - end up slight bumper knock with car in front. Same distraction on Motorway while doing 70-80 - serious crash, death and injury. Should the same error have the same punishment?

Should you not be concentrating more where there is more danger, therefore if you know the consequencies are high, then the punishment should reflect that.

Driving a car means driving a potential lethal weapon, do people just not realise this?

Maxticate

The driver was driving appropriate to the conditions.

15 mph in an area where they could legally do 30mph. This shows they have taken account of the trecherous conditions. No winter tyres or chains increases the risk of control loss but millions of drivers every year get through winter safely without them and there are no laws here specifying the use of them in certain conditions.

The driver was unfortunate enough to hit an area of the road which caused the car to go out of control. No-one can steer or brake on black ice, the fact it was on a downhill stretch if road means that the momentum of the car increased forcing it to cross the junction.

The cyclist was unfortunate enough to find themselves in the path of the out of control car.

I feel lifetime ban and hefty fine to be way over the top.

It would be different if the driver were barrelling down the hill at 40mph reading the paper and shaving and then they lost control on the ice.

Kieran_Burns

The institute of Advanced Motorists:

http://www.iam.org.uk/do_you_want_to_be ... river.html


Good God. I didn't know the IAM did cycling courses: :shock:

http://www.iam.org.uk/whycyclingandtheiam.html

Kieran_Burns

Wallace1492 wrote:

Surely however, it is the potential consequences of the error that will prove how serious it is. Example, distracted while slowly driving along in heavy town traffic - end up slight bumper knock with car in front. Same distraction on Motorway while doing 70-80 - serious crash, death and injury. Should the same error have the same punishment?

Should you not be concentrating more where there is more danger, therefore if you know the consequencies are high, then the punishment should reflect that.

Except that there are more accidents in town than there are on the motorway, so statistically you need to concentrate more in town. This seems to negate your argument.

davmaggs

Wallace1492 wrote:

Driving a car means driving a potential lethal weapon, do people just not realise this?

I think it's because the majority of people realise that they are fallable and that your absolute 100% certainty in your own judgement is something that they don't have and they don't have your skills to never cause an accident.

Anyone who has driven for a few years has had an experience/fright where they would have been at fault, but luckily the gods were smiling that day and nothing serious happened. These people aren't the sociopaths that fill the headlines with obviously dangerous driving, but they are the average person who every so often gets it wrong.

Engineers talk about chains of events that cause failures. It is rarely one thing.

W1

davmaggs wrote:

Anyone who has driven for a few years has had an experience/fright where they would have been at fault, but luckily the gods were smiling that day and nothing serious happened. These people aren't the sociopaths that fill the headlines with obviously dangerous driving, but they are the average person who every so often gets it wrong.

Except Dilema. Apparently.