Death by dangerous cycling

[Penistone999 10]

I think that getting a max 2 yr sentence with time off etc is near enough getting off

 

Agreed ........

[Jason crock 10]

I know it's off topic but how on earth did you come up with that username. Penistone. I've never seen that before. How is allowed?

[Hairyloon 10]

I know it's off topic but how on earth did you come up with that username. Penistone. I've never seen that before. How is allowed?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penistone

 

Either they're happy that he speaks for them, else they've simply not noticed...

[Cyclone 10]

If cyclists were bound by law to be responsible for their actions , like motorists are , then they would think twice about riding like lunatics ignoring the highway code.

 

This thread goes to show that they are (of course) subject to the law.

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 07:32 ----------

 

I think that getting a max 2 yr sentence with time off etc is near enough getting off

 

Drivers that kill people generally walk free from court.

[Guest sibon]

 

Drivers that kill people generally walk free from court.

 

Simply untrue.

 

Drivers convicted of death by dangerous driving "generally" go to jail.

[ads36 219]

and generally, drivers aren't prosecuted for 'death by dangerous driving'.

 

because, it's very hard to argue the distinction between 'dangerous' and 'careless'...

 

yes, a person can be found guilty of 'causing death by careless driving', with little/no chance of prison time.

Edited August 29, 2017 by ads36

[El Cid 220]

If cyclists were bound by law to be responsible for their actions , like motorists are , then they would think twice about riding like lunatics ignoring the highway code.

 

Some people just don't like cyclists, because the police cannot be bother to prosecute them for minor infringement of the law.

A bit like speeding and driving whist using your mobile, motorists flout loads of laws too.

[Daven 10]

Some people just don't like cyclists, because the police cannot be bother to prosecute them for minor infringement of the law.

A bit like speeding and driving whist using your mobile, motorists flout loads of laws too.

 

Firstly - the police don't prosecute anyone

Secondly - the police are so thin on the ground these days there aren't enough of them to cover the areas they are supposed to police.

Life threatening crimes will always take priority.

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 11:01 ----------

 

If cyclists were bound by law to be responsible for their actions , like motorists are , then they would think twice about riding like lunatics ignoring the highway code.

 

Some might think twice but still do it since many (not all) are a law unto themselves and clearly don't give a flying fig.

Edited August 29, 2017 by Daven

[dvp82 10]

Firstly - the police don't prosecute anyone

Secondly - the police are so thin on the ground these days there aren't enough of them to cover the areas they are supposed to police.

Life threatening crimes will always take priority.

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 11:01 ----------

 

 

Some might think twice but still do it since many (not all) are a law unto themselves and clearly don't give a flying fig.

 

Many don't even think twice, even though there are laws and just do it since many (not all motorists) are a law unto themselves and clearly don't give a flying fig.

 

I personally think there should be tougher punishments to deal with both motorist and cyclist who break the law.

 

Saying that I still see plenty of drivers using a mobile phone while driving despite the penelty been recently doubled.

Edited August 29, 2017 by dvp82

[Eater Sundae 12]

and generally, drivers aren't prosecuted for 'death by dangerous driving'.

 

because, it's very hard to argue the distinction between 'dangerous' and 'careless'...

 

yes, a person can be found guilty of 'causing death by careless driving', with little/no chance of prison time.

 

To be convicted of dangerous driving, reckless behaviour has to be proved. Juries seem to find this difficult.

 

As I see it, there is no real difference, in terms of proof, between death by dangerous driving and manslaughter. Reckless behaviour, causing death.

 

I don't particularly like the addition of death by dangerous/careless driving to the laws, as it tends to put emphasis on the death bit, and ignores the dangerous/careless bit, which is the root cause of the problem. We should be clamping down on bad driving, and not just waiting until someone is killed.

 

However, once we have gone down the route of "causing death by...", then it only seems right to include cycling.

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 11:54 ----------

 

Many don't even think twice, even though there are laws and just do it since many (not all motorists) are a law unto themselves and clearly don't give a flying fig.

 

I personally think there should be tougher punishments to deal with both motorist and cyclist who break the law.

 

Saying that I still see plenty of drivers using a mobile phone while driving despite the penelty been recently doubled.

 

I fully agree.

[redfox 10]

This thread goes to show that they are (of course) subject to the law.

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 07:32 ----------

 

 

Drivers that kill people generally walk free from court.

 

 

 

For someone who seems to check facts before they post I think you posted before you checked on this occasion.

 

See link -

 

http://www.road-peace.org.uk/resources/RoadPeace%20Sentencing%20of%20Causing%20Death%20by%20Driving%20offences%20England%20Wales.pdf

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 12:06 ----------

 

and generally, drivers aren't prosecuted for 'death by dangerous driving'.

 

because, it's very hard to argue the distinction between 'dangerous' and 'careless'...

 

yes, a person can be found guilty of 'causing death by careless driving', with little/no chance of prison time.

 

 

 

Not if you actually know what the distinction is - and the definition of dangerous driving is contained in the statute it is not really that hard at all.

 

Can you supply the evidential basis for the assertion that a person found guilty (which is after trial I assume) has little or no chance of prison time ?

 

Try google

[Eater Sundae 12]

For someone who seems to check facts before they post I think you posted before you checked on this occasion.

 

See link -

 

http://www.road-peace.org.uk/resources/RoadPeace%20Sentencing%20of%20Causing%20Death%20by%20Driving%20offences%20England%20Wales.pdf

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2017 at 12:06 ----------

 

 

 

 

Not if you actually know what the distinction is - and the definition of dangerous driving is contained in the statute it is not really that hard at all.

 

Can you supply the evidential basis for the assertion that a person found guilty (which is after trial I assume) has little or no chance of prison time ?

 

Try google

 

The link is interesting.

 

A couple of thoughts...

 

1. I find it hard to understand the concept of causing death by careless driving whilst drunk. Surely drinking and driving throws it straight into reckless behaviour and should therefore be dangerous driving.

 

2. Based on the 3 grades of recklessness which apply to dangerous driving, I doubt that the cyclist would have been found guilty of dangerous driving in this recent case, much in the same way as he wasn't found guilty of manslaughter.

 

(Edit) Another (third) thought. Cars typically weigh 1 to 2 tonnes, whereas bikes are more likely to weigh 15 to 20 kg. So the likelihood of causing damage to a third party are much reduced. This would need to be addressed or acknowledged if cyclists were to be added to the death by dangerous/careless driving laws.

Edited August 29, 2017 by Eater Sundae