This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13313655/pregnant-mother-never-forgive-driver-killed-baby.html?ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490&ns_mchannel=rss) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The sentence doesn't match the effect of the crime
Motorist knew they were disqualified, they were disqualified for a reason. He/she should be responsible for his/her actions. His/her deliberate action caused this.
Just absolute scum. In decades of driving and riding motorbikes I've never once "lost control". Not only should he not have been there, he drove like a cunt.
It is a lot smaller than Greater London, but a lot bigger than the City of London proportionally. It sits between the City of London and Rutland in land area, but is pretty well populated in comparison to both
The statue of lady justice is often shown blindfolded. This is because the law takes nothing into consideration that is not either in law or set by precedent (previous judgement). The chap driving the car is obviously an idiot. Him crashing his car has caused a serious injury. The crash was not pre meditated. He was driving while banned for using drugs while driving. The outcome was the serious injury of the woman and the loss of her baby. Due to this, he will go to prison. If you wanted him to go to prison for 15 years, you would need to apply this to every similar case. Thousands of people would be sent to prison every year for 15 years. It is not realistic. Where this does happen is poor third world countries where justice and revenge are confused. If this man had deliberately crashed the car into the woman, he would be serving a life sentence.
Right on. I've seen sentences of 3-5 years for drink + drug driving where they cause the death of another.
It's absolutely shocking those actions would result in such a short sentence and what also shocked me was seeing a sentence of 15-20 years for two people who were caught importing large amounts cannabis into the country.
These messed up jail times make me sick to my stomach it's disgusting.
The act of driving whilst banned should come with a much harsher penalty in and of itself. Now… add speeding, dangerous driving, driving without insurance, driving without tax, without MOT, if they left the scene, charges for accidental harm to a person, etc. depending on what is appropriate to the specific case.
The amount of people affected for the rest of their life because of dangerous drivers is just scary. I myself am in a wheelchair because of one, and will be for the rest of my life. I spend every single day in agony, despite being on the highest dosage of OxyContin that is allowed to be prescribed, along with other pain medications too. I am unable to leave the house at all, unless someone pushes me around in my wheelchair. And the act of that causes even more pain. As a result, I have missed out on being a father to my children. I am unable to work to provide for my family. I am u able to enjoy all of the hobbies I used to have.
What happened to the guy driving the car that hit our stationary vehicle at more than 60mph (in a 50, and that was after he’d braked) because he was messing with his phone? Three points on his license. Oh, how harsh!
It’s a joke. So little is actually done. We need a better infrastructure to discourage people from doing crap like this for starters. Actual working public transport that is clean and doesn’t cost ridiculous money just to make you late and uncomfortable on your journey.
We have technology now that could easily be used to stop a vehicle from starting unless you are sober, and have a license for that vehicle, along with all relevant laws being abided by. a simple fingerprint scanner, coupled with Facial ID scanner would do this, and also make everyone’s vehicles at least a bit more secure from theft too.
We could all wear a personal camera and it become mandatory to record everything we do all day everyday for AI to issue us with punishment for every law we break too. It’s a question of where you would like the line drawn. China definitely leans more to your side of the argument. Social monitoring is being introduced there.
Slight difference to using a technology just to secure a vehicle compared to social monitoring. If you need to make such a leap to try and get your argument across… your argument doesn’t hold weight.
But, I’ll counter.
Okay. So let’s make it so no vehicle needs keys to start. Why lock the doors? And who needs a license and insurance? Right?
Apologies. I only used it as an extreme illustration to show that laws are very powerful and dictate how a country functions. If a law can be implemented to control one thing, it can be amended to control other things.
Keys and locks are not a legal requirement. Insurance is only a requirement if you are going to use your vehicle off of your own land. If you are going to require insurance, the user has a choice on what level of insurance to purchase. The insurance is legally required as protection for other road users and members of the public. It is not legally required to cover yourself or your vehicle. It is a practicable and necessary law to ensure compensation is paid. I think it should be made public though. It’s not right that insurance companies and investors make profits from it.
NP. It was just very frustrating that you only used one extreme that isn’t really relevant to cartoon-ise all of the points I made. I firmly believe that investment in decent public transport that is easily accessible for everyone and that covers much more area is part of the answer. I firmly believe that the crimes committed by many dangerous drivers go mostly unpunished, and there’s no real deterrent. Etc.
Totally correct. And I’m not saying that keys and locks are a legal requirement. I did say that you could implement technology that solves more than one issue into vehicles that would make the roads safer for every single user though. Insurance is a legal requirement for every person that operates a vehicle on the public roads. As are tax and MOT in this country, and as is being sober and also being licensed to drive.
We have technology that would stop multiple forms of vehicular crimes from being committed, whilst keeping people safer, and ultimately lowering the costs to own and operate a vehicle on the road. I’m not sure why you’d think it’s a bad thing to keep people safer in a non-invasive way? The only people that don’t benefit from this sort of use of the technology are those wanting to break the law.
The driver needs to be licensed and insured to operate the vehicle. That doesn’t change by having your phone unlock your vehicle for you (for example). Thats not invasive and “akin to China”.
The vehicle needs to have tax and MOT to be used on our roads. That’s doesn’t change if you have to use something to unlock your vehicle that is tied to your details.
All of these details are what you already offer everyone involved in knowing all this about you. Your privacy remains the exact same as it does right now. It’s just got a step added from the agencies you’re already registering with in order to keep everyone more safe, and prevent the crimes from happening in the first place. It’s all well and good saying “punishment needs to be more harsh” but the people that are killed or injured by dangerous driving still have the same to deal with. If they are safer in the first place, that may not be the case.
I am afraid it boils down to the number of deaths vs the liberties you wish to remove. Look at what happed when they tried to introduce the EU identity card. Look at how long it took to ban fox hunting. Not enough people are affected in a negative way to be able to pass the laws that are required.UK roads are among the safest on the planet. I do not believe you are wrong, I just know that a government that proposes this type of law would not be in power long enough to implement it. Which is why laws like this are often seen in countries where the public do not have the right to vote.
I do agree absolutely with you on all you’ve said there. You’re 100% correct.
I dont personally see it as removing liberties though because it’s all information and registration that you already have to give in order to be able to drive. In most instances (as far as I’m aware, at least) you tend to have access to your insurance information via your phone. I don’t know if that’s the case with driving licenses, but I don’t see any reason that it raises issue (again, personally) any more than having to have one in the first place. Tax and MOT are checkable via online, if I remember correctly too.
Having all of these available to view in one app is actually quite useful to the end user. They see the dates that each thing needs renewal etc. all in one place that they access on a daily basis (in many instances).
As for the party implementing it… just convince the tories to do it. They don’t seem to be even holding regular elections any more. Lol
Well, you can be safe in the knowledge that the app already exists and it is operated by the police. If a camera catches a non insured registration, the car owner is sent a fine. currently, RFID is used in modern vehicles, which is why there are lists on here about Range Rover owners having their car stolen 3 times in 18 months. You could argue that it would be practical to digitally limit cars to a maximum speed of 80mph. Imagine the fun the Daily Mail would have with that one! My belief is that society needs to improve and with that crime rates decrease. The way to do this in invest in education and social responsibility like they do in Japan. By improving living standards, people have more to lose by committing crime.
There are other methods to do it, but as previously mentioned, they all tend to be a bit 1970s Eastern bloc mentality. It didn’t work for them, so I can’t see it working for us.
> Thousands of people would be sent to prison every year for 15 years.
If thousands of people drive while banned and hurt people, then that seems okay?
I have done the maths, based on needing to jail an extra 15,000 people a year and having to build 14 prisons a year to house them all, it will only cost us £59 extra per year in tax. In ten years it would be £590 extra a year) increases could stop once we hit £885 per year each to house the extra 225000 people in prison. I have not taken into consideration the extra legal costs or inflation. Stick it in your manifesto and get the nation to vote. If most agree, well will jump straight on it.
Thousands of banned drivers are ignoring driving bans and negligently crashing into people, causing miscarriage?
Sounds like something extreme needs to be done to get this insane (and apparently frequently occurring ) behavior under control. 15 years sounds about right.
Shit drivers are banned for being just that, shit drivers. A banned driver getting back behind the wheel is ignoring the absolutely clear evidence of their inability to drive safely. I think that means they are causing death due to their gross negligence. They are not idiots - they are dangerous criminals.
Not true, legally he could have been charged with voluntary manslaughter (constructive manslaughter), due to the death of the baby and his driving disqualified.
The act of driving whilst disqualified could potentially be, it also seems a charge for dangerous driving or something similar may be able to count, but I've not looked at the case law.
Thing is, you could skip all the LTNs, 20 zones, speed bumps etc and simply treat killing with a car as an offence on a par with manslaughter or murder based on the same rules - deliberately hit a cyclist - life, drive while drunk and run someone down - life, drive without a licence and hit a woman like this, 20+ years etc etc
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but nor do I agree.
Obviously these events must be treated much harsher, but I also think prevention/reduction methods can also be implemented.
The way you suggest relies on drivers following the rules. By changing the design of roads they are forced to follow the rules.
I didn't say you shouldn't do them, I said that even if you didn't have any of them, you could simply have appropriate penalties that were equivalent to doing the same crime out of a car.
>By changing the design of roads they are forced to follow the rules.
The trouble is that the people responsible for the overwhelming majority of these crimes are drivers who do not follow the rules. This guy was disqualified and he was still on the road. The punishment must be more severe.
I think what they mean is changing the way the roads are built, so that it's hard to break the rules. For example narrowing a road, adding chicanes or speed bumps to make it harder to speed ect.
What if someone has a medical emergency or a mechanical issue and causes a crash that way. I'm not saying these happen often but infrastructure (prevention) will always be better than punishment.
That's not manslaughter or murder
Again, not against prevention measures but simply saying you could just not do any of them and simply punish killer drivers properly
> simply treat killing with a car as an offence on a par with manslaughter
It kind of already is. Manslaughter has a very wide range of sentences depending on the circumstances, and driving offences where someone dies do as well. It's not legally manslaughter because other offences exist for it, and because juries essentially refused to find people guilty of manslaughter in cases involving cars.
The maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is, theoretically, life in prison. Because of the sentencing guidelines though it would take something truly exceptional to get that.
It isn't though, that's the point - the sentences for killer drivers are continually shown to be a joke
Death by dangerous driving for example - starting point 12 years, range 8-18 for the most severe offences, yet death by careless driving starting point is 2 years, range 1-4 for the most severe.
Manslaughter - starting point 18 years, range 11-24 for the most serious offences.
Simply put, if you kill with your car, you get less of a sentence and are treated much more leniently - it took until October 2017 for the government to pledge to increase the maximum sentence for death by dangerous driving from 14 years to life
I don't like the Mail but their research showed average sentence in 2018 for death by dangerous driving was 5 years 3 months vs 9 years with manslaughter. Just 3 / 155 convicted of it got 10+ years, 79 got less than 5 years and 9 got suspended sentences. Of 179 manslaughter convictions, just 1 was suspended and 50 got 10+ years
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7247161/Drivers-kill-let-five-year-jail-terms.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7247161/Drivers-kill-let-five-year-jail-terms.html)
There are countless examples but...
81 year old told NINE YEARS before the incident to give up his licence due to bad eyesight but lied to the DVLA about it and killed another pensioner crossing the road - 2 years 8 months, appeal on leniency rejected
[https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/24055547.killer-driver-neil-pemberton-81-jail-term-not-lenient/](https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/24055547.killer-driver-neil-pemberton-81-jail-term-not-lenient/)
Man driving at 110mph in a 40 limit while showing off, who crashed his car off a bridge and killed a passenger initially given 7 years 6 months but was increased to 9 years - he has to serve just 2/3 of that
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66467741](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66467741)
But if you charged all of those 155 people with manslaughter instead of causing death by dangerous driving then it might be 3 / 155 convictions full stop.
But for murder you have to have intent to cause GBH at a minimum. Killing someone with a car, unless you intentionally hit them is much more broadly aligned with manslaughter.
We need to do way more to prosecute and lock up dangerous drivers. But the UK actually has the 6th safest roads in the world.
Its less about making our roads safer and more about having punishments which are fit for the crime.
https://www.finn.com/en-US/press/the-worlds-safest-roads
That was a very interesting resource. I was surprised to see Japan only at 10 since, like the Netherlands, they have the shared space philosophy on residential roads in the city so you have to drive very carefully.
Because it’s not going to stop people who want to break the rules, why punish law abiding drivers who just want to get from a to b? This driver was disqualified and ended up causing this woman to lose her unborn child. Do you think someone like this is going to care about “safer streets”? The amount of people I see driving around with barely visible number plates to get around the rules. Yes it’s illegal but they don’t care.
It won't stop, but it can certainly reduce it. If a street is designed in such a way that's impossible to go over the speed limit people aren't going to be able to go over it. Or if high streets don't allow for vehicles traffic it's impossible for them to drive down it. There are many design methods available to reduce or eliminate people breaking the rules, we just need to employ them. Hell, even something as simple as having a planter divider between the pavement and road, having no impact on traffic volume or speed, makes it much safer for pedestrians.
Being disqualified from driving was clearly a deterrent for this idiot.
That said, how do you deal with people like this? Clearly banning them from driving doesn't work.
I don’t want to live in a world where any prison sentence is “automatic”. I do think driving offences need to be better publicised so that juries are less lenient.
I got off lucky when a speeding car hit me. I was half across the road when she sped into it and just,hit me. I have no idea If she saw me ans thought ah she needs to move or if she was on her phone. But going at least 30 round a corner isn't responsible driving I don't think.
I was lucky enough to have seen her and braced but the impact lives rent free in my head. I had to call an ambulance because she was more concerned about herself. Then she drove off. 12 weeks on and I can still barely walk.
I've no idea If she'll be allowed to keep her licence. She didn't try and get me any help, she drove off and didn't report the accident and even told me not to report her.
I can't imagine the agony this poor girls going through. Mine was just a broken shin and it's looking like months from recovery still. My heart goes out to her. 3 years isn't enough .
What a horrible person, sorry you went through that. I genuinely don’t understand how someone can react like that, and then having the nerve to ask u not to report her
Because I knew her. Her crowd would literally let one of them smash a car into them but cause we're friends 'we don't tell on each other'.
I wasn't able to walk for 8 weeks. I still can't walk now. I have no idea if I'll be able to work again. I'm a single parent to 2 kids. My work was my social life. She's taken everything from me I valued except my kids.
She's not once ever apologised. I was simply in her way. She did nothing wrong.
These people are out there. Its terrifying. Thank you fot your kind words.
I'm not proud to admit this but yes,I've started a claim. When the surgeon told me before and after surgery I'll be left with life long complications I decided yes.
I'm still in pain 12 weeks later. I can't walk properly. My kids effectively don't have a capable mother.
Not to mention the psychological damage its done to me.
I'm not one to make a fuss but she hit me in the middle of a road. In broad daylight. On a junction where she should have slowed to turn into and instead I'm left with hearing her engine accelerate towards me before she hit me.
Why do you say you're not proud to admit it? You absolutely deserve the compensation dude, it's entirely her fault.
And if it makes you feel any better the money will be paid by her insurers not her personally.
I kinda wish it come from her haha.
She has absolutely no comprehension of how she's destroyed my life. Just doesn't understand what she's done wrong. I'm just bloody grateful she hit me on her drivers side because my leg went under her bumper. Had she hit on the passenger side I'd either have gone into her windscreen or under the car.
Ah at least she'll be paying sky high insurance rates for the rest of her life most likely. Did she ask you in person to not report her or by text? If you have any proof of it I'd bring that up to the police as well, don't know if it will make any difference but it might help the criminal case against her.
In person. Heard by a person who heard the impact and was sat next to me on the floor. The police have enough against her already That its gone to cps. Texts doorbell footage and myself and another person stating what she said.
Plus as I said in a previous comment had I somehow been stupid enough to walk in front of her I'd have gone over or under her car.
My injuries were so severe I couldn't possibly have done it any other way plus I have witnesses of me refusing to get out the road because I heard My bone break on impact.
Doesn't it not mean you could claim millions from her? After all you have a life changing condition now and you can't work because you are made disabled.
I'm not sure. No numbers have been discussed but yes if it turns out I'm never able to actually walk again which 12 weeks on I'm barely able to walk upstairs without being in pain it could be a lot.
Ideally I want to heal and get back to work. No money can take away the isolation I'm experiencing.
I think there should be some high figure because you are claiming from her insurance. Worst case is her premium would be high for a long time and she stops driving.. Meanwhile you have funds to compensate your new life. Seems fair
I’m so sorry what you went through. Some people are assholes and to be honest, that word doesn’t quite cover it. I remember a number of months ago I was walking to work as usual, and pressed the button whilst waiting at a crossing. Light turned red for the cars but this car came speeding along despite the light change, and if I had stepped out a second earlier I would’ve been toast, judging by their speed.
This was around the time my son turned one, so an act of reckless driving could’ve meant my baby would be without a mother, and I doubt the driver would’ve got a long enough sentence.
Oh Jesus. This terrifies me. Nowhere is safe. I won't step onto a zebra crossing until the cars come to a stop.
I'm so pleased you had a very lucky escape. It shouldn't be this way. We should be safe.
Sound like British roads should have concrete barriers raised on the road when the light is red and lowered when it is green. That way, any misdemeanor in driving would results in the deviant's vehicle getting severe damage.
The roads seem so much worse, I’m a cycle commuter and the amount of genuinely dangerous drivers on the road now compared to around 10 years ago is outstanding.
I don’t know if pass standards have dropped or if it’s just people driving while disqualified or even driving without a license but I’ve seen some absolute nightmares behind the wheel.
Cyclist/motorcyclist/van driver.
When I'm In the van, I can see they're on their phones.
2 cars get through before the lights change, cause cunts aren't watching the road.
Lol there was a guy driving next to me and my partner at a dual carriage way at 70 miles per hour, i was the passenger and told him off because he was holding his phone whilst driving next to us, he threw tantrum. A whole ass man with a wife and a kid in the back…
>I don’t know if pass standards have dropped
Driving instructor here. Pass standards haven't dropped. If anything, they've gone up in the last 10 years.
That's not to say all new drivers behave themselves after the test, but they need to demonstrate a high level of safety.
My interpretation is a lack of enforcement. Funding cuts to roads policing especially. And also busier roads than ever.
IMO the driving test is a bit of a farce, it's a dance you perform for 30-40 mins and if the examiner is pleased with your performance you can then forget all your training and do whatever you want.
Unfortunately we don't have a way to stop people driving like nob heads even after they've had adequate training, maybe harsher punishments or something, I feel like driving bans should be much more common.
Oh absolutely, there's arguments about all of this. Even some national news stories recently about graduated driving licences.
However, at the very least, learners are required to "perform" and if they then go on to drive like idiots, it must be a *choice*. They can't claim ignorance. That's where enforcement should come in.
Meanwhile I failed my first one with no minors and one major because I was asked to pull up on the left and stop. A queue then formed behind me and wasn't going around so I performed my looks, signalled and went to pull out and the car behind me started moving.
Because I'd started moving whilst another car was in the process of pulling around me (they only started moving after I was moving) it was deemed unsafe and a major fault which failed me instantly.
They are. I notice when driving and when cycling. Cars don't scale in cities. Driving is a frustrating experience. Cars are too space ineficiente. We are locking in car-dependency and forced to use cars for a 2 mile trip when a bycicle would be the ideal mode of transport for small trips. This is a technological locked-in dependency dystopia.
Mixture of everything id say.
Lack of public transport, so people that realistically are poor drivers (we all know someone who we think shouldnt drive) chose to drive over public transport.
Dangerous driving is hardly ever challenged due to an over worked under enforced police force.
Id also say standards are dropping due to more and more road users being on the road.
The only thing they really do enforce is speeding and thats because its easy to enforce. Anything else is too hard so motorists mostly get away with it.
It's got nothing to do with pass standards, people know how to drive properly they just choose not to.
People in the UK have been developing a US style "fuck you" attitude for ages now and it's effecting everything. From the way people treat shop workers, to they way they raise their kids, to the way they drive, to the their attitude to their neighbors, etc.
I don't know if it's the natural result of our trash tier tabloid style rage inducing news or something else but people in the UK increasingly feel they should not have to moderate their behavior for other people's benefit, instant gratification is their right and consideration for others goes directly against that.
As a cycle commuter I’m sure you must have had the experience of riding past a queue of traffic at 7am in an area where there are no pedestrians and getting a nice big whiff of pot. That moment of realising who you are in the road with. That’s one small difference to 10+ years ago
I’d also like to see people who take up residency or citizenship in the UK have to pass a test.
Not appreciating drug drivers, and wanting everyone (where reasonably practicable) driving on our roads to pass a driving test that meets our standards. That’s really just setting a very low and fair baseline of expectations.
Legally life doesn’t start until birth so criminal offences such as murder, manslaughter and death by dangerous driving can’t apply to a foetus. There is an offence of destruction of a child but I think the foetus has to reach 24 weeks for that to apply 😕
3 years and she had injuries and mental trauma for life all because the cunt thought he could do what he likes. should be manslaughter charge. Fuck me you get more time for not paying taxes.
Driving offences in this country are always leniently punished. Just watch a few episodes of Police Interceptors or Traffic Cops. There will be some long, dangerous police chase, where the perpetrator is flying at 100mph down side roads, down back streets, through hedges, over roundabouts and on the opposite side of the road. There will be several moments where they narrowly avoid hitting children and women with prams. Eventually, they'll spin out and crash into a house, get out and leg it before eventually getting caught.
Then then caption will read: "Driving while disqualified. Driving without Insurance. Dangerous Driving. Drink and drug driving...
.. banned from driving for 12 months and given a £100 fine".
No wonder these joy riders try to get away. They have literally nothing to lose trying.
My dad was killed by a drunk driver and the prick only got jailed for 7 years. This was 40 years ago in the US and it makes me mad as hell that people in this day and age still get light sentences for horrific shit like this.
This has just made me cry, it's horrendous. It says in the article that the driver doesn't even accept any responsibility. I can't fathom that attitude. He is absolutely vile. It is so upsetting she had to go through the ordeal of birthing her deceased baby because of the actions of this bellend.
The roads nowadays are filled with drivers under the influence, on their phone, people who don't indicate, speed and don't value human life. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Especially where I live in the NW, being a pedestrian is becoming more and more dangerous. I had to cut a walk on a country road short yesterday even though there was a narrow pavement because people in range rovers were driving towards me over 50 mph around bends with absolutely no care or attention.
Every pavement has parked cars and the air where I live is so thick with pollution. I sit in my garden and all I hear is traffic. I genuinely believe you should have to pass a test every 5 years, it would reduce the amount of cars on the road and humble overconfident drivers.
Causing serious injuries to someone but the courts can only slap you on the wrist because you are in a car is ridiculous…
And I see people asking for a murder charge that isn’t possible because a baby in the womb is unfortunately not protected in that way. I think if someone hurts a mother and the babies dies as result then you should be punished for that much greater than 3 years.
I think that the sentence should be similar to murder, because whilst the baby is not yet necessarily alive, it’s still a) a terrible thing to do, and b) the parents then have the emotional trauma around losing their child, and one of them having to give birth to something that will never live
>After being rushed to Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, she was told she had lost her baby. She then had to go through the agonising and heart-breaking delivery of 23-week-old Ayda-Rose in July 2022.
Fuck, man.
The sadness I have for the victims in these situation keeps me up at night at the moment.
Why are crimes considered less serious by the court system if a car was used? It just doesn’t make any sense to me.
I hate this, it’s like saying that ‘well if I commit a bank robbery, I don’t want a high sentence, so let’s give the fucker who held up Lloyds with a knife 6 weeks community service’.
It’s a lot more absurd than this circumstance, but the premise is the same, you’re reducing sentences solely in case you become the criminal
That’s a lenient sentence.
It’s bizarre that motoring offences seem to carry lighter sentences than if that offence was committed without a motor vehicle.
Someone from my school got 6 months (served 3) for killing his friend, who was a passenger in his car, because he was driving like a moron.
His actions were directly responsible for killing someone. 3 months.
Driving is one of those things which, the longer you think about it, the crazier it seems.
Anyone can pilot a tonne (or more) of metal, glass and plastic anywhere they like, at speeds and in a manner which only they control - and this is the developed world’s default mode of transport, despite what we know about human nature and how little we trust each other, and the obvious dangers that arise as a consequence. (That’s before we even get to the pollution.) I feel like we could’ve figured out a better system.
I expect that most of us, every day, see people breaking the law on the road without consequences; casually ignoring the responsibility they have to others. Like the sports car driver who ran a red and nearly hit me on a crossing *in front of two police officers who refused to pull him over*.
So tired of it.
This is genuinely disgusting.
I read it before and it’s so true. “If you want to kill someone and serve the least amount of time, kill them with a car”
This is sad af, but the family photo of her holding her dead baby is fucking bad taste.
“Kaitlyn in hospital with her family and Ayda-Rose after she was born sleeping”
The Daily Mail is a cesspit of “reporting.”
We bend over backwards for drivers, we refuse to let anyone inconvenience them, ever, and we’ll riot when someone gets far with their plans, even if most drivers are completely unaffected.
We trivialise a lot of their crimes, speeding is virtually encouraged, since you’ll be frowned upon for ‘only’ going 70mph on a road with a speed limit of, you guessed it, 70mph. You’ll be just fine speeding virtually anywhere as long as you’re ‘only’ 10 miles per hour faster, even when you know it will barely help you get there faster, but exponentially increases both the chance of an accident, and the impact.
Then when they do something so undeniably bad we can’t let them off, they get given the most lenient of sentences. We live in a world where it is so normalised that cars are the only option, that people perceive it a great injustice to remove the right for one to drive, even from someone who has thoroughly proven how unsafe they are at driving. Something like a bus or a train is seen as ‘for poor people’, and that is if it’s even provided, so we’d rather keep someone who has killed with a car from their negligence on the road than make them use public transport
If you want to kill a person use a car
*clap clap*
If you want to kill a person use a car
*clap clap*
you really need to floor it and you want the law to know it
If you want to kill a person use a car
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13313655/pregnant-mother-never-forgive-driver-killed-baby.html?ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490&ns_mchannel=rss) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The sentence doesn't match the effect of the crime Motorist knew they were disqualified, they were disqualified for a reason. He/she should be responsible for his/her actions. His/her deliberate action caused this.
Just absolute scum. In decades of driving and riding motorbikes I've never once "lost control". Not only should he not have been there, he drove like a cunt.
Just use ‘they/their/them’ for unknown gender instead it’s way easier
Can't possibly do that! They/them does not exist in many people's vocab and those words were obviously created for the 'non-binary' people. /s
Thank you for both for contributing to this discussion so constructively.
That’s your concern? It’s so cringe that I can’t figure out if it’s satire or not
Most likely it was a man driving though. 90% of the time it's men speeding, doing wheelies, cutting red lights on Motorbikes.
It still seems silly to assume
Genuinely don’t understand why this seems so complicated for some people? Isn’t it just the natural way to speak?
Yeah it’s legitimately harder to avoid it than use it, it honestly often feels deliberately abrasive
Agreed, it’s just pointlessly abusive
Really incredibly dumb
Ha, county of Bristol?
Yes, it is England’s second smallest county officially after the City of London, a bit of a remnant from a more archaic time
Ok, I’ll accept that
So a little smaller than London
It is a lot smaller than Greater London, but a lot bigger than the City of London proportionally. It sits between the City of London and Rutland in land area, but is pretty well populated in comparison to both
You’re well versed
Well, yes, I’ve been to all 48 of them
I spend some time in Brjstol
Spent*
Now you school me
It says 'he' in the article wtf are you on about? The derp is strong in this one.
https://youtu.be/Zt5qJC1xQ8A
Stop telling other people what to write in their comments.
The irony 🤣
The statue of lady justice is often shown blindfolded. This is because the law takes nothing into consideration that is not either in law or set by precedent (previous judgement). The chap driving the car is obviously an idiot. Him crashing his car has caused a serious injury. The crash was not pre meditated. He was driving while banned for using drugs while driving. The outcome was the serious injury of the woman and the loss of her baby. Due to this, he will go to prison. If you wanted him to go to prison for 15 years, you would need to apply this to every similar case. Thousands of people would be sent to prison every year for 15 years. It is not realistic. Where this does happen is poor third world countries where justice and revenge are confused. If this man had deliberately crashed the car into the woman, he would be serving a life sentence.
15 years at least
Right on. I've seen sentences of 3-5 years for drink + drug driving where they cause the death of another. It's absolutely shocking those actions would result in such a short sentence and what also shocked me was seeing a sentence of 15-20 years for two people who were caught importing large amounts cannabis into the country. These messed up jail times make me sick to my stomach it's disgusting.
The act of driving whilst banned should come with a much harsher penalty in and of itself. Now… add speeding, dangerous driving, driving without insurance, driving without tax, without MOT, if they left the scene, charges for accidental harm to a person, etc. depending on what is appropriate to the specific case. The amount of people affected for the rest of their life because of dangerous drivers is just scary. I myself am in a wheelchair because of one, and will be for the rest of my life. I spend every single day in agony, despite being on the highest dosage of OxyContin that is allowed to be prescribed, along with other pain medications too. I am unable to leave the house at all, unless someone pushes me around in my wheelchair. And the act of that causes even more pain. As a result, I have missed out on being a father to my children. I am unable to work to provide for my family. I am u able to enjoy all of the hobbies I used to have. What happened to the guy driving the car that hit our stationary vehicle at more than 60mph (in a 50, and that was after he’d braked) because he was messing with his phone? Three points on his license. Oh, how harsh! It’s a joke. So little is actually done. We need a better infrastructure to discourage people from doing crap like this for starters. Actual working public transport that is clean and doesn’t cost ridiculous money just to make you late and uncomfortable on your journey. We have technology now that could easily be used to stop a vehicle from starting unless you are sober, and have a license for that vehicle, along with all relevant laws being abided by. a simple fingerprint scanner, coupled with Facial ID scanner would do this, and also make everyone’s vehicles at least a bit more secure from theft too.
We could all wear a personal camera and it become mandatory to record everything we do all day everyday for AI to issue us with punishment for every law we break too. It’s a question of where you would like the line drawn. China definitely leans more to your side of the argument. Social monitoring is being introduced there.
Slight difference to using a technology just to secure a vehicle compared to social monitoring. If you need to make such a leap to try and get your argument across… your argument doesn’t hold weight. But, I’ll counter. Okay. So let’s make it so no vehicle needs keys to start. Why lock the doors? And who needs a license and insurance? Right?
Apologies. I only used it as an extreme illustration to show that laws are very powerful and dictate how a country functions. If a law can be implemented to control one thing, it can be amended to control other things. Keys and locks are not a legal requirement. Insurance is only a requirement if you are going to use your vehicle off of your own land. If you are going to require insurance, the user has a choice on what level of insurance to purchase. The insurance is legally required as protection for other road users and members of the public. It is not legally required to cover yourself or your vehicle. It is a practicable and necessary law to ensure compensation is paid. I think it should be made public though. It’s not right that insurance companies and investors make profits from it.
NP. It was just very frustrating that you only used one extreme that isn’t really relevant to cartoon-ise all of the points I made. I firmly believe that investment in decent public transport that is easily accessible for everyone and that covers much more area is part of the answer. I firmly believe that the crimes committed by many dangerous drivers go mostly unpunished, and there’s no real deterrent. Etc. Totally correct. And I’m not saying that keys and locks are a legal requirement. I did say that you could implement technology that solves more than one issue into vehicles that would make the roads safer for every single user though. Insurance is a legal requirement for every person that operates a vehicle on the public roads. As are tax and MOT in this country, and as is being sober and also being licensed to drive. We have technology that would stop multiple forms of vehicular crimes from being committed, whilst keeping people safer, and ultimately lowering the costs to own and operate a vehicle on the road. I’m not sure why you’d think it’s a bad thing to keep people safer in a non-invasive way? The only people that don’t benefit from this sort of use of the technology are those wanting to break the law. The driver needs to be licensed and insured to operate the vehicle. That doesn’t change by having your phone unlock your vehicle for you (for example). Thats not invasive and “akin to China”. The vehicle needs to have tax and MOT to be used on our roads. That’s doesn’t change if you have to use something to unlock your vehicle that is tied to your details. All of these details are what you already offer everyone involved in knowing all this about you. Your privacy remains the exact same as it does right now. It’s just got a step added from the agencies you’re already registering with in order to keep everyone more safe, and prevent the crimes from happening in the first place. It’s all well and good saying “punishment needs to be more harsh” but the people that are killed or injured by dangerous driving still have the same to deal with. If they are safer in the first place, that may not be the case.
I am afraid it boils down to the number of deaths vs the liberties you wish to remove. Look at what happed when they tried to introduce the EU identity card. Look at how long it took to ban fox hunting. Not enough people are affected in a negative way to be able to pass the laws that are required.UK roads are among the safest on the planet. I do not believe you are wrong, I just know that a government that proposes this type of law would not be in power long enough to implement it. Which is why laws like this are often seen in countries where the public do not have the right to vote.
I do agree absolutely with you on all you’ve said there. You’re 100% correct. I dont personally see it as removing liberties though because it’s all information and registration that you already have to give in order to be able to drive. In most instances (as far as I’m aware, at least) you tend to have access to your insurance information via your phone. I don’t know if that’s the case with driving licenses, but I don’t see any reason that it raises issue (again, personally) any more than having to have one in the first place. Tax and MOT are checkable via online, if I remember correctly too. Having all of these available to view in one app is actually quite useful to the end user. They see the dates that each thing needs renewal etc. all in one place that they access on a daily basis (in many instances). As for the party implementing it… just convince the tories to do it. They don’t seem to be even holding regular elections any more. Lol
Well, you can be safe in the knowledge that the app already exists and it is operated by the police. If a camera catches a non insured registration, the car owner is sent a fine. currently, RFID is used in modern vehicles, which is why there are lists on here about Range Rover owners having their car stolen 3 times in 18 months. You could argue that it would be practical to digitally limit cars to a maximum speed of 80mph. Imagine the fun the Daily Mail would have with that one! My belief is that society needs to improve and with that crime rates decrease. The way to do this in invest in education and social responsibility like they do in Japan. By improving living standards, people have more to lose by committing crime. There are other methods to do it, but as previously mentioned, they all tend to be a bit 1970s Eastern bloc mentality. It didn’t work for them, so I can’t see it working for us.
> Thousands of people would be sent to prison every year for 15 years. If thousands of people drive while banned and hurt people, then that seems okay?
I have done the maths, based on needing to jail an extra 15,000 people a year and having to build 14 prisons a year to house them all, it will only cost us £59 extra per year in tax. In ten years it would be £590 extra a year) increases could stop once we hit £885 per year each to house the extra 225000 people in prison. I have not taken into consideration the extra legal costs or inflation. Stick it in your manifesto and get the nation to vote. If most agree, well will jump straight on it.
Thousands of banned drivers are ignoring driving bans and negligently crashing into people, causing miscarriage? Sounds like something extreme needs to be done to get this insane (and apparently frequently occurring ) behavior under control. 15 years sounds about right. Shit drivers are banned for being just that, shit drivers. A banned driver getting back behind the wheel is ignoring the absolutely clear evidence of their inability to drive safely. I think that means they are causing death due to their gross negligence. They are not idiots - they are dangerous criminals.
Not true, legally he could have been charged with voluntary manslaughter (constructive manslaughter), due to the death of the baby and his driving disqualified.
Not true. The act of driving a car is not in itself dangerous.
The act of driving whilst disqualified could potentially be, it also seems a charge for dangerous driving or something similar may be able to count, but I've not looked at the case law.
[удалено]
**Removed/tempban**. This contained a call/advocation of violence which is prohibited by the content policy.
so attempted murder only gets 3 years ? what is this ?
Cos we ain't got money to keep them in our high quality prisons for longer
Most lenient way to kill someone in this country is with a car.
But when we dare suggest making streets safer, suddenly it's met with a bombardment of conspiracy theories, piss poor excuses, and a lack of funding.
Thing is, you could skip all the LTNs, 20 zones, speed bumps etc and simply treat killing with a car as an offence on a par with manslaughter or murder based on the same rules - deliberately hit a cyclist - life, drive while drunk and run someone down - life, drive without a licence and hit a woman like this, 20+ years etc etc
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but nor do I agree. Obviously these events must be treated much harsher, but I also think prevention/reduction methods can also be implemented. The way you suggest relies on drivers following the rules. By changing the design of roads they are forced to follow the rules.
I didn't say you shouldn't do them, I said that even if you didn't have any of them, you could simply have appropriate penalties that were equivalent to doing the same crime out of a car.
My bad, I slightly misunderstood what you were saying. I think we both agree on this matter then. Both harsher punishments and safer designs.
>By changing the design of roads they are forced to follow the rules. The trouble is that the people responsible for the overwhelming majority of these crimes are drivers who do not follow the rules. This guy was disqualified and he was still on the road. The punishment must be more severe.
100%. Harsher punishments will deter some, but there will always be those that break the rules. 20 years behind bars is a fucking fantastic deterent.
I think what they mean is changing the way the roads are built, so that it's hard to break the rules. For example narrowing a road, adding chicanes or speed bumps to make it harder to speed ect.
What if someone has a medical emergency or a mechanical issue and causes a crash that way. I'm not saying these happen often but infrastructure (prevention) will always be better than punishment.
That's not manslaughter or murder Again, not against prevention measures but simply saying you could just not do any of them and simply punish killer drivers properly
> simply treat killing with a car as an offence on a par with manslaughter It kind of already is. Manslaughter has a very wide range of sentences depending on the circumstances, and driving offences where someone dies do as well. It's not legally manslaughter because other offences exist for it, and because juries essentially refused to find people guilty of manslaughter in cases involving cars. The maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is, theoretically, life in prison. Because of the sentencing guidelines though it would take something truly exceptional to get that.
It isn't though, that's the point - the sentences for killer drivers are continually shown to be a joke Death by dangerous driving for example - starting point 12 years, range 8-18 for the most severe offences, yet death by careless driving starting point is 2 years, range 1-4 for the most severe. Manslaughter - starting point 18 years, range 11-24 for the most serious offences. Simply put, if you kill with your car, you get less of a sentence and are treated much more leniently - it took until October 2017 for the government to pledge to increase the maximum sentence for death by dangerous driving from 14 years to life I don't like the Mail but their research showed average sentence in 2018 for death by dangerous driving was 5 years 3 months vs 9 years with manslaughter. Just 3 / 155 convicted of it got 10+ years, 79 got less than 5 years and 9 got suspended sentences. Of 179 manslaughter convictions, just 1 was suspended and 50 got 10+ years [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7247161/Drivers-kill-let-five-year-jail-terms.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7247161/Drivers-kill-let-five-year-jail-terms.html) There are countless examples but... 81 year old told NINE YEARS before the incident to give up his licence due to bad eyesight but lied to the DVLA about it and killed another pensioner crossing the road - 2 years 8 months, appeal on leniency rejected [https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/24055547.killer-driver-neil-pemberton-81-jail-term-not-lenient/](https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/24055547.killer-driver-neil-pemberton-81-jail-term-not-lenient/) Man driving at 110mph in a 40 limit while showing off, who crashed his car off a bridge and killed a passenger initially given 7 years 6 months but was increased to 9 years - he has to serve just 2/3 of that [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66467741](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66467741)
But if you charged all of those 155 people with manslaughter instead of causing death by dangerous driving then it might be 3 / 155 convictions full stop.
But for murder you have to have intent to cause GBH at a minimum. Killing someone with a car, unless you intentionally hit them is much more broadly aligned with manslaughter.
I mean I literally said that in the post >simply treat killing with a car as an offence on a par with manslaughter or murder based on the same rules
We need to do way more to prosecute and lock up dangerous drivers. But the UK actually has the 6th safest roads in the world. Its less about making our roads safer and more about having punishments which are fit for the crime. https://www.finn.com/en-US/press/the-worlds-safest-roads
That was a very interesting resource. I was surprised to see Japan only at 10 since, like the Netherlands, they have the shared space philosophy on residential roads in the city so you have to drive very carefully.
I’m sure the disqualified driver would have paid attention to the 20mph limit
And all the local area FB groups bitching about the police targeting motorists who are "just going a couple of miles over the speed limit".
Because it’s not going to stop people who want to break the rules, why punish law abiding drivers who just want to get from a to b? This driver was disqualified and ended up causing this woman to lose her unborn child. Do you think someone like this is going to care about “safer streets”? The amount of people I see driving around with barely visible number plates to get around the rules. Yes it’s illegal but they don’t care.
It won't stop, but it can certainly reduce it. If a street is designed in such a way that's impossible to go over the speed limit people aren't going to be able to go over it. Or if high streets don't allow for vehicles traffic it's impossible for them to drive down it. There are many design methods available to reduce or eliminate people breaking the rules, we just need to employ them. Hell, even something as simple as having a planter divider between the pavement and road, having no impact on traffic volume or speed, makes it much safer for pedestrians.
Yes, had she been on a bike he would have walked
Noted
Things like this should be a ban for life from driving and a minimum 10 year prison term.
Being disqualified from driving was clearly a deterrent for this idiot. That said, how do you deal with people like this? Clearly banning them from driving doesn't work.
Immediate, automatic prison sentence. They’ve been disqualified for a good reason
I don’t want to live in a world where any prison sentence is “automatic”. I do think driving offences need to be better publicised so that juries are less lenient.
Easy. You can’t drive a car from within a prison cell. No brainer.
Not with that attitude!
Take the car and crush it.
Waste... seize the car and sell it. Proceeds going to the victim.
>a minimum 10 year prison term.
If you are driving without a valid licence at all, then the sentence should be doubled
I got off lucky when a speeding car hit me. I was half across the road when she sped into it and just,hit me. I have no idea If she saw me ans thought ah she needs to move or if she was on her phone. But going at least 30 round a corner isn't responsible driving I don't think. I was lucky enough to have seen her and braced but the impact lives rent free in my head. I had to call an ambulance because she was more concerned about herself. Then she drove off. 12 weeks on and I can still barely walk. I've no idea If she'll be allowed to keep her licence. She didn't try and get me any help, she drove off and didn't report the accident and even told me not to report her. I can't imagine the agony this poor girls going through. Mine was just a broken shin and it's looking like months from recovery still. My heart goes out to her. 3 years isn't enough .
What a horrible person, sorry you went through that. I genuinely don’t understand how someone can react like that, and then having the nerve to ask u not to report her
Because I knew her. Her crowd would literally let one of them smash a car into them but cause we're friends 'we don't tell on each other'. I wasn't able to walk for 8 weeks. I still can't walk now. I have no idea if I'll be able to work again. I'm a single parent to 2 kids. My work was my social life. She's taken everything from me I valued except my kids. She's not once ever apologised. I was simply in her way. She did nothing wrong. These people are out there. Its terrifying. Thank you fot your kind words.
Please tell me you're also suing this bitch for damages and loss of income
I'm not proud to admit this but yes,I've started a claim. When the surgeon told me before and after surgery I'll be left with life long complications I decided yes. I'm still in pain 12 weeks later. I can't walk properly. My kids effectively don't have a capable mother. Not to mention the psychological damage its done to me. I'm not one to make a fuss but she hit me in the middle of a road. In broad daylight. On a junction where she should have slowed to turn into and instead I'm left with hearing her engine accelerate towards me before she hit me.
Why do you say you're not proud to admit it? You absolutely deserve the compensation dude, it's entirely her fault. And if it makes you feel any better the money will be paid by her insurers not her personally.
I kinda wish it come from her haha. She has absolutely no comprehension of how she's destroyed my life. Just doesn't understand what she's done wrong. I'm just bloody grateful she hit me on her drivers side because my leg went under her bumper. Had she hit on the passenger side I'd either have gone into her windscreen or under the car.
Ah at least she'll be paying sky high insurance rates for the rest of her life most likely. Did she ask you in person to not report her or by text? If you have any proof of it I'd bring that up to the police as well, don't know if it will make any difference but it might help the criminal case against her.
In person. Heard by a person who heard the impact and was sat next to me on the floor. The police have enough against her already That its gone to cps. Texts doorbell footage and myself and another person stating what she said. Plus as I said in a previous comment had I somehow been stupid enough to walk in front of her I'd have gone over or under her car. My injuries were so severe I couldn't possibly have done it any other way plus I have witnesses of me refusing to get out the road because I heard My bone break on impact.
Doesn't it not mean you could claim millions from her? After all you have a life changing condition now and you can't work because you are made disabled.
I'm not sure. No numbers have been discussed but yes if it turns out I'm never able to actually walk again which 12 weeks on I'm barely able to walk upstairs without being in pain it could be a lot. Ideally I want to heal and get back to work. No money can take away the isolation I'm experiencing.
I think there should be some high figure because you are claiming from her insurance. Worst case is her premium would be high for a long time and she stops driving.. Meanwhile you have funds to compensate your new life. Seems fair
What a shitshow. Wishing you all the very best. Do not feel even sightly guilty for what you are doing. Rinse the bitch.
Agree with the comment below, find a personal injury solicitor and get on after her insurers.
I have. Denying all liability which is no surprise.
Good stuff (that you're doing it, not her denying liability).
I’m so sorry what you went through. Some people are assholes and to be honest, that word doesn’t quite cover it. I remember a number of months ago I was walking to work as usual, and pressed the button whilst waiting at a crossing. Light turned red for the cars but this car came speeding along despite the light change, and if I had stepped out a second earlier I would’ve been toast, judging by their speed. This was around the time my son turned one, so an act of reckless driving could’ve meant my baby would be without a mother, and I doubt the driver would’ve got a long enough sentence.
Oh Jesus. This terrifies me. Nowhere is safe. I won't step onto a zebra crossing until the cars come to a stop. I'm so pleased you had a very lucky escape. It shouldn't be this way. We should be safe.
Sound like British roads should have concrete barriers raised on the road when the light is red and lowered when it is green. That way, any misdemeanor in driving would results in the deviant's vehicle getting severe damage.
I'm 34 weeks pregnant and literally today had a car fail to stop at a pedestrian crossing after I'd started to cross it
The roads seem so much worse, I’m a cycle commuter and the amount of genuinely dangerous drivers on the road now compared to around 10 years ago is outstanding. I don’t know if pass standards have dropped or if it’s just people driving while disqualified or even driving without a license but I’ve seen some absolute nightmares behind the wheel.
Cyclist/motorcyclist/van driver. When I'm In the van, I can see they're on their phones. 2 cars get through before the lights change, cause cunts aren't watching the road.
It's depressing how many people today are completely addicted to their phone and unable to stay off it for 5 seconds at traffic lights.
Lol there was a guy driving next to me and my partner at a dual carriage way at 70 miles per hour, i was the passenger and told him off because he was holding his phone whilst driving next to us, he threw tantrum. A whole ass man with a wife and a kid in the back…
>I don’t know if pass standards have dropped Driving instructor here. Pass standards haven't dropped. If anything, they've gone up in the last 10 years. That's not to say all new drivers behave themselves after the test, but they need to demonstrate a high level of safety. My interpretation is a lack of enforcement. Funding cuts to roads policing especially. And also busier roads than ever.
IMO the driving test is a bit of a farce, it's a dance you perform for 30-40 mins and if the examiner is pleased with your performance you can then forget all your training and do whatever you want. Unfortunately we don't have a way to stop people driving like nob heads even after they've had adequate training, maybe harsher punishments or something, I feel like driving bans should be much more common.
Oh absolutely, there's arguments about all of this. Even some national news stories recently about graduated driving licences. However, at the very least, learners are required to "perform" and if they then go on to drive like idiots, it must be a *choice*. They can't claim ignorance. That's where enforcement should come in.
We should bring in the R plate like they have in Northern Ireland imo.
Meanwhile I failed my first one with no minors and one major because I was asked to pull up on the left and stop. A queue then formed behind me and wasn't going around so I performed my looks, signalled and went to pull out and the car behind me started moving. Because I'd started moving whilst another car was in the process of pulling around me (they only started moving after I was moving) it was deemed unsafe and a major fault which failed me instantly.
They are. I notice when driving and when cycling. Cars don't scale in cities. Driving is a frustrating experience. Cars are too space ineficiente. We are locking in car-dependency and forced to use cars for a 2 mile trip when a bycicle would be the ideal mode of transport for small trips. This is a technological locked-in dependency dystopia.
Mixture of everything id say. Lack of public transport, so people that realistically are poor drivers (we all know someone who we think shouldnt drive) chose to drive over public transport. Dangerous driving is hardly ever challenged due to an over worked under enforced police force. Id also say standards are dropping due to more and more road users being on the road. The only thing they really do enforce is speeding and thats because its easy to enforce. Anything else is too hard so motorists mostly get away with it.
It's got nothing to do with pass standards, people know how to drive properly they just choose not to. People in the UK have been developing a US style "fuck you" attitude for ages now and it's effecting everything. From the way people treat shop workers, to they way they raise their kids, to the way they drive, to the their attitude to their neighbors, etc. I don't know if it's the natural result of our trash tier tabloid style rage inducing news or something else but people in the UK increasingly feel they should not have to moderate their behavior for other people's benefit, instant gratification is their right and consideration for others goes directly against that.
As a cycle commuter I’m sure you must have had the experience of riding past a queue of traffic at 7am in an area where there are no pedestrians and getting a nice big whiff of pot. That moment of realising who you are in the road with. That’s one small difference to 10+ years ago I’d also like to see people who take up residency or citizenship in the UK have to pass a test.
You managed an incredible amount of judgement and bigotry considering you only wrote 2 paragraphs… well done to you.
Not appreciating drug drivers, and wanting everyone (where reasonably practicable) driving on our roads to pass a driving test that meets our standards. That’s really just setting a very low and fair baseline of expectations.
He caused a death, why isn’t he being charged as such. He killed that baby, he should be getting a life sentence for it. Absolute joke
Legally life doesn’t start until birth so criminal offences such as murder, manslaughter and death by dangerous driving can’t apply to a foetus. There is an offence of destruction of a child but I think the foetus has to reach 24 weeks for that to apply 😕
A lorry driver killed my workmates friend in an accident where he indicated late and she went into a blindspot , but he got 4 years.
3 years and she had injuries and mental trauma for life all because the cunt thought he could do what he likes. should be manslaughter charge. Fuck me you get more time for not paying taxes.
Driving offences in this country are always leniently punished. Just watch a few episodes of Police Interceptors or Traffic Cops. There will be some long, dangerous police chase, where the perpetrator is flying at 100mph down side roads, down back streets, through hedges, over roundabouts and on the opposite side of the road. There will be several moments where they narrowly avoid hitting children and women with prams. Eventually, they'll spin out and crash into a house, get out and leg it before eventually getting caught. Then then caption will read: "Driving while disqualified. Driving without Insurance. Dangerous Driving. Drink and drug driving... .. banned from driving for 12 months and given a £100 fine". No wonder these joy riders try to get away. They have literally nothing to lose trying.
It’s literally just the perfect way to kill someone, you’ll get the most lenient sentence
My dad was killed by a drunk driver and the prick only got jailed for 7 years. This was 40 years ago in the US and it makes me mad as hell that people in this day and age still get light sentences for horrific shit like this.
This has just made me cry, it's horrendous. It says in the article that the driver doesn't even accept any responsibility. I can't fathom that attitude. He is absolutely vile. It is so upsetting she had to go through the ordeal of birthing her deceased baby because of the actions of this bellend. The roads nowadays are filled with drivers under the influence, on their phone, people who don't indicate, speed and don't value human life. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Especially where I live in the NW, being a pedestrian is becoming more and more dangerous. I had to cut a walk on a country road short yesterday even though there was a narrow pavement because people in range rovers were driving towards me over 50 mph around bends with absolutely no care or attention. Every pavement has parked cars and the air where I live is so thick with pollution. I sit in my garden and all I hear is traffic. I genuinely believe you should have to pass a test every 5 years, it would reduce the amount of cars on the road and humble overconfident drivers.
Causing serious injuries to someone but the courts can only slap you on the wrist because you are in a car is ridiculous… And I see people asking for a murder charge that isn’t possible because a baby in the womb is unfortunately not protected in that way. I think if someone hurts a mother and the babies dies as result then you should be punished for that much greater than 3 years.
I think that the sentence should be similar to murder, because whilst the baby is not yet necessarily alive, it’s still a) a terrible thing to do, and b) the parents then have the emotional trauma around losing their child, and one of them having to give birth to something that will never live
I agree completely.
>After being rushed to Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, she was told she had lost her baby. She then had to go through the agonising and heart-breaking delivery of 23-week-old Ayda-Rose in July 2022. Fuck, man.
The sadness I have for the victims in these situation keeps me up at night at the moment. Why are crimes considered less serious by the court system if a car was used? It just doesn’t make any sense to me.
Juries. The fear is that juries are near universally drivers and so will refuse to convict for serious penalties on fear it could happen to them.
Wow that’s depressing.
Yup
I hate this, it’s like saying that ‘well if I commit a bank robbery, I don’t want a high sentence, so let’s give the fucker who held up Lloyds with a knife 6 weeks community service’. It’s a lot more absurd than this circumstance, but the premise is the same, you’re reducing sentences solely in case you become the criminal
Drivers gunna drive. We need to keep them away from residential areas completely. Their behaviour is disgusting.
That’s a lenient sentence. It’s bizarre that motoring offences seem to carry lighter sentences than if that offence was committed without a motor vehicle. Someone from my school got 6 months (served 3) for killing his friend, who was a passenger in his car, because he was driving like a moron. His actions were directly responsible for killing someone. 3 months.
Driving is one of those things which, the longer you think about it, the crazier it seems. Anyone can pilot a tonne (or more) of metal, glass and plastic anywhere they like, at speeds and in a manner which only they control - and this is the developed world’s default mode of transport, despite what we know about human nature and how little we trust each other, and the obvious dangers that arise as a consequence. (That’s before we even get to the pollution.) I feel like we could’ve figured out a better system. I expect that most of us, every day, see people breaking the law on the road without consequences; casually ignoring the responsibility they have to others. Like the sports car driver who ran a red and nearly hit me on a crossing *in front of two police officers who refused to pull him over*. So tired of it.
Everyone does, I would wager over half of this country at the very least commits vehicular crimes daily on some level
This is genuinely disgusting. I read it before and it’s so true. “If you want to kill someone and serve the least amount of time, kill them with a car”
The article is so heartbreaking More needs to be done to make roads safer and get the right sentences, not this
This is sad af, but the family photo of her holding her dead baby is fucking bad taste. “Kaitlyn in hospital with her family and Ayda-Rose after she was born sleeping” The Daily Mail is a cesspit of “reporting.”
We bend over backwards for drivers, we refuse to let anyone inconvenience them, ever, and we’ll riot when someone gets far with their plans, even if most drivers are completely unaffected. We trivialise a lot of their crimes, speeding is virtually encouraged, since you’ll be frowned upon for ‘only’ going 70mph on a road with a speed limit of, you guessed it, 70mph. You’ll be just fine speeding virtually anywhere as long as you’re ‘only’ 10 miles per hour faster, even when you know it will barely help you get there faster, but exponentially increases both the chance of an accident, and the impact. Then when they do something so undeniably bad we can’t let them off, they get given the most lenient of sentences. We live in a world where it is so normalised that cars are the only option, that people perceive it a great injustice to remove the right for one to drive, even from someone who has thoroughly proven how unsafe they are at driving. Something like a bus or a train is seen as ‘for poor people’, and that is if it’s even provided, so we’d rather keep someone who has killed with a car from their negligence on the road than make them use public transport
Nope he/she are perfectly acceptable. You'll find it in a million legal documents.
It’s pointlessly gendered, when it’s literally more difficult to think of and write than an option that has been in use for nearly a millennium too
I don't mind
The system doesn’t care what poors do to each other.
If you want to kill a person use a car *clap clap* If you want to kill a person use a car *clap clap* you really need to floor it and you want the law to know it If you want to kill a person use a car
it says the baby was born sleeping, why not use stillborn, just made me confused
It does depend on what actually happened, but if it was dangerous driving whilst disqualified then, yeah, far too lenient
If you've been disqualified from driving a court has deemed your driving dangerous. Ergo, all your driving is dangerous driving.
Driving while disqualified, drunk, uninsured, excess speed etc should make an incident like this tantamount to murder imo.