keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,590
Likes: 2,623
|
Post by keitha on Jun 22, 2023 14:21:33 GMT
Car accidents are 99% (or more) accidents, the remainder are deliberates. If I hit another car by accident the rules of the road determine who was at fault and I could be prosecuted. If I hit a pedestrian it will almost certainly be judged my fault unless they threw themselves under the car, I am driving a lethal weapon and if I get it wrong (accidentally) and cause injury or death I will be prosecuted, the punishment will take into account the circumstances (in that case quite lenient). I would also blame myself for life, but the law would still punish me. Certainly round here the police don't refer to them as accidents but as road traffic collisions ( RTC ). According to rumour locally, one of the local yobs hit someone who was remonstrating with him about the level of sound from the car he was driving and the way and speed he was driving. When arrested he protested it was an accident , apparently the police officer concerned said "hitting him was an accident, getting back in your car and driving over his leg so you could get away wasn't" said yob is now being held at his majesties pleasure awaiting trial. the same yob was also prone to racing an off road motor bike around the streets, often on just one wheel and with no helmet, the Police had been instructed not to chase him as he might be seriously injured in any crash or if he lost control. Now to me that encourages dangerous behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 22, 2023 17:06:28 GMT
Car accidents are 99% (or more) accidents, the remainder are deliberates. If I hit another car by accident the rules of the road determine who was at fault and I could be prosecuted. If I hit a pedestrian it will almost certainly be judged my fault unless they threw themselves under the car, I am driving a lethal weapon and if I get it wrong (accidentally) and cause injury or death I will be prosecuted, the punishment will take into account the circumstances (in that case quite lenient). I would also blame myself for life, but the law would still punish me. ... the same yob was also prone to racing an off road motor bike around the streets, often on just one wheel and with no helmet, the Police had been instructed not to chase him as he might be seriously injured in any crash or if he lost control. Now to me that encourages dangerous behaviour.It does, but the Police are between a rock and a hard place on this sort of thing. Just look at recent incidents that have been in the news. Over the years, the rules around police engaging in chases, who is qualified to do it, the authority required to do it and continue it, and the level of continuous monitoring has increased. And that is probably, overall, not a bad thing. If nothing else, there is a significantly heightened degree of risk of innocent third party injury/fatality, either from collision by the person being chased or indeed from the Police themselves (regardless of their skills and qualification). Also, however 'inadvertent' - or indeed "accidental" to use the current in vogue topic - extrajudicial death sentence is rarely the appropriate sanction for the particular anti social behaviour or crime. In many cases these days, with cameras in so many places, if the individual can be identified it doesn't really need a chase in order to find and bring to justice [of course in the case of stolen vehicles that is far less so]. It's a difficult one, but the reticence about engaging in high speed chases unless really justified is an understandable one.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 22, 2023 17:23:28 GMT
.... Nothing is ever considered an "accident". Au contraire. Nearly everything is considered an accident. That is, an incident with a bad outcome for which there was no intent. If there was intent, there would be a raft of additional/different charges. If I cause someones death as a result of driving recklessly/dangerously, it is considered to be an accident. And hence I might get charged with "causing death by dangerous driving". But I won't get charged with murder. because there was no intent. But the fact that I did not intend, does not mean I am not responsible by way of my actions. To take a example that is currently in the news. If the Titan submersible is shown to have structurally failed (which based on latest news is looking like one reasonable possibility), then it won't have done so because of the intent of an individual or corporate body. Not least because the founder/owner was onboard. So it will be an accident. However, it is entirely conceivable that it will be shown that the company/CEO used methods that were unproven and insufficiently tested, and which ultimately likely lead to failure of the pressure vessel (or failure of something else). If that is the case, then there will likely be identifiable "responsibility" for the incident, even though there was no intent. For which one or more individuals and/or a corporate body may be held accountable for. It could well turn out that the Titan was indeed an accident waiting to happen.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,612 
Likes: 1,740
|
Post by benaj on Jun 22, 2023 17:39:13 GMT
Well, at least the chance of go missing within a cage fight is close to 0, unlike these space and deep sea travels.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,590
Likes: 2,623
|
Post by keitha on Jun 22, 2023 18:08:32 GMT
... the same yob was also prone to racing an off road motor bike around the streets, often on just one wheel and with no helmet, the Police had been instructed not to chase him as he might be seriously injured in any crash or if he lost control. Now to me that encourages dangerous behaviour.It does, but the Police are between a rock and a hard place on this sort of thing. Just look at recent incidents that have been in the news. Over the years, the rules around police engaging in chases, who is qualified to do it, the authority required to do it and continue it, and the level of continuous monitoring has increased. And that is probably, overall, not a bad thing. If nothing else, there is a significantly heightened degree of risk of innocent third party injury/fatality, either from collision by the person being chased or indeed from the Police themselves (regardless of their skills and qualification). Also, however 'inadvertent' - or indeed "accidental" to use the current in vogue topic - extrajudicial death sentence is rarely the appropriate sanction for the particular anti social behaviour or crime. In many cases these days, with cameras in so many places, if the individual can be identified it doesn't really need a chase in order to find and bring to justice [of course in the case of stolen vehicles that is far less so]. It's a difficult one, but the reticence about engaging in high speed chases unless really justified is an understandable one. In the Cardiff case the Police have been economical with the truth initially "no police on that road" then "not chasing" and that was the line followed by the Police Commissioner, then video emerges of the 2 young lads being followed by a Police van. The police weren't following at the time of the accident as the E_bike had taken a short cut through a pedestrian area .... but then there was no excuse for the riots that followed, and then a week or so later relatives and friends organised a memorial ride / drive from Cardiff to Barry www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cardiff-riots-teenagers-killed-police-b2359021.html2 arrests and 20 out of 50 vehicles involved seized
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 22, 2023 18:16:25 GMT
It does, but the Police are between a rock and a hard place on this sort of thing. Just look at recent incidents that have been in the news. Over the years, the rules around police engaging in chases, who is qualified to do it, the authority required to do it and continue it, and the level of continuous monitoring has increased. And that is probably, overall, not a bad thing. If nothing else, there is a significantly heightened degree of risk of innocent third party injury/fatality, either from collision by the person being chased or indeed from the Police themselves (regardless of their skills and qualification). Also, however 'inadvertent' - or indeed "accidental" to use the current in vogue topic - extrajudicial death sentence is rarely the appropriate sanction for the particular anti social behaviour or crime. In many cases these days, with cameras in so many places, if the individual can be identified it doesn't really need a chase in order to find and bring to justice [of course in the case of stolen vehicles that is far less so]. It's a difficult one, but the reticence about engaging in high speed chases unless really justified is an understandable one. In the Cardiff case the Police have been economical with the truth initially "no police on that road" then "not chasing" and that was the line followed by the Police Commissioner, then video emerges of the 2 young lads being followed by a Police van. The police weren't following at the time of the accident as the E_bike had taken a short cut through a pedestrian area .... but then there was no excuse for the riots that followed, and then a week or so later relatives and friends organised a memorial ride / drive from Cardiff to Barry www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/cardiff-riots-teenagers-killed-police-b2359021.html2 arrests and 20 out of 50 vehicles involved seized I don't disagree with any of that.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 22, 2023 19:40:42 GMT
We have open ground behind us, and the 'lads' on illegal bikes coming off the fields onto the road give me nightmares. They just rush onto the road, no helmets obviously, either going home or into the green lanes opposite across a really main road taking their lives in their hands. They are also destroying some local ancient sites.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jun 22, 2023 20:05:32 GMT
Yes .. maybe a politician that can command an 80 seat majority... starmer you think? Certainly not ... I said a serious politician ... not one who expounds an economically illiterate fantasy. You've missed the point ... Boris 80 seat majority was based on Labour collapse & a general trend ... on a get B done whomever was Tory leader would have won. A Labour victory will be based on anti-Tory, anti-SNP vote not anything Starmer does. Starmer can only lose the election, Sunak only win ... like 92. As i said...like starmer? no. borises majority was based on labour saying they would reverse brexit, along with the the lib dems and the snp's... and your assumption of get b done is nonsense.. teresa May certainly wouldnt have won , and she wanted to get brexit done.. in her own wierd way... and labours victory or loss could still be decided by the stupidity of starmers flip flop comments/promises/non promises.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jun 22, 2023 20:08:25 GMT
Doesnt say clearly what actually happened.. i suspect the kids were on the road.. PARENTS NOT WATCHING MAYBE? and i agree "accidents happen" seems to not exist anymore... there always seems to be someone to blame. It does. It says they were in the central hatched area ... ie not in the road but waiting between lanes to cross. Perhaps not the most sensible place. Quite right ... sad either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jun 22, 2023 20:16:29 GMT
Many years ago, soon after passing my test, I was driving along a B road in the West Country somewhere. The traffic lights ahead were amber. I accelerated to get through them. I didn't know that there was a dog leg at the traffic lights. I went through the just changing to red lights, and went straight across the road into the right hand lane of the opposing side. Had there been a car there (or a pedestrian crossing) I would have crashed straight into it at 60 miles an hour. It would have been an accident. But it would, absolutely, have been caused by my poor judgement. And I would rightly have been held to account for it. I was very lucky. It scared the  out of me. no it wouldnt have been an accident, it would have been reckless driving, or worse.... AMBER MEANS STOP. JUST LIKE RED MEANS STOP.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jun 22, 2023 20:26:20 GMT
CERTAINLY NOT AMUSING SITUATION... But i simply cannot stop thinking about the 5 people on the titan submersable .... what they must be enduring is unthinkable. please god find them alive. though i dont hold out much hope.. so sad. so sad to hear this news today...... I heard a comment today from an ocean expert with regard to this tragedy, i found it profound... "When a human being dips his toe in the ocean.... he is then bottom of the food chain"
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jun 22, 2023 20:40:08 GMT
Many years ago, soon after passing my test, I was driving along a B road in the West Country somewhere. The traffic lights ahead were amber. I accelerated to get through them. I didn't know that there was a dog leg at the traffic lights. I went through the just changing to red lights, and went straight across the road into the right hand lane of the opposing side. Had there been a car there (or a pedestrian crossing) I would have crashed straight into it at 60 miles an hour. It would have been an accident. But it would, absolutely, have been caused by my poor judgement. And I would rightly have been held to account for it. I was very lucky. It scared the out of me. no it wouldnt have been an accident, it would have been reckless driving, or worse.... AMBER MEANS STOP. JUST LIKE RED MEANS STOP. Maybe I should have said unintentional. And whilst I don't disagree with your characterisation of what amber means, in my experience an astonishing number of drivers interpret it differently. Anyway, like I said, I was a new driver, I made a bad mistake, and I was very lucky to get away with it. It taught me an extremely valuable lesson at no cost. Not everybody is so lucky.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 22, 2023 20:46:34 GMT
no it wouldnt have been an accident, it would have been reckless driving, or worse.... AMBER MEANS STOP. JUST LIKE RED MEANS STOP. Maybe I should have said unintentional. And whilst I don't disagree with your characterisation of what amber means, in my experience an astonishing number of drivers interpret it differently. Anyway, like I said, I was a new driver, I made a bad mistake, and I was very lucky to get away with it. It taught me an extremely valuable lesson at no cost. Not everybody is so lucky. No, it would still have been an accident. The very definition of accident is an incident that is unintentional. An accident has causes, in this case as you rightly recognise and own up to would have been what you did, but is still unintentional. You were lucky to get away with it as you say. I'm sure many of us, in our youth especially, and particularly those of us of a male original gender, have had driving incidents that we were lucky to get away with.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,500
Likes: 924
|
Post by aju on Jun 23, 2023 16:37:12 GMT
I thought about this for a while having been in a similar situation recently where the lights changed when i was just passing over the stop line. I checked here what the current rules are www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/light-signals-controlling-traffic.htmlwhere it stated the following Just a thought, hopefully any cameras will be able to corroborate my view and see the car behind was perilously close too! |
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,590
Likes: 2,623
|
Post by keitha on Jun 23, 2023 17:21:51 GMT
Maybe I should have said unintentional. And whilst I don't disagree with your characterisation of what amber means, in my experience an astonishing number of drivers interpret it differently. Anyway, like I said, I was a new driver, I made a bad mistake, and I was very lucky to get away with it. It taught me an extremely valuable lesson at no cost. Not everybody is so lucky. round here Amber, means put yer foot down or we'll get stuck on red red < 3 seconds = go red + amber, put it in gear and start to rev engine green don't go for 3 seconds cos one of yer mates may be coming the other way Traffic lights don't apply to cyclists, or Deliveroo/just eat drivers on mopeds both of whom either ignore the signals completely or ride round them on the footpath.
|
|
out of me.