Driver walks free after seriously injuring rider! WTF?

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 18 Jan 2006 03:05:36 GMT

Would that be a story if it was the normal state of affairs?

Does that describe you? Your parents? Your teachers? Your
co-workers?

Zebee

 

I'm not suggesting jail time, but to walk free without any sort of fine

its not uncommon for drivers who wipe out motorcyclists to get off
scott free. no points, no fines no fuckin anything.

Not worth a pinch of shit. Victims dont come into it AT ALL. All the
court is there for are the road rules.

not really, fucking 100% WRONG, but not unbelieveable.

 

At last someone is thinking logically.

 

We live at the end of a short dead-end street. People pull out of drives
blindly because they don't expect traffic, particularly at certain times of
the day. It doesn't matter if you're on the bike or driving the car.
Sometimes they just don't "see" and look most surprised when blasted with
Fiamms.

There's another common problem when drivers go into auto mode and only
process part of the information required. Sitting at red light + red right
turn arrow in Redcliffe the other night. Cars in both facing right turn
lanes, so arrows go green. While I'm wating in the right through lane the
turkey in the hatchback on my left sees green and goes hard for it. Luckily
for him/her the 4wd turning on the facing green arrow was steady off the
mark. Simply not paying attention.

 

The story falls apart right here.

 

I don't and never have felt it is ok to hurt someone. Some people
obviously do though and this will not help to make them rethink the way
they drive.

Take for example the guy in a Mazda rx8 that cut across four lanes of
traffic including several solid white lines the other morning right
infront of me and I don't mean politely, indicating, looking for other
traffic, rather foot to the floor and go for it style regardless of
anyone else might also have just left the toll booths. I saw him coming
at me and was on the horn and brakes..
His response was arm out of the window to give me a one finger plus
shouting some stuff I couldn't hear.

Its the message it sends to tossers like the one above that concerns me,
not those that already take care when driving.

 

Yeah he has to lose his licence. Sheesh the justification for taking ur
licence away for speeding is the 'potential' damage. Nothing potential
about this. So we take ur licence away if you might hurt someone (at
midnight in the sticks) but we dont even fine you when you have.

Sheesh

Dave

 

Zebee Johnstone wrote:

One wonders if this is the same judge who sent a bloke down for 6 or 7
years, after he crashed into another car, killing the occupants.

It was certainly reported in the Manly Daily, about six months ago.

In a kinda warped way, I can actually see that the apparent randomness
of the punishment could be a good thing but only if, every now and
again, there is _extreme_ and public punishment.

As I've said before, sharia law and public stonings, do have some good
points.

Maybe the poor bikie's parents _would_ throw the first rocks... maybe
they wouldn't. <shrug>

regards,
CrazyCam

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:13:14 +1100

He obviously already *knows* it's OK to be an idiot.

He's dead certain he's in the right, or else he is equally certain he
won't get caught. Or won't have a crash.

That's the problem... hands up those who are sure that their skills
mean they are less likely to have a crash than the average driver?

How many people will answer that question with "Yes, my driving
behaviour means I will ahve a crash"?

If they don't think they will crash, then will any sentence make a
difference to them?

Zebee

 

Just an average female driver?
G.

 

Which is bloody hard to do when using an iridium/tinted visor. I *always*
assume they haven't seen me.
As to the case in question - people are right, punishment won't aid the
rider, so maybe it's best all punishments are discarded? :0)

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:19:50 GMT

I think it's more so that not all punishment is judicial, and not all
offences are ther same.

If you were driving a car and killed a rider, would you think that if
you weren't prosecuted that you had done nothing wrong?

On the other hand, if you deliberately sideswiped someone and they
were hurt, and you weren't punished for it, would you do it again?

I think some people will punish themselves. Others won't realise they
did wrong unless lots of people tell them so. And some won't ever
realise they did wrong and have to be dealt with some other way.

It's that discretion thing - that someone with access to more facts
than a newspaper report gets to decide what might work.

Something that has been removed for a lot of offences, and that's bad
news. Although it can be a problem - when speed is at issue, those
who want the police to exercise discretion always seem to want that to
meen "let me off" and are pissed off if that doesn't happen...

Zebee

 

Zebee Johnstone wrote in message

I accept that this case may well have had extenuating circumstances that
weren't reported. At least I hope that was the case.
Much like the cyclist that was killed recently by a female driver who was
talking on her mobile phone at the time. I have had the unfortunate
experience of being involved in a fatal accident with a pedestrian. I *was*
prosecuted - despite being told initially I wouldn't be - and yet I still
feel I had done nothing wrong. The only feeling it left me with was never
help the traffic police/highway patrol with anything.

I think the overall feeling here is the lack of uniformity in decision
making - that its easy to prosecute speedsters as its easy to detect them,
whereas things like not indicating, talking on your mobile etc are usually
placed on the 'too hard' bucket. Yesterday I was almost taken out by a
driver of a 4wd running red lights - with his finger out at me as he did so.
Quite deliberate, patently an action not out of character, yet he gets away
with it, whilst I get three points for exceeding 110 on a straight freeway,
sunny day, no traffic and a cop hiding in bushes to catch 'dangerous'
drivers.

Drivers displaying a lack of attention is a daily occurrence, possibly
something we've all been guilty of on occasion but have been fortunate to
get away with. Ever had that feeling of suddenly realizing you're at point B
without recalling how you got from point A? However that tends to be on
straight roads, there's no excuse for not checking right, left and right
again at an intersection.

As someone else pointed out here before, driving standards in Sydney are far
worse than in London. I have no idea the methods used to teach people to
drive in Australia, but I'd respectfully suggest they fall way behind a lot
of European countries methods.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:54:03 GMT

I think the extenuating circumstances were reported.

Someone with a long record of good behaviour made a mistake and
someone else was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The driver was shattered according to the magistrate.

I think a conviction *should* have been recorded and I'd be interested
ot know why not - the bod's a pensioner and couldn't afford
insurance? That it would make no difference to anyone? I'd like to
hear his reasons before assuming them.

Zebee

 

How about, for a start a couple of hundred hours working in an old
peoples home? Or "Meals on wheels" No, on second thoughts NOT M on W.

Isaac.

 

Whichever way they go, it should be uniform across the board.

Why not? If you can demonstrate a legitimate reason (not an excuse) for
your speeding, or whatever the offence is, then the magistrate should be
able to apply a sentence or whatever at his discretion.

 

Because there ARE people out there who don't give a rat's arse about
other road users. And if they found themselves in such a position,
they'll do the over the top remorse bit, knowing that the beak may let
them off.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:48:33 +1100

So because yu suspect a magistrate won't be able to tell the
difference - although you presumably could - that genuine remorse
should be treated the same?

Zebee

 

Well Zebee. I think that he should have his licence suspended and
something recorded for an oops involving injury. At a minimum. Hell I
wouldnt mind seeing a month suspension for anything involving injury.

And I once met a guy who thought motorcycles were dangerous. Hell he
should know. He had hit 4 of them. He had never been charges. But
clearly this was a guy who just never saw motorcycles. Hell he admitted
that. Some sort of record would allow a magistrate to say "enough. I
cont care if these motorcylists keep falling off in front of you. Even
if you have done nothing wrong (as if) You still lose your licence cos
shit happens around you "

Anyway thats what I think. Of course you can disagree

Dave

 

So, whose more likely to wind up hurting someone; mr tosser or mr takes
care?

When someone shows up in court for hurting someone on the road and is
found to be legally responsible, surely he or she is considerably more
likely to be mr tosser than mr takes care. Sure, at this point we can
start looking for extenuating circumstanses, but absent those, best to
keep the fucker someplace nice and safe for a few years.