On 05/02/2016 08:31, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
On 04/02/2016 11:04, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 10:06:06 AM UTC, Mrcheerful wrote:
On 03/02/2016 23:48, Tom Crispin wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-35472617

It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime
driving ban.

This loophole must be closed.

Can you imagine the public outcry if the owner of a bicycle whose
vehicle was used to deliberately harm an innocent bystander was allowed
to get away with failing to provide the rider's details? I wonder why
we have never heard of such a case..


Cyclists that deliberately run into and kill children are allowed to get
away with a fine, no ban, no jail time. You cannot have it every way.

Philip Benwell didn't appear to "get away with it" when he got a 12 month
sentence.

So the case went through due process and the guilty party brought to
account for himself in court?

Just a £2,200 fine for Jason Howard, described as a 'vile little man' by
the deceased's father.

You said "Cyclists that deliberately run into and kill children". Since
'cyclists' and 'children' are both plural words you're not doing very well
by having to cite an example from 8 years ago.

There was also the little turd in Lancashire (Preston?) who deliberately
rode (at speed) along a footway and mowed down (not too strong a term) a
small girl in front of her horrified parents.

"This has ruined my life...", he whinged, when caught and facing
prosecution... "I didn't know it was an offence...", he wriggled.

But even citing that case isn't necessary. Stating case-types in the
plural is normal discourse in conversational English.

You could could also tell us the proportion of motorists that have received
more than a £2,200 fine after mowing a child down. You should have plenty of
examples because there will have been about 260 in those 8 years.

What?

*Deliberately* mowing down a child (which is the situation under
discussion)?

I'd say that that number was a huge... NIL.

Wouldn't you?