|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
JNugent wrote:
On 04/02/2016 20:43, John Smith wrote: 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. Contract cancer, filth. That's another example of something you never say. He cocked up there. What a piece of **** this person is. I won't call it a man. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On Thursday, 4 February 2016 20:44:04 UTC, John Smith wrote:
Contract cancer, filth. One at a time, please. https://twitter.com/BogTrotter1/stat...52652382916608 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
"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. 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. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
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? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:48:28 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin
wrote: It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Let us assume you were out on one of your "training" rides and fell off when the first of the group fell off taking others with him, not an uncommon event. Your leg was injured and an ambulance summoned. Before being taken away you ask the group to take your car, left at the clubhouse, home for you. When you get home you find your car in your drive. Later the police visit to tell you your car has been involved in an accident and someone has died. They want to know who was driving. When you ask you are told Bill and Fred took your car home. When interviewed by the police Bill says Fred was driving, Fred says Bill was driving. You think it fair you should have a mandatory lifetime driving ban for failing to give driver details? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
Peter Parry wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:48:28 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin wrote: It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Let us assume you were out on one of your "training" rides and fell off when the first of the group fell off taking others with him, not an uncommon event. Your leg was injured and an ambulance summoned. Before being taken away you ask the group to take your car, left at the clubhouse, home for you. When you get home you find your car in your drive. Later the police visit to tell you your car has been involved in an accident and someone has died. They want to know who was driving. When you ask you are told Bill and Fred took your car home. When interviewed by the police Bill says Fred was driving, Fred says Bill was driving. You think it fair you should have a mandatory lifetime driving ban for failing to give driver details? Well, no. Because you _have_ provided the details of the driver. But any ambiguity could be prevented by not asking 'the group' to take your car home. You ask one person, ensuring that he or she is insured and qualified to drive your car. And if neither Bill nor Fred want to admit to driving the car, then they are both charged with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. -- john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons) 'It never gets any easier. You just get faster' (Greg LeMond (1961 - )) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
JNugent wrote:
On 04/02/2016 20:43, John Smith wrote: 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. Contract cancer, filth. That's another example of something you never say. Wrong yet again, thicko. 'says the depraved troll who wishes cancer on other peoples' children' (Nugent, 02 February 2016) When have I wished cancer on others' children? -- john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons) 'It never gets any easier. You just get faster' (Greg LeMond (1961 - )) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:05:39 +0000, John Smith
wrote: Well, no. Because you _have_ provided the details of the driver. You have provided details of a number of people, only one of whom could have been driving. You have not identified the driver any more than if you had provided the membership list of the club or the electoral roll of the town. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On 05/02/2016 11:53, Peter Parry wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:48:28 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin wrote: It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Let us assume you were out on one of your "training" rides and fell off when the first of the group fell off taking others with him, not an uncommon event. Your leg was injured and an ambulance summoned. Before being taken away you ask the group to take your car, left at the clubhouse, home for you. When you get home you find your car in your drive. Later the police visit to tell you your car has been involved in an accident and someone has died. They want to know who was driving. When you ask you are told Bill and Fred took your car home. When interviewed by the police Bill says Fred was driving, Fred says Bill was driving. You think it fair you should have a mandatory lifetime driving ban for failing to give driver details? Of course. That's what he said, isn't it? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Brutal driver walks
On 05/02/2016 12:05, John Smith wrote:
Peter Parry wrote: On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:48:28 -0800 (PST), Tom Crispin wrote: It is time that failing to provide driver details results in a lifetime driving ban. This loophole must be closed. Let us assume you were out on one of your "training" rides and fell off when the first of the group fell off taking others with him, not an uncommon event. Your leg was injured and an ambulance summoned. Before being taken away you ask the group to take your car, left at the clubhouse, home for you. When you get home you find your car in your drive. Later the police visit to tell you your car has been involved in an accident and someone has died. They want to know who was driving. When you ask you are told Bill and Fred took your car home. When interviewed by the police Bill says Fred was driving, Fred says Bill was driving. You think it fair you should have a mandatory lifetime driving ban for failing to give driver details? Well, no. Because you _have_ provided the details of the driver. But any ambiguity could be prevented by not asking 'the group' to take your car home. You ask one person, ensuring that he or she is insured and qualified to drive your car. And if neither Bill nor Fred want to admit to driving the car, then they are both charged with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Even though there is neither evidence nor even the slightest suggestion of a conspiracy? One of them is telling the truth, the other is not and neither of them has entered into any conspiracy. Fancy a lawyer with three law degrees not spotting that. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Partner's anger as death crash driver walks free | David Hansen | UK | 32 | May 9th 10 07:46 PM |
Lorry driver who killed cyclist walks free from court with 'ludicrous' £275 fine | [email protected] | UK | 102 | July 13th 08 11:36 PM |
Lorry driver on mobile kills cyclist, walks free from court. | spindrift | UK | 0 | April 8th 08 08:42 AM |
Killer driver walks free | spindrift | UK | 0 | May 22nd 07 09:52 AM |
Brutal breach of rider's rights! | Bill C | Racing | 9 | September 16th 05 04:41 AM |