Can drivers use snow and ice as an excuse if they kill someone?

On Feb 7, 9:32*am, "The Todal" wrote:
Doug wrote:
Bearing in mind the large number of crashes and some resulting deaths
during the freeze, will those killer drivers be allowed to get away
with it? They were advised to stay at home but they didn't have to.

Each case would be treated on its own merits and its own facts, as you must
know.

Obviously you couldn't say someone was guilty of dangerous driving simply on
the basis that they drove to Tesco to buy a newspaper while there was snow
on the ground and there was no need to make that journey.

If they drove too fast or didn't leave enough of a gap they might be guilty
of a driving offence and they would almost certainly be liable in negligence
as it would be difficult to persuade a court that they could not have driven
with a bit more care.

I didn't make myself clear and maybe adding 'They were advised to stay
at home but they didn't have to.' was confusing.

It sometimes happens that drivers kill but are allowed to get away
with it, on the basis of some excuse or other, such as victim blame or
some unexpected medical condition or a vehicle fault. So, can snow and
ice also be used as a valid excuse for a killing?

-- .
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On 08/02/2012 06:58, Doug wrote:
It sometimes happens that drivers kill but are allowed to get away
with it, on the basis of some excuse or other, such as victim blame or
some unexpected medical condition or a vehicle fault.

That's a little harsh. If someone has a totally unpredictable stroke
while at the wheel and causes an accident should they be punished or
should the fact that they had a totally unpredictable stroke or heart
attack 'get away with it'.
Ditto for a totally unpredictable vehicle failure. Sometimes equipment
just fails without any warning at all. Should the user of a machine be
held responsible for a failure of that machine when the failure was in
no way predictable?
I lost control and hit a wall about 20 years ago after driving through a
puddle that turned out to be a pot hold, snapped the track-rod end and
lost steering on a car that was in MoT. My fault for driving through the
puddle (I suspect that it will end up being my fault in your mind as I
was driving a Karweaponnn), the council's fault for failing to maintain
the road, the government for not having a much more stringent MoT test
for track rod ends or just a combination of events?
Had I hit a pedestrian it certainly would not be their fault but is it
always a fault.

So, can snow and
ice also be used as a valid excuse for a killing?

Yes in specific circumstances. In some circumstances accidents just happen.

Andy

"Doug" wrote in message
...
On Feb 7, 9:32 am, "The Todal" wrote:
Doug wrote:
Bearing in mind the large number of crashes and some resulting deaths
during the freeze, will those killer drivers be allowed to get away
with it? They were advised to stay at home but they didn't have to.

Each case would be treated on its own merits and its own facts, as you
must
know.

Obviously you couldn't say someone was guilty of dangerous driving simply
on
the basis that they drove to Tesco to buy a newspaper while there was snow
on the ground and there was no need to make that journey.

If they drove too fast or didn't leave enough of a gap they might be
guilty
of a driving offence and they would almost certainly be liable in
negligence
as it would be difficult to persuade a court that they could not have
driven
with a bit more care.

I didn't make myself clear and maybe adding 'They were advised to stay
at home but they didn't have to.' was confusing.

It sometimes happens that drivers kill but are allowed to get away
with it, on the basis of some excuse or other, such as victim blame or
some unexpected medical condition or a vehicle fault. So, can snow and
ice also be used as a valid excuse for a killing?

===================================

Your use of reverse gear on your bike is noted.

On 08/02/2012 06:58, Doug wrote:
On Feb 7, 9:32 am, "The wrote:
Doug wrote:
Bearing in mind the large number of crashes and some resulting deaths
during the freeze, will those killer drivers be allowed to get away
with it? They were advised to stay at home but they didn't have to.

Each case would be treated on its own merits and its own facts, as you must
know.

Obviously you couldn't say someone was guilty of dangerous driving simply on
the basis that they drove to Tesco to buy a newspaper while there was snow
on the ground and there was no need to make that journey.

If they drove too fast or didn't leave enough of a gap they might be guilty
of a driving offence and they would almost certainly be liable in negligence
as it would be difficult to persuade a court that they could not have driven
with a bit more care.

I didn't make myself clear and maybe adding 'They were advised to stay
at home but they didn't have to.' was confusing.

It sometimes happens that drivers kill but are allowed to get away
with it, on the basis of some excuse or other, such as victim blame or
some unexpected medical condition or a vehicle fault. So, can snow and
ice also be used as a valid excuse for a killing?

-- .
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

So it is only sometimes that drivers kill, I'm surprised they don't do
it all the time, after all they are allowed to, they have 'A licence to
kill'

On Feb 8, 6:14*pm, Tony Dragon wrote:
On 08/02/2012 06:58, Doug wrote:









On Feb 7, 9:32 am, "The *wrote:
Doug wrote:
Bearing in mind the large number of crashes and some resulting deaths
during the freeze, will those killer drivers be allowed to get away
with it? They were advised to stay at home but they didn't have to.

Each case would be treated on its own merits and its own facts, as you must
know.

Obviously you couldn't say someone was guilty of dangerous driving simply on
the basis that they drove to Tesco to buy a newspaper while there was snow
on the ground and there was no need to make that journey.

If they drove too fast or didn't leave enough of a gap they might be guilty
of a driving offence and they would almost certainly be liable in negligence
as it would be difficult to persuade a court that they could not have driven
with a bit more care.

I didn't make myself clear and maybe adding 'They were advised to stay
at home but they didn't have to.' was confusing.

It sometimes happens that drivers kill but are allowed to get away
with it, on the basis of some excuse or other, such as victim blame or
some unexpected medical condition or a vehicle fault. So, can snow and
ice also be used as a valid excuse for a killing?

-- .
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

So it is only sometimes that drivers kill, I'm surprised they don't do
it all the time, after all they are allowed to, they have 'A licence to
kill'

I wonder what was cheaper, Andy's little Japanese lime green
Karweaponnn or an orange Bond Bug, not that they could manage to kill
anyone even if tried.

Get back at the speeding little buggers Doug. Bottom right of page.

http://www.bondbug.com/#

On 08/02/2012 18:14, Tony Dragon wrote:
On 08/02/2012 06:58, Doug wrote:

-- .
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

So it is only sometimes that drivers kill, I'm surprised they don't do
it all the time, after all they are allowed to, they have 'A licence to
kill'


No he is 100% correct.
With all the cutbacks today if an agent attains '00' status in MI6 they
just let him use his driving licence as printing up a licence to kill is
just too expensive these days. After all it is the same thing.

Andy

On Feb 8, 6:58*am, Doug wrote:

It sometimes happens that drivers kill but are allowed to get away
with it, on the basis of some excuse or other, such as victim blame or
some unexpected medical condition or a vehicle fault. So, can snow and
ice also be used as a valid excuse for a killing?

Last Sunday, I was better off on the bike as cars were getting stuck
in the snow all over the shop.

--
Simon Mason