What do you think of the latest amendments for punishment of drivers who kill while at the wheel?

Question

Apparently there are different degrees of severity and responsibility. If u kill just by momentary inattention (maybe reaching for your mobile when it rings)you can get a community sentence as opposed to killing someone while texting . Shouldn't ALL crimes linked to killing while at the wheel get very stiff prison sentences, after all there is no degree of being dead is there?

Answer 1

do you drive, do you never take your eye off the road, do you never wave to people you know, do you always pull over when you turn the radio on, do you never look in shop windows.

accidents happen and for most accidents to happen someone has to have not been doing something they should of.

i don't think the laws need changing i just think peoples minds need educating

Answer 2

About as lame and stupid as Bob B so sue me!

Answer 3

Accidents happen. People make errors, mechanics can fail, the roads can be less than ideal, animals can just suddenly jump out onto the road.

Fact is that when you get behind the wheel or when you ride as a passenger, there is a certain amount of risk that is assumed by everyone involved.

You can reduce your risk by wearing a seat belt, not riding in adverse conditions, avoid traveling roads that are not well maintained, reduce distraction inside and outside of your vehicle, etc. But the fact remains that people still get hurt and/or killed when riding or driving.

Willful things like drinking and driving and texting while driving, should have severe penalties, but other things that just are....like human inattention...just are. I think the when someone kills someone else in an accident like that, that for most people, having to live with the knowledge that your distraction for only a few seconds, cost someone their life, is probably punishment enough.

Answer 4

I suppose I can see it from the Government's angle here, although it is the independent Sentencing Guidelines Council who have issued the guidance. Please bear in mind that these are guidance with a starting point. There is, morally speaking, no suitable punishment for causing a death. Nothing can bring the deceased back or reassure the bereaved. So the law tries to be objective and have the punishment reflect the culpability. So, those who drive dangerously will inevitably face a sentence starting point of custody before the judge considers any aggravating and mitigating features of the offence and offender. A momentary lapse of concentration, ie carelessness, is not as serious. So death by careless driving has a sentence starting point of community penalty before taking into account any aggravating (such as use of a mobile phone at the time) or mitigating features.

I do not think that the law claims that there is any adequate punishment for causing a death. It cannot. But, how else do you allow the judiciary to treat each case on its own facts, whilst still having a structure that encourages some consistency in sentencing? It is not easy and I would not want to be responsible for such.

Hope that helps

Answer 5

My father in law died crossing on a green man signal, the guy was doing 65 in a forty zone . he got a 1 year ban and 200 pound fine, so you tell me, Maybe if the person or persons trying to amend this law had lost someone in this way, their would be prison for all drivers who kill. my wife suffers to this very day and will always, but would like to ask the offender his views on this.

interesting topic though

Answer 6

An 'eye for an eye' contained the idea of just and fair punishment.  Also to deter crime.  It didn't work.  

Humans are just incapable of dispensing fair judgment.  

Remember OJ Simpson?  Remember Rodney King?

So I give up!

Answer 7

They are too lenient!!

Answer 8

still not tough enough

Answer 9

can you remember the last time the government didnt think of anyway to punish drivers ? if we all gave up driving where would they get the billions they rob off us in tax and vat ?