Kill a cyclist when ******- serve 9 months.

[Matt B]

David Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:52:51 -0000 someone who may be "PK"
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>>> The Westminster government's "identity" card scheme could cover this
>>> easily. However, they will not do so due to the motoring lobby being
>>> against it.
>> Surely that would just increase then numbers of unregistered drivers?
>
> They wouldn't be able to start a car.

In the same way that criminals can no longer buy guns, or foreigners
cannot buy British passports, or that you cannot get a new car number
plate made up without the appropriate documentation?

Mmm. Well, actually they /would/ be able to buy the ability to start
the car - and in starting it, albeit illegally, the fact that we had an
id scheme in operation, would render them completely legitimate in the
eyes of those around them, the Police would no longer need to check them
for licence validity, and they would be beyond reproach.

--
Matt B

 

[Adrian Godwin]

John Clayton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> A life driving ban in these circumstances is necessary. Sadly creeps like
> this will drive and drive again.

He was already happy to flout the law, driving while not permitted
(no insurance, drunk etc.)

Why do you think a permanent ban would stop him ?

-adrian

 

[Brian G]

Adrian Godwin wrote:
> John Clayton <[email protected]> wrote:
>> A life driving ban in these circumstances is necessary. Sadly creeps like
>> this will drive and drive again.
>
> He was already happy to flout the law, driving while not permitted
> (no insurance, drunk etc.)
>
> Why do you think a permanent ban would stop him ?

A permanent ban might not stop him, but would at least establish his
position as an unauthorised driver. In due course the technology may
become available to prevent such people from driving. It would also
signal to drivers that should they behave in this manner their right to
drive is at absolute risk.


--
Brian G
www.wetwo.co.uk

 

[John Clayton]

"Adrian Godwin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John Clayton <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> A life driving ban in these circumstances is necessary. Sadly creeps
>> like
>> this will drive and drive again.
>
> He was already happy to flout the law, driving while not permitted
> (no insurance, drunk etc.)
>
> Why do you think a permanent ban would stop him ?
>
> -adrian

Adrian,
I don't believe a permanent ban would stop him. The sentence (above) "Sadly
creeps......" states exactly that.
I'm merely suggesting that for starters.
John

 

[Mark]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:39:44 +0000, Matt B
<[email protected]> wrote:

>David Hansen wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:03:26 -0000 someone who may be "John Clayton"
>> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>
>>> A life driving ban in these circumstances is necessary. Sadly creeps like
>>> this will drive and drive again.
>>
>> The Westminster government's "identity" card scheme could cover this
>> easily.
>
>How? Would it continuously monitor each driver of each vehicle at all
>times, to ensure they weren't banned? If drivers were more rigorously
>checked for validity at the roadside, it would simply create a market
>for forged id cards with the "clean driving licence" bit set to true.
>Any banned motorist would then become "legitimate", and untouchable.
>
>> However, they will not do so due to the motoring lobby being
>> against it.
>
>Can you cite evidence to support that. Don't you think that we should
>/all/ oppose anything, and everything to do with the "identity" card scheme?

Hear hear!

M.

 

[Mark]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:55:40 +0000, Matt B
<[email protected]> wrote:

>spindrift wrote:
>> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article3174653.ece
>
>As accurate as ever in your summary, I see ;-)
>
>It does though, make one wonder whether compulsory insurance is such a
>good thing. Those who don't have it have a big disincentive to hanging
>about after a collision to help - they will be prosecuted whether it was
>their fault or not. Those with it will succumb to "risk compensation",
>and drive a bit less carefully, happy that they will be covered,
>whatever the consequences of their actions. I wonder if any studies
>have been done into the effects on road safety of compulsory insurance.

I very much doubt risk compensation would apply to insurance. IMHO
it's more about personality. The kind of person who would not buy
insurance is more of a risk taker than the person who does buy it.

M.

 

[Mike Sales]

"Mark" wrote>
> I very much doubt risk compensation would apply to insurance. IMHO
> it's more about personality. The kind of person who would not buy
> insurance is more of a risk taker than the person who does buy it.
>

Insurancecompanies believe it does. They call it moral hazard.

Mike Sales