Woman jailed over cyclist's death

[Theo Bekkers]

"Trevor S" wrote
> "Theo Bekkers" wrote

> > Suppose you were trimming your hedge and you carelessly let a
branch
> > fall on the footpath, someone walking past just at that moment
trips
> > on it, does a spectacular cartwheel and lands flat on his back
unhurt.
> > A passing bus driver witnesses this and his attention is
distracted
> > for a secvond, bus runs into a tree and 20 people die.
> >
> > Do you expect to be hung for the outcome?
>
> Hung ? No, as I said , the outcome is important, I am agin' the
death
> penalty, as it kills people. In the instance you explore, the bus
drive
> killed 20 people through direct neglect, to me it is fairly black
and
> white example.
>
> > Should the bus driver be hung for the outcome?
>
> No
>
> > Should the pedestrian be hung for the outcome because he wasn't looking where he was going?
>
> No.
>
> > Shall we hang them all?
>
> No
>
> > I suspect the driver will be punished for your carelessness and
that
> > you will receive no blame.
>
> because there is none to assign, unless you want to blame the
drivers
> mother for giving birth, how far down the blame ladder do you want
to
> step ?. Seems blatantly clear to me in your example the bus driver killed 20 people in your
> example, your mitigating circumstances
amoutn to
> nothing more then a fart in the wind IMO. Would you like to see te Government blamed for not
> training the driver correctly, or the
Police
> for not disqualify the driver, or the people that made the hedge
cutter
> blamed for allowing me to use it ? Your philisophy is seriouly
flawed
> precisly because of your blame transferal.
>
>
> >> As an aside, the US Government has a bill before congress where
this
> > sort
> >> of Goal time would be given to people downloading MP3's, now lets
> > put
> >> THAT in perspective.
> >
> > Nobody does that unintentionally. It is a deliberate act of theft.
>
> Uh huh.... I think you missed my point, it is only theft because of
the
> powerful IP lobby in the USA, there ability to incarcerate someone
for
> downloading an MP3 was used as a direct example of proving the point
that
> the law is an ass. In a world of swings and round-a-bouts putting
somoen
> in Goal for downloading an MP3 seems to be to be a prime example of
the
> world gone mad.
>
> --
> Trevor S
>
>
> "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein

 

[Theo Bekkers]

"Trevor S" wrote
> "Theo Bekkers" wrote

> Hung ? No, as I said , the outcome is important, I am agin' the
death
> penalty, as it kills people. In the instance you explore, the bus
drive
> killed 20 people through direct neglect, to me it is fairly black
and
> white example.

I agree.

> > I suspect the driver will be punished for your carelessness and
that
> > you will receive no blame.

> because there is none to assign, unless you want to blame the
drivers
> mother for giving birth, how far down the blame ladder do you want
to
> step ?. Seems blatantly clear to me in your example the bus driver killed 20 people in your
> example, your mitigating circumstances
amoutn to
> nothing more then a fart in the wind IMO. Would you like to see te Government blamed for not
> training the driver correctly, or the
Police
> for not disqualify the driver, or the people that made the hedge
cutter
> blamed for allowing me to use it ? Your philisophy is seriouly
flawed
> precisly because of your blame transferal.

I agree again. Suppose you were on your mobile and stepped off the curb in front of the bus
driver. He takes evasive action, misses you and kills 20 passengers. His fault or your's?

A bunch of motorcyclists protested in Geelong last week because of the lenient sentence handed out
to a motorist who did not hit a motorcyclist who died. That is an interesting scenario.

> > Nobody does that unintentionally. It is a deliberate act of theft.

> Uh huh.... I think you missed my point, it is only theft because of
the
> powerful IP lobby in the USA, there ability to incarcerate someone
for
> downloading an MP3 was used as a direct example of proving the point
that
> the law is an ass. In a world of swings and round-a-bouts putting
somoen
> in Goal for downloading an MP3 seems to be to be a prime example of
the
> world gone mad.

So if you wrote some piece of software that revolutionised accounting it would be OK for me to make
a mastercopy available and invite anyone to download their copy, that would be fine. I would be
basing my defence on the principle that you're charging too much for a legit copy.

Theo

 

[Theo Bekkers]

"Theo Bekkers" wrote Nothing at all.

Sorry, an oops of the send button.

Theo

 

[Trevor S]

"Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote in news:9ToXa.11331$bo1.10196
@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

> "Theo Bekkers" wrote Nothing at all.
>
> Sorry, an oops of the send button.

Hey, ya had me

--
Trevor S

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein

 

[Trevor S]

"Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote in news:mSoXa.11330$bo1.9011 @news-server.bigpond.net.au:

<snip>

> I agree again. Suppose

In the above example, clearly the mobile manufacturers fault

If he had hit me and I was the only one killed IN THE ABOVE instance, he should still be charged
with manslaughter, with mitigating circumstances affecting the scentence. Using the exact instance
you describe, his fault.

supposes, suppose, suppose I am sure you could go on all day and find an example I might find
troubling but taking it back to the original post, I am deeply troubled that given the
circumstances of the original cyclsits death, in the way described, a scentence as lenient as the
one given was the resultant penalty. Manslaugher, a decade in Goal and a decade of garnished wages
would be the _minimum_ scentence I think worthy for the taking of someones life in that manner.

> A bunch of motorcyclists protested in Geelong last week because of the lenient sentence handed out
> to a motorist who did not hit a motorcyclist who died. That is an interesting scenario.

I am not aware of the facts behind the incident so it's a litte hard to comment. I no long read
AUS.MOTORCYCLES for a variety of reasons if that was were this was originally bought up

<snip>

> So if you wrote some piece of software that revolutionised accounting it would be OK for me to
> make a mastercopy available and invite anyone to download their copy, that would be fine.

I would have no problem with that.

> I would be basing my defence on the principle that you're charging too much for a legit copy.

Using your example, that is not a legitimate defence IMO. If how ever you have no intention of
purchasing it, then that is a legitimate defence, once again IMO. In the particular instance you
cited, use of that software to generate an income stream would be prima facea evidence that you had
intended to use it, therefore it is theft, in any other case it isn't theft.

As an aside, litigation in the music industry against your customer base is IMO a poor marketing
strategy and one that is simpily the death rattle of sector too stupid to realise the end is nigh
and is throttling the last bit of income stream from a soon to be expired business model.

IMO the defintion of theft has been mutated by the IP lobby into something it never was intended to
be. Look at Mr Mouse in the USA as a classic example, he long ago should have passed into the public
domain, and yet Congress enacts special legislation to protect him.

I would like to see major changes made to the copyright act but that is another debate enitrely

suppose suppose .. Do you think someone who finds a cure for Aids should be allowed to not sell it
if that is their wish ?

--
Trevor S

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -Albert Einstein

 

[Theo Bekkers]

"Trevor S" wrote

> suppose suppose .. Do you think someone who finds a cure for Aids
should
> be allowed to not sell it if that is their wish ?

They will sell it. Companies are investing tens of $millions in a possible cure in the hope of a
huge return.

Theo

 

[syrus_82]

i had a friend a few years ago that done pretty much the same thing, big nite out on the town and decided to drive home, he was drunk of course and she wasnt but its basically the same situation. well he got done for manslaughter, (i dont see why she didnt get it) and sentenced, for a minimum of 5 years. i knew that guy fairly well and i think that the sentence was fair.
the lady should have got longer i feel.
there are to many pl out there who constantly drive when tired, under the ifluence (alcohol and drugs) and there needs to be harsher penalties for these ppl. i think that in australia we are to leniant to criminals, especially if the crime is not in the media, if a crime is in the media and there is a lot of hype going on around it, there is a lot more pressure from the public for a harsher sentence, but in general the penalties are to soft.
my deepst condolences to the family of the cyclist

 

[Anonymous]

"Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > suppose suppose .. Do you think someone who finds a cure for Aids should be allowed to not sell
> > it if that is their wish ?

> They will sell it. Companies are investing tens of $millions in a possible cure in the hope of a
> huge return.

Curing a disease isn't nearly as profitable as providing small doses of ongoing "treatment".. They
won't sell it if it's not in their business interest to do so..

PC

 

[Tim Jones]

"hippy" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Luther Blissett" <[email protected]> wrote
in
> message news:[email protected]...
> > If that lady had recevied 10 years, a lot more people would think twice about driving under the
> > influence of drugs. And remember .. she chose to

>
> Actually the drugs didn't play a part in the actual crash. It was the lack of sleep, apparently.
> If anything, she should have had more gear.. maybe she wouldn't have fallen asleep at the wheel?
> 24 hours without sleep was found to be equivalent to a 0.1 BAC IIRC. How many people out there
> drugs or no drugs are too tired to drive safely? A bloody lot I imagine!
>
> What was she actually charged with and why was it not a manslaughter charge?
>

To pick up on an old thread ;-)

I was watching the lifestyle channel a few nights ago, and they did a test on a track - a driver
with a BAC of over the limit and a driver who was fatigued. They both had someone in the back seat
checking when they strayed over lines and when they changed the speed too much.

The result was that the drunk driver, while he was exuberant to the camera had perfect results. The
tired guy, under the same circumstances messed up about a dozen times in a one hour drive.

Tim