Increase in Prison Sentence for Dangerous Driving

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/6867132/Dangerous-drivers-face-five-years-in-jail.html

"The maximum punishment will be increased from two to five years in jail under the proposals to strengthen the law against reckless driving."

Still a bit low is it not? At least it's progress though, good to see the drink driving limit coming down too. Not too sure about reducing the speed limits, surely a better approach would be to try and reinforce the fact that just because the speed limit is 30mph on a road, it does not mean that you can travel at 30mph at all times and always be safe.

Not sure it's too low for dangerous driving itself bearing in mind the following excerpt;

Other offences have already been introduced to ensure that those killing others through poor driving face jail sentences.

These are the laws that need to be far more draconian.

As for speed limits, having a 30mph limit that isn't always safe leads to a grey area of legislation where dangerous driving becomes a subjective matter for debate.

True, however judging how dangerous you're driving purely on speed, with all due respect, is a fucking stupid idea.

I have been in a car with drivers who regularly break the speed limit, but they are good drivers, they know how to handle a car properly, at times I have been in cars going over twice the speed limit, but still felt safe, because I knew the car was being driven by a skilled driver. I have never, ever been more afraid in a car than when I was in my mates car a few months after he got his licence, 15 minutes of pure terror. Not once did he even approach the speed limit.

Fast driving does not mean dangerous driving, people need to learn that.

Still a bit low is it not? At least it's progress though, good to see the drink driving limit coming down too. Not too sure about reducing the speed limits, surely a better approach would be to try and reinforce the fact that just because the speed limit is 30mph on a road, it does not mean that you can travel at 30mph at all times and always be safe.
I'd like people to realise that just because the speed limit is 30mph, it doesn't mean you absolutely HAVE to drive at that speed.

Three's no suggestion of determining dangerous driving purely on speed. However, by establishing a safer limit for all occaisions would make any intended prosecutions far easier.

I'm also of the opinion that your friends are idiots for speeding, particularly at speeds in excess of double the speed limit. I accept that I don't know the full circumstances under which this happened and have full respect for their skill at handling a vehicle at speed. However, one person's skill is never enough to mitigate anothers inability or lack of perception. Their idiocy lies not in their own skills but in their inability to appreciate those of people that they don't know. It's this sort of egotism that causes accidents.

True, however judging how dangerous you're driving purely on speed, with all due respect, is a fucking stupid idea.

+1. It's normally OK if you take some downers at the same time.

On a serious note, good. The CPS sentencing guidelines have plenty to approve of, including "aggressive driving" and "driving while avoidably distracted".

I'd like people to realise that just because the speed limit is 30mph, it doesn't mean you absolutely HAVE to drive at that speed.

The Highway Code is explicit in that it states that you should always drive at a speed appropriate to the road conditions.

If I drove at 30mph on many london streets I would have had loads of accidents by now. The streets are often narrow, excessively bumpy and winding with loads going on on either side with parked cars, deliveries, peds etc. 30mph is too quick for the conditions imo. Lowering the speed limit still won't stop people who want to from speeding, but most of the traffic would be slower.

If you want to drive fast hit the motorway.

20's plenty FTW

I'd like people to realise that just because the speed limit is 30mph, it doesn't mean you absolutely HAVE to drive at that speed.

If that were possible we wouldn't need any speed limits.

If that were possible we wouldn't need any speed limits.

I think that's do-able.

At the moment, drinking and driving is seen as deeply uncool, whereas using a mobile phone or speeding are seen as pretty acceptable and just an excuse for the police to make money fining car drivers. It's arguable exactly which of these three is the most dangerous (likelihood of being involved in an accident, severity, etc), but they're all in the same ballpark.

Drinking and driving apparently used to be pretty acceptable (as it still is in many countries on the continent) and *something *has changed that perception. So there's no reason why the public can't feel the same way about the other incredibly dangerous things that people do while behind the wheel of a car...

The Highway Code is explicit in that it states that you should always drive at a speed appropriate to the road conditions.
Yes, but you still get people saying things like "Come on granny! It's a 30 zone!" when someone is driving at 28mph.

At the moment, drinking and driving is seen as deeply uncool, whereas using a mobile phone or speeding are seen as pretty acceptable...
True, although some progress is being made. You see people pull over to take phone calls, or get the passenger to answer etc. I guess it'll just take some time before it becomes as socially unacceptable as drink driving.

So why can you have a DVD player in a car?!?

The road to drink driving being unacceptable wasn't quick or easy. It required a lot of campaigning and essentially parading victims for emotional effect. Unfortunately, at the same time cars are able to accellerate a lot quicker and go quicker in lower gears and mobile phones have become very prevalent, we have entered an age of apathy. It's quicker and easier for people to grumble that the government should do something about it, forgetting to tell them what to do and who serves who.

As for DVD players in cars, there are regulations about where those players and displays can be located in a vehicle and limitations on how much they can distract the driver. Although it's important, I don't think that the shift in model away from the car as a utilitarian transport tool is specifically relevant to dangerous driving.

As for DVD players in cars, there are regulations about where those players and displays can be located in a vehicle and limitations on how much they can distract the driver. Although it's important, I don't think that the shift in model away from the car as a utilitarian transport tool is specifically relevant to dangerous driving.

There are LCD screen that blacked out the moment the driver is about to move, however I seen quite a lots of people in their hip hop slave car managed to bypass it.

So why can you have a DVD player in a car?!?

To watch DVDs of course.

In Car DVD player?

Ludicrism of the highest order.

It's OK if it's in the engine, like on Pimp My Ride.

I wonder what the stopping distance of the car being driven at twice the speed limit was. Or the reaction time difference. Compared to a car being driven at half the speed, that is.

Skill can manage this sort of thing though, take a look at F1 drivers for instance. The problem exists with other drivers perceptions.

As an example, imagine a car driver approaching a T junction with a busy 40mph road who, although generally cautious is in a bit of a hurry. He wants to make a left turn to looks to his right and sees one of mccarthy's idiot mates in their car at a point that, if they were driving at 40mph experience tells him that he has time to exit the side road and get up to speed safely and without affecting the other driver. In a snap judgement he starts his manouver with taking the time to assess the speed of the other vehicle, perhaps to preserve a little momentum and assuming the other driver is a decent person obeying the speed limit. If mccarthy's idiot mate is actually doing 80mph, because he can handle the vehicle on the road surface at that speed, an accident is inevitable and injury or death is likely. The reason being is that both drivers did something unexpected and neither one appreciated that motivations of the other party. The T junction driver could be justified in their actions, mccarthy's idiot mate never could.

Speeding for drivers=jumping red lights for cyclists.

Neither side will admit it is dangerous- both parties think that because they do it safely they are above the law.

That said I'm about to drive home and I'll be doing approx 90 on the motorway.

Make of that what you will.

Most roads that are 30 mph are residential or busy high streets where 30 mph is not appropriate, surly the logical step is to have the default speed limit in urban areas as 20 mph and the 30 mph roads as the exception, along with the current 40 mph exception on some urban roads, having the inverse situaion as it currently is makes no sense.

We also have to ask our self why and how was the original 30 mph limit chosen? If the assumptions previously made have turned out to be incorrect or the desired affect not resulted then in light of new evidence we need to change limit.

Speeding for drivers=jumping red lights for cyclists.

Neither side will admit it is dangerous- both parties think that because they do it safely they are above the law.

That said I'm about to drive home and I'll be doing approx 90 on the motorway.

Make of that what you will.

Aside from the environmental aspects, I'm personally not that fussed about speed limits on motorways. I'd happily have no speed limits on motorways, in return for 20mph in all residential areas and city centres.

Speeding for drivers=jumping red lights for cyclists.
.

In what manor do you mean equal? In the lack of acceptance of danger?

We also have to ask our self why and how was the original 30 mph limit chosen? If the assumptions previously made have turned out to be incorrect or the desired affect not resulted then in light of new evidence we need to change limit.

A good point. the 30mph speed limits is from a time when volumes of traffic, capabilities of cars and car culture in general were very different. Urban design was also very different and car speeds are one of the reasons why new housing developments rarely have long straight sections.