Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "lightly"

[Acadian1974]

Forum Sponsor

Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "lightly"

Topical, considering how often the issue is brought up here:

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/11/03/fatal-crashes-typically-fail-to-yield-criminal-charges

 

[reciprocity]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

There is another side to this sort of thing.

a lot can go one, even when there are no HTA charges when the driver is not at fault.

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Traffic laws are heavily flawed. The biggest problem is the concept of "accidents". There are very few actual true accidents in collisions. The correct term is negligent driving. There is a massive amount of negligent driving.
The most severe incidents leading to fatalities are typically plead down by the lazy Crown attorneys, looking for throughput of cases rather than any actual justice. Either way, court cases are rarely covered by media, so charges are not a proper deterrent to negligent driving.
Also, the increasing numbers of older people killing people on public roads is not being addressed at all by the MTO.

It is scary how bad you have to be to lose your licence, and how most bad and illegal driving is not enforced, it's 99% speeding charges.

 

[JFD]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

in a case where someone is killed is a very slippery slope in this category. Really, i'd be inclined to have a jury pass judgement - society is angry - most know what's up and what needs to be done.

If people knew they were going to be judged by the people they infringe upon every day, i think they'd be more fearful than having to pay a fine, which in most cases, aren't even a drop in their buckets (from examples i've seen of near miss drivers)

 

[Bermuda]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

in a case where someone is killed is a very slippery slope in this category. Really, i'd be inclined to have a jury pass judgement - society is angry - most know what's up and what needs to be done.

Agreed.

Driving is a responsibility. Punishments and fines for breaking the rules of the road are meant to discourage people from breaking these very rules - because the type of driving that breaks them is often considered dangerous, and in worst cases, life taking.

So then why the hell is it that when someone actually takes a life while breaking one of these rules, they are punished to effectively the same degree as if they had simply been caught by a road-side cop? The former is the prime example of the truest worst-case scenario and should be addressed as such, while the latter is what should server as the stern reminder.

Careless driving is (almost) encouraged by NOT actively punishing for the worst consequences of it. There is the idea that killing someone in a vehicular accident is all but on par with being pulled over and cited with a speeding ticket.

 

[happycrappy]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Quote-

Martella has also launched a lawsuit, but he is still looking to the justice system to address the surge of pedestrian deaths. “If somebody causes a death while driving, I don’t think they should ever drive again,” he insists.

This thinking is quite problematic. Accidents, or at least how society defines them, need to be treated accordingly. To insinuate a permanent penalty for a lapse in judgement lacks any degree of reason. There is little doubt that the families of the deceased will be devastated, but that has no argument in the penal phase. We have countless mechanisms that act as deterrents, regulations, and limiting steps to curb bad decisions or poor judgement already. The people that would be targeted here don't meet the criteria for a "dangerous offender needing permanent sanction". If they did, there are already laws to speak to that.

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Quote-

Martella has also launched a lawsuit, but he is still looking to the justice system to address the surge of pedestrian deaths. “If somebody causes a death while driving, I don’t think they should ever drive again,” he insists.

This thinking is quite problematic. Accidents, or at least how society defines them, need to be treated accordingly. To insinuate a permanent penalty for a lapse in judgement lacks any degree of reason. There is little doubt that the families of the deceased will be devastated, but that has no argument in the penal phase. We have countless mechanisms that act as deterrents, regulations, and limiting steps to curb bad decisions or poor judgement already. The people that would be targeted here don't meet the criteria for a "dangerous offender needing permanent sanction". If they did, there are already laws to speak to that.

Martella is way off base. You cannot make blanket judgments like that. Many pedestrians and cyclists killed were killed because they ignored the rules of the road.

The problem we have right now is that bad driving is not really enforced, because its faster and cheaper to right speeding tickets, which are now used as a revenue stream.

I'd like to see video deputies in Ontario -drivers with HD dash/helmet cams that can submit videos of bad driving for the OPP to place charges.

 

[happycrappy]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Martella is way off base. You cannot make blanket judgments like that. Many pedestrians and cyclists killed were killed because they ignored the rules of the road.

The problem we have right now is that bad driving is not really enforced, because its faster and cheaper to right speeding tickets, which are now used as a revenue stream.

I'd like to see video deputies in Ontario -drivers with HD dash/helmet cams that can submit videos of bad driving for the OPP to place charges.

Agreed, especially the revenue bit (specifically the cell phone law). I'm sick of the cell phone hysteria; the charge applicable for distracted driving has been around for many years, has a bigger fine and demerit points, and is under-used. As a result of typical hysteria in the media, now you can be ticketed for even HOLDING a phone under this weak-minded law they brought in. BUT, you can still drive with a timmies, cheese burger, and some Eminem cranked to the moon, lol. Great minds at work there

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Agreed, especially the revenue bit (specifically the cell phone law). I'm sick of the cell phone hysteria; the charge applicable for distracted driving has been around for many years, has a bigger fine and demerit points, and is under-used. As a result of typical hysteria in the media, now you can be ticketed for even HOLDING a phone under this weak-minded law they brought in. BUT, you can still drive with a timmies, cheese burger, and some Eminem cranked to the moon, lol. Great minds at work there

In 2011, I was ticked for holding my cellphone while linking it to Bluetooth, while stopped at a red light. I lost in court, even after proving the phone was not in use, but I still think that it is a valid law.

Texting is proven worse than drunk driving. Any beverage while driving should be banned, drive-throughs should be banned for several reasons.

We need to stop treating high speed, heavy vehicles that kill like a big comfy sofa in our living rooms.

 

[happycrappy]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

In 2011, I was ticked for holding my cellphone while linking it to Bluetooth, while stopped at a red light. I lost in court, even after proving the phone was not in use, but I still think that it is a valid law.

Texting is proven worse than drunk driving. Any beverage while driving should be banned, drive-throughs should be banned for several reasons.

We need to stop treating high speed, heavy vehicles that kill like a big comfy sofa in our living rooms.

I don't dispute ticketing distracted drivers; I just question why they didn't use a law already on the books, that had teeth. More politicians are wasting time by presenting legislation that is redundant, and making them look like innovators. I do however, have an issue with ticket for just holding a phone. Too vague, too easy to be the recipient of poor discretion. Less than HTA172, but a similar concept of a broad-sweeping, all encompassing criteria for a ticket. If the cops have resources to dress like hobos to get a ticket at an intersection for phone use, then they bloody well have the resources to drive down the road and ticket truly "distracted" drivers.

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

I don't dispute ticketing distracted drivers; I just question why they didn't use a law already on the books, that had teeth. More politicians are wasting time by presenting legislation that is redundant, and making them look like innovators. I do however, have an issue with ticket for just holding a phone. Too vague, too easy to be the recipient of poor discretion. Less than HTA172, but a similar concept of a broad-sweeping, all encompassing criteria for a ticket. If the cops have resources to dress like hobos to get a ticket at an intersection for phone use, then they bloody well have the resources to drive down the road and ticket truly "distracted" drivers.

In my case, the police officer lied and said I was holding the phone while driving the car, not while stopped.
The judge ignored my contest to this, arguing that the law doesn't distinguish moving or not. The fact that the PC lied didn't bother the judge either.
I proved with evidence I had a bluetooth device, I proved the phone was not in use, I even showed a picture of the car interior with manual transmission (it's not possible to text/talk and drive while shifting), after the PC statement and the judges response, I recognized what a kangaroo court it was.

It gets better, I got a $100 fine for failing to show insurance papers because I didn't find them within 30 seconds, I got a $140 fine for the phone charge, then $150 a year for three years from my insurance carrier.
$690 for doing the safe thing and pairing my phone for hands-free use, while stopped.

I agree that loud music and food while driving is a major crash risk and should be in laws, but society seems to think 3,000 killed a year and many more maimed for life is ok.

 

[油井緋色]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

In my case, the police officer lied and said I was holding the phone while driving the car, not while stopped.
The judge ignored my contest to this, arguing that the law doesn't distinguish moving or not. The fact that the PC lied didn't bother the judge either.
I proved with evidence I had a bluetooth device, I proved the phone was not in use, I even showed a picture of the car interior with manual transmission (it's not possible to text/talk and drive while shifting), after the PC statement and the judges response, I recognized what a kangaroo court it was.

It gets better, I got a $100 fine for failing to show insurance papers because I didn't find them within 30 seconds, I got a $140 fine for the phone charge, then $150 a year for three years from my insurance carrier.
$690 for doing the safe thing and pairing my phone for hands-free use, while stopped.

I agree that loud music and food while driving is a major crash risk and should be in laws, but society seems to think 3,000 killed a year and many more maimed for life is ok.

Your scenario is pretty ********. I've often debated, while on my bike at a red light, to pull out my cell phone to check for missed texts when I know it went off. We all know it's near impossible to pull it out while riding but with our current law, I could get charged like you did, which is ludicrous. The problem was texting while operating a vehicle which resulted in careless driving.

With regards with loud music, I don't think that's too big of an issue as I ride with earbuds and even if those aren't in there's the exhaust.

 

[Ugur Dinch]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

In my case, the police officer lied and said I was holding the phone while driving the car, not while stopped.
The judge ignored my contest to this, arguing that the law doesn't distinguish moving or not. The fact that the PC lied didn't bother the judge either.
I proved with evidence I had a bluetooth device, I proved the phone was not in use, I even showed a picture of the car interior with manual transmission (it's not possible to text/talk and drive while shifting), after the PC statement and the judges response, I recognized what a kangaroo court it was.

It gets better, I got a $100 fine for failing to show insurance papers because I didn't find them within 30 seconds, I got a $140 fine for the phone charge, then $150 a year for three years from my insurance carrier.
$690 for doing the safe thing and pairing my phone for hands-free use, while stopped.

I agree that loud music and food while driving is a major crash risk and should be in laws, but society seems to think 3,000 killed a year and many more maimed for life is ok.

Geeezus FK.

I'd need rehab for a year before driving again after that bs.

 

[Ugur Dinch]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Your scenario is pretty ********. I've often debated, while on my bike at a red light, to pull out my cell phone to check for missed texts when I know it went off.

I do that everyday without any hesitation

I even take the glove off my left hand if I need to type back LOL

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Geeezus FK.
I'd need rehab for a year before driving again after that bs.

I learned from it. I learned that if a GED with gun decides to go after you and lie to make up on a ticket quota, there is nothing you can do about it.

It could be worse, some other guy in a similar situation fought his ticket for 18 months all the way to the Supreme Court of Ontario, then lost. That's why you are hearing about the holding aspect in the media. That guy likely spent $15-20K on legal fees.

 

[nobbie48]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

It's all about intent. Two drivers are doing the same thing, cruising along and texting to multi-task. Neither intends to kill anyone.

Two months ago I was approaching a red light and gearing down for a stop. As I got to about 20 feet of the white line the light turned green and I started to accelerate but noticed a cager coming from the right and not slowing down. I stopped as he (Texting) slammed on the brakes sliding half way through the intersection.

If a cop was standing there the cager would have gotten basically the same ticket regardless of whether I saved my own butt or not because there was no intent, just a lapse in judgement.

As much as it disgusts me to hear of the pitiful fines, one has to ask what good would be done if ALL of us were subjected to life in jail for any lapse in judgement. It's time to think outside the box in how we punish people for lapses in judgement. Right now all we can come up with is monetary impact and it isn't working.

 

[elton_t]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

So basically in Ontario I can stage a murder and be able to get away with it for a small fine. That's good news!!!

In China is even better, kill whoever you hate then pay the police.

I always thought you will be charged for manslaughter here in a civilized country like this.

There's so many things need to be updated here in this province and possibly Canada as a country.

I wonder if anyone can name, what we are proud of as Canadian or Torontonians?

Because frankly I can think of none.

 

[Ugur Dinch]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

As much as it disgusts me to hear of the pitiful fines, one has to ask what good would be done if ALL of us were subjected to life in jail for any lapse in judgement. It's time to think outside the box in how we punish people for lapses in judgement. Right now all we can come up with is monetary impact and it isn't working.

Exactly my thoughts. And unless you are a psychopath, you probably on your own learn the biggest lesson, which is the most important, IMO.

I wonder if anyone can name, what we are proud of as Canadian or Torontonians?

Because frankly I can think of none.

Not sure if it counts, but I chose to come to Canada vs States, mainly for

(1) Melting pot vs mosaic. Although I have no intentions of staying in my community 100%, it's a different story if I'm being forcefully something-ized.
(2) Neutral political world view

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

I wonder if anyone can name, what we are proud of as Canadian or Torontonians?

Because frankly I can think of none.

1. We have the top four standards of living in the world.
2. We have one of the least violent societies in the world.
3. We don't allow people to carry assault rifles.
4. You get really sick, you go to hospital, you get better, without a $100,000 debt.
5. We live longer than Americans
6. We live better than Americans
7. We live healthier than Americans
8. We have a higher level of education than Americans.

If you don't see that , do us a favor and move to the US.

 

[CafeRay]

Re: Article looking at why drivers involved in fatal collisions seem to get off "ligh

Straight from 'Murica:

http://www.streetsblog.org/2013/11/...for-cab-driver-who-maimed-tourist-sian-green/

The cab driver who intentionally hit a cyclist and drove onto a Midtown sidewalk, severing the leg of British tourist Sian Green, will not be charged with a crime by Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance.

"According to published reports, Himon has a history or reckless driving, with three moving violations in 2011, including citations for running a red light and doing 65 mph in a 45 mph zone, resulting in nine points on his license. He was also involved in another crash that resulted in injury, reports said.
After reportedly arguing with a bike messenger, Himon drove a quarter of a block on a Midtown sidewalk with the cyclist on the hood before slamming into Green. He confessed to the media that he intentionally stepped on the gas before mounting the curb.""

You can do this with a car, intentionally, and get off scott free:

Forum Sponsor