Star article: When is a fatal crash careless driving vs criminal? | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Star article: When is a fatal crash careless driving vs criminal?

I think if you do something like pulling a u-turn, blowing a stop sign, turning left through oncoming traffic, crossing the center line, and it kills someone, you need to pay the consequences. All of those are things a driver has complete control over that involve affecting the right of way vehicle.

Ah, and FYI, I always stop, I always signal (it pisses me off when people don't) and the only reason I drive close is because the idiots in the GTA like to put their little cars in my safety gap between me and the car in front of me. I "speed" but only to the extent of everyone else and haven't had a ticket in years.
 
IMO it's all about right of way. You should know when you are potentially ****ing up someone's right of way and be more careful when you do it. Don't blow a stop sign and crash into someone that didn't have a stop sign. Don't change lanes without looking and cut off the guy in the lane so he crashes into you. Don't make a u-turn across 5 lanes of traffic when there is traffic coming in both directions without looking.

But many people seem to think speed is the killer and that's about all they enforce. I'll admit I speed but if everyone actually watches out before they make a maneuver, like they should, speeding won't hurt anyone. Check your mirrors, signal, follow the signs and markings, etc.
 
nobbie48 said:
My earlier post states what I understand is the reality, that you only get charged with making an unsafe turn whether the act results in a collision or not. In other juridictions the charges are upped if there is damage, injury death etc.

The question is "Do people even consider the consequences when they make these bad decisions?"

Would any driver think to him/her self, If I make this illegal turn and kill someone I'm going to jail? I really doubt it.

Is there anyone on this forum (Or planet) that never speeds, always comes to a 100% stop, never tailgates regardless of congestion, always signals, etc? The person that killed the biker just used a different arrow out of the quiver.

Macs makes a very responsible statement indicating that he is a resposible person that contributes greatly to society. If he blundered and killed someone would society be better off if he spent the rest of his life in jail?

The taxpayer pays for his keep. Possibly his family goes on welfare. The kids without his guidance become trash. His technical skills are wasted.

Would we not be better served if he was allowed to keep doing his job, contributing to society, raising good kids (Including telling them where he went wrong)? Volunteering his lesson to others etc.

It all goes back to intent and attitude. Both can be difficult to verify.
Click to expand...

Common sense on GTAM? Is that even possible?

It's kind of ironic that GTAMers complain about laws being made based on emotions and knee jerk reactions, following an accident where someone was killed, that serve absolutely no purpose other than to make the victim's families "feel better" (proposing zero blood alcohol level as the legal drinking limit, stunt driving laws, etc.) yet they would promose the same sort of thing to people that injure motorcycle riders on the road. Of course circumstances of an accident matter and it's called an "accident" for a reason. Might as well charge your wife with "negligence casuing bodily harm" when she flushes the toilet when you're in the shower too.
 
SunnY S said:
More injustice?

http://www.ottawasun.com/2012/11/29/man-acquitted-in-crash-which-killed-top-liberal-aide

http://www.timescolonist.com/health...yclist+gets+jail+probation/7663963/story.html
Click to expand...

Lock them up for a couple of years, and when they get out no chance EVER of a drivers license as they have already proven they can't be trusted behind the wheel.
The second one deserves a worse sentence due to the alcohol involved... And she's been a life time problem it sounds. No sympathy for people like that.

Doesn't matter that it was a motorcyclist that died. It could have been anyone that they killed.

And what's with the people entering that door that didn't even turn their heads when that crash happened... That would have been a loud and distinct noise.
 
Roasted said:
Common sense on GTAM? Is that even possible?

It's kind of ironic that GTAMers complain about laws being made based on emotions and knee jerk reactions, following an accident where someone was killed, that serve absolutely no purpose other than to make the victim's families "feel better" (proposing zero blood alcohol level as the legal drinking limit, stunt driving laws, etc.) yet they would promose the same sort of thing to people that injure motorcycle riders on the road. Of course circumstances of an accident matter and it's called an "accident" for a reason. Might as well charge your wife with "negligence casuing bodily harm" when she flushes the toilet when you're in the shower too.
Click to expand...

They're actually called Collisions now...accident implies no one is at fault. This has nothing to do with hurting motorcyclists, pedestrians have been struck down in crosswalks and killed, the same laws apply and a failure to yield ticket is given...no criminal proceedings or punishment. If someone in a truck or big van or big SUV pulls a dickhead move in front of my car, my odds are only marginally better than on my bike.

In response to noobie a page back (multiquote isn't working) I think remorse plays a huge part in determining punishment though. If I pull an illegal U-turn and someone bins it because of me, or if I crank a right hand turn and kill a pedestrian I would still rather be charged with THAT than something stupid like failure to yield. Everything else would be something a judge considers in sentencing. If there's genuine remorse, then by all means don't lock someone up, but the problem is in these cases there's a surprising lack of empathy or acknowledgement of responsibility. A year or two ago a guy that I used to read about because he campaigned for safer roads in the UK for cyclists was killed by a driver who did a rolling stop. The driver was very obviously in a state of shock and showed real remorse for his actions in court. As I recall he pleaded guilty to a serious charge, but the judge saw fit to give him a 1 year ban from driving, 100 hours of community service and a fine payable to charity. This is an acceptable outcome to me. A plea bargain from Careless Driving down to Fail To Yield is not
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom