Cycling UK demand crackdown on drivers being allowed to keep licences after conviction.

[ebikeerwidnes]

I relate this to when I was a teacher is a rather 'challenging' secondary school

The discipline system that eventually brought the behaviour around was very simple
First offence - a polite warning
Second offence - a yellow card - which came with a free 10 minute detention at the end of the day
Third offence - go straight to the isolation room - do not pass go - do not meet up with your mates for a fag behind the kitchen bins

Once that was enforced - and it was getting the teachers to enforce it that was the main problem - then behaviour fell into line

while kids were allowed to get away with the old " just one more chance Sir" concept then they just took the whatsit - and expected every teacher to go along with it every time

In my opinion the points system is the same

In most cases the offender has built up the points over a period of time
hence they have had plenty of warning that a ban is likly unless they learn to obey the rules

I would support a system where people with >x points are offered extra training to help them work out how to drive more slowly (hint - the right pedal makes you go faster - push it less and you go slower)
AT their own cost - in fact they are already available

but help and support at an earlier stage

but then no "one more chance" if you still get a ban


maybe the one circumstance I would allow 'one more chance' is if someone accrues a lot of point in one trip in exceptional circumstances
e.g person gets a phone call that their relative needs them urgently (maybe kid run over) and gets a load of speeding tickets in one day getting there
but I think the courts think about that anyway

the old "I can;t get to work'
or 'my poor kids won;t be able to get to the school I chose that I can only get to in my Range Rover"

 

[BoldonLad]

If they don't let you off for robbing a shop because you are poor why an earth do they if you drive!

I don't recall "being poor" used in mitigation for robbery, but, being drunk is frequently wheeled out as an "excuse", in the area I live.

 

[Drago]

Its a disgrace. It actually takes quite a bit of effort to get a ban. You need to be pithed, drugged up, stupidly dangerpus, kill someone, or else commit minor offences on multiole occasions. If you're about to lose your licence you've really worked hard to reach that position.

Its not something you can lose accidentally, or by bad luck, it takes serious wrongdoing or repeated minor wrongdoing. That being the case any driver who has reached that point has had ple ty of opportunity to think about the consequeces of losing their licence and carried on anyway, so there should be none of this hardship bollards.

And having considered how hard one needs to try to get a ban, that ban should be for life, same as if you abused a pilots licence or shotgun licence, or any other type of licence for doing an activity that could kill. Most people get though their driving days with none or few points (36 years with none for me) so its an eminently minor risk for the moderately careful and competent among us.

 

[steveindenmark]

Exceptional hardship is ridiculous mitigating circumstances. If the mitigating circumstances were there before the offence took place and you knew How can it be mitigating circumstances. You are just ignoring the consequence of your actions. You know when you leave home to go to the pub drinking that if you get caught over the limit when driving, you will be banned. That will lead to exceptional hardship. How can exceptional hardship be used in mitigation?

If a deer jumps in front of you and you swerve to miss it and hit a car Thats mitigating circumstances

 

[mjr]

If a deer jumps in front of you and you swerve to miss it and hit a car Thats mitigating circumstances

Not always. At least some of the time, that's incompetent driving, going too fast to stop within what they can see to be clear.

 

[classic33]

Not always. At least some of the time, that's incompetent driving, going too fast to stop within what they can see to be clear.

And if a deer were just to clear the ditch at the side of the road, getting out of a field that wasn't fenced to keep them out?
I've been walking on a single track road, where the deer came from one side, landed in the road and just as quick, cleared the ditch on the other side.

I've also put three metre boundary fences up to try and keep them out. Yet there's always at least one that'll clear that height.

 

[Time Waster]

I saw a red deer stag in full splendour in Glen Etive jump over a deer proof fence from a standing start after just 3 or 4 steps! It then decided to take my mate on his challenge. He did a starsky and hutch style jump over the bonnet and into the car saying "move move move! ". A big angry glaswegian scared by a grown stag.

I've also nearly hit one jumping down from a bank out of the woods. Actually two in close procession. Very common in Scotland at times I believe judging by the number of cars we used to see in October driving around with no bumper due to deer strike.

As to telling a police officer you didn't know you were speeding. A serving copper running a road safety course I went on for drivers (RoSPA course not speeding course) said if stopped do not admit to not knowing your speed as it could lead to more than just a speeding ticker.

Getting multiple speeding tickets can happen surprisingly quickly. I know a few people who got two speeding tickets before they even knew they'd been pinged for speeding. One case was on a stretch of road where the speed limit wasn't clear. Something about lack of signs or they were covered by vegetation I can't remember.

12 points can be awarded for just two offences that come with 6 points. A delay in notification of offences could mean you don't have the opportunity to amend your ways after your first offence.

I'm not defending offending motorists because I broadly follow most people's views that 12 points should mean a ban without hardship appeal. I disagree with hardship arguments. If a truck driver did something wrong do they keep their truck driving licence? Aiui there's a difference there with offences and licence of drivers.

 

[Drago]

Mrs D hit a muntjac deer on the motorway, did a lot of damage to her car. Relatively closely packed traffic moving at 60mph meant she had zero realistic prospect of seeing the 2 foot tall animal as it somehow dodged traffic long enough to step in front of her. I was front seat passenger and just caught it out the corner of my eye but it was in the radiator before I could even form the words in my mouth.

 

[Time Waster]

Bye bye bumper? Or was it more damage?

 

[Drago]

Radiator, air con rad, bumper, grille, all sorts of stuff. It was a week cold 308 GT and the dmaged came to £3500 in 2009 prices. By an amazing piece of luck (for us, not for the deer) it was a square on impact, dead centre, and all the damage was to bolt-on components. Other than the bumper itself no bodywork or paint was required,

 

[Amanda P]

A suggestion (beginning with a digression).

A lot of people use their cars for foolishly short journeys not only because they’re lazy, but also because it’s free!

Yes, it costs no money at all to get in your car, turn the key and drive it around.

It’s expensive to put fuel in it, though, and to tax it, insure it, service it and all the rest of it. But the cost isn’t directly associated with the act. If you had to fold up twenty pound notes and feed them into a slot on the dashboard before the car would start, it would give you a chance to think about whether it might make more sense to walk or get the bus.

Similarly with driving offences: perhaps we need to more directly associate the cost/punishment with the offence. If you‘re caught speeding, you instantly receive a short-term ban - maybe a week.

For that week, life for a car-dependent person is going to be seriously fonked up. Also, the ban begins right there, right then: you won’t drive away. You’ll be walking or calling a taxi, and your car will be taken away by a police officer or a recovery truck.

(Tough on innocent passengers, I know. But the present arrangements are pretty tough on innocent victims. Fleet drivers would have to explain why their wagon/van/execmobile has been seized. But if you can’t do the time…)

After a second offence within a certain period (maybe three years, as with the current totting-up process), you’d get a ban for a month. After a third offence, you’d be banned for a year.

Yes, of course, drivers could simply go and buy another cat, just as many continue to drive while banned right now. But the instant retribution, and the instant disruption of life, might do what totting up points does not.

We’ve learned from recent terrorist attacks that motor vehicles really can kill, so why don’t we apply similar rules to those we do with firearms, explosives - even knives?

 

[mjr]

And if a deer were just to clear the ditch at the side of the road, getting out of a field that wasn't fenced to keep them out?

Was "some of the time" not clear enough to exclude the truly difficult-to-avoid?