Educate or prosecute?

What would you opt for?


  • Total voters
    81
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I cast my vote to prosecute.

Two reasons, all the people I know who have been on speed awareness courses have done so purely to avoid points and it has not changed their attitude at all.

Secondly, a colleague of mine was taken out by a car some time ago. The driver was originally charged with Driving without due care etc. They were given the option of an awareness course, which they took. Despite this when it came to the civil case for damage/injury the driver refused point blank to accept any responsibility. Clearly they had learned nothing from the experience.
 
OP
OP
middleagecyclist

middleagecyclist

Call me MAC
Well, this is a right little hornets nest isn't it?

I suppose I should tell you what I decided on. I think either approach have their place and I too would like the option for both together as well. In this case I opted for...education.

If the offender had been a nasty little prat who couldn't give a toss and had commited other offences at the time (speeding, drinking, no insurance, etc) I would have gone for prosecution, although I get the impression this is automatic when such situations occur. The driver in my case stopped, came over to help and was very apologetic and shaken up. He was not being malicious when he hit me or recklessly trying to overtake me. He simply didn't look properly when he pulled out. I wonder how many road users, cyclists included, have been in that situation?

The course will cost him £130.00, will last a full day and he may well get some bad habits broken. His insurance premiums will be higher anyway as I am already claiming damages (new helmet, jersey, prescription painkillers, almost one month of pain and reduced function in my dominant hand). I don't think he will be as careless at such junctions again and that is the thing I'm most bothered about.

Very interested to see others take on this. Thanks for all the comments.
 

Pauluk

Senior Member
Location
Leicester
ohnovino said:
IME the worst group for blocking cycle lanes and ASLs are older drivers, presumably because these facilities didn't exist when they took their test and they've never been forced to refresh/update their skills.
How many drivers do you know who regularly update their skills. I'm not aware of any.

If we are generalising I find the worst group to encounter for blocking cycle lanes and close passes are BMW drivers and young men in VW Golfs. However, the last two blocked ASZs on my commute were both 30ish, one a man and one woman in fairly ordinary cars. I think insurance companies penalise young drivers (under 25 at least) because statistically these are the ones that have the most accidents and drive more recklessly than most.
It would be interesting to see the stats regarding age groups to see where the real problems lie. Also, a number of my friends and family who are drivers and are well away from retirement age didn't realise that stopping in a ASZ when approaching a red light was that serious and could get them 6 penalty points until I pointed this out to them !!!

Regarding the OP I think the offender should be prosecuted and let the courts decide the penalty.
 

GetAGrip

Still trying to look cool and not the fool HA
Location
N Devon
Prosecute is what I voted for, but quality education should be PART of the punishment. Unfortunately, imho, only the points and pounds will actually make them think about repeating the same offence in future
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
I went for prosecute, on the basis that points and a fine should equal a decent bit of education.

I do think there should be some kind of assessment on the speed awareness courses, so if someone is clearly not interested they can be referred back to the courts for points on the licence.
 
OP
OP
middleagecyclist

middleagecyclist

Call me MAC
Educate - ideally I'd like the equivalent of a suspended sentence where the fines and points are kept on hold for a period (say a year?) and if the driver has any further incident then they are added back on, otherwise they lapse.
Sounds interesting. Suspended points for some offences if education is taken instead? I like it.
 
compulsory tests introduced 1935, 77 years ago. Assuming 16 years old to take it. I reckon at 93 years minimum the number of drivers who've legally never sat a test is a small and rapidly reducing number.

Almost, but not quite:

My mother (born 1923) was learning to drive when the Ministry of War felt the need to use all the existing driving instructors. She and all other learner drivers were handed a full licence without ever sitting a test.

My father was discharged from his volunteer HO military service in late 1945. He wrote a note himself, saying that he was a competent driver and signed it as regimental adjutant (a role he took briefly before demob). When he returned to civilian life the next week, he was given a full licence on the basis of his own signature.

Both are long dead, but would be 89 and 91 if still alive. I believe there were many more like them who were awarded full licences during or just after the war for no very apparent good reason.
 

gambatte

Middle of the pack...
Location
S Yorks
Almost, but not quite:
Close enough for me :tongue:^_^
 
OP
OP
middleagecyclist

middleagecyclist

Call me MAC
One other thing with points when the driver is not actually stopped at the time of any incident, is that other people may be willing to take them instead of the offender. I know of at least two people who got their mother to take speeding points for them. I doubt she would have attended an education course instead as she didn't drive at all despite holding a licence. And 12 points doesn't mean automatic disqualification either if mitigating circumstances can be argued.

Of course some people carry on without a licence and/or insurance. These people should be terminated prosecuted to the full extent of the law and ideally locked up for good spell and have any vehicles crushed and then have their testicles crushed with a big mallet (most are men i'm sure). You get the idea anyway. Some people just can't be educated or rehabilitated.
:evil:
 

Hip Priest

Veteran
middleagedcyclist says they were elderly.

It could be that prosecuting them ends their driving career. Whether that's a good or a bad thing who is to say. Something to consider.

Interestingly enough, a friend of mine was recently hurt in a car accident with an elderly gent. The police told her he went into the station the next day and voluntarily surrendered his licence. The crash had made him realise how far his driving ability had declined with age.
 

StuartG

slower but further
Location
SE London
Sorry, when it comes to re-testing its the sub 25 year olds who we should start with. Rather more over represented in the KSI statistics then their more mature peers. But then I'm not sure competence is the main issue. More attitude is the problem. Something harder to test for.
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
middleagedcyclist says they were elderly.

It could be that prosecuting them ends their driving career. Whether that's a good or a bad thing who is to say. Something to consider.
Yes, it is something to consider.
It's something every driver needs to consider when they take control of a potentially lethal machine.
 
Top Bottom