Comments on: How Is It Worth Jail Time?! http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html Don't annoy a dragon, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:34:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: ThunderDragon http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html#comment-1416 ThunderDragon Fri, 21 Dec 2007 23:28:00 +0000 http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/blog/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time/#comment-1416 Well that depends on what I feel like at the time...<br/><br/>Cars have uses other than killing. A gun doesn't. Well that depends on what I feel like at the time…

Cars have uses other than killing. A gun doesn’t.

]]> By: Asp http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html#comment-1414 Asp Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:19:00 +0000 http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/blog/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time/#comment-1414 I hope you missed a word there TD, I think sending all Law Students to prison is a bit on the harsh side!<br/><br/>The thing to stress - driving with a mobile phone <b>will not</b> result in anyone being sent to jail.<br/>What it will do though is aggravate <b>already dangerous</b> driving. Which always has had the <i>potential</i> of a custodial sentence being given.<br/><br/>Yes, they might not have killed anyone by virtue of the dangerous driving. But that's more luck than judgement. If someone was acting dangerously with a gun, you'd expect the full force of the law to come down on them. Why should a car be any different? I hope you missed a word there TD, I think sending all Law Students to prison is a bit on the harsh side!

The thing to stress - driving with a mobile phone will not result in anyone being sent to jail.
What it will do though is aggravate already dangerous driving. Which always has had the potential of a custodial sentence being given.

Yes, they might not have killed anyone by virtue of the dangerous driving. But that’s more luck than judgement. If someone was acting dangerously with a gun, you’d expect the full force of the law to come down on them. Why should a car be any different?

]]> By: ThunderDragon http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html#comment-1413 ThunderDragon Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:13:00 +0000 http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/blog/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time/#comment-1413 Because they <b>haven't</b> killed anyone, Asp, and so shouldn't have to suffer a custodial sentence for it. <b>lots</b> of crimes - <b>real</b> crimes - carry a risk of hurting or killing someone, yet <b>they</b> don't carry the possibility of a custodial sentence, which as a trainee lawyer, you should.<br/><br/>If this sets a precedent, then there should be custodial sentences for speeding, mugging, burglary, rape...<br/><br/>It is quite simply absurd. Because they haven’t killed anyone, Asp, and so shouldn’t have to suffer a custodial sentence for it. lots of crimes - real crimes - carry a risk of hurting or killing someone, yet they don’t carry the possibility of a custodial sentence, which as a trainee lawyer, you should.

If this sets a precedent, then there should be custodial sentences for speeding, mugging, burglary, rape…

It is quite simply absurd.

]]> By: Asp http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html#comment-1412 Asp Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:58:00 +0000 http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/blog/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time/#comment-1412 Yet again, a piece of news over something that's not actually changed.<br/><br/>Driving whilst chatting on your mobile can easily be a component element of dangerous driving. Always has been (remember, before three points were introduced dangerous driving was the only way or prosecuting for driving whilst chatting).<br/><br/>No-one would object that causing death by dangerous driving should result in a custodial sentence. No-one would object that such dangerous driving can include chatting on your mobile.<br/>So why do people object to dangerous driving, without killing anyone, shouldn't result in custody.<br/><br/>It will be very rare. But chatting will only be one factor. And if someone's chatting on their mobile whilst changing the radio and putting on their make-up - they need to made an example of.<br/>People need to remember, driving a car is being in charge of a dangerous weapon, and as such requires concentration.<br/><br/><i><a HREF="http://thelawwestofealingbroadway.blogspot.com/2007/12/dangerous-nonsense.html" REL="nofollow">Bystander</a> also has an interesting take on this.</i> Yet again, a piece of news over something that’s not actually changed.

Driving whilst chatting on your mobile can easily be a component element of dangerous driving. Always has been (remember, before three points were introduced dangerous driving was the only way or prosecuting for driving whilst chatting).

No-one would object that causing death by dangerous driving should result in a custodial sentence. No-one would object that such dangerous driving can include chatting on your mobile.
So why do people object to dangerous driving, without killing anyone, shouldn’t result in custody.

It will be very rare. But chatting will only be one factor. And if someone’s chatting on their mobile whilst changing the radio and putting on their make-up - they need to made an example of.
People need to remember, driving a car is being in charge of a dangerous weapon, and as such requires concentration.

Bystander also has an interesting take on this.

]]> By: Paul H http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html#comment-1411 Paul H Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:29:00 +0000 http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/blog/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time/#comment-1411 I'm in favour of stiffer penalties, but as you say, not custodial. I'd also like to see much larger penalties for people actually involved in accidents. Something like "If you were on the phone at the time you were involved in an accident then the accident is your fault, your insurance company isn't liable for a penny, and the NHS will be billing you for your treatment." I've long thought something similar about seatbelts - not that the accident is your fault, but the consequences are. I’m in favour of stiffer penalties, but as you say, not custodial. I’d also like to see much larger penalties for people actually involved in accidents. Something like “If you were on the phone at the time you were involved in an accident then the accident is your fault, your insurance company isn’t liable for a penny, and the NHS will be billing you for your treatment.” I’ve long thought something similar about seatbelts - not that the accident is your fault, but the consequences are.

]]> By: Byeck http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time.html#comment-1410 Byeck Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:47:00 +0000 http://thethunderdragon.co.uk/blog/2007/12/how-is-it-worth-jail-time/#comment-1410 Two years for using a mobile whilst driving is good.<br/><br/>I'd also give 12 months to anyone using a mobile on a bus, in a pub or any other public place. Two years for using a mobile whilst driving is good.

I’d also give 12 months to anyone using a mobile on a bus, in a pub or any other public place.

]]>