Wednesday, 11 May 2011

Fines

BBC News amongst others is reporting the new idea of on the spot fines for dangerous driving. I'm sure we've all seen examples such as the ones in the video, and worse. 

The plan for an £80 fine and three points on a licence is a start, but nothing more. 

It seems like nothing more than a political stunt when you consider that you can get fined £1,000 for throwing a piece of chewing gum in the street.

Surely, driving dangerously and threatening the safety of others should have a much higher penalty than than littering? 

What do you think? 

6 comments:

Joe said...

Honestly?

If people are driving dangerously (as opposed to carelessly), then I think a ban and a £1,000 fine suits it well.
It doesn't need to be 12 months, perhaps 3mo initially would be fitting. This, along with a 1-day course gives them a clear message of what is not acceptable. If they get caught again, then 12+ months ban, and a much heavier fine, as they knew what was wrong.

In this country, you can serve longer for defrauding a company out of money, than for trying to kill someone.

PAul said...

I thought it was careless driving, not dangerous?
Dangerous driving is not an offence to deal with by FP.

I agree it looks like a political stunt, also what's the appeal process for a FP ticket?
Are you simply guilty until proven innocent?
And is the penalty increased if you go to court and lose?

I agree the penalty for littering is high.

But the enforcement rates for dangerous and careless driving need to increase. I see too many idiots undertaking on the motorway form lane 3 (or 4) in to lane 1 and back out again.
If the police are not there to witness it, then they can't issue the FP notice.

Fixed Penalty is not the answer though. To the salesmen in their repmobiles it's pocket change, and doesn't hurt them at all.

Besides that 3 Points means they can have 4 goes at it before they are off the road with a totting-up disqualification. Or more accurately, get caught 4 times and drive like an idiot countless times.

There are no consequences for their actions, only for getting caught.

Anonymous said...

maybe a good way to deal with it, is to make it part of the driving test to witness a video demonstration of what happens in a crash and a breakdown of the the propper cost of the crash, ie the cost of the ambulance, hellimed, police, fire and hospital,the cost of loss of work while recovering and the cost of insurance going up. maybe after seeing a few of the hard hitting demo's some people might think twice. they need to be caught before they are let loose in the car.

emas employee

Mork said...

Seems to me that it's just another option for the police to use.
It’s a good idea.
Let the police deal with the open-and-shut cases.
It gives the police an option do something besides let them off or send them to court.

Lynda Halliger-Otvos said...

The small amount of the fine makes me wonder if the authorities are just placating someone in the power structure...

Wayne Conrad said...

We have a "dangerous driving" law in Arizona. As written, it's not enforced (and, for all practical purposes, not enforcable). It requires the officer to witness three of certain traffic violations (speeding, not using the single, tailgating, etc.) within a certain amount of time. The officers aren't willing to wait that long: They fear being witness to an accident they could have prevented by pulling the person over rather than waiting for that third violation.