Abercrombie wrote: Fine, but those who are caught should be punished for their own behaviour, and for the behaviour of those who get away. We should make the total amount of punishment equate to the total amount of crime.
PS: people who intentionally drive badly "intend" to kill and maim people.  But seriously ... 1st
Your actual agenda must be some sort of social experiment to determine whether a revolution is possible in the 21st century.
If every person caught driving over the posted limit, is punished for every person who has driven over the posted limit, you are effectively punishing the few for the inability of the legislative and judicial branches to influence the majority. That is either a recipe for anarchy, or a population of sheeple ...
Besides, such Draconian measures would be unnecessary if the laws were written properly. The best laws require very little tweaking to achieve a naturally high level of compliance. Therefore, the law is flawed.
2nd
People who intend to kill and maim people, kill and maim people. 'Weapons of opportunity' - I.E., items commonly used by the public for nonviolent purposes - are often preferable to objects designed primarily for the purposes of killing, maiming, and otherwise harming people and animals, for their very multifunctionality.
It now appears that one of those many functions is encouraging demagogues to believe that there are no meaningful distinctions between infractions, regulatory offences, code violations, infringements, misdemeanors, and violent felonies.However, to provide a counterpoint, if I had managed to kill a good friend of mine through wanton recklessness without using a car, I would imagine that the penalty would be somewhat gentler than eight years in prison (I don't even consider the 15 year driving ban a punishment, more like a precaution). IMHO, it should be greater, regardless of the instruments involved, and I am removing the fact that he was busy committing other felonies in the meantime.
I also don't see why the newspaper chose to refer to Mark Page as a joyrider. I am a former joyrider. (OK, former may still be a bit of a stretch?)
He carjacked his own father with a knife.
He also carjacked some other lady [with, or without a knife?].
He evaded police when spotted playing with the handbrake (every time I got caught playing with the handbrake by cops, I just waited, had a nice chat with the officers, and generally behaved in a manner completely opposite Mark Page, whcih is primarily why I have no record of being a joyrider. That I was usually alone, and went to great lengths to guarantee that is the other reason.)
He stole fuel.
He continued to evade police and resist arrest, resulting in the death of Darryl Faulkner.
Where I'm from, when death[s] result[s]s during the commision of a felony, the charge or charges resulting from said deaths are either manslaughter, or murder.
If anything, he got off easy because he did it with a car.I hereby charge the Belfast Telegraph of reporting this article with an inappropriately skewed perspective, and thus skewing the perspective of the readers in turn.
_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
Another dangerous killer driver has been banged up. Possibly for not long enough. I think the judge got it right.
h, ain't it! 
