give dangerous drivers points!

Joined
18 Apr 2006
Messages
361
Reaction score
8
Location
Cambridgeshire
Country
United Kingdom
Some idiot slammed into the back of our car at the weekend, even though we were stopped at the roundabout waiting for it to clear from the right.

I think if someone crashes into the back of you and its obviously their fault, they should automatically get 2 points.
I mean, you get points/fines for speeding and having a light not working which are only theoretical dangers. You plough into the back of someone and you get nothing!
Ok you get higher insurance premiums, but the victim has all the hastle of sorting their car out only to end up with a car thats probably not 100% as good as it was before the accident.
 
Sponsored Links
i agree totally :eek: and life imprisionment for running a cyclist over whos minding his own business :LOL:
 
dangerous driving is an offence. so is driving without due care and attention.

James, the driver that smashed into you may not be a dangerous driver. He may have had a lapse of concentration, or perhaps saw a gap and expected you to take it (still no excuse to have the crash though). We all make mistakes, it doesn't make us dangerous.
 
crafty1289 said:
dangerous driving is an offence. so is driving without due care and attention.

James, the driver that smashed into you may not be a dangerous driver. He may have had a lapse of concentration, or perhaps saw a gap and expected you to take it (still no excuse to have the crash though). We all make mistakes, it doesn't make us dangerous.

In this case, there's no doubt that he was guilty of driving without due care and attention.
I my view if you hit the back of someone, you are guilty of dangerous driving apart from in the minority of cases where there is an excuse like the car in front had an accident and came to an immediate halt giving you no chance of stopping.
I think the fact that there's no punishment unless you actually kill someone and the the police are involved is part of the reason why so many people think its OK to tailgate.
The bloke who crashed into me had the attitude that "I have crashes all the time, its a company car and nothing will happen to me. Why shouldn't I drive dangerously to save time?".

The problem I see is that if there was a risk of points, drivers might not want to admit crashes were their fault.
 
Sponsored Links
Spark123 said:
Have you reported this attitude to his boss?
I don't know who he works for. I think he probably was the boss, unfortunately.

I just think its too easy for a certain group of tosser drivers to drive like complete idiots.
Fitting limiters in cars so they can't go over 70mph might be a start...
 
Slogger said:
and life imprisionment for running a cyclist over whos minding his own business

I suspect these people know you from this forum...!
 
JamesA said:
I just think its too easy for a certain group of t****r drivers to drive like complete idiots.
Fitting limiters in cars so they can't go over 70mph might be a start...
you dont have to be doing 70mph to be driving like an idiot. making all cars have the same 80bhp engine would be a good idea - obviously completely unworkable, but imagine how cheap parts would be.

Taxi drivers are the worst. A white hackney carriage overtook me the other morning, it was 5:50am, on a 30mph residential road, and i was doing 40 (30 is stupid when theres no frigger about, its a straight road with very few deviations). he must have been doing 60 the whole distance he was still visible to me. If only they had speed cameras about at that time of the morning . . . (they do set up on that road) Most of the hackney carriages in doncaster are driven by immigrants. I'm saying nowt. Slogger, you there? I got my own back on him by making it difficult for him to get past - i changed down a gear and floored it :LOL: (i was GOING TO do this anyway, you understand . . . :cool: :cool: :cool: )
 
JamesA said:
In this case, there's no doubt that he was guilty of driving without due care and attention.
Sounds reasonable, but your hypothesis needs testing in a court of law.

I my view if you hit the back of someone, you are guilty of dangerous driving
That may be your view, but it is not the law's.

apart from in the minority of cases where there is an excuse like the car in front had an accident and came to an immediate halt giving you no chance of stopping.
You should always drive within stopping distance.
 
did you report the accident to the police,they may prosecute for due care and attention but only if its reported :)
 
crafty1289 said:
ban-all-sheds said:
You should always drive within stopping distance.
Really? :confused: You sure about that ban? :eek:
Well - it didn't look right at the time - interpreted literally it means the opposite of what's intended.

It's the term I've always used and I thought "what nonsense", but couldn't think of a way to rephrase it.

"always drive beyond stoppng distance"?
 
crafty1289 said:
I got my own back on him by making it difficult for him to get past - i changed down a gear and floored it :LOL: (i was GOING TO do this anyway, you understand . . . :cool: :cool: :cool: )

Crafty, I'm sorry, but that is the sort of behaviour that can cause accidents.

The highway code stipulates that if someone wants to overtake you, you must let them.
 
securespark said:
crafty1289 said:
I got my own back on him by making it difficult for him to get past - i changed down a gear and floored it :LOL: (i was GOING TO do this anyway, you understand . . . :cool: :cool: :cool: )

Crafty, I'm sorry, but that is the sort of behaviour that can cause accidents.

The highway code stipulates that if someone wants to overtake you, you must let them.


It also states that drivers must observe the speed limits.
 
Thankyou joe-90. And if there had been a car coming the other way, I would have slowed of course. As it was, it was 5:30am and there was nobody about. I didn't consider my driving to be any more dangerous than his, given he was doing 60 on a 30 road. (as i said, i was doing 40, but its a long straight road and there was nobody about - a ghost town) but 60 is just reckless. you'd think taxi drivers would treasure their licenses. :rolleyes: should have got his taxi number.

ban-all-sheds said:
crafty1289 said:
ban-all-sheds said:
You should always drive within stopping distance.
Really? :confused: You sure about that ban? :eek:
Well - it didn't look right at the time - interpreted literally it means the opposite of what's intended.

It's the term I've always used and I thought "what nonsense", but couldn't think of a way to rephrase it.

"always drive beyond stoppng distance"?
i know what you meant - was being pedantic :LOL: the rephrase sounds daft. "always leave enough distance to stop in an emergency"? :cool:
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top