A Tasmanian motorist who killed a cyclist has been handed a pretend sentence.  How is it that the judicial system can hand out a 4 month suspended gaol sentence for such a criminal act, but less brutal actions get much longer sentences?

This is deplorable.

Should the supposed "peak" cycling bodies begin a discussion with the magistrates and judges?

I'm just speechless and angry at this!  This is not fairness in sentencing, nor does the punishment fit the crime.

Views: 1400

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Of course it isn’t a sport; it is much closer to apathy by our society. It appears to be seen as the cost of driving. A few people make noises about how the road toll is unacceptable, but the will is not there to take the steps that will do something. My current theory is that the basic problem is a lack of driving skills by those that hold licenses. The current solution is speed cameras, mobile speed cameras, extended time on P plates, spending 150 hours learning bad habits from other bad drivers while on your L plates, double demerit points, advertising blitzes, changing demerit points, changing fines and lots of other actions that avoid the root cause because that would be politically unpopular.

Agree, however I am not convinced of a wholesale degradation in driving ability (although maybe not the point you were making). Although this certainly is a partial element. Check out what happens next double demerit points period. Cars will slow down to the speed limit, keep left, and generally be much more applied in their driving. Particularly when there are many more marked Police about. I think it can be done, but in general people do a cost benefit analysis, and go with the couldn't be bothered approach when not faced with a clear and present danger of being caught.

I am more of the view it is much more about attitude. Everything is more important than driving properly these days. Your smart phone, your fight with your partner, terrorists, Sydney house prices, whatever - you name it. People are driving distracted. This is hard to fix. People do not see the value in paying attention to their driving. So what if they don't indicate? so what if I change lanes without checking my blind spot? So what if they blow an amber light they could have stopped for - actually this is almost an unwritten rule that one must never stop for an amber under any circumstances. This is what inattention and distraction leads to. However we have a very noticeable aggression problem in Sydney. Everyone I know who has driven elsewhere (particularly overseas) immediately sees it on return to Sydney. The MUST GET IN FRONT AT ALL COSTS mentality is as prevalent as it is absurd and ineffectual in actually getting anywhere quicker.

But the apathy thing Geoff, I believe that is the key. We as a society just don't care, we just keep calm and carnage on.

I think Andrew has this right. There needs to be a rebalancing. We need a FAR more practical and efficient way of making drivers more cautious.

I am of the opinion that we need to have a formal study made of the European liability system (drivers that hurt cyclists and peds are automatically in the wrong, cyclists that hurt peds are automatically in the wrong). Rather than just make assertions about it we need to take an evidence-based approach.

In Europe, as a cyclist and as a pedestrian, there is a sense of greater safety. It is not just driver training and speed limits and road engineering. It is, I believe, an awareness on part of drivers. This awareness is the opposite end of the continuum from what Andrew describes well as driver distraction in Australia. 

Too true it's attitude and lack of skill. I want to include mandatory motorcycle training and two years on a LAM motor bike before you can drive a car. benefits - teaches road skills vulnerability good habits and maybe mums and dads will drive as if it was their kid on the bike

Did the judge declare he was a 'driver' and had a conflict of interest?

Probably no more than they did as also being a potential victim - as all of us are. Be we driving, riding or a pedestrian.

No way SUVS. 

If he or if his loved one rides a bike on the roads  he wouldn't have given a 'IDGAF' sentence like he did.

By the way ; is there a suggestion what can we do or who do we write to about this to express a concern that being killed going about our lawful business is seemingly acceptable to the courts ? (or similar) 

Meanwhile across the sea in Vic, this: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/north/police-call-for-ban-on-cyc...

Another "cyclists cause motorists to veer on to the other side of the road". No, a failure to preferentially use the brakes does that. But at least they understand this much: "A car might hit them and the car driver is going to be fine, but the cyclist is going to be badly hurt or pushed off the embankment.”

Now, where's my hierarchy of risk control?...

Is this a specific Bloody Victoria road rule, "VicRoads acting regional director Nick Fisher said cyclists were permitted to occupy a whole traffic lane in sections of road where there was no sealed shoulder"

How much "sealed shoulder" is enough 100mm?

Perhaps BV/BN lobbied for this rule so cyclists would be respected?

That is not in the road rules.

BV/BN lobbying for equal fines for respect bonanza


No doubt $14K will mean impressive respect... oh wait, dont read the comments.


© 2020   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service