If hoons get their cars impounded for first time offenders.
The law should include repeat drunk drivers

Depends what law is broken.

If someone kills someone on the road, it's not 'just another car accident'.

If someone speeds and ends up killing anyone other than themselves, I want to see them to time in a cell. And not just a few months time either, serious time.

Same if they are drunk or drugged.

You end someone's life, you should be locked up for the rest of yours.

It depends on the circumstances. I was once travelling at about 40 - 50 kmh in a 11o kmh zone in WA in a blinding rainstorm when a Valiant went past me at what must have been close to 110 kmh. He could not have had much more than a rough guess at where he was going. So who was dangerous?

Willem

I have seen signs in one or two places that say "100km/hr, it's a limit not a target".

Safe driving obviously means driving to the conditions (traffic, weather,...) and being courteous of others. There really needs to be two limits a top and a bottom and of course in enforcing the bottom there needs to be latitude by officers. Here, on this side of the ditch, officers can ticket someone for driving too slow, especially of they are creating a traffic hazard.

Alan

I reckon prison sentences (in most cases) are a mistake ... but finding an effective alternative is not easy!

Why? because prison sentences just put people into a context of lots of criminals and others where they often they learn criminal conduct. So prisons become schools for criminals ... at taxpayers' expense! Its also a cruel form of punishment.

There should be just, and severe if necessary, punishment for wrongdoers. I just reckon prison is a lousy way of doing it, where nobody benefits. Not the victims, not society, not the taxpayers, and not the offenders.

Prisons should only be used for remand centres, and for prisoners who are simply too dangerous to release.

Willem

as i said...... without a valid reason.....

What do you all recon of this way then...

Inside America's toughest jail:Tent City, Arizona

Like the Mongol who I followed back to Ocean Grove tonight, I was car 8 in a 14 car convoy following this spastic at 60km/hr in a 100 zone, 2 erratic overtaking people didn;t seem to give the hint, why don;t these idiots look behind and realise, oh that stream of cars would like to get past me and pull over, some people think its there right that they are travelling "fast enough" in there terms and others should follow suit, assholes

__________________
"There is a good idea in the bottom of every bottle"....Jack Daniels

I said care for victims as I think that would slow up a decent person.

However IMHO throwing the book at people who exceed arbitrarily set speed limits by a few K is entirely about making money, not road safety.

If you want to save real lives I could come up with a number of options that have been proven to work, but are costly. Brainwashing the public and then booking them on mass is revenue positive and gives people a nice warm feeling that they are doing something.

Speed doesn't kill - inappropriate speed for the conditions can be dangerous though.

So when I didn't know I had epilepsy, had an accident and ran off the road and hit someone I should have ended up in jail? I didn't kill anyone but went damn near close.

Long version.

Ran off M2 heading west just after the toll plaza where it kinks left then right. Passed out due to seizure) and didn't turn right ran straight into the back of two cyclists. Now 2 years earlier I had another pedestrian run out in front of me and he was hit. He admitted so in courts and I lost license for 12mths. I had family doctor of 35+ years, 3 neurologists and RTA medicine and driving specialists all say that I couldn't have known that it would happen and I didn't have a history.

1 year and $50-K in lawyers later I am still guilty of dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm, which while I couldn't have known it would happen I did hit them and do considerable damage. Fortunately it was in a "between rover" phase or they'd defiantly be 6' under. What I really objected to was them trying to get me for 16 counts of "obtain benefit by deception (legal speak for fraud) because I didn't tick the box on my previous license applications stating I had a history of blackouts, seizures and fits.One count per application I had put in over the years. The judge decided that was too much and brought it down to one.

So end result, 2 year good behavior bond, 2 years (200 hours in the end) community service and 3 years no license. AND to boot I could no longer qualify to keep my job as a commercial diver as I couldn't pass the medical required to do the course, let alone the annual medical required to keep the certification. So there went my quite considerable income and only real qualification.


Sp please consider that while there are those who do do the wrong thing. The law exists to lay blame on someone. There isn't a provision for something being an "accident"