Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 5905
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Wed Jul 05, 2017 2:26 pm

BJL wrote:What's even more bemusing is the number of cyclists who refuse to retaliate against motorists after having their very life put at risk for fear of upsetting them. I bet cyclists wouldn't be so forgiving if someone had pointed a gun to their head or held a knife to their throat. But a motor vehicle? 'Oh no, you can't retaliate, it will just make them hate us even more'. Screw that. If someone idiot puts my LIFE at risk, then they had better hope I don't catch up with them.

Cyclists in this country should be getting more angry and more organized. If I had my way, every time a cyclist is killed because of a motorist, major intersections in all capital cities would be blocked by cyclists for one hour at 5:00pm on the following Friday afternoon. Anything less is a pointless exercise. You may as well go invent a hashtag or something. :evil:



I would fall into your "bemusing" category. But I would say that that is more useful than your recommended response as implied very strongly by your closing "then they had better hope I don't catch up with them" Hmmm, shares a lot to my mind with the attitude of the worst of motorists.

Because I and you and everyone else that drives a car (or a bike for that matter) will have, on occasion, not seen a rider, or not seen a ped as you back out of the shopping centre car bay looking in five different directions at once or had your focus taken by something else, maybe important or had to move over to avoid an unseen hazard. It is a given that we will occasionally bugger up or have to make an awkward choice without any intent whatsoever and sometimes even with all due attention.

So my first response is to assume that very common failure that anyone of us will have done ourselves. And indeed I have had the occasional angry blast of a horn and the two finger salute when the person doing it does so without having seen whatever it was that dictated my movements that offended him. I'd hate to think that you would also go on the aggression route when you yourself may be the one that did not have all the information when the driver did. Such as an errant child on the other side of the road causing the driver to move unexpectedly to the left. It happens.

Whereas carrying a gun is not a given. Anyone pulling a gun and pointing it am is going to NOT have me extend any doubt. I mean, where IS the doubt? There is none.

None of this is to say that there are not people who also screw far too often up because of habitual inattention, habitual lack of care, irresposibilty, attitude and so forth. Just saying that most situations that we may find alarming are not because of evil people or people any worse than me.

I'd suggest that a better course of action than to go on the attack is almost always to try to get them to see the problem from my POV. And to couch it in a way that shares the problem rather than loads it on him because human nature makes otherwise a loser. And if you can't do that then just move on because "better hope I don't catch up with them" will NOT achieve any improvement.

I trust that you do not claim to never be susceptible to those human foibles or the odd bit of serendipity as you travel about. Because, the worst kind of fool is the one that does not know he is a fool. And there are lot of bad drivers that fall into that category. Ditto cyclists.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

defy1
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:40 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby defy1 » Wed Jul 05, 2017 3:17 pm

redsonic wrote:
defy1 wrote:Its funny how "justice" works in Australia, its almost as if depending the type of instrument used in the killing impacts the sentencing. If he had killed the cyclist say with a gun, knife, bomb or any device more in tune with crime and violence, I am positive he would have received a harsher sentence. But because it was caused with a mode of transportation its called an "accident", even though clearly he had intent to kill. Might as well go kill someone with a toaster, you can almost get away scott free.


This.
I wonder if society's attitude about vehicles as weapons will change with the increasing number of incidents where terrorists or crazies drive deliberately into pedestrians. It may be enough to jump the mental block people seem to have re deliberate use of a vehicle to harm.


That's a good comparison, so if I break it down:

Extremist Terrorist:
Weapon=car
Motive=hate, stupidity, ignorance
Crime=kills people
Sentence=20+years, life, death penalty

vs

Bogan idiot
Weapon=car
Motive=hate, stupidity, ignorance
Crime=kills people
Sentence=4 years

Something is wrong with that picture

RobertL
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:08 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby RobertL » Wed Jul 05, 2017 3:24 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote: Because I and you and everyone else that drives a car...will have, on occasion...not seen a ped as you back out of the shopping centre car bay looking in five different directions at once


When G20 was in Brisbane in 2014, I did some motorcade driving. We were trained by Murcotts driving school, and worked with the regular COMCAR drivers (the ones you see driving the PM around on the news).

Anyway, the instructors told us that one of the biggest expenses in running a vehicle fleet is caused by slow speed carpark bingles. The ongoing panel-beating and other costs push up insurance premiums. It also puts cars out of action temporarily, which causes issues, and it is a workplace health and safety issue.

So COMCAR's way of reducing this is to make it a rule that you never park in a spot where you have to reverse out. This is most commonly done by reversing in to the spot. That way, you only have to concentrate on a smaller area as you back in, with very little likelihood of reversing over a pedestrian. Then you can drive out more easily, only having to look ahead and to the side.

I do this all the time now and it makes life much simpler.

User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
Posts: 5905
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Wed Jul 05, 2017 4:23 pm

I usually put the hazard lights on as well. I don't know why cars aren't wired to automatically do so.
Unchain yourself-Ride a unicycle
Image

BJL
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby BJL » Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:16 pm

ColinOldnCranky,

I won't quote your reply to my post. It's too long.

I'm not talking about those that make mistakes. But those who deliberately close shave cyclists and yell abuse out the window or throw objects at cyclists. Those people haven't made a mistake. They know exactly what they're doing. But even those who make mistakes need to learn from them and take more care on the roads. Drivers who are accident prone shouldn't be on the roads. But where do you draw the line? Innocent mistakes can kill just as much as deliberate actions. Society in general needs to place more emphasis on the responsibilities to road users and the consequences of their actions. I've said it before on here and I'll say it again. Many people seem to think that driving (or riding) a vehicle on the roads entails about as much responsibility as sitting in front of the TV having a beer. In Victoria, it almost seems that the TAC is doing all it can to reduce the road toll whilst VicMotorists, *cough*, I mean, VicRoads, the state government, some police, many judges and motoring groups seem to be doing all they can to resist any measures to make the roads safer for cyclists.

Australia has a very poor attitude in many things. 'Always blame someone or something else' should be nation's motto.

Tonight, I saw an ad on TV for one of those current affairs shows, apparently larger servings of food are making us fat. Next they'll be blaming the livestock for growing too big. Or plate manufacturers for making plates bigger. Or toilet manufacturers making bigger toilets so people with normal sized asses fall straight in. Never the fault of the fat asses stuffing their mouths with food. They couldn't help it. Food was placed in front of them so they ate it all. No brains at all. No responsibility taken at all. Look around. Happens in just about every facet of Australian life. Including on the roads.

Some might criticize my hard line stance regarding this but it's our lives on the line here. And I think the cycling community in Australia is too weak to stand up for itself. Maybe google how the Dutch cycling revolution came about. It's hard to see cyclists in Australia taking a similar stance and forcing political change. Instead we seem quite content to continue watching our fellow cyclists die on the roads.

cp123
Posts: 1498
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby cp123 » Mon Jul 10, 2017 9:49 am

ColinOldnCranky wrote:
cp123 wrote:go to the daily terrorgraph newspaper and search his name. there was an article there yesterday that linked his prior driving form. he has a rap sheet of at least a dozen offences - speeding, DUI, drugs, blahdey blahdey blah.


while he might be a good character (snort....), he can't drive for poop.


Care to give us a link? I've drawn a blank.



http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/n ... eb7e5cf25f

User avatar
bychosis
Posts: 5010
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby bychosis » Mon Jul 10, 2017 1:03 pm

RobertL wrote:
So COMCAR's way of reducing this is to make it a rule that you never park in a spot where you have to reverse out. This is most commonly done by reversing in to the spot. That way, you only have to concentrate on a smaller area as you back in, with very little likelihood of reversing over a pedestrian. Then you can drive out more easily, only having to look ahead and to the side.

I do this all the time now and it makes life much simpler.


This. I much prefer getaway parking.
bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.

uart
Posts: 932
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby uart » Mon Jul 10, 2017 1:16 pm

cp123 wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:
cp123 wrote:go to the daily terrorgraph newspaper and search his name. there was an article there yesterday that linked his prior driving form. he has a rap sheet of at least a dozen offences - speeding, DUI, drugs, blahdey blahdey blah.


while he might be a good character (snort....), he can't drive for poop.


Care to give us a link? I've drawn a blank.



http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/n ... eb7e5cf25f


No that's a different case cp123. This thread was not discussing the Ben Smith motorcycle close pass case, it was a much worse case in Queensland (near Noosa) where a driver was actively trying to run cyclists down (not just close pass) before killing one. He got a more lenient sentence than that Ben Smith for a much worse crime.

cp123
Posts: 1498
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby cp123 » Mon Jul 10, 2017 1:28 pm

sorry Uart. :oops: think I crossed my wires or fried them in the flux capacitor.


2 years 9 months??????? far blinking canal..... :evil:

Shred11
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 12:32 pm
Location: Launceston

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby Shred11 » Wed Jul 12, 2017 3:42 am

There is a fundamental item missing from the sentencing in every single one of these cases: the lifetime ban from driving.

In any collision causing serious injury or death, society needs to take steps to ensure that such a collision can't happen again in the same circumstances. In these cases, the problem is the driver... so why should they _ever_ be in charge of any powered vehicle again?

Given the tendency for unlicensed drivers to drive anyway, if it were up to me, I'd arrange it so there is any car they are caught driving is automaticially confiscated and the offender sent straight back to gaol if they're caught driving. I'd also apply the ban to any vehicle with an engine and wheels. I don't care if in 50 years time, they need a powered wheelchair and there would be no exception for driving a forklift or even an eBike. No powered vehicle. Ever.

As things stand, in four years the murderer will be back on the road. Just like letting someone who shot another person buy a new gun as soon as they get out of gaol.

uart
Posts: 932
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby uart » Wed Jul 12, 2017 1:30 pm

Shred11 wrote:There is a fundamental item missing from the sentencing in every single one of these cases: the lifetime ban from driving.


Yes, can you imagine the outcry if sentencing like this was imposed for killing with guns.

It would almost be like if Martin Byrant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia) or Man Monis (had he survived the siege) were only given a 4 year sentence, and told "and to really punish you we are going to make you wait another whole 2 years before we give you back your gun and a license to use it". :?

User avatar
Mububban
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:19 pm

Re: Man of "good character" given 4 years (min) for deliberately murdering cyclist.

Postby Mububban » Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:39 pm

A man found not guilty of manslaughter over the death of Elijah Doughty in Western Australia's Goldfields has been sentenced to three years in jail on a lesser charge.
The 14-year-old boy was fatally run over in Kalgoorlie in August last year, leading to riots and violent scenes as people gathered to protest over his death.

A Supreme Court jury deliberated for six hours before finding the man — whose identity is suppressed — guilty of the lesser charge of dangerous driving occasioning death.


So this case involved a young motorbike thief being chased and unfortunately run over by the owner of the motorbikes.
The car driver got 3 years in jail for "dangerous driving occasioning death" - is that a similar charge that drivers often walk away from when they kill cyclists?
When you are driving your car, you are not stuck IN traffic - you ARE the traffic!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users