AIBU to think some fatal driving offences should be manslaughter?

[Whichnumbers]

If a driver kills someone when they are purposely breaking the law that it should be manslaughter by car charges.

`For example using a hand held mobile to call or text, or using a digital device to watch tv whilst driving, or speeding over 20% the speed limit, drunk driving, running a red light, driving onto the pavement, then those action are deliberate and known to cause death if in a crash

presently the charge is death by dangerous driving which just doesn't seem to equate with the responsibility on the driver - they have murdered someone, knowing that their actions could kill

I have to agree. You do see some really light sentences handed out for death by dangerous driving which must be really insulting and painful for the victim's family.

Some drivers walk free from court
https://www.runcornandwidnesworld.co.uk/news/23815462.driver-killed-beloved-young-man-walks-free-court/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy51e25xyr9o

Gosh that’s appalling. Unfit to stand trial, but fit to drive! How bizarre. At least the police involved are pursuing it.

I personally think it should be a murder charge and should be life. People aren’t stupid, they know if they take their eyes off the road etc it can result in an accident or death.

Err? The maximum sentence is life imprisonment! In effect it is manslaughter. The issue is the person didn’t set out to kill anyone so it’s not planned and premeditated. Their actions or lack of attention caused a death, just like manslaughter. The sentencing guidelines must be adhered to but the max sentence is life and has been for 4 years.

At the very least I think anyone guilty of death by dangerous driving should never be allowed to have a driving licence again.

They may not intend to kill, but many choose to drive in an unsafe way. (Speeding in residential areas, tailgating snd texting as three examples)

Therefore by default, they have chosen a path which leads to the worst consequences and should face murder charges.

I'm tired of poor drivers wreaking havoc everywhere. I also feel that whilst some may be physically capable of driving and passing the driving test, they are still mentally unfit to hold a licence (risk taking excessive speed). So those who accrue points for repeatedly speeding should have licences revoked.

Its extremely rare to get a lifetime ban, you can cause two separate incidents of death in a crash and not be wearing your glasses (which was the cause of the crash) - yet still not get a lifetime ban on driving

MeetMeOnTheCorner

if you were committed of manslaughter using a shot gun it would be highly unlikely you'd ever get your gun licence again. Death by dangerous driving and its highly unlikely you'd receive a lifetime ban on driving

If you want to get away with murder, use a car as the weapon

The offences of causing death by careless driving/dangerous driving were brought in because juries were extremely reluctant to convict drivers who killed of manslaughter.

The defence would always do the “ladies and gentlemen, it could have been any one of you making a momentary mistake at the wheel - why would you condemn this upstanding young man to a lifetime of blah blah” routine and juries bought it every time. Probably because they all used to drive while pissed too, as was de rigeur in the 70s and 80s.

My job is investigating fatal road traffic collisions (I’m a Police Detective). It is very difficult to manage the expectations of family members with regards to sentencing guidelines for road traffic offences. I have investigated the most horrific of collisions where a suspect is drunk/drugged/unlicensed/failed to stop and they have not received more than 8 years (and will serve 4).

In every case I have prosecuted for Causing Death by Careless Driving (not dangerous), the defendant has not received any kind of custodial sentence. This is something that families can’t comprehend either- their loved one wiped out in an instant and the most the defendant gets is a ban/fine/community order.

Every single case we get a conviction on I just feel flat and disheartened as there really is no form of justice, and ultimately no sentence imposed would bring that person back. It’s a very sad job!

if some of the police shows are anything to go by, the people who commit crimes that result in their license being revoked are generally not the kind who care about driving with any license or insurance, and a ban, lifetime or otherwise, will be of no consequence to them.

There's been several cases where a car has been used as a weapon and the person has been convicted of murder.

This is very true - the lad that killed my Grandma in a hit and run had no insurance and was already disqualified from driving for a previous hit and run (in that instance he only broke someone’s arm). He got 8 years in prison and an 8 year driving ban.

Some are prosecuted as manslaughter.

It’s much easier to get a conviction for death by dangerous driving than it is for manslaughter. The CPS isn’t going to pursue a manslaughter charge unless they have a realistic chance of conviction.

I believe the reason why death by dangerous driving was introduced as an offense in the first place was because juries almost always refused to convict drivers of manslaughter.

The latest jolly jape is driving at speed whilst under the influence of nitrous oxide.

Can I make a few points

The reason why we have 'death by dangerous driving' is the unwillingness of Juries to convict on manslaughter charges

Sentencing is governed by sentencing council guidelines there is I suggest a question of how causing death by dangerous driving compares with other offences in terms of sentences. An obvious suggestion might be an exercise in trying to 'compare' recommended sentences across the board so that there is some sort of similar crimes attract similar sentences.

My suggestion might to look at the Dutch approach and make greater use of secure hospitals for more serious offenders.

There is then the question of disqualification. On the one hand The Secret Barrister points out rightly that a lifetime ban could be counter productive in that someone who having 'turned their life around' and started to act like a sensible human being would none the less never be able to drive again. My suggestion would be and it would depend on the seriousness of the offence that offenders should have a 'tariff' ban that they have to serve - reset to zero if they are caught driving when disqualified followed by something similar to a Parole Board hearing before they can be reconsidered for a retest and significant restrictions if they do manage to pass.

As amongst other things a Parliamentary Committee has pointed out breaching a driving ban does not attract the level of penalty that breaching other 'prohibitions' does. I would suggest that driving when banned should be treated the same way as an injunction with power of arrest ie straight to detention until a Judge is free to deal with you and probably serve the rest of the ban in jail.

Finally of course we need to look at at road traffic enforcement, getting the drunk, dangerous and illegal off the road and keeping them off the roads. On the spot bans, confiscate vehicles and heavy fines/jail for driving like a twat.

Yes I also agree. It might stop people being ludicrously reckless like driving right at people crossing a road (they might come around a corner and you are already there and they don't like it) or overtaking when you are doing the speed limit or overtaking cyclists when cars are coming towards them.

A while ago a drunk driver killed two girls when they were doing their athletics training in Hampshire and he was only given 6 years so out in 3.

On the ban thing given that we have telemetry now you could allow them to drive but only for certain journeys like going to work or taking their kids to school/medical appointments.

Anything else that they can't reasonably explain like needing to take a diversion because of roadworks means they are back inside for a week.

Decade?

@Whichnumbers We recognize they are not the same crime. Using a shot gun is illegal. Full stop. Driving a car is not. Using a gun is pretty much premeditated. Lots of traffic accidents are not. Most are misjudgements and catastrophic mistakes.

The sentences for dangerous driving can be substantial but there are sentencing guidelines. Death by Careless driving is not the same offence either. It carries a much lighter sentence and there are various factors courts must consider when sentencing. It’s not one size fits all.

Bereaved people usually want someone locked up and the key thrown away but the max sentence for death by careless driving is 4 years. Much lower than for dangerous driving. It can be a community service order. It all depends on what happened and why.

MeetMeOnTheCorner

shotguns are not illegal, they are heavily regulated in uk. They are also widely used by farmers as essential tools for land management

We need suspended sentences for any disqualification; get caught driving while disqualified, and you’re inside: so many driving offences are committed by those already disqualified, and their penalty? Disqualification! Of course, we don’t have the prison space for this.

(If only prisons could be funded by confiscation of the assets of wealthy career criminals, but this will never happen.)

One of the many tragedies that always stays with me is the driver that had drugs and alcohol in his system and hit and killed three boys at the same time. He got 13 years plus a 13 year driving ban. How can 3 lives be worth only 13 years?