[BBC News] Teenager jailed for death crash

[WTF]

i have read this forum in detail and think some vauable points have been made. would like to add the following:

 

- this young man, like other people in a similar situation, will, irrespective of the reasons why, have his life permanently altered due to this sentence. As, for those of you who are interested, his family, who will have to be pt through the hell of visiting him in jail. yes, they will get him back, unlike his very, very unfortunate friend's parents, however, my point is that this sentence will change the lives of more than just him

-prison, is not, and never will be, no matter the 'its cushy' view, be easy. Being locked behind a prison door completely alone and stripped of all dignity is a punishment, whether or not there is a tv screen sitting in front of him. his first strip search, his first cell search, missing his mother's birthday and christmas, will be a punishment, never ever forgotten or fully gotten over

- we as a society must take some responsibility. why not alter the driving test requirements and ensure that time is spent learning (safely) how to drive on derestricted roads, the importance of reducing speeds, and i would go as far as to say, simulation of losing control at speed. consequences of accidents like this are often based on luck - some people die, some people are hirrifically injured, some people walk away, but most drivers at some stage do lose control of their cars. teach our kids that this can happen, and if it does, the car becomes a weapon and maybe more consideration might be given. additionally, it is possible to educate drivers to drive at speed safely, even with post driving test lessons in this area - can this hurt?

- my opinion is that causing the death of another person in a car should mean an instant lifetime ban. this person's crime is driving badly again, not an pre meditated offence, not one caused by maliciousness or intent. take away the ability to get behind a wheel again and this driver could never be in this position again.

 

It is incredibly unfair, but accidents do happen, whether through momentary lapses or downright stupidity. my thoughts go out to both families affected, especially those who lost their son, which must be unbearable. however, surely more good can come of using this as an example to reform our driving test system, and even some aspects of sentencing. This young man will live with this forever and it is a very, very difficult situation for all. I only hope that prison doesn't damage him - for some people, living with 'career' criminals is not a good thing.

 

 

so with prison being so bad, do you think if he ever gets behind the wheel again, he will be so keen to show off?? if not, the prison worked for him, and other road users and passengers he is less likely to kill!!

 

the driving test already lets drivers prove they know how to drive safely. i'm sure he didn't 'forget' how to drive safely in TWO days!! it was a deliberate choice to not drive within the 50mph speed limit of his licence, and not to drive within the 40 mph limit of the corner. the crash can barely be called an accident, a deliberate gamble against the odds maybe?? how can you 'improve' the test?? it doesn't matter how tough it is to pass, once the licence is obtained, driving in a manner to pass the test is discarded at will. back to an earlier post, speed restricted cars would lessen the risks for new drivers and their potential victims in a big way. like the 12bhp limit for L plate motorcyclists.

 

as to banned for life if you kill someone, i think the actual circumstances should be looked at. if you were going like a loon and ignoring all safety issues then yes perhaps, but if your vehicle suffers a mechanical failure, or some careless pedestrian just steps out infront of you, it may not be fair to ban the driver.

[LadyManx]

i'm sure that the prison sentence will serve as a lifelong reminder to him - i don't know what the answer is in sentencing for this crime, i don't think i said that prison isn't the answer, my point is that, in response to earlier posts stating that prison is not enough of a deterrent and that it is not difficult enough (we see lots of posts along those lines don't we), i think that prison is, in fact, a punishment that is incredibly tough to do and then live with - some people may say that this is the point - not necessarily arguing.

 

My point re the test is that, unless things have changed in the years since my driving tests, driving lessons do not prepare you for driving outside of the roads of douglas, eg homezones etc that you see them called today. completely agree with regards to the restriction on cars - just think that prevention is ALWAYS better than cure, and it is time that the driving test, and lessons themselves, are looked at. perhaps, if we take away the mystery and excitement that comes with getting on the 'out of town' roads by ensuring that a certain amount of lesson time is dedicated to those very roads where we see these deaths, it may assist. I'm by no means an expert - just don't see how it can harm to make changes like that. Ok - in THIS case, showing off resulted in death, what about all the cases that aren't reported where it 'only' ends up with a car written off, or a whiplash injury??

 

I think also my post re lifetime ban said 'causing the death of someone in a car' - probably should have added by dangerous driving which in itself is a high threshold of bad driving - surely mechanical failure or a careless pedestrian would not be causing the death of another person through dangerous driving?

 

Anyway, I only posted because this is such a waste, think its about time that our government looked at prevention of these accidents rather than us posting 93 comments every time one occurs.

[WTF]

94: clarifying the dangerous aspect of causing deaths does make sense, perhaps i should have assumed that's what you meant as it's in this topic.

 

prison is prison, for a young person with i assume a clean slate up until now, the sentence does seem long, especially when compared to similar events we aren't supposed to mention!! also the penalties for what he did were in place long before he chose to do what he did!! the consequences ( crash, death, jail ) may not have been high on the list of important/what might happen until the write off came to a stop.

 

open roads are open roads, a lot easier to 'drive' along than navigating roundabouts, junctions, pedestrian crossings and general congestion of towns. oddly ehough driving instructors start you off out of town/marine drive where there is less traffic and the driving conditions are 'easier' to contend with. if you stick to the speed limits of the licence and the restricted zones, it is easier to drive on 'open roads' than to shuffle round town playing tunes on the gearbox so NO extra driver training is really necessary, just driving in the same manner as you did to pass the test in the first place would be more than sufficient.

 

young person, bad decission, showing off, ( all the norm with or without a car around friends and those you want to impress ), crash, dead friend, wishes he hadn't done it, always will. perhaps your banned for life idea could be a 'choice' in such seemingly obvious stupidity. jail or no driving ever again on the road. i would suspect most would choose walking or cycling as a way of life..

 

lastly, you can't 'prevent' human nature, you can only limit the opportunities for it to be deadly.

[Haraheart]

I have read this thread with personal interest. This young man was driving his dad's car 2 days after he passed his test with 3 of his mates in the back. He was 17, full of bravado, trying to impress and deluded into thinking he could handle a car at 120mph. We've all been teenagers, we all know how it works. We all made stupid decisions - unfortunately his decision cost a person their life.

"Revenge" only rears its ugly head on really bad days - then we should lock him up and throw away the key. But what would that achieve? One precious life has been lost, why waste another?

He needs to be punished and I am not the person to decide how that happens.

We can debate the human rights and wrongs of a custodial sentence ad nauseum, but it won't change anything - what's done is done.

He also needs re-educating and I'm no teacher, so again, how this is best achieved is not for me to decide.

Maybe the characters involved in this sorrowful tale are ones 15-16 year olds about to start their driving careers can relate to; a 17 year old just passed his test with his 3 mates, driving round the island, seeing what they can see. His 18 year old friend, Michael sat in the back passenger seat with his seatbelt on...

 

Good will come of this. It has to.

[WTF]

I have read this thread with personal interest. This young man was driving his dad's car 2 days after he passed his test with 3 of his mates in the back. He was 17, full of bravado, trying to impress and deluded into thinking he could handle a car at 120mph. We've all been teenagers, we all know how it works. We all made stupid decisions - unfortunately his decision cost a person their life.

"Revenge" only rears its ugly head on really bad days - then we should lock him up and throw away the key. But what would that achieve? One precious life has been lost, why waste another?

 

 

Good will come of this. It has to.

 

unfortunately 'good' is an unlikely outcome however much it would be nice to see. human nature is what it is, and showing off/posing at that age is the norm. unfortunately in todays supposedly affluent society it takes more than a new watch to be the talk of the town. obtaining a car or the use of one is very easy, and as every body has one you have to do something stupid/clever in one to stand out.

 

as to 'revenge'?? what is the difference between that and justice? not all 'punishments' should be considered as revenge or retribution, that's why they are 'punishments' prison is a punishment, it is not revenge. why incarcerate anyone for anything?? there has to be a reason? it is in no way similar to some tosser with a knife or gun going round killing people. i don't put him in that category of danger to society. he could just as easily wiped out a family minding their own business travelling the other way. you say a few times that things aren't upto you, the punishment and the education, well apparently not, which is why those it was upto decided upon the 'puniushment' . as i said above the risks and penalties were there before he crashed, no good complaining after the fact that they were imposed. maybe change things for the future, but if you go too far away from what is there, there will be plenty of fatal accidents involving cars running over people with a better chance of disposing of an enemy without going to jail for it.

 

i don't know whether the lad had a pair and owned up/ confessed his guilt from the start, or whether his advocate said look son your fucked, fes up and it is an automatic 1/3rd off your sentence? either way his idea or not, he saved the taxpayer money and saved insulting his friends memory and family. which if it was his choice, he goes up a few notches. just a pity it took a friends death to 'educate' him. so we'll say his education is actully achieved and passed with honours already, with just the punishment to live out.

[Nitro]

Maybe the characters involved in this sorrowful tale are ones 15-16 year olds about to start their driving careers can relate to; a 17 year old just passed his test with his 3 mates, driving round the island, seeing what they can see. His 18 year old friend, Michael sat in the back passenger seat with his seatbelt on...

 

Good will come of this. It has to.

 

I highly doubt it, 4 cases that I can remember those involved or knew of them, another 5 that I remember due to similar ages, The woman who died on the motorbike at hillberry, I knew one of her Daughters, awful tradedy, limited as to what I can say due to forum restrictions (through no fault of the forum itself I might add), a lovely girl though, obviously brought up well, so very cruel that such a thing could happen.

 

The others i'm not going to mention, due to the fact I very much doubt the families what to be reminded of the accidents (however that particular accident always crops up), as its hard enough, but the point is people (young imparticular) seem to have this view that their invincible from accidents, when its inexperience of car control that has caused a high percentage of them.

 

I can say these accidents did at the time (and still do) affect my decision on how I drive today, more so those I can relate too (though either age or the fact I knew them or knew of them, if the yellow markings for fatal collisions were made permanent the islands roads would look like a giant black board covered in chalk, its the dark side of the island really, the image of speed and "greatest roads for racing in the world", also some of the most unforgiving roads to "race" on.

 

Anyway point I was getting to, Re : being invincible, I know a few people who at the time just passed their test. The challenge?, see what sort of "speed" you can get out of your car, normally at some point along the TT course, speeds "recorded", doing a "ton" wasn't unheard of, neither was 70, 80 or 90mph, the odd roads would also be used a drag strips to see who was the fastest idiot, the fact more fatal accidents don't happen is surprising and IMO can only be down to how cars have become safer and stronger over the years (but with that more powerful), its not down to the excellent skills of the driver anyway, because if they were that good they wouldn't have needed lessons, but more to the point the previous accidents didn't seem to have any effect, Due to the "its never going to happen to me" attitude that is highly presented.

 

I've been countlessly overtaken this week by "R" platers, where i've been sticking to speed limits (seems unacceptable by a good 60% of drivers not just Recently passed drivers though). Its scary that anyone with this sort of immature attitude to driving (and disregard of laws in general) can actually hold a licence to what essentially is a lethal weapon, driving like its some sort of video game, where saving a possibly minute or two is important, but they've been driving like this for years, never had an accident?, so why make the possibilty higher?

 

Had I passed at 16/17 or perhaps if a parent bought me a car I think my attitude would have been somewhat different though, you're still in that school mentality where you don't know anything about life or its dangers, everything is fun and seemingly harmless. (sort of like looking back and wondering how I got away with never being seriously injured on a pushbike, going over ridiculous jumps and going round corners like I was riding in the TT, stupid, but you don't think of dangers at the time.)

 

Anyway thats more than enough waffle from me, but if more people thought of the horrific accidents that have happened, the countless lives lost, perhaps (maybe, just maybe) people would change the way they drive, hopefully take a step back and realise a car really is a basic tool for A-B, doesn't matter what picture your draw up, you're the one in control, no such thing as an "accident", lack of control isn't an accident in itself, its just an accident waiting to happen.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

He needs to be punished and I am not the person to decide how that happens.

We can debate the human rights and wrongs of a custodial sentence ad nauseum, but it won't change anything - what's done is done.

He also needs re-educating and I'm no teacher, so again, how this is best achieved is not for me to decide.

 

If re-education is needed, why would you punish?

[Slim]

If re-education is needed, why would you punish?

 

As a deterrent to others.

[manxy]

I have read this thread with personal interest. This young man was driving his dad's car 2 days after he passed his test with 3 of his mates in the back. He was 17, full of bravado, trying to impress and deluded into thinking he could handle a car at 120mph. We've all been teenagers, we all know how it works. We all made stupid decisions - unfortunately his decision cost a person their life."Revenge" only rears its ugly head on really bad days - then we should lock him up and throw away the key. But what would that achieve? One precious life has been lost, why waste another?

He needs to be punished and I am not the person to decide how that happens.

We can debate the human rights and wrongs of a custodial sentence ad nauseum, but it won't change anything - what's done is done.

He also needs re-educating and I'm no teacher, so again, how this is best achieved is not for me to decide.

Maybe the characters involved in this sorrowful tale are ones 15-16 year olds about to start their driving careers can relate to; a 17 year old just passed his test with his 3 mates, driving round the island, seeing what they can see. His 18 year old friend, Michael sat in the back passenger seat with his seatbelt on...

 

Good will come of this. It has to.

What is alleged and wrote in papers is not always the full truth. Would peer pressure make a difference?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

If re-education is needed, why would you punish?

 

As a deterrent to others.

 

How uncivilised.

[Jimcalagon]

If re-education is needed, why would you punish?

 

As a deterrent to others.

 

How uncivilised.

 

Unfortunately not everyone is as enlightened as yourself - some people can only be restrained from doing things which are harmful to others by the threat of serious repercussions.

[jimbms]

If re-education is needed, why would you punish?

 

As a deterrent to others.

 

How uncivilised.

So let's get this right LDV you do not think prison does any good and re-education etc is the way. Ok let's see your views on mass murderers, repeat peadophiles and war criminals, are you sure you want the likes of these walking the streets on a "re-education program". The main point is that no matter what level the crime there is a consiquence to be paid for commiting such crime and that consiquence is punishment in one for or another. That my dear anarchist is what is called civilisation.

[r1man]

If re-education is needed, why would you punish?

 

As a deterrent to others.

 

How uncivilised.

 

And I suppose taking someone elses life is civilised?

 

I suspect that judging by his comments, haraheart is closer to this than they would want to be since (s)he understands perfectly well the feelings of hopelessness / bewilderment attached to such an event. Thus the plea for something to change whilest recognising that the young lad in prision has indeed made a complete mess of his own future and robbed someone else of theirs.

 

Whether remorseful or not (and I do not know the lad in question, so it is not for me to say one way or the other) this boy has a debt to pay to society for his actions and for me at least, part of that debt is to be incarcerated for his (unintended consequences) actions as a reminder to others that this kind of youthfull and foolish behaviour is not acceptable to society as a whole. Consider also the feeelings of those in the emergency services that had to deal with the aftermath of this tragedy. A truly awful event for everyone concerned.

 

Civilised doesn't enter into this. Stop bleating about being civilised when a life has been taken.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

So let's get this right LDV you do not think prison does any good and re-education etc is the way.

 

The point I was making was just in response to Slim's reply about deterrence in respect of punishing someone. I was saying that if someone does not know that they have done wrong why should people be punished simply to provide a deterrent to others. How is that justifiable?

 

Whether remorseful or not (and I do not know the lad in question, so it is not for me to say one way or the other) this boy has a debt to pay to society for his actions and for me at least, part of that debt is to be incarcerated for his actions as a reminder to others that this kind of youthfull and foolish behaviour is not acceptable to society as a whole.

 

It is not murder, and we can talk about civilised and uncivilised in respect of the response. I just do not believe that the debt should involve ruining someone's life in order to repay the 'debt' to society. I would ask that the debt be paid in a more useful, productive, and more satisfying manner for society.

[Slim]

How uncivilised.

 

You've got that backwards.