About time?

  Zaphod 3 12:53 25 Feb 2009
Locked

That members of this government were given the message that they are not above tthe law, should have been more than 3 months though, still at least it is a start.

  perpetual motion 12:54 25 Feb 2009

"have been more than 3 months though" what do you mean..? have you got a link please..? let us know what its about please?

  Zaphod 3 13:56 25 Feb 2009

I've just won the dimbo of the day. Copied it and forgot to paste.

click here

  Chegs ®™ 15:41 25 Feb 2009

He had crashed his Audi minutes earlier and is thought to have been trying to retrieve his mobile phone from the vehicle when it was hit.

Subsequent tests showed he had been drinking and crashed his car into the central reservation, spinning it round.


The guy that was killed was not because of this peers texting,but the peer was jailed because of a prolonged instance of dangerous driving.Both people were guilty of immense stupidity.

  laurie53 20:04 25 Feb 2009

We're all guilty of that from time to time but it shouldn't mean a death sentence.

  Grey Goo 20:22 25 Feb 2009

Quite often is for somebody else.

  JYPX 20:33 25 Feb 2009

On a scale of 1 to 10 I would say that holding a phone conversation whilst driving scores (as a dangerous practice) something like 4. Texting whilst driving is more like 9. And yet, this is a practice which can be seen several times on any motorway journey. Is it time for us to recruit many more traffic police who will be financed 100% by fines handed out to these dangerous idiots?

  bremner 20:42 25 Feb 2009

For once I think this sentence is excessive.

The guy had been texting but the accident occurred minutes after he had finished and was probably a consequence of the dead drivers drinking and driving.

I have known prolific robbers and burglars who have not got such custodial sentences

  rawprawn 20:51 25 Feb 2009

I agree with bremner, he had travelled at least 3 KM after using his mobile before the accident,and I have seen many worse cases where a much lesser sentence has been imposed.
Even if a point was being made I feel that a suspended sentence would have been enough.

  Chegs ®™ 01:38 26 Feb 2009

"he had travelled at least 3 KM after using his mobile before the accident"


If he HAD been using the phone when the accident occurred,then you would've expected him to be given a lengthy sentence.Particularly,had the victim been innocent of any offence.He was just lucky that he had ceased using the phone beforehand.It is highly dangerous to drive & text but scores do so,by reminding people that even peers can be jailed for it sends as clear a message out that this practise must be stopped.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Xiaomi Mi Mix 2 review

What went wrong at the Designs of the Year 2017

iPhone X news: Release date, price, new features & specs

Comment regarder des séries et talk-shows américains en France ?