Car killers and justice

Only recently, near my home, an elderly woman was knocked down and killed by a speeding driver. She didn't die instantly. It took a while. But she was dead by the time she got to hospital. All she wanted to do was to cross the road to catch a bus. The bus stop could be seen from her bungalow. The driver is probably being questioned at length as no court case seems to have occurred yet.

I use this blog to have a go, so to speak, at the downright anti-social, selfish behaviour of some drivers. Road safety is not about penalising people, or it shouldn't be the first option. Good driving standards are about road safety. I'm all for freedom - freedom of expression, freedom to dress how you like, freedom to speak your mind, watch what you want, all the rest of it. But freedoms are not about frightening people or killing them. I certainly to not have a freedom to place a bomb under the seat of a person I may have fallen out with. I do not have the right to shout abuse at people. Freedom is only freedom if people can live peaceably together.

So it is hardly freedom to drive at 60mph or more in a 30mph zone. Frightening people, scaring people, annoying people. What kind of freedom is that? None at all in my view. However, many disagree. Or more pointedly, they can't be bothered or care not a jot for anyone else.

One such selfish sod was Atif Faiz, who was driving at twice the speed limit when he hit Amanda Bailey in Leeds Road, Nelson. Ms Bailey was crossing the street to a garage when Faiz's Astra hit her at 60mph in a 30mph zone. She died a short time later. No doubt in extreme agony. The judge told Faiz at the subsequent trial this week, "If you have any conscience, you should be haunted every day of your life by what you have done and the hurt you have caused." I hope so. Sorry might be a start!

Faiz got three years in jail. Seeing as HM Prisons are not about punishment or even rehabilitation these days, more about cell occupancy management, Faiz will be out in 18 months with the possibility of driving down another road. What sticks in the craw is the fact that it was a hit and run. He knew she was dying! As Ms Bailey's mother says, "I'd never have left the body in the road - I wouldn't do that to a dog or a cat so I wouldn't do it to a human being".

Three years for this? This is not justice - it is merely a slap on the wrist. If the sentence had been appropriate (ten years in my opinion) the judge would not have needed to rub it in to Faiz.

In Britain, speeding is seen as being perfectly OK with lots of people. I see it every day. White vans, parcel delivery vans, reps, executives, those going to the leisure centre - most going too fast. The attitude is that those driving come before anyone else. In fact, "what the hell is that guy crossing the road for?" is more like it. I'd have a properly dedicated traffic court where those accused of traffic violations go. We need a complete overhaul of how we deal with the misery and mayhem that follows the selfish and mean-spirited actions of some people.

The young woman pictured above is dead. Not because she had a disease or was involved in a true accident. She was killed by a man in a moment of self-centred desire. What a waste of a life!

Speedy Gonzales to slow down?

When it comes to speeding on roads I'm in a kind of bind. I'm all in favour of getting arrogant mindless drivers to change their ways, but I'm totally against arbitrary speed fines and new ways of getting policemen to poke their noses into cars without just cause. Traditionally, the local authorities have seen cars and all forms of road transport as an easy conduit towards revenue raising. Road safety comes a poor third on the list, after spending money on disabled crossings in second place. Now don't get me wrong, I support good traffic management including proper wheelchair access. But it has to be properly funded and not as some pot-scraping exercise at the end of the financial year so that the budget isn't compromised!

So the news is that speed-limiting devices could be fitted to vehicles on a voluntary basis to reduce speed. These will use satellite positioning to check a vehicle's location and when its speed exceeds the limit, power will be reduced and the brakes applied if necessary. If on a voluntary basis, then I have no problem whatsoever. This could well encourage the arrogant to go no faster than the speed limit allows.

The BBC has a report on the topic. Jon York, fleet manager for British Gas, has a telling point. He largely agrees with the idea, but says, "It does aid road safety, it does reduce incidents, but it is part of a wide-ranging number of initiatives within British Gas and one of those is driver training because you have to change people's behaviour." That's the whole point. Changing behaviour.

However, a contrary view is rather baffling. Derek Charters, from the Motor Industry Research Association, believes limiting speed automatically could cause accidents. "The last thing you need is one car to be overtaking and then pull back in, in front of the cars in front, because that braking event will then cause everybody to start to slow down, which will then compress the traffic, which then causes an incident." Come on, Mr.Charters, think please. Why would somebody be overtaking, at speed, in a restricted zone? You don't need to be a researcher to know that that is nonsense. Unless of course, you are in favour of racing between these zones. On seeing a 30mph sign does one attempt to overtake at 40mph? We are all supposed to drive with "due care and attention". I sometimes wonder about people like Mr.Charters.

The government's transport advisers claim the technology would cut road accidents with injuries by 29%. But it would also just make the roads are far more pleasant place to be driving on. Get rid of the racers, stop the speedos and the weavers and those just out to please themselves. Life is complicated enough without feeling the roads are like shark-infested waters!

Anne Robinson banned from driving

The UK is in a total shambles, as Alan Sugar might say, when it comes to road safety, speed policy and driving habits. Yesterday Anne Robinson, she of the Weakest Link fame, was banned for driving under the totting up procedure. She had another speeding conviction to her name.

Her lawyer, Michael McGoldrick, came up with a pretty weak link! He said she had not seen the camera as she was disorientated by the road system on her first ever visit to Portsmouth. Come on, Mr McGoldrick, everyone knows that it is 30mph within a city centre, unless it is a dual carriageway indicating 40mph or more. And in any case, does the fact that she had not seen a speed camera mean that she can speed?

The whole system is ridiculous. The authorities are out to raise money by catching speeding motorists but make little or no effort to re-inforce good behaviour by placing quality, instructive road signs where they should be.

I think a whole new educational approach is required. We need to get away from the racing around regardless of others approach and behave a bit more decently as citizens. I would trial in certain areas roads with no markings. Let the drivers learn to be cautious, careful and considerate. Think it won't work? Well, its been done in the Netherlands and it does work.

The result will be a less stressful driving experience, but it will have its downside. The authorities will lose out on fines, the accident repair business will be upset, and the road painters will have to look elsewhere.

I'm all in favour of getting our roads back to civilisation and away from the current mayhem. Ms Robinson thought it OK because it was a Sunday morning. I suppose the magistrate listened to this weak explanation because he was going to fine her anyway. All he could say was "I am sorry she won't have a very pleasant memory of her first visit to Portsmouth".

We won't get very far with magistrates and everyone else just playing the same old record!