New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

They should also have said mobile stuck where the sun doesn't shine!

.
.
.
.
.
.
Oh, and an infraction

Brendan Hughes

Scottish accent too strong for you?

LG John

In fairness it wasn't the most obvious of jokes

Leslie

Just imagine where you would be if you had hit someone after your problem with that fuel surge!

Les

Diesel

No it's that capital 'I' that threw me - though you'd been on the Tenents

LG John

That's actually something I think about at least 4-5 times a year - just pops in my head.

When the car crossed (backwards!) into the other lane my life and anybody else's was completely at the mercy of luck. Notwithstanding, I still regarded the incident as an accident. A set of circumstances some of which are beyond my control that lead to the outcome.

The fuzzy issue is that some of the factors were in my control. I could have driven slower, I could have taken a different route or I could have been more careful in checking my fuel or ensured that my tyres were replaced earlier (they were legal but low).

My issue with the British Blame Culture is that when sh*t happens we seem to love to retrospectively try and find ANYTHING that someone could have done different to avoid it and then blame them for it. The problem that creates is that if you look hard enough you can blame someone for nearly everything that happens. In my case I'm easy enough to blame as issues of tyres and fuel surge aside my entry speed was 80mph into a corner on a 60mph road. Normally you can carry 95mph+ through it but bottom line is anything over 60 is speeding and I have to hold my hand up to that.

Assuming a biker was coming the other way hit me and was killed I would probably go to jail. If you are asking me if I'd feel sorry about that the answer is very obviously yes - that would be a deeply horrible thing to carry for the rest of my life. If you are asking if I feel I deserve jail the answer IMHO is no! I also disagree with the sentencing of 10 pence short on Pistonheads who was jailed in similar circumstances.

Ironically if you regard my incident and 10 pence shorts as similar then the person that should have been jailed is me. I got away with it and save for 5-6 fleeting thoughts a year I carry no real burden from the event. 10 pence short injured someone and did jail time. As far as I'm concerned his lesson was learned the very instant he walked over to aid the unconscious mangled rider. He was instantly rehabilitated (if you like) and I get on with life and chalk it down to 'experience'. Seems a little wrong somehow.

Leslie

Thats a good and very honest reply S Boy. I only mentioned it as an example of what might happen when these new laws are paseed.

As you say you could be technically held to blame for your speed into a corner which you know is normally safe at considerably higher speed. It is also fair to say that normally you would not have expected the fuel surge which is a problem which is unusual on a Scooby and it caught you out quite comprehensibly. All those of us who drive fast cars tend to corner a bit faster where they expect it to be safe when we know the road is clear and I do not exclude myself. More likely in the middle of the night these days.

I think that since you did not involve anyone else then had you been seen in the pirouette by a copper you would probably have got a bit of a bollocking and you would go on your way having learned a lesson-at least about fuel surge anyway

The likelihood in the near future of course is that you would get a lengthy gaol term if you hit someone, and that is a sobering thought. What would happen if you missed everything as you did is the question! Hard to say whether they would accept the reason as being a fault in the car's fuel system.

Les

LG John

I think this is sort of the problem.

For example Person A and Person B are of the same age, male, no previous convictions and they both climb up to a building overlooking a busy street.

At the same time Person A and B turn their back and chuck a brick over their shoulder off the building. Person A's brick harmless smashes on the ground. Person B's brick kills someone. Both Person A and B are seen on CCTV and arrested. It's my understanding that in our current legal system Person B would get far greater punishment because of the outcome of his actions. However, the motives and intent of Person A and B were equal and the probability of either one of them killing someone was also equal.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you are going to jail one driver because he lost control and was unfortunate enough to hit someone coming the other way (a factor completely at the mercy of probability) then surely you should jail the driver who had the same loss of control but hit nobody. I'm short, maybe I should be behind bars <shrug>

The Zohan

LOL!
Much appreciated - as long as it is not Decaf or 'WE' have a problem