![]() |
Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
I'm sure with the way you think G, you've plenty of years left in you yet ;) |
Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
|
Re: She asked for it ...
One innovative ad to warn drivers ...
http://i.cbc.ca/1.1488201.1379101395...tches-kill.jpg And how often do you see this when you are out on the road? |
Re: She asked for it ...
as long as you dont find teh term pigs offensive this video perhaps explains why the using a phone while driving law isnt implimented much
they dont seem to know its illigal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoxDYzBiInU |
Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tlxjng8h3Tc |
Re: She asked for it ...
It's taken a long time, but folks seem to be getting the message that driving while impaired is not really a good idea ... This is a positive change. One used to hear drivers saying that they don't drive after drinking (or toking) because they don't want to face the legal consequences of their stupidity: suspension, fine, higher insurance rates, impound fees, jail time, etc. Now, many have reached what I believe is the correct conclusion: Driving while drunk is just plain [deleted]ing dumb. This is definitely a change for the better.
In Ontario, distracted driving is a violation of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act ... (things are different here; Provinces have different laws.) Impaired driving is a Criminal Code offence which carries higher penalties. Maybe folks would sit up and take more notice if the offence was moved into the Criminal Code. There have been some positive moves by, believe it or not, the major insurance companies, which are starting to sit up and take notice, and increase insurance rates, dramatically in some cases, for drivers convicted of distracted driving. There is, of course, the temptation to drive without insurance; but the minimum fine in Ontario for this offense is $5,000.00, impounding the vehicle, and licence suspension ... second offence gets you jail time. And there's an irony goin' on with distracted driving: people just don't seem to see it as a crime. They do, however see impaired driving as a crime. And the irony, of course, is that distracted driving has become responsible for more deaths and serious injuries than impaired driving. The message is getting through to the drinkers, but not the texters. In a recent interview on local tv, an officer from the O.P.P. offered the opinion that texting is responsible for more accidents and near collisions than the figures show. If there is not solid evidence, the cause of the accident is put down as something like "unsafe lane change" or "driving without due care and attention." He wouldn't come out and say it, but his body language told it all: "We know damn well that the asshole was using his phone; but there is no definite proof ... and we can't ask him 'cause he's smeared all over the 401." |
Re: She asked for it ...
The ultimate penalty and the one paid by this girl....is losing your life.
In the process of losing your own life though you can cause others to be killed or maimed. |
Re: She asked for it ...
A few years ago the police thought my wife was in danger. I knew she was ok because she'd just rung me to say she was on her on her way home but they wouldn't take my word for it. Instead they told me to ring her mobile and keep ringing till she answered it even though I told them she was driving. Then to tell her to pull over and phone the police to tell them she was ok. What would have happened if a copper had seen her answer the phone to me or she'd caused an accident? The police told me to do it would have seemed a very lame excuse.
|
Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
....I'd of asked why the police automatically assume my Mrs is a irresponsible/selfish driver. |
Re: She asked for it ...
A few years ago, on a Bobsleigh run in Prague, halfway down the run, the Rastafarian team was hitting about 95mph when the ting went way out of control, rolled and spun and broke up mid flight into a thousand pieces, landed in a big heap at the bottom. Fortunately no one was seriously hurt.
When asked what happened, the driver is reported to have said, "I jus dun't no man, I let go da wheel to change da tape and it all started to appen" |
Re: She asked for it ...
yesterday coming back from burnley at the roundabout leading to the motorway the lights on the roundabout had turned red.Theres 2 lanes and the guy in the nearest lane to me as my lights went to green stopped but the idiot on the inside lane shot through red yapping on his mobile phone.I was very lucky to see him and react as fast as i did becuase the view of the inside lane was blocked by vans on the outside lane.
if they had red light jumping cameras they would not have only got him for jumping red but possibly been on his phone with reckless driving thrown in and got this moron off the roads for a while. im not sure how many deaths LCC want before they do something about this problem but it was such a close call i had to pull over for a few seconds as i was pretty shaken and i dont scare easy |
Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
;) |
Re: She asked for it ...
I think driving can be dangerous enough without adding to it by texting etc (Don't end up a statistic, and don't make some other poor soul one either).
As for as punishment goes,if caught offenders cars (and phones) should be crushed and they should be banned for 'life'....bit harsh?....don't text and drive then,it's not a hard concept to grasp. |
Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
|
Re: Re: She asked for it ...
Quote:
Texting? Driving? Making it up as they go along? Posting clearly and after thinking shouldn't be a hard concept either, but it does seem to be beyond the grasp of some of our members. :( |
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:59. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com