Sentence Doubled.

Wally · 02-06-2009, 02:32 PM

As tragic as the accident was, I don't see the connection between "dad's high-powered Ford Falcon" and the ability to do 82 kph in a 70 kph zone? I'm also rather quizical on the prerequisites on gaining a licence in Victoria, if driver training doesn't require wet weather driving?

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...005961,00.html

futura97 · 02-06-2009, 02:43 PM

18 Years old... speeding on a wet road... over taking cars while on a wet road and he kills one and wounds 3 others and he's only going to get 2 years? Wouldn't be suprised if he gets parole after 12 months...

This is a joke. He should have been charged with manslaughter, and causing bodily harm. People like this should never have been able to get there licenses in the first place. He knew what he was doing, I'm just glad he now has to live with his consequences instead of having died in the accident.

Quote:

"It takes little experience to know that poor visibility and wet roads significantly heighten the risk to all road users. Mr Neethling chose to speed even though he had had no experience of driving in such conditions," Justices Chris Maxwell, Frank Vincent and Kim Hargrave said.

That sums it up nicely...

cant · 02-06-2009, 03:17 PM

NOT LONG ENOUGH !

Ok, you dont want to ruin his life, but what about the life of the passenger he killed, BIG lesson there.

Ive got a BMX thats high powered, The media sure can hype stuff up.

What sort of dad doesnt teach there kids to drive in the rain?

A licence to operate a motor vehicle is a privilege not a right, we all should remember that.

.

prydey · 02-06-2009, 04:27 PM

you guys may be missing wally's point. why make mention of 'dads high powered ford falcon' with a speed only 12km/h over the limit.

futura97 · 02-06-2009, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

you guys may be missing wally's point. why make mention of 'dads high powered ford falcon' with a speed only 12km/h over the limit.

It doesn't go into any real details of the car. For all we know it could be a bog standard falcon, or could have been an f6, or xr6 turbo or maybe "just" a v8. Just because you have a high performance car doesn't mean that irresponsible drivers are doing 40-50+ over the speed limit.

Either way it doesn't really matter what car he was driving. Fact is, he had no experience, and showed extremely poor judgment to cope with the situation.

Daymoe · 02-06-2009, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by futura97

It doesn't go into any real details of the car. For all we know it could be a bog standard falcon, or could have been an f6, or xr6 turbo or maybe "just" a v8. Just because you have a high performance car doesn't mean that irresponsible drivers are doing 40-50+ over the speed limit.

Either way it doesn't really matter what car he was driving. Fact is, he had no experience, and showed extremely poor judgment to cope with the situation.

Its just another beat up to get the already penalised P platers up poo creek even more.

prydey · 02-06-2009, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by futura97

It doesn't go into any real details of the car. For all we know it could be a bog standard falcon, or could have been an f6, or xr6 turbo or maybe "just" a v8. Just because you have a high performance car doesn't mean that irresponsible drivers are doing 40-50+ over the speed limit.

Either way it doesn't really matter what car he was driving. Fact is, he had no experience, and showed extremely poor judgment to cope with the situation.

its sensationalism, thats what it is. it grabs your attention and pollutes your thinking. he was going 12km/h over the limit. why even mention the type of vehicle. every car on the planet is capable of doing what he did. i doubt very much those left behind will care what type of car he was driving.

also as already mentioned. its not about being young and inexperienced. being fresh from learning, the rules should be still clearly in his mind. their is no excuse for driving how he did. impatience is one of the biggest killers on the road.

MAD · 02-06-2009, 04:56 PM

I don't know why they mention wet weather at all, it seems to me that the cause of the accident was crossing double white lines, it's usually an unsafe manoeuvre to overtake across double white lines.
He didn't kill someone from inexperience, he killed someone cause he did something stupid.

onfire · 02-06-2009, 05:36 PM

Why mention the " high powered falcon " because its another apparent example, they'll use to limit P-Platers more so.

XR6-VCT-2000 · 02-06-2009, 05:49 PM

We've all made stupid mistakes !, it's just a shame it cost someone their life. If he is a decent bloke, then living with what he has done it will probably be a lifetime sentence of guilt for taking another persons life, that alone would be pretty bad imo.

Daymoe · 02-06-2009, 05:54 PM

Its also not like that he'll just go in and serve his 2 years and come out like normal and continue on with his life. Chucking an "attractive" 18 year old into a place with a bunch of hardened criminals would be hardly easy living, he'll most likely get beaten up and raped.

Not saying he doesn't deserve to be punished but don't complain that 2 years isn't enough either, I'd like to see me or anyone else here last 2 years inside the slammer. Though, overtaking in the wet over double lines, that's not an "accident" due to "Dad's high powered Falcon". Its called Stupidity.

3000 hours community service, doing the knock with the ambulance/police and attending road accidents plus paying fully for the funeral and wake for the person he killed, paying for the wounded medical bills and the guilt from accidentally killing his mate.

gtxb67 · 02-06-2009, 05:55 PM

assuming it was actually a high powered falcon, they used those words because it was a "high powered falcon". it is up to car lovers everywhere to drive sensibly and not give the law makers any more reasons to tighten the laws further

maybe we should be asking, why was a kid with 12 days experience driving a high powered falcon with the possibility of rain - considering he had not driven in the rain before, i would think that was a stupid risk

unfortunately with the drought, it was difficult for some kids to learn in the rain, simply because there wasn't any. the first time my wife drove in the rain was during here driving test

LTDHO · 03-06-2009, 08:09 AM

Would the result have changed if the car was a Toyota Camry?

No it wouldn't. Same death!

But the other interesting fact, if you with to kill one or many people, use a car, you will be out of jail in under 5 years. If you use a knife or gun, then you will get multible life sentences.

mcflux · 03-06-2009, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LTDHO

Would the result have changed if the car was a Toyota Camry?

No it wouldn't. Same death!

I disagree. The Camry is way safer.

It has heaps of these:

And Toyota's latest innovative safety measure:

Rob · 03-06-2009, 08:29 AM

What a load of crap. Fair enough he was overtaking on double lines and in the wet, that's an idiotic thing to do. But 12kph over? That's hardly dangerous. It was probably a standard I6 Falcon, but because he was young, and he did 12kph over, it's now a hoon sob story - young bloke, 'high powered' car etc etc.

Tuddy200 · 03-06-2009, 11:22 AM

Would a professional driving course have prevented this accident? Possibly.

I am talking a professional driving course that tackles all aspects of driving. Attitude, Road Rules, Road Conditions, Car Dynamics and Car Handling.

5 part course, that can be covered over 5 months BEFORE being given your learners permit. The course teaches you how to drive, not the parents.

6 months of professional driver training, then 1.5 years of real world driving experience with a supervising driver picking up on mistakes, then by the time you are a probationrary driver I would hope that You'd have all the skills and knowledge to drive safely.

To many factors are involved here:

- Did he know crossing double lines was illegal? Was never on any of my driving tests of 25 questions. (I am sure we have more then 25 road rules!).

- Did he have the skills to handle the car in the wet if he had to avoid something? Like a car on the highway @ 100KM/H let alone the above situation.

- Was he just allowed to drive with his attitude with no education on the outcomes of his actions. Obvisously was.

Young people are impressionable, thus they see and hear all this talk about how safe cars are these days and they also think they are invincable thus think "My car is built to handle this, and I have my licence" with no education to correct thier views that your not invincable, just a creap licencing system. Cars are safe, but not bullet proof. There are volunteers out there that have been effected by road tradgey ready to give real life accounts of one wrong decision that could also be used in the education phase of these young "impressionable" people.

Until something to PREVENT this is done then all that will ever happen is sentencing more and more.