Father Throws Chair at judge after Driver who Killed his Family got 120 Hours of Community Service
View original on programming.dev
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on programming.devSyndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on programming.dev
209 replies
The reasoning behind it:
"Lack of Proof for Severe Negligence: Under Dutch law (Artikel 6 Wegenverkeerswet), a heavy prison sentence for a fatal traffic accident requires proof of gross negligence or recklessness (schuld)."
"No Evidence of Excessive Speed: Investigators could not legally prove that the driver was speeding excessively or that speed was the definitive cause of the vehicle losing control."
"Lesser Offense Applied: The court convicted him under a lighter traffic article (Artikel 5) for failing to keep his vehicle under continuous control rather than aggravated manslaughter or fatal recklessness, which capped the legal punishment guidelines significantly."
The original 120-hour sentence was itself overturned upon appeal in September 2015. The higher appeals court concluded that excessive speed was legally proven, sentencing the driver to 15 months in prison and a four-year driving ban.
In 2020 the traffic laws were overhauled to increase penalties and expand what constituted reckless driving. A penalty points system was also implemented.
What a high quality comment. Whatever they're paying you, it isn't enough.
don't worry. whatever he's being paid for that service, I'll double it!
Did the chair thrower get off as justified anger?
Sadly no info on the chair thrower.
Found it!
The father was not charged, prosecuted, or punished for throwing the chair. The Dutch Public Prosecution Service and the presiding judge officially chose not to press charges or seek legal penalties against him, explicitly citing extreme emotional duress and immense grief, stating that they completely understood his reaction given the profound trauma of losing his two-year-old daughter and his parents in the crash.
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2014/11/22/vader_die_stoel_naarrechtergooidenietvervolgd-1-2156081/
Good sleuthing
I got off
why do they always use weasel words ? all the evidence you need is a dead person, you killed someone, ipso facto you weren't paying attention ,automatic manslaughter charge. Murder would have a higher bar. eg
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-10-08/woman-charged-with-manslaughter-over-trevor-fleet-death/107241342
There are legitimate accidents, even if most are preventable. Humans are all too fallible.
I’m at work so can’t watch video but excessive enough speed should be all you need. In my state, +30mph constitutes a major accident as far as insurance premiums go.
Not quite that simple.
I'm one of the few drivers who always drives as if expecting the unexpected. I try to never even put myself in a situation where someone could jump out in front of my car and die (by slowing down when passing pedestrians for example).
But that being said, there is only so much I can do. Maybe some day one of you retards will get yourselves killed and use my vehicle to do it. I don't want to be held accountable for your follies.
If you killed someone, this case should be investigated properly rather than shoved under the bed because it's law.
So you think the 2 grandparents hid somewhere and then jumped with their bikes and their toddler grandchild in their arms in front of the speeding car?
He didn't say "in this case, it's clear that..." he said "all the evidence you need is a dead person." Pedestrians can never be at fault? BRB I'm gonna go jump in front of a car and set my family up for life
I'd go as far as almost never.
Like if you can present dashcam footage that the pedestrian hid out of sight and jumped in front of you with no warning while you were not driving too fast for the conditions (which might or might not mean going significantly slower than the posted limit), then that should be taken in to account.
Outside of that? Yeah. Pedestrian being at fault should require incontrovertible proof that the pedestrian deliberately tricked you into being a part of their suicide attempt.
The person not in control of a two ton death machine should not be required to constantly watch out for murderous ecocidal narcissists. All the extra alertness and awareness needed to keep people safe from cars should be 100% on the drivers.
I knew some muppet like you would try to twist my words this way :)
If you want to get away with murder, do it with a car.
Looking at you Anne Sacoolas, a name that should be infamous throughout the Western world.
For those who don't know, this piece of crap was driving on the wrong side of the road after leaving a US base in the UK and through her extremely negligent driving killed a teenager on a moped. Instead of answering for her crime, she fled like the spineless excuse for a human being she is back to the US on a diplomatic passport. Seeing as we're basically America's Belarus, she never got close to seeing the inside of a British prison and the US actively refused to send her back. If you work for US intelligence you are literally allowed to kill British people in cars with impunity, they'll even come out and bat for you when you're caught.
There may be no hell but I hope the rest of her days are as close to it as possible, but her actions reveal a callous moral vacuum of a person who no doubt only feels good about getting away with it. Shame on her name forever, shame on the US government for protecting her, and shame on the British government for folding like tissue paper instead of heeding its duty to seek justice for its citizens.
They also didn't go after Russia after they used weapons of mass destruction on British soil.
Rich people don't care as long as it's not their money being hurt.
Don't even get me started, in another age the negligence with respect to Russia and its influence would be tantamount to treason. In my view Burnham must restore confidence by doing the Russia Report properly.
Also morbid fact, when I took my A-level in physics a question on the paper involved the murder of Litvinenko by the Russian government. If I remember correctly, the question was about the nature of alpha radiation and its property of being relatively benign outside the body but disasterous to inhale or ingest, plus some calculations on the dose the poor bastard was exposed to.
Haha this is a top tier tshirt.
Found on /c/[email protected]
Murder has some pretty specific conditions to apply... Maybe consider reading less /c/fuckcars and more what a capital offense entails...
120 hrs of community service is insane for a "negligent killing" if that's what you want to call it. Those kinds of rulings are reserved for billionaires.
The judge found that the prosecution didn't prove he was recklessly speeding and had to convict him of a lesser offense, which came with a cap on the sentence she could give.
On appeal the court did find speeding was proven and he got 15 months jailtime + a 4 year driving ban.
Not understanding that a pithy internet comment is not going to be words the same way a legal context would employ them as strict terminology is very stupid.
ai simp->ai/car simpVengeance!
Maybe you should spend more time on c/fuckcars and less being an ecocidal narcissist.
Good peopdont drive cars for personal transportation.
That community took a real fucking hard and quick turn from being a group of people with a decent message about the benefits of public transportation, to some fucking brain dead idiots accusing everyone else of being a criminal for driving a car.
It's almost like communities built on hate reinforce your worst thoughts.
The worst thought common among humans right now is "there's nothing wrong with driving". You didn't need a community to reinforce that. The bastards profiting off the destruction of the planet will make sure it gets reinforced in every piece of media you consume in your entire life.
When the wars over clean drinking water start, we need to send the people who wouldn't buy a bus pass to the front lines first.
That's the "worst common thought"? You're a parody of an activist.
And you're an ecocidal narcissist, so I consider your derision a badge of honor.
Translation: that comm took a real fucking hard turn from being. Some polite hippies I could easily ignore into being militants who keep pointing out how my selfish choices affect other people.
Good job proving my point. Get off the internet and touch grass, you could definitely use it.
Good job proving my point, too.
Please stay on the Internet. If you never go outside again you can't trade my habitable biosphere or my safety for your minor convenience.
You’re right, I should just shoot my fucking daughter too since why bother trying to provide for her when some brainwashed goof on the Internet wants all the benefits of society without any of the underpinnings that drive it forward? Why not?
It’s actually, and this will surprise you incredibly, an absolute lack of empathy for people other than yourself that you lack. It’s that you think everyone is in the same situation and the solution for everyone is a train or a bus or just “better transit” But that’s not the case and it cannot be for everyone. People are being forced to live kilometers away from work, but sure they should sacrifice their lives, the families, their time, every part of the their life to “take transit” so some clown on the internet can “live in a walkable city”.
The other problem is you are literally online too much and brainwashed into this abusive circle of “car = bad” and spouting these big words without an ounce of actual understanding. So yes, please, touch grass and go talk to real people. There is value in what that community is trying to achieve, but what it has become isn’t going to achieve anything other than generate more hate.
Good people don't insult random strangers on the internet.
The people helping destabilize the environment for their own selfish convenience aren't random. They are pretty fucking strange though.
I assume she won't give him any punishment... If vehicular homicide is 120h community service, and the chair this guy threw didn't even hit anything, I mean.
She will give him 10 years for attempted murder on public official.
You're probably right. I don't think it's a matter of a judge punishing him just like that. He will probably have a trial and some other judge with sentence him.
No, he'd only avoid getting punished if he hit her with a car.
She didn't punish him.
(Someone else in the comments section found this article not me)
Vehicular homicide turned out to be over one year in jail. Please read both links in the post, not only the first one.
If in that position I don't think I would throw a chair at her , first I would go deal with the guy that killed my family and is out on the street...
If the judicial system can't provide an adequate solution, eventually people will just solve things themselves. Which to some extent already happens, depending where you live
That's exactly right... the quickest way to get a normal, law abiding citizen, to become a "terrorist" is to take his family and deny him justice
I've been in that sort of position. I'm continually struggling. Maybe it's the adhd talking, but the absence of justice is truly aggravating.
It's both. Both the ADHD and a normal, valid response.
Autism too. It physically pains me.
Or just run over the judge with your car. You'll only get 120hrs of community service.
The plot of Law Abiding Citizen
The killer is not out on the street, though. The next level of the court system corrected the sentence to more than one year of jailtime.
That might be enough time for the father to cool down, but I wouldn't count on it.
When the perp gets released, he better have his head on a swivel when crossing the road for a long time.
Cause they knew what happened to the last judge. They can learn.
Totally out of bounds. They should have hit the judge with a car, obviously
Probably would've gotten a lighter sentence
Necessary contempt of court is awesome and rarely heard of. Chair throw was justified.
The easiest ways to get away with murder is to hit someone with your car or be a cop.
And I wonder why I have so much anxiety while driving while other fuckers seem to be totally cool being insane.
I'm terrified to drive a car.
Honestly, I want a car driven by (a smart) AI, with the vehicle itself designed to be heavily armored and without windows. Just cameras, each put in a spot to allow the car to see around corners, to have a high view of the roads in every direction, maybe some echolocation and infravision.
I don't want to ever drive, because it makes me feel ill. Trying to figure out how to not cause some sort of disaster, is just not fun.
If it were possible, I would use a teleporter to skip driving outright.
I don't understand why they keep making self driving cars with these cameras and shit
It should be like ants and on a grid. All cars should be aware of other cars. Basically the same as trains operate, how hard is that?
Then implement a massive amount of trolleys and trains to reduce cars on the road.
How fucking hard could that be? I feel like society is so fucking dumb sometimes.
Don't even have to be a cop. Just shoot an unarmed kid wearing a hoodie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Zimmerman
Right, the easiest way to get away with murder is to be white and have your victim be black. All the others are heavily contingent on skin colors too, but the next easiest one would be to be wealthy, followed by being a cop.
Or sick a dog on them
A friend of mine, Jessica Bullen was killed by a driver looking at the roof of their mouth in the rearview mirror when he plowed into her. The facts were not dispute. No jail time for the driver.
I would run her down in my car for the low low cost of 120 hours of community service
Crikey, if I were that judge I'd be very cautious for the rest of my life for handing out such a sentence.
Can the parents/family appeal? Because if not then life isn't worth much.
The driver got 15 months in jail and a 4 year driving ban in the end. Which is still pretty low, especially since the article said he didn't show any sign of remorse.
Shit like this is why a TV series like Dexter could exist. Some people are walking around just fine with themselves after committing a heinous act. If it was an accident, fine, don't hate yourself forever, forgive yourself eventually, but showing no signs of remorse is something only a trashfire of a person could do
I'm coming to the awareness perhaps it never was. And I'm not sure where that leadsbeyond, "What makes human life more valuable than plant and animal life (other than the fact we're humans and kind of biased)?"
And i can understand that father 100%.
So odd that this thing that happened 12 years ago is getting the rounds so effectively right now. All over reddit and of course all over Lemmy too. Really shows how easy it is for repost bots to control narratives.
We come here to escape this ragebaiting bullshit
A couple of weeks ago a 19 year old got 8 months prison for killing a pregnant woman with his car. He was going 120 in a 50 km/h zone. The Dutch judicial system is way too lenient when it comes to sentencing man slaughter by car.
https://www-moordplekken-nl.translate.goog/nieuws/ali-a-19-veroordeeld-8-maanden-cel-doodrijden-zwangere-vrouw-toepad-rotterdam?_x_tr_sl=nl&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=nl&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Why does it matter if there was speeding involved or not? You killed cyclists, it shouldn't matter how that happened. Only exception would be intended or not.
Because it does matter how it happened. Most legal systems, as well as most people's moral judgements on the issue, are going look at the totality of the circumstances.
Someone going 3x the speed limit is creating a more dangerous situation and should face a higher penalty than someone who was, say, following all the rules but sneezed and accidentally hit a cyclist.
It doesn't feel reasonable to say someone who gets wasted and swerves into a cyclist has the same degree of responsibility as someone who fails to see the victim. Both bad, but drunky made worse choices and introduced more danger. Similarly, speeders have less time to react, lower levels of control, and have exponentially increased the impact forces in a crash.
Obviously, intentionally hitting someone and killing them is the worst but personal choices that increase risk raise culpability.
Indeed, he killed while going %150 over the speed limit. That should be considered reckless/gross negligence manslaughter and shouldn't be punished with just community service. It should be punished with jail time and they should make public service announcements out of events like this so people don't act like idiots.
I suppose if the offender was an immigrant, they would make him bleed out of his ass.
Apparently, it was revisited and his speed was considered/acknowledged and his sentence was substantially increased.
what, 125 hours instead of 120?
clearly the defense had a good lawyer. I would be suing for every penny to their name and use it to vindictively smear the defense for the rest of their lives with the money.
new job? new billboard outside your job with your face plastered on it calling you a murderer.
move to a new city? ad campaign on social media within your face and name with similar message.
the only thing that would make me feel whole is if that person feels not just remorse, but absolute unyielding despair. I don't want them to die, I want them to want to die every moment they exist.
I think it was 15 months in prison and a multi-year ban on driving.
He was clocked going 75 in a 50. That's nothing for rural roads. In modern cars, you won't even feel the difference at travel speed.
For reference, I've been driving for 30 years and haven't had a ticket in 20 years, and even i will look down in amazement that I am going as fast as I am. There's nothing reckless about it, and that's why the judge ruled this way.
75mph on rural roads? I've also been driving for 30 years, and have done a lot of that on rural roads. You are out of your mind if you don't feel the difference between 50 and 75. On the interstate, with zero traffic? Maybe. On a winding rural road? Bullshit.
I don't think it is mph. It probably Km/h. But it still is much to fast!
it is mph, as stated in the articles
Why would there be a speed limit of 50 mph in the netherlands???
I like how you just assume I am wrong instead of thinking that maybe your dumbass doesn't understand that rural roads aren't all curvy.
See a therapist about the narcissism. All of you, really.
There is no assumption. They think you're opinion is wrong and so do I. Deal with it and don't resort to childish name calling because an internet stranger told you what they think of your opinion. Maybe talk to someone about your anger issues too.
It is not just about curviness though, chance of death for a hit pedestrian sharply increases after 40mph and is practically 100% at above 60mph. To be fair it is also quite high at 50mph so this is not just an issue of "if he went with 50 they certainly wouldn't die" (though they would have had better chance for sure). But this is to say, when they put these limits, they don't just pull them out of their asses to torture drivers.
I’m sure it’s “if he were going the speed limit he should have had time to see and react, given the road characteristics “
Dang I didn't realize they still made people this dumb
Cool so you're just an asshole? Thanks for posting! Super useful bits of information you've shared.
no we assume you're an asshole from the things you write and post here bill. and your confidence is DISTURBING! -
" I’ve been driving for 30 years and haven’t had a ticket in 20 years, and even i will look down in amazement that I am going as fast as I am. "
what the fuck
Lol
If you can't tell whether or not you're going 50% over the speed limit at what you call "travel speed", then you should not be operating a motor vehicle. Seriously, that is not a small difference.
Yea. I thought the whole "cant tell the difference in speed" was shit as well.
It's also shit because you can LOOK AT YOUR FUCKING SPEEDOMETER even if you can't feel the difference in speed.
I think this case alone already nullifies your argument. Rules like this exist for exactly this reason, not for people to say "that is fine I am a good driver so I can go faster than the rules". I have been driving for quite a while too (10 years or so) and the fact that you can't see a difference between 80km/h and 120km/h just means you have gotten too comfortable. 90? Quite possibly, 100 ok fine but at 120 you should already be feeling off unless you are on a highway. On top of this, attention and reflexes only wane with age, so unless situations like this are harshly punished people will keep causing accidents just like this.
I didn't say it was fine to drive like that. I said it was understandable how someone would do that and not have acted maliciously or even negligently. Cars are waaaay too smooth and it's way to comfortable to drive them faster than they should be driven by civilians in 99.9% of contexts.
I know I've been in a car with my brother and thought, "wow, we must be going 80" and he was doing well over 100. Empty highway, sunday morning, so the only risk would have been a dumbass ticket and he's one of those entitled, connected people so it wouldn't have even mattered. But still. I wouldn't have agreed to ride at those speeds (and I haven't been in his car since.)
If you’re driving a car at a speed much faster than you intended to, by definition you’re being negligent. Speedometers are very easy to check and by failing to regularly check your speed you’re acting negligently.
In what world does that not count as negligent?
If you don't notice a difference between 80 km/h (50 mph) and 120 km/h (75 mph), you shouldn't be driving.
Bullshit. If that was the case, the speed limit would just be 75 there.
Oh, well since you're reckless and lucky I guess it's okay.
if you can't tell the difference between 75 in a 50 it's time to turn in your license.
seriously, do it before you murder or maim someone.
Especially on a rural road. Nothing but ruts, patches and pot holes.
and animals crossing, and farm vehicles, and downed limbs from trees.... yep, rural roads are prime speed and fuckin die real estate.
I had a family member that felt this way about driving. He died wrapped around a pole and took his passenger with him.
I feel bad for his passenger.
Just to clarify, we're talking kph, not mph, right?
Because there's a difference between drunk driving and swerving to avoid a deer
...so it does matter how it happened?
Watch him get a worse punishment, too. (Not saying what he did is okay.)
at his sentencing he could say "I'm sorry, I've learned my lesson. next time, instead of throwing a chair, I'll run over the judge's family instead, since that'll only get me 120h of community service."
Maybe judges should get some accountability for letting murderers get away with murder
If I were a judge, I would fear for my life to hand down a sentence like that for someone that killed that guys family. Do you want ants?
(what he did was 100% ok)
c/fuckcars
2013?!
It took 13 years from incident to sentencing! Jesus!
The story is from 2014
Whodathunkit
From the linked articles, the killing took place in 2013, the sentencing and chair throw happened in 2014, and in 2015 an appeals court changed the sentence to 15 months in prison.
Edit: From another linked article, he fled to the UK but was extradited to Netherlands to serve the sentence in 2016, and in 2017 he was given early release to travel to Poland for the birth of his own child.
That one woman laughing her ass off. Probably the stenographer, thinks the judge is a cuntface.
Sounds like crying
Def sounded like crying to me
I assumed that had to be crying given the context, but it sure sounds like laughter. I’m confused.
On one hand I am glad that something closer to justice was eventually served, on the other hand I don't like the idea of prosecutors being able to appeal verdicts. I think appeals in criminal cases should be reserved for the defense. I don't like the state being able to try over and over again.
There are only so many really skilled judges. Also here in Finland it's visible that in many cases the lowest level of the court system makes outright ridiculous rulings in any case that isn't completely clear-cut. It's not nice at all that big-time idiots are allowed to work as judges at all, but since that seems to be an international phenomenon, it's probably something more or less unavoidable.
For the basic stuff even the worse judges will do. But for anything more serious, it's good that the case can be escalated to someone actually competent! Finding really good judges is by far not easy.
With criminal culpability attached by a guilty verdict, I have no qualms with the prosecutor appealing the case further. Prosecutors should not get a second bite at the apple after an acquittal, but after a conviction, they should be able to address errors made at trial.
Some more on it: https://nltimes.nl/2017/05/15/polish-driver-killed-toddler-grandparents-crash-released-early-mps-angered
that's fucking bullshit.
Didn't even hit her
Should have thrown it faster.
Old, Repost, Rage bait
Meanwhile the imax camera keeps on rolling. What a clown show.
What would you have the camera operator do?
It should. People need to see this.
I hope that judge looses her family. What a fucking sick joke.
Look, obviously the convenience of a person in a car is worth many times the life of a person not in a car. That's just science!
If you make people in cars responsible for the mayhem and death they cause, people will drive slower and more responsibly, and then traffic will be too slow and I can't zoom-zoom in my pollution powered people crusher!
/S, obvs.
People who use cars for personal transportation are sick, and need to be institutionalized for everyone's safety.
Behavior like this is going to drive people away from your cause.
And behavior like a carholes is going to destroy human civilization. Fuck cars and the assholes who drive them.
Do you really think you're changing people's minds by being a cunt?
It's worked so well for PETA.
I don't really fucking care, tbh.
If you're an ecocidal narcissist, then the sweetest plea I could make will fall on deaf ears. You've already decided your convenience is more important than the environment or anyone else's safety. I just want to make sure you know how much contempt decent people have for you.
You do realize that many people do not have access to public transportation, right? Having a personal vehicle isn't always a choice.
But being a cunt is a choice.
And yet the politicians preventing that sleep soundly in their beds every night. Sounds like a skill issue to me.
There is no version of the automobile as personal transportation you can convince me is ethical. Anyone who thinks they're being forced to drive and isn't fighting tooth and nail against the system "forcing" them to drive is just another ecocidal narcissist who values their convenience above anyone else's life.
You need to get out of your echo chamber. Life isn't black and white like that.
You don't care about your own cause?
Okay then, fuck off then troll.
Ah, someone who hates rural people.
Lol, depends. Do you mean farmers, miners, loggers, and other people doing important jobs that can't be done in the city? Not at all.
Do you mean wannabe hermit fuckwastrels who live in the middle of nowhere but insist on easy access to all the convenience and safety of modern society and want to force the people living in cities to buy it for them? Then absofuckinglutely.
Yeah that's a real privileged stance you have and you're not a good person for having it.
As an environmental advocate, I beg you, please keep your opinions to yourself, you're making it harder for change.
You can advocate for the environment or the status quo. Pick one.
But the fact that you even felt the need to say this means you already have, and you picked wrong.
You blame people for being in a system they did not choose and would have them slain rather than build a new system. How old testament.
Never said that, but it's a cute straw man.
I guess it's easier to imagine everyone who disagrees with mainstream thinking as Hitler when you assume they just want to kill everyone who disagrees with them the way you do.
Oh sorry, you just want to have them institutionalized for the rest of their life for driving a car. Yeah. That's way better. My b.
Still need cars to get to and from work, and in the case of farmers, their rural homes, dipshit.
I can't tell if you're so illiterate and incurious that you genuinely don't know that for most of human history those jobs have been done by people living where the work is,not if you're just a disingenuous fuckhead who was hoping I didn't know that. Either way I'm pretty sure that any further conversation had with you would be boring and pointless.
And I don’t know if you’re just a moron who thinks they’re being funny, or if you really are that horrendously uneducated. Even farmers need to go to town from time to time for supplies, and perhaps to sell their produce. And towns generally aren’t where farms are, since farms, require, y’know, acreage.
As for loggers, they generally worked where they lived because of company towns, which if you’re ignorant of that charming part of human history, were very, very bad.
And thanks for proving there's no point in even discussing what's possible with you since you can't imagine anything different from what is.
‘Different from what is’? I thought we were talking about
If that’s the difference you want, to lock up farmers, loggers, rural mail carriers, and the like, then I’d rather not imagine that, thanks.
Curious on your take on what to do with commercial truck drivers. Or do you think things like cut trees and the bulk of most farmers’ produce just magically teleports itself to where it needs to go?
Hi. Have you considered that many people literally got priced out of cities? No, of course you haven't.
Most normal lemmy.ml user.
I feel for the dad.
But you don't prevent crime with a harsh punishment, you prevent it by guaranteeing the person gets caught.
You know how you stop reckless driving? Automatic traffic cameras on every road that send you a nice fat fine whenever you violate the rules of the road.
You'd save thousands of lives every year if every major road was monitored in this way.
"Guys, we just have to implement a surveillance state to cut down on traffic violations!"
You see how dumb that sounds when you rephrase it?
I'm still for it. Nobody who's behind the wheel of a car should have any privacy, since the tiniest mistake or moment of inattention on their part can kill or maim multiple other people in a fraction of a second.
Oh yes, because cameras are so very selective and only watch when a car is driving by and only watch the person operating the vehicle.
Everyone ELSE should not be expected to sacrifice their privacy is the point you're entirely missing.
And your imaginary privacy isn't worth my life of the lives of the people I care about is the point you're deliberately ignoring.
Your car and your phone are already surveilling you. You're just arguing against automatic traffic fines at this point
Flock you, looking for a surveillance state
Imagine instead of roads were designed to discourage speeding, we weren’t as car dependent, and we started taking both drivers Ed and consequences seriously?
Yeah I'd love a non-car oriented transit system but unfortunately 80% of the world would fight you tooth and nail to keep their metal livingrooms.
The automatic and guarantee fines would do a lot of work getting people on board to ditch the cars.
There’s a big fucking difference between 120 hours community service and harsh punishment for killing someone’s family
I did 40 hours for marijuana possession.
Edit. i guess each human life is worth about an oz of pot
You don't curb crime with harsh punishments? So hefty automated fines for minor traffic infractions isn't harsh punishment?
You are clueless.
A harsh punishment is something like life in prison, glad I could clear that up for you 👍
You're clueless!
In what way am I the 1995 teen comedy staring Alicia Silverstone?
If we are going to choose a technological solution then making autonomous emergency braking and electronically speed-limited cars mandatory would actually help more.
Yeah that, coupled with building safer infrastructure, and investing in pedestrian, bicycle, and public transportation infrastructure in order to get people out of cars in the first place.
Disagree hard. The punishment needs to be so severe that these dirtbags never get another chance to ruin people's lives ever again, period!!!