Nine years and four months for 3 lives

J J

jimharri

Moderator
Joined
30 Dec 2007
Messages
157,749
Location
The back of beyond
Seems that's the going rate for killing three people while driving under the influence of nitrous oxide, at speeds of nearly 100mph...

www.bbc.com

Laughing gas 100mph crash driver jailed for killing friends

Friends Daniel Hancock, 18, Elliot Pullen, 17, and Ethan Goddard, 18, were killed in the crash.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Did he intend to kill them? No, almost definitely not. But he made a conscious decision to get behind the wheel while under the influence of "laughing gas". To me, that's a ludicrous sentence.
 
jimharri said:
Seems that's the going rate for killing three people while driving under the influence of nitrous oxide, at speeds of nearly 100mph...

www.bbc.com

Laughing gas 100mph crash driver jailed for killing friends

Friends Daniel Hancock, 18, Elliot Pullen, 17, and Ethan Goddard, 18, were killed in the crash.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Did he intend to kill them? No, almost definitely not. But he made a conscious decision to get behind the wheel while under the influence of "laughing gas". To me, that's a ludicrous sentence.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
The little twat is on film having laughing gas while driving.
What ever laughing gas is.
 
Betterdeedthan red said:
Would the car have made a difference?
Click to expand...
Impaired cognitive function when operating any machinery is ludicrously stupid, and more so when it's intentional.

You could argue that the risk was compounded due to the higher performance of the vehicle, but in reality, the kinetic energy is proportional to the speed and the weight of the vehicle and a crash at high speed in any vehicle isn't a good place to be.

9 years is way too short for this little prick. It should have been manslaughter.
 
An awful tragedy for everyone concerned. The poor bugger will have to live with it for the rest of his life.
 
The blue phantom said:
If he hadn't of hit anyone and crashed he'd of got no time. Just like being absolutely fuckin bladdered behind the wheel. This is where the stiff sentences should be given out too.
Click to expand...

Dont think that's actually true. The offence would have been dangerous driving. If he'd hit a wall or turned the car of and legged it he would have been charged with criminal damage and/or fleeing the scene of an accident and failing to report.

He pled guilty so he gets a third off, and that's about what the maximum sentence used to be. Don't see the point of locking him up for life, incredibly stupid and reckless but longer inside only produces someone more likely to reoffend. Another ten years would be another 500k before inflation.
 
They should bring in graduated license and restrict the horsepower of cars you can drive at certain ages, black box etc, insurance is expensive but the find ways of getting the money for it or not paying at all.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Impaired cognitive function when operating any machinery is ludicrously stupid, and more so when it's intentional.

You could argue that the risk was compounded due to the higher performance of the vehicle, but in reality, the kinetic energy is proportional to the speed and the weight of the vehicle and a crash at high speed in any vehicle isn't a good place to be.

9 years is way too short for this little prick. It should have been manslaughter.
Click to expand...

Death by dangerous driving is equivalent to manslaughter. Doesn't actually make much difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top