With the current prison population, and the number of real crimes going on, what the hell is the point of jailing a motorcyclist. No accident, no injuries, just speeding.

Why not give him a ton of community service to inconvenience him ?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_...and/8329590.stm

 

it's very harsh, but an incredibly irresponsible thing to do

you do go to prison if you carry a gun down the street, regardless of whether you hurt anyone with it

the reality is that he will serve what, three months?

hard to know what to do really, but if it had been one month in prison (served) plus the fines and ban, I'd probably say it was fair

I'd agree about community service, except is isn't, iykwim

 

I think its exactly the right thing to do.

Shouldnt have to be an accident or injuries to justify it.

 

I agree with both above.

Just because he didn't kill or injure somebody doesn't mean that what he did wasn't dangerous.

The way I would view it is:

How would you feel if someone drove down your street or past a local school at speeds in excess of 80mph would you consider that to be dangerous?

 

completely unjustified when you consider a policeman in a car was OK doing c160 not so long. scot free i think he was called.

at the very least you'd need more context to justify it - ie was there a lot of traffic around etc? even then a bike is much less likely to kill anyone but himself than that 1500kg vectra

one rule for them.. absolutely criminal

 

I disagree totally, there is no context I can think of where you can be doing 160mph on the road and it is justified whether you are in a bike or car.

Just because one policeman got off doesnt mean this is then how all others should be judged.

 

A gun is designed to kill people though

And based on that, when a pi55ed person punches someone in the face, it is a deliberate act to injure/kill someone.

Yet where is their prison sentence?

Better yet, why don't they get banned from drinking alcohol for 12 months?

He did 166mph on a public road which isn't the smartest idea.

I do understand how addictive it is and how achieveable it is for a modern bike.

However, that was his intention - for his own thrill.

Based on that, the crime cannot be worse that someone punching someone else in the head.

So yes, ban him from driving, give communiy service, but jail time is simply uncalled for.

 

only in the eyes of some

afaik the law does not generally 'rank' crimes across different types

 

So based on what you have said, it is "more OK" if you do something for your own gratification? Some people like to drink 10 pints in the pub and drive home for their own gratification. If they are stopped and breathalised then they will be sentenced accordingly whether they did it for their own gratification or not...

To answer the specific you raise I would imagine that if somebody who was drunk murdered somebody by punching them in the head they would go on trial for murder (or manslaughter depending on the circumstances) and be sentenced accordingly - which would be custodial.

Just because nobody was hurt doesn't mean that he should be given a lesser sentence.

 

So what you are saying is that the 'Law' isn't based on morality