[binand]

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Even though it pains me to hear about incidences of mob lynching, for once the mob should have lynch this low life.

You seem to be arguing in favour of lynching. Can you please mention the specific scenarios in which you feel lynching is OK? Or is it be done in all cases?

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by Acharya

any driver who kills seven people on the roads in his/her car (ignore the Q7 as well) must be tried for murder.

Ouch! That escalated quickly.

Even without dipping ourselves into the legalese ocean, I want to point out that murder and causing death by a road accident are poles apart. Please do not harbor such thoughts, for your and all our sakes as drivers. Accidents happen indiscriminately and can and do occur despite our best intentions and precautions. To err is human and unfortunately, in this battlefield called road transportation, the consequences of errors can be fatal. This is where mobs get it wrong in their anger when accidents happen and they thrash the driver of the bigger vehicle first and ask questions later. They shouldn't be doing either - thrashing or asking questions. That's the job of the law.

Let me tell you this - my uncle fell asleep at the wheel of his Swift in 2013. Our grandma (his mom) was killed, my dad was in a vegetative state and he himself suffered enough injuries. To top it all, my marriage was put in jeopardy by the accident. Did he actually murder his mom? Was it premeditated or unintended murder? Was there an intent to kill? What did he stand to gain by it? I am running out of breath with my limited legal knowledge and I'm sure legal experts know what I'm getting at.

If he had ploughed into a crowd instead of into a roadside ditch, the body count would have been way higher. Sure. But I can tell you with certainty it still wouldn't have been murder.

Even with murder, by the way, there's something called the principle of reformative justice in law...even actual murderers are given a shot at reforming themselves.

Sorry for strongly taking exception to your post in this manner. I guess what worries me is that someday (God forbid) if I were at the wheel when something fatal occurs, I do not want random people passing instant judgments like this. And neither would you, my friend.

[Acharya]

Originally Posted by locusjag

Ouch! That escalated quickly.

Well, by conservative estimate we have 150000 deaths on our roads in India, call it murder or not, it really doesn't matter, people are dying anyway.

Either we take a strong view of it, severely punish people who drive dangerously or keep giving benefit of the doubt to such drivers.

Most develop countries are taking tough stand on it and doling out punishment as high as life sentence (similar to murder).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7454416.html

Until sometime ago we as society had taken a light view on offences against women and it was accepted, the result - most of the offences were not even reported. Situation is starkly different now compared to one/two decades ago, with right attention & fast conviction, more & more people are getting aware of repercussions of such offences.

We need a similar crackdown on rash & negligent driving.

Literally speaking one can never compare a road accidents with murder (so, I agree on this point, unless it's an accident to murder). But one can certainly compare the two in terms of legal outcomes i.e. punishment.

Sorry for being O.T.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by Acharya

Well, by conservative estimate we have 150000 deaths on our roads in India, call it murder or not, it really doesn't matter, people are dying anyway.

It really matters sir. If shopkeepers have encroached on a road illegally and Ramu hits a pedestrian who steps into his path with his car at 40 Kmph. The victim dies tragically. An unfair, trumped up and unbecoming criminal case of murder against Ramu will destroy his life, precluding all employment opportunities from him and denying him of so much more in life.

Either we take a strong view of it, severely punish people who drive dangerously or keep giving benefit of the doubt to such drivers.

Most develop countries are taking tough stand on it and doling out punishment as high as life sentence (similar to murder).

Developed countries are taking tough stances and registering criminal cases leading to jail time only when moral turpitude is involved. Examples include Driving Under the influence (DUI) of drugs/alcohol, distracted driving while texting etc.

We need a similar crackdown on rash & negligent driving.

I frankly have no idea what measures Indian law provides for meting out exemplary punishments for wanton accidents involving moral turpitude. But I agree that we need crackdowns where it is proven. And we should remember, Indian law is not draconian. We definitely don't have to follow the US model where with 5% of the world population, they shamefully have 25% of the world's prison population.

Lastly, I totally understand the angst you are expressing. But we shouldn't descend into the madness of becoming the judge, jury and executioner ourselves.

[SCORPION]

How do you prove that someone was driving dangerously? What would constitute as proof that someone was driving dangerously? Statement of bystanders? Chance CCTV footage? Dashcam recording, either yours or someone else's?

On the other hand, what if you were not driving dangerously. What if you were driving following all the rules and still meet with an accident and kill someone. If you don't have a dashcam and no CCTV footage. Bystanders can swing either way depending on which was the more expensive vehicle. How would you prove your innocence? Would you still be tried for murder?

[turbospooler]

I have very sad news. Never had I thought that I will be posting more than my opinion on such a demoralizing but eye opening thread.
My Uncle (51) was returning from Pune to Baramati (MH) via the Morgaon road with his family (wife, son and daughter). They were in a Hyundai Verna SX(O) variant bought 3 years ago.
It was raining and for no apparent reason, the car lost control on a straight road, skid sideways and rotated few times and rammed onto a nearby tree. Help arrived quickly as there was an ambulance in front of them which saw all the saga and promptly made a U-Turn to arrive at the scene. In all the skidding and rotation, the car apparently hit a 2-wheeler rider (thankfully no pillion).
My uncle and the 2-wheeler rider were both severely injured.
They reached the hospital in Baramati in godspeed but in vain. My uncle had broken ribs which pierced the vitals, his head had been hit severely, presumable by the B-Pillar and had caused hemorrhaging. Doctors declared he was Dead on Arrival. Same was for the 2-wheeler rider.
There was no rash driving, no overtaking, no act to save someone else's life by making sudden steering movement. However, it was fate that had something to do with it.
The airbags (2 of them in the front) did not deploy as it was not a frontal crash.
The car was mangled beyond recognition. As I post this, 2 weeks would've passed to this unfortunate event.
My 2 cents from all this:
i) We should take safety more seriously and try to protect ourselves with as many safety features (better build, side airbags, curtain airbags, crumple zones). Rest is in the hands of God / fate / probability.
ii) Do try to help anyone in such a situation. (A passerby in an Orange Tiago was a Godsend who drove my aunty and sister to the hospital. He was not even from Baramati and was fumbling for the directions but made it. God bless you kind stranger).

PS: I see people becoming aggressive in the posts above. There is no need for becoming Honorable Judges all of a sudden. There are always 2 sides to a story. Even if one feels anger towards such incidents, many times it may be just the Hand of God playing with us.

[airbus]

Originally Posted by turbospooler

It was raining and for no apparent reason, the car lost control on a straight road, skid sideways and rotated few times and rammed onto a nearby tree.

Was it a case of aquaplaning? I am asking this because many in India don't give much importance to aquaplaning.

Sometime back in a car owners WhatsApp group someone posted a photo of the console asking why he is getting alarms for Parking Brake/Low Brake Fluid + ABS. From the photo we could see that he was driving under heavy rain and at speed of about 100 kmph. When we checked the manual, we found that these are alarms for malfunction of the EBD system. Basically brakes will work but without ABS and EBD. Manual suggested to reduce speed below 40 kmph and avoid panic/hard braking situations. We asked the driver to slow down as without his knowledge he was actually aquaplaning.

[for_cars1]

Originally Posted by airbus

...many in India don't give much importance to aquaplaning.

...... he was driving under heavy rain and at speed of about 100 kmph. ..

Level of awareness about the dangers of aquaplaning is very low among our driving population. Very alarming to say the least, so many people on our roads continue to drive at high speeds when its raining. Pure ignorance of the high risk they are putting themselves into.

The drivers are certainly under the false impression that they are in control and nothing will happen. As a thumb rule, upto 60 kmph when its raining may be relatively safer, but any higher speed drastically increases the chances of the wheels sliding over the wet road and going into an uncontrolled spin. It can get so easily triggered at higher speeds on wet roads, just a swerve of the steering, a slight tap on the brake pedal or even driving at a higher speed along a road slowly curving to the right or left. Once the tyre traction is lost, its very hard to regain control.

High time everybody realize this and stay under 60kmph on wet rainy roads. There is no need to learn the hard way by ending up aquaplaning the vehicle

[Axe77]

Very very sorry to hear of your loss. It is indeed a very sad and unfortunate occurrence.


In monsoon drives to Lonavala or even Pune I have routinely everything from large jeeps to hatchbacks to big Germans ripping at 120+ speeds - even in lashing rains. There is clearly no fear of aqua planing or otherwise.

The thing is sometimes it need not be raining and you can suddenly aqua plane on a large pool of water that may have accumulated on a section of the road.

[turbospooler]

Originally Posted by airbus

Was it a case of aquaplaning?

Originally Posted by for_cars1

High time everybody realize this and stay under 60kmph on wet rainy roads. There is no need to learn the hard way by ending up aquaplaning the vehicle

Originally Posted by Axe77

Very very sorry to hear of your loss. It is indeed a very sad and unfortunate occurrence.

Thanks for the analysis and words of consolation. I understand that the speed they were doing was in fact 60-65 kmph. The family was travelling together so such high speeds were controlled by interruptions done by my aunt to slow things down (as all mothers do).

Not sure what the real reason may have been.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by turbospooler

It was raining and for no apparent reason, the car lost control on a straight road, skid sideways and rotated few times and rammed onto a nearby tree.

My deepest condolences on the loss of your uncle and the grief of your aunt and her daughter. This is clearly a case of aquaplaning. It happens even to big aircraft despite their weight and tyre footprint pressure. May God bless him and give his family strength in this hour. Yours prayerfully - V.Narayan

[batish]

Originally Posted by turbospooler

I understand that the speed they were doing was in fact 60-65 kmph.

Not sure what the real reason may have been.

Sorry for your loss.

Had they all fastened their seat belts? Maybe there could be a pothole on road, they're not even visible when it's raining.

[AccordSport]

@turbospooler and @locusjag

Sorry for your pain and loss.

Originally Posted by locusjag

Ouch! That escalated quickly.

Even without dipping ourselves into the legalese ocean, I want to point out that murder and causing death by a road accident are poles apart. Please do not harbor such thoughts, for your and all our sakes as drivers. Accidents happen indiscriminately and can and do occur despite our best intentions and precautions. To err is human and unfortunately, in this battlefield called road transportation, the consequences of errors can be fatal. This is where mobs get it wrong in their anger when accidents happen and they thrash the driver of the bigger vehicle first and ask questions later. They shouldn't be doing either - thrashing or asking questions. That's the job of the law.

Let me tell you this - my uncle fell asleep at the wheel of his Swift in 2013. Our grandma (his mom) was killed, my dad was in a vegetative state and he himself suffered enough injuries. To top it all, my marriage was put in jeopardy by the accident. Did he actually murder his mom? Was it premeditated or unintended murder? Was there an intent to kill? What did he stand to gain by it? I am running out of breath with my limited legal knowledge and I'm sure legal experts know what I'm getting at.

If he had ploughed into a crowd instead of into a roadside ditch, the body count would have been way higher. Sure. But I can tell you with certainty it still wouldn't have been murder.

Even with murder, by the way, there's something called the principle of reformative justice in law...even actual murderers are given a shot at reforming themselves.

Sorry for strongly taking exception to your post in this manner. I guess what worries me is that someday (God forbid) if I were at the wheel when something fatal occurs, I do not want random people passing instant judgments like this. And neither would you, my friend.

I have known this Pollachi - Coimbatore stretch from my childhood days. This is where rich kids try their car top speeds and there were videos of buses racing as well.
Mistakes happen, but if a person deliberately causes accident by over speeding (which most likely looks like the case with this Audi) and if a person's carelessness leads to death he should be brought to jury for murder!

I don't think in developed nations like USA they would let go if it happens.

I wish safety is given priority and technologies like Adaptive Cruise, Automatic breaking, etc becomes cheaper and mandatory! ( Nowadays it is available in family cars like corolla, civic in mid versions itself in US)

[extreme_torque]

Originally Posted by binand

You seem to be arguing in favour of lynching. Can you please mention the specific scenarios in which you feel lynching is OK? Or is it be done in all cases?

Infact I am not. I am saying for once I wish the public lynched this guy if he was driving drunk and ended up killing 6 people.

[binand]

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Infact I am not. I am saying for once I wish the public lynched this guy if he was driving drunk and ended up killing 6 people.

7 victims I think. But if 6 is right please feel free to substitute in the questions below.

If someone who is drunk kills 7 people you want to lynch him?
What if the number of victims were 6? Would you still want to?
5? 4, 3, 2 or 1? Where do you draw the line between leaving the law to take its course and delivering instant justice?

And if someone who is not drunk kills 7 people do you still want this brand of vigilant justice to be the norm?