Advertisement

New penalties for dangerous driving

By 15 May 2014 17

Attorney-General, Simon Corbell, today introduced legislation into the Legislative Assembly to target high-risk dangerous driving and offer further protection to vulnerable road users.

“The Road Transport Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 was created in response to concerns raised by the Director of Public Prosecutions about the need for an aggravated version of the offence of furious, reckless or dangerous driving”, Mr Corbell said.

“The Bill provides for a higher maximum penalty where a person is convicted of the offence when an aggravating factor is present.

“It also, for the first time, defines what constitutes a vulnerable road user, including pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, riders of animals, users of motorised scooters and users of segways.”

The aggravating factors for the offence introduced by the Bill are:

• failing to comply with a request or signal given by a police officer to stop the vehicle;

• driving while intoxicated;

• driving at a speed that exceeded the speed limit by more than 30%;

• being a repeat offender;

• driving with a person younger than 17 years old in the vehicle; or

• driving in a way that put at risk the safety of a vulnerable road user.

The maximum penalty for the offence of furious, reckless or dangerous driving where an aggravating factor is present will be 200 penalty units, imprisonment for two years or both. In addition, the person’s driver licence will be automatically disqualified for at least 12 months. The maximum penalty for the offence without an aggravating factor in the ACT remains at 100 penalty units, imprisonment for one year or both.

“This Bill targets high-risk driving behaviour that has the potential to have catastrophic consequences.

“The increased penalties reflect how seriously the community regards anti-social behaviour that puts other road users at risk.”

(Simon Corbell Media Release)

Please login to post your comments
17 Responses to
New penalties for dangerous driving
tobefair 10:33 am
15 May 14
#1

Segways are considered vulnerable road users? a) I didn’t know they could go on the road and b) how are they vulnerable on paths?

bigred 6:45 pm
15 May 14
#2

Ho hum, as if it will actually applied. You see, without enforcement what does a penalty on the statutes matter?

gooterz 9:11 pm
15 May 14
#3

The aggravating factors for the offence introduced by the Bill are:
• driving while intoxicated;
> So any level or over the legal limit?

• driving at a speed that exceeded the speed limit by more than 30%;
> So doing 52 in a 40 zone would get you done?
>Plenty of bus zones are 20.. 26 would put you over..

• being a repeat offender;
>This is just stupid.. You wont get punished on your first run though.. Repeat offenders don’t care about the rules hence repeat offences.

• driving with a person younger than 17 years old in the vehicle; or
• driving in a way that put at risk the safety of a vulnerable road user.
>driving itself puts at risk any road users.. Hence the CTP.

If we can set decent punishments/deterrents for “an aggravated version of the offence of furious, reckless or dangerous driving” then why have two versions of it. Dangerous driving is bad.. but its not nearly as bad as dangerous driving speeding.

We should be making the system more black and white, why waste our money for lawyers to work out if an offence was aggravated or not. Just assume they were and give them the worst of it.

bundah 8:54 am
16 May 14
#4

Potentially facing jail sentences for travelling at 30 per cent above the mandated limit, including in school zones or construction areas is plainly excessive and besides there’s bugger all room at the AMC as it is.

The genius of Corbell knows no bounds…

Very Busy 10:27 am
16 May 14
#5

Oh, thank God for that. For a minute there I thought I was going to have to start using my indicators.

switch 10:45 am
16 May 14
#6

Very Busy said :

Oh, thank God for that. For a minute there I thought I was going to have to start using my indicators.

And turn yer foglights off!

Innovation 11:11 am
16 May 14
#7

bigred said :

Ho hum, as if it will actually applied. You see, without enforcement what does a penalty on the statutes matter?

Very true! Hopefully, the police at least will accept footage from the ever increasing number of private cameras as evidence.

bundah said :

Potentially facing jail sentences for travelling at 30 per cent above the mandated limit, including in school zones or construction areas is plainly excessive and besides there’s bugger all room at the AMC as it is…….

What’s wrong with penalising someone more harshly for doing 50+ k’s in a school zone or worksite? I doubt such an offence would result in jail time (at least not the first time) but perhaps it might force people to treat these speed limits – and even lower ones such as 5, 10 or 20 kph – more seriously. At the moment it’s sometimes dangerous to try and do 40 in a construction zone when others still try to do 80 or even 100 kph.

HiddenDragon 11:47 am
16 May 14
#8

So will Ministers and senior officials who miss program and project targets by more than 30% be fined 200 penalty units (from their own pockets) and thrown in the clink?

Slightly more seriously, if it’s necessary to have severe penalties to protect pedestrians from motorised vehicles, what about specific protections against the dangers presented by aggressive cyclists. Given the local fondness for obsessively enforcing arbitrary rules and limits, why not have a rule which says that cyclists who weigh over a certain (arbitrary) amount face extra speed etc. restrictions (to be enforced by compulsory GPS tracking devices) because of the special threat which their large mass presents to pedestrians. Just a modest suggestion for our ever-alert and concerned legislators and regulators to chew on…….

Kim F 2:38 pm
16 May 14
#9

But when are we going to teach Gulia how to park legally and/or properly?

bundah 3:53 pm
16 May 14
#10

Innovation said :

bigred said :

Ho hum, as if it will actually applied. You see, without enforcement what does a penalty on the statutes matter?

Very true! Hopefully, the police at least will accept footage from the ever increasing number of private cameras as evidence.

bundah said :

Potentially facing jail sentences for travelling at 30 per cent above the mandated limit, including in school zones or construction areas is plainly excessive and besides there’s bugger all room at the AMC as it is…….

What’s wrong with penalising someone more harshly for doing 50+ k’s in a school zone or worksite? I doubt such an offence would result in jail time (at least not the first time) but perhaps it might force people to treat these speed limits – and even lower ones such as 5, 10 or 20 kph – more seriously. At the moment it’s sometimes dangerous to try and do 40 in a construction zone when others still try to do 80 or even 100 kph.

Absolutely nothing wrong with penalising someone for exceeding the limit. We already have fines in place for that however what we don’t need is prison sentences for such an indiscretion.

It’s about applying an appropriate level of punishment which doesn’t include whacking someone over the head with a mallet for speeding!

Alderney 4:39 pm
16 May 14
#11

I’ve long advocated for increased penalties for those committing traffic offences with minors in the car.

I hope they extend this principle to other offences as it’ll reduce incidences of bad learned behaviours.

I commend this approach.

Solidarity 4:58 pm
16 May 14
#12

Harsher penalties hey? So if the deadsh*ts see the red and blue and realise they’ve lost their license either way, are they going to pull over, or go for broke?

drewbytes 5:56 pm
16 May 14
#13

I think some of you have comprehension issues. The press release relates to the “aggravated version of the offence of furious, reckless or dangerous driving”. The aggravating factors are as listed including, for example, speeding at more than 30% over the speed limit. So you must be charged with furious, reckless or dangerous driving and must have also committed one of the aggravating factors to be charged with the aggravated offence of furious, reckless or dangerous driving.

bigred 8:17 am
17 May 14
#14

Kim F said :

But when are we going to teach Gulia how to park legally and/or properly?

And Simon, who thinks he is a taxi driver when going shopping.

milkman 10:34 am
17 May 14
#15

switch said :

Very Busy said :

Oh, thank God for that. For a minute there I thought I was going to have to start using my indicators.

And turn yer foglights off!

And use the left hand lane.

gazket 3:32 pm
17 May 14
#16

Jake Arioli only got 3 months jail for terrorising a family during a road-rage incident, smashing a rear window with a metal pole causing glass to spray over a baby.

I’m sure Jake Arioli would of used mental health issues for leniency and regards for the mental health issues now suffered by the family not considered at all.

going to jail for doing 78 in 60 zone or 52 in new town centre 40 speed limits is rather harsh and will never happen . There have been a few parents pulled up for DUI when picking kids up from school none have been charged with furious, reckless or dangerous driving. A cyclist have never been charged with speeding and had furious, reckless or dangerous driving added. So why bring in new laws.

cranky 6:56 pm
17 May 14
#17

So would Mr Corbell be interested in viewing my dash camera recording of an ACT Traffic Inspector vehicle passing me as I stopped at a red light on Anzac Parade a week or so ago.

No attempt to brake. Came from behind and sailed through on a real red. No element of slightly orange to it.

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement
The-RiotACT.com Newsletter Sign Up

Images of Canberra

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.