The Waikato Times With which is Incorporated The Waikato Argus. FRIDAY, MAY 17, 1929. MOTORISTS’ PENALTIES.

Waikato Times, Volume 105, Issue 17713, 17 May 1929, Page 6

The Waikato Times With which is Incorporated The Waikato Argus. FRIDAY, MAY 17, 1929. MOTORISTS’ PENALTIES.

Motoring accidents continue to increase, though not, perhaps, more rapidly than might be expected from the increase in the number of vehicles. The rising generation accepts the dangers of the road as a part of modern life and tends to develop skill in driving proportionate to the risks. In the stage of transition the police and dispensers of justice who are called upon to keep a check on carelessness have a puzzling task. They feel that drivers who commit errors of judgment and as a result injure, or even kill, other users of the road are not at all in the category of people who recklessly discharge firearms and perhaps put a bullet through an innocent bystander. Juries have so repeatedly lefused to convict drivers of manslaughter that the police now hardly ever bring such a charge in case of a fatal motor accident. However, a strong feeling is abroad that many drivers fail to exercise due care. During the past two weeks magistrates and judges have imposed severe sentences- In Christchurch a woman “of unblemished reputation”—as the judge remarked—was disqualified for life from driving and a man was fined £IOO and forbidden to drive for five years- In each case negligent driving had resulted in an accident with fatal results. At Auckland Judge Herdman was even more severe in the case in which a youth had knocked down a child, causing its death. lie imposed a sentence of six months’ imprisonment with hard labour and debarred the culprit from driving for seven years. The offence was considered particularly serious as the lad drove on after knocking down the child. Most people will agree with the judge in taking a serious view of such conduct, though in this case counsel for the defence contended that the driver had not intended to “run away.” The least that a person with humane impulses would do is to stop and see what injury had been done and whether he could give any assistance. Moreover, the perils of the road would be enormously increased if people of cowardly instincts were encouraged in the idea that they might escape detection by driving away as quickly as possible after an accident in which they had been at fault. Unfortunately there are such, people. A few days ago the

| mangled remains of a man who had j apparently been killed by a car were found near Foxlon. At the inquest a police witness said this was the third case of the kind in the Dominion within a week. The difficulty of tracing the guilty driver in such circumstances is tremendous, and it seems impossible to devise any system of checks. Whether the fear of severe penalties will have the desired effect is very doubtful. A driver who is in a panic after having injured someone on the road is not likely to have his better senses restored by the recollection of harsh punishment inflicted on others. Far more reliance is to be placed on the spirit of sportsmanship with which, fortunately, the great majority are endowed. The greater the risks the greater the need for a code of sportsmanship, and this motor age certainly requires a special code. That humanity in general will rise to the need we do not doubt. |

Correspondents have criticised the lack of uniformity of penalties for careless driving- This was perhaps inevitable, as general principles do not immediately appear in new circumstances. Besides we And the penalties very uneven in the case of offences that have been common since the days of the Deluge. Much depends on the judge’s personal view of the offence and of the effect of imprisonment and other sentences. We fear that even the state of His Honour’s liver may vary the sentence considerably. In any case we consider those judges and magistrates who have debarred careless drivers from taking charge of cars for a long period of years have taken the right course. The privilege of driving should be confined to those who are not only skilled hut careful. To bring this about is far more important than to punish the few careless ones who cause serious injuries to others. The chief weakness of the present control is that it blows the warning horn after the disaster has occurred. Hardly ever is a careless driver brought into court unless after an accident. In case of obvious drunkenness, it is true, the authorities do prosecute, hut in such cases it is not usual to take away the driving license for any coosiderable period. In Wellington a few days ago a man who, with his wife, had been intoxicated in a car, had his license cancelled for three months only. A Wellington paper pointed out how different would have been the fate of a locomotive driver in similar case. But apart from those who drive while intoxicated there are scores of motorists who drive around corners and across intersections at such a pace that only luck saves them and others from disastrous accidents. They go on for the most part without any check. While we would not desire to see any system of trapping introduced, it is quite clear that patrols ought to be out to take a note of people who deliberately endanger the lives of others. It would really be better to check such people before they kill anyone.