If the Government thinks that people's sleeping on footpath in night is justified...then they should make following amendments in Motor Vehicle Act.
i) If u are driving in nights and u see ppls sleeping on footpath, then u stop the vehicle, park it on the roadside, go to ur desired workplace by walking..dis also work for ur fitness
ii) Local corporators,MLAs & MPs have every right to settle poor peoples on footpath for their votebanks. Such Roads where peoples living are ban for driving. If there is no place for settling ppls on footpath, Polticians resevers their rights to allow people to sleep on roads.
iii) if u are driving in nights (drunk or not drunk) and if u loose control of the vehicle, n u are looking to hit roadside pole or tree to stop the vehicle, instead of that u find ppls sleeping on footpath...then u have to take ur gun out and shoot yourself....
iv) don't dare to enter the road, where u see boardsign with man sleeping....
RE:New Rules for driving at Night.....
by S Kumar on Sep 06, 2007 01:30 PM Permalink
By the same logic the Government should also notify that all the vehicles must be driven on the footpath instead of on the roads! How would you justify the vehicle being on the footpath in the first place? If people were standing or walking on the footpath instead of sleeping. still you think the driver had the right to mow them down? Please understand that here the problem is not people being on the footpath (do you expect them to be in the middle of the road?) but the way poeple drive. Please don't tell me that all those behind the wheels are flawless and sober all the time. Also how do you justify the ten year old driving Qualis on to two people on the road a couple of days back in Delhi? Or the 16 year old boasting of driving the Skoda at 180 kmph in Mumbai sometime back? It is the kind of people who think anyone behind the wheel is always right and try justify their actions to be put behind the bars. Give us a break man
RE:New Rules for driving at Night.....
by S Kumar on Sep 06, 2007 01:46 PM Permalink
Exactly! So please don't blame the people for being on the footpath whether sleeping or walking. Your arguement sounded as if it was the fault of the people who were sleeping on the footpath that the car climbed on to the footpath
RE:New Rules for driving at Night.....
by S Kumar on Sep 06, 2007 04:19 PM Permalink
And those who drive on the pavement should be left out scott free?! Do you think they are sleeping on the pavement out of their choice? Or do you think they are doing so because it gives them a high? Why do you think the police wasn't acing enough to prevent the crime? Why is it that the people can't keep away from crime if the police is not after them? Here the guy who drove on the footpath is supposed to be educated enough to know what is right and wrong. He might have his own reasons for being their and the investigating agencies might have found out what they were and whether they were justifiable or not. The judgement given is based on that. Let us not try to justify him. I do understand that accidents do happen but most of them are avoidable. Here the issue is of somebody commiting a crime and he is punished under the existing laws. The people sleeping on the pavement weren't breaking any laws and if and when there a law preventing it, they will be punished. But before making such law it must be ensured that nobody will have to sleep on the pavement any more. As long as it is not done please don't blame them. If one can't drive properly he could commit the same mistake anywhere.
RE:Pure unjustice
by ashok pai on Sep 06, 2007 01:11 PM Permalink
well, speak about salman killing 3 people while driving drunk. why compare with periera. lets wait for that sentence
RE:Pure unjustice
by bharat dureja on Sep 06, 2007 01:20 PM Permalink
Ya perfectly all right If salman gets a life term for Killing 3 people woth rash driving thats fine But at present its pure injustice
India has no value for the human life.Its simple.We are large in numbers like insects. Everyday many people fall down from the local trains,people are killed while crossing the railway tracks,pedestrians killed by reckless driving. But who cares? We do not have strict rules and wherever we have the rules,those are not strictly followed. Just compare how easily one can get driving licence in any part of India with that in foreign country. You will know the difference. At the same time there are so many hyppocrates in India who care too much about the stray dogs,rats ,snakes,frogs,cows etc. But they do not think of human beings. Maneka Gandhi is the leader of such hyppocrates. Human life is not at all respected in India
RE:No value for Human Life
by ashok pai on Sep 06, 2007 01:14 PM Permalink
you have lost it totally. you dont respect wildlife, you probably live in a city and want all of india to have only buildings with zero trees and forests. people like you will appreciate forests when yu suffer from lack of water. only then it will dawn on you that a well preserved ecosystem is the key to a healthy & prosperous nation.
human life is cheap because of excess population. so why pick on animal conservationists. that problem can be solved by being sensitive, and by following the laws. not by venting your anger at the green brigade. be thankful that they are doing a good job, or else, we'd have all the forests mined, and destroyed, and yu'd probably be complaining then too... and most likely another brain fart of an opinion then too.
RE:No value for Human Life
by RS Chakravarti on Sep 06, 2007 01:40 PM Permalink
It seems clear that he should have got a longer sentence. But killing animals (I mean wild animals in forests, not stray dogs or other pests) is bad too and people who do that should also go to jail. Comparisons are not always meaningful. Our governments and society as a whole are also guilty of gross negligence. We force people to leave their homes and sleep on pavements in Mumbai or starve. When will we concentrate our attention on such matters?
RE:No value for Human Life
by Makarand Sane on Sep 06, 2007 01:24 PM Permalink
Dear Ashok, I have never commented on wild life or opposed preserving it.My concern is we give too much stress on animals especially for stray dogs in localities(be it rural area or city) but do not care for human beings. An animal conservationist like you will make a big hue & cry over this issue. But people like you never consider under what circumstances a common man in India lives. You are still bothered about the stray dogs and cow shit...your mentality is stinking one.
RE:RE:No value for Human Life
by Shree on Sep 06, 2007 01:34 PM Permalink
Mr Markand Please know the differenc between Environment Coservationist and Animal right avtivist, they are very much different. latter ones are for the cities.
I dont understand this law in India Salman Khan killed deers and got 5 years A Pereira killed 7 human beings and got 3 years Sanjay Dutt just kept arms at his residence and got 6 years Apna bharat mahan!!! What a law ?
RE:RE:3 years RI for Alister Pereira
by mash on Sep 06, 2007 12:42 PM Permalink
I feel Salman and Sanjay dutt did things intentionally so no. of years are more. I dont think it was rigorous improsonment for them. And anyway before knowing the j of jail they are free outside. So lets not feel sorry for them at the moment.
RE:3 years RI for Alister Pereira
by mash on Sep 06, 2007 01:17 PM Permalink
Exactly. but it should be rigourous unbailable since he was drunk driving. He could have caused an accident on the road and killed someone innocent
i'm not at all supporting alistair n he deserves to be punished ... but then.. suppose someone genuinely loses control while driving.. n u have people sleeping on pavements... whose fault is that? anyone can lose control ..n its bad for both drivers n people on the pavement.. n a thought should be spared for drivers also.. they are humans too. n pavements along busy and fast roads ..should never have anyone alongside them in the first place... the law never bothers to rectify that... n both lives,injuries and precious court time will be saved..
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by ashok pai on Sep 06, 2007 01:02 PM Permalink
largely agree with you. but most cases where these rich kids have been found to be losing control, according to original reports (not doctored by lawyers, and subsequent bribed reports) point to excessive drinking and losing control, or high speed thrills.
but yeah, its the problem of the government for regulating the spaces in the city and checking pavement dwellers for safety reasons.
but, how often do you see common people running over pavement dwellers ? it only seems to happen with rich drunk kids in expensive vehicles. puru raj kumar, periera, salman khan etc etc.
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by Raman Chugh on Sep 06, 2007 12:42 PM Permalink
i totally agree with you and have been saying the same. people are not supposed to be sleeping on footpaths & road dividers. if they do then its at their own risk & no one should be penalised for it but the government.
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by Younus Khan on Sep 06, 2007 12:48 PM Permalink
i think u r also a crusader he lost control because he was drunk not because there was something wrong with the car
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by Prabhat.A.Shukla on Sep 06, 2007 12:40 PM Permalink
if you are so sure about loosing control and killing people... ... then you should better quit driving...or just be mentally prepared to go to jail someday....btw there is difference betn loosing control and drunk driving...
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by Gurdeep Singh on Sep 06, 2007 02:57 PM Permalink
Another Bihar sympathizer from UP Bihar
RE:RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by Raman Chugh on Sep 06, 2007 12:43 PM Permalink
accidents do happen when u drive . i do agree if the person driving is found drunk then there is no excuse whatsoever.
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by Shyam Shivadas on Sep 06, 2007 12:51 PM Permalink
What happens when your younger brother/sister, who is walking on the pavement, is coming back from school and they are run over by a drunk driver?
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by mash on Sep 06, 2007 01:01 PM Permalink
My friend shyam they were sleeping on the pavement at night when it is very dark and the ground is less visible and not walking
RE:RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by ashok pai on Sep 06, 2007 01:04 PM Permalink
thats still not an excuse to go into the pavement. even if the people werent sleeping and probably strolling, that would still make the car driver the culprit. i dont see your point in trying to defend the driver, who in most probablity is drunk and driving after the party and probably at speeds exceeding 40-50 kms which most people travel at.
RE:are people supposed to be sleeping at the edge of roads?
by mash on Sep 06, 2007 01:21 PM Permalink
He surely has to be severely punished for drunk driving but not for killing people sleeping on the pavement, since sleeping on the pavement is againt the rule. They did that on their own risk and i truly feel they shouldnt be compensated either. Here the law and order is to be blamed
RE:What about SALLU ?
by ashok pai on Sep 06, 2007 01:10 PM Permalink
there's a lot of people rallying around him, he shouldnt be let away scot free. he should be unished normally. the law is an ass when it comes to killing people by drunken drivers, since the punishment is a pittance.
sleeping on footpath is also illegal..... footpaths r made for walking... poor people sleeping on footpath is highly objectionable.... but who compel them to sleep on footpath
Politicians... to create vote bank, they r allowing peoples to stay in slum & on footpaths... Mumbai is already overburden with population...
if this situation continues.... people may sleep on roads in future...and it will be a nightmare for the drivers..
RE:punish them also.......
by Raktim Roy on Sep 06, 2007 12:31 PM Permalink
Does it mean that rash and drunken driving is justified? He may have hit people walking on the street too. Whether people stop sleeping on the footpath or not every Pereira needs to be punished to set a right example
RE:punish them also.......
by Kishor Bhosle on Sep 06, 2007 12:35 PM Permalink
dude read the post carefully..... law must punish drunken driver very severely.. but at the same time, Law must punish politician for current situation of the city and the peoples who r sleeping on the street..
RE:punish them also.......
by Prabhat.A.Shukla on Sep 06, 2007 12:44 PM Permalink
HAHAHAHAHAH...PUNISH POLITICIANS..DUDE..u totally deluded...Politcians toy with law to set free there favoured criminals and murderers...
RE:RE:punish them also.......
by Raktim Roy on Sep 06, 2007 12:58 PM Permalink
Wishful Mr.Bhosle. I am with you about punishing the politicians part but when it comes to the next general elections I hope you are in the forefront to change the government and not simply make a point. If you don't vote and think that law will straighten things out well all I can say is you are living a deluded dream. Dream on ! But where matters can be decided by law as in Alistair's case, I think severity is the order of the day.
RE:punish them also.......
by Anuj Singhal on Sep 06, 2007 12:34 PM Permalink
Do you always drive within 50 kmph??? Even if you are driving on a broad road with no traffic....I bet you dont...Simple argument would be that you too might hit someone and every someone like you should be punished as well
RE:punish them also.......
by Raktim Roy on Sep 06, 2007 12:55 PM Permalink
I don't understand why this question arises Anuj. Your point is irrelevant because Alistair drove his car up a footpath at 55 or 60 or whatever. For your info I don't drive a car on the footpath but the way you seem to be taking this it looks like you are familiar with that style of driving. So best of luck to you mate should you do this sometime and trample upon a few. Needless to say I would feel that 3 years would be too less for a crime like that.
