How many people need to die at the hands of elderly drivers before the government acts?
If you watched actual Japanese news, you'd know that the government is currently acting. An amendment to the license laws is going to be introduced next fiscal year that requires all drivers over 75 to drive a vehicle with active safety measures (automatic braking systems).
Is it legally right to convict him, though?
Sure, he made a mistake and caused deaths. But can you really equate a mistake, even a fatal one, with negligence (failure to meet duty of care). He presumably had an active licence, so he was not (at least officially) assessed as unacceptably dangerous to permit as a driver. So as long as he wasn't driving under further degradations (fatigue ... etc), is it right for a mistake to be interpreted as failing to meet a duty of care?
Yes it is legally right to convict him. Whether or not he made a mistake, the onus is on him to prevent that mistake from happening. He is the person in control of the vehicle, as such the responsibility falls on him not on the state for licensing him.
If I mistakenly drive the wrong way down a 1 way road and hit a car, the mistake was my fault. Therefore I'm at fault. If I mistakenly drop a piece of wood off a roof and it hits someone below, it's my fault. Someone is always at fault, unless it's an act of nature, and this definitely doesn't qualify as one.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
It will be fun to dox people during the Olympics. Rather, it will be fun to watch the police hurry to arrest somebody who is actually just smoking a cig.
I wouldn't attempt it. Contrary to popular belief the cyber crimes division of the National Police Agency is actually pretty capable at doing their job.
Are you for real? Please educate yourself on the health benefits of Cannabis and CBD oil. Researchers are now understanding it is a kind of miracle drug.
Anyone who thinks any type of substance is a miracle anything, just proves they shouldn't be handling it.
Great, now they are starting to threaten people before they arrive.
Locals may tolerate being treated like children but its offensive to start this sort of nonsense as Japan starts to get watched on the world stage.
Its not threatening people. You don't get special treatment just because you're visiting the country. Japan has laws, however Draconian, and they have to be followed.
Since there haven't been anything proven that marijuana is any more useful than a placebo, and the fact that is smells to high hell, I'm glad Japan is strict on it. It smells like a bunch of sweaty dudes stuck in a box in the middle of July..
-7 ( +7 / -14 )
Impose is still not mandatory. It’s just a strong urge.
impose verb - force (an unwelcome decision or ruling) on someone.
Force sounds pretty mandatory to me.
Was just going to post that...
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Man people are thin skinned in this current day and age. Having seen the cartoon, its a pretty good take on actual policies surrounding Israel... But then again, anything criticizing Israel is going to be seen as anti-Semitic...
21 ( +23 / -2 )
Not "one" of the largest, "the" largest global automaker, with sales of over 15 MILLION vehicles yearly, bypassing Toyota and Volkswagon by nearly 5 million vehicles.
I think you'll find you're absolutely wrong.... Considering every single news outlet says that they would've been the 3rd largest automaker. Forbes, Bloomberg, etc...
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Automatic braking sensors on all cars.
Start with auto brake licence limitation from the end of this year for all under 25s and over 65s when buying next car.
Over 75s to get automatic braking fitted on present car by early next year.
As I've mentioned before this is the most logical approach. Make it a requirement to drive on their license, just like glasses. It's practically the same thing, a requirement to make sure you can safely operate the motor vehicle. Once you renew your license at 65 or so, this now becomes a requirement. You must drive a vehicle that has automatic braking systems installed.
Don't have one? Tough luck, install a system on your vehicle, OR the government could offer incentives and rebates based on needs of the people. Have a kei truck because your a farmer? Its a requirement for your work so the government will give a rebate of 80%. Live in Tokyo and just want to drive because you like it? Tough luck, it's on you to make it happen. There are many other ways to get around the city.
Pretty fair I think. Driving is a privilege not a right.
6 ( +6 / -0 )
My mistake, linked the wrong statistic. This one:
Page 17 for those that are interested. The most dangerous group of drivers are people aged 40-49 according to the statistics.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
But it is not the oldies (of which I will soon be) that worry me on the road. It is the younger people, particularly the 20 - 25 age group that think everyone but themselves are idiots on the road. The reverse is actually the truth.
Funny, since the actual official statistics say the opposite is true.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
Welfare did nothing because they were asked to not do anything by the Aunt and Uncle. They legally aren't allowed to do anything at this point. I think a lot of this misunderstanding comes from a terribly worded sentence...
But the center did not contact the 51-year-old man after a request from his aunt and uncle, with whom he lived, out of concern that it could "incite" him, they said.
This isn't, the aunt and uncle asked for help and the center said no. This is, the aunt and uncle asked for help and then asked the center not to contact him. As later explained here:
On Jan 10, the aunt called the center saying Iwasaki preferred not to be contacted by it, and she and her husband wanted to watch his condition for a while, which led the center to leave Iwasaki alone.
So many people clearly need to get their eyes checked...
2 ( +5 / -3 )
Canadians have a nickname for this place "Rotten Ronnie's" if you use this expression on any Canadian I can assure you they will know what you are speaking of. Any non-Canadians who have Canadian friends ask them if they know what "Rotten Ronnie's" is and I can guarantee they will know.
As a Canadian, I assure you that not everyone uses this slogan, heck I've never even heard of it... Must be a west coast thing
1 ( +1 / -0 )
We won’t know for four days, but if the Brexit Party does well, then either Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage will become PM and the UK will finally get a clean Brexit. Making UK great again!
Hate to burst your bubble but the UK will never be "great again". The manufacturing industry is dead, and if it magically is somehow revived by brexit, it wouldn't be even remotely competitive on the international stage. Inferior quality products, little to no natural resources. If brexit happens, the mass exodus of financial institutions from the UK will leave the country's reputation of financial mega-house to tatters. The average-joe so to speak, doesn't understand any of this. All they see is their steel mills shutting down and no more British Layland, but they fail to understand why. Britain is barely able to sustain its own population on food production, it lacks sway as a transit hub for goods, the UK will never be great again and the faster people like you learn that the better the UK will be. You can't make the UK great again, but you can make it better than it is now.
7 ( +12 / -5 )
I mean I know that I'm not going to change anybody's opinions on the matter. Its much easier to be outraged at everything than think about things logically with an understanding of how it came to be and how both sides view it.
That being said, do I agree with the bail conditions? I think they are a bit harsh but I'm on the fence. And not that this will make me seem anymore qualified to the people here who already hate me for seeing this from a legal perspective, however I did study law at a national university in Japan. So yeah... I'd say I know pretty well how law works in this country.
-8 ( +6 / -14 )
Your evidence is what?
See my response to Disillusioned for the answer. There isn't any evidence required.
Nonsense. People don't need to have law degrees to recognize moral outrages.
But if you feel a lawyer's voice is needed to voice outrage, then here's a quote from a lawyer cited above: "It's inhumane. It's outrageous."
I admit, I did a bad job of articulating what I meant with that comment. However, I don't see the moral outrage in this case. I meant more along the lines of people screaming human rights violations without understanding that the law allows to infringement of human rights in certain cases. Also people don't seem to understand how bail works and as such get upset. Anyone with any sort of knowledge regarding how bail is decided wouldn't be freaking out like most people on this forum do. They don't have to agree with the bail condition though.
As for the lawyer's quote. Of course he is going to say that, he's the defenses representative. Like I said, he doesn't have to agree with it, but at least he understands how bail is decided upon. He wouldn't be a very good defense lawyer is he just said: "suck it up, it is what it is".
-6 ( +8 / -14 )
ksteer - Why is this ridiculous by any means? His wife is expected of contacting people involved in the case on his behalf.
It would seem that it is you who does not understand the law. There is no evidence of any such contact between Ghosn and his wife or his wife and other parties. If there was, she would have been indicted as well for either obstruction of justice or for tampering with evidence. All contact between Ghosn and his wife has been strictly monitored since his arrest. This is just another pathetic ploy by the Japanese injustice system to force some kind of confession. The japanese prosecutors must be really hopeless if this is the only way they win a case. They just torture a 'suspect' both physically and emotionally until they crack. The japanese prosecutors will also drag this case out for years trying to break Ghosn. They are just pathetic!
Do I need to repeat myself. "*His wife is expected of contacting people on his behalf...*" Bail doesn't require evidence to set conditions. It's quite literally up to the whim of the Judge. You're correct that if there was strong evidence she likely would have been indicted as well. But like I mentioned above, there doesn't need to be evidence or proof to impose bail restrictions.
-9 ( +7 / -16 )
But I digress, its damn near impossible to teach the general population about how the law works... That's why there are lawyers. If you don't understand the law, you don't have a right to be outraged at things like this. Its like when people complain about elections but didnt actually vote. Read the law, understand how it works, and then if you don't agree with it, say something. But I've argued too much with people who lack the knowledge, or will to understand how the law works.
-8 ( +8 / -16 )
There is no proof he has committed a crime! 6 months have passed by and they have 0 evidence! So yes, it is absolutely ridiculous to prevent him from seeing his spouse.
As mentioned before, its a preventative measure as part of his bail conditions. You don't have to be convicted of a crime to have conditions on your bail. The other option is that he just doesn't get bail. Bail is decided entirely by the courts based on perceived potential to tamper with evidence, reoffend etc. In this case, they think that he is likely to use his wife to tamper evidence = no seeing wife without permission.
Regarding the evidence they have, if they had evidence they wouldn't be telling you or me, or anyone in public. That's how trials get tainted..
-12 ( +8 / -20 )
It was? What crime was he convicted of?
Or are you presuming guilt?
You don't have to be convicted of a crime to break your bail conditions... Im presuming innocence until proven guilty, but there is quite a bit of evidence that says he broke his bail conditions via his wife. The Japanese courts also seem to agree with me so...
-10 ( +10 / -20 )
Why is this ridiculous by any means? His wife is expected of contacting people involved in the case on his behalf. That means potential tampering of evidence and also that he was potentially using her to get around his bail restrictions. This was brought on by himself and her.
-16 ( +11 / -27 )
I wonder how many truckloads of salt they've ordered?
7 ( +8 / -1 )
Toyota crown, only the most common car in Japan, as almost every tax is one of them. Good luck with that!
Yeah... not quite. The taxis in Japan are Toyota Comfort models. The crown is a completely different vehicle...
0 ( +1 / -1 )
@smithinjapan Not to jump into your argument with darknuts but...
That's a pretty extensive list of official apologies and reparations..
13 ( +15 / -2 )
@Alex80 I doubt Germany would support South Korea, or it would be forced to accept all the Greek claims for further war reparations that it always rejected
I think that likely has to do with Greece being part of the EU. But I did forget about that. Either way it would have some biases for the case...
4 ( +4 / -0 )
As much as they're trying it might be useful to get a digital facial reconstruction specialist to perhaps give us a photo of roughly what she would look like now. She's the same age as me, I definitely don't look like I did when I was 9...
Assuming she is still alive, she will likely have a different identity and false memories imposed on her by the kidnapper. She isn't gonna be the same person remotely, likely suppressing those memories of that time of her life...
1 ( +2 / -1 )
They got little to lose at this point, but who will be this "third country"?
I assume a country that both are on good terms with who wasn't involved directly in the war between either side... so.. Turkey? Perhaps an African nation like Kenya or Uganda? Canada would also make a pretty good one I guess. The US is too involved politically in both of them to be used, Germany has a tendency to be apologetic and would likely take the SK side...
0 ( +4 / -4 )
What about the Alsok security guys? They are private security and they carry guns.
Private security companies in Japan are not allowed to carry guns. Alsok and Secom security guards only carry batons and/or mace. No security personnel have guns. I guarantee that. (My wife is a Japanese cop).
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Tohoku Shinkansen corridor doesn't support 360 km/hr regular commercial service, the max possible for regular service is 320 km/hr.
The Alfa-X's max commercial service speed is determined by the track it runs on, not by the rolling stock itself.
Not even remotely correct. The only reason the current speed is limited to 320km/hr is because of the issues with entering tunnels that the current generation of rolling stock has. It's also has to do with laws regarding sound (from entering/exiting the tunnels) that is caused by the pressure waves and generally noise ordinances in cities. So yes, it is also determined by the rolling stock or else they wouldn't be testing these. The new design alleviates the pressure wave, making the rolling stock quieter and allowing them to travel at faster speeds without breaking laws regarding noise.
Work seems to be ongoing to upgrade the section between Morioka and Shin-Aomori to 320 km/h, primarily in the form of improved sound barriers. This should make operating at 360 km/h possible, if the improved noise dampening techniques being tested using the ALFA-X test train are successful.
From Wikipedia only because its in English. Original article is an article on Yahoo news.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
And where is this district? Asking for a friend.
Its literally in the article...
-1 ( +4 / -5 )
I'd hazard a guess and say that both bike riders were up to no good - probably street racing. Not only that, what are the odds that he was wearing a piss pot helmet tied around the back of his head...?
1 a.m on the Metropolitan inner circle route? I'd say the chances are extremely high that this is what happened.
Also, hitting a wall in a tunnel is a pretty hard thing to do... unless you're going at pretty high speeds without knowing the route (especially when the corners on that road randomly appear).
1 ( +1 / -0 )
This is propaganda to force aging Japan to accept the idea of giving up your right to drive. Young drivers kill more people. The problem here is not age. It's humans. Take away everybody's license - or only those who have broken the law, but don't take away licenses simply because they are a certain age.
In what world do you live where it's a "right" to drive. Its not a right at all, its a privilege given to you by the state. Don't like their rules? Don't drive.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
11. We’re Always Innocent Till Proven Guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.
12. The Right to Privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters, or bother us or our family without a good reason.
The prosecutors clearly violated 11 and 12 with Carole.
I guess it's true what they say. You can't argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience... Have fun believing in fantasy land. (Also, quote a government of australia article is completely irrelevant.)
0 ( +4 / -4 )