Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Andy B on 28 October 2009, 18:50:09
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/8329590.stm
I used to travel this bit of road most weekends and even in my Manta many years ago it was a quick bit of raod, 166 is pretty quick though. If it's the exact bit I'm thinking of it's almost 2 miles & virtually straight.
-
Myself and my three sons all ride bikes and cars, jail is not the answer, yes ban him from the road for ten years but jail will not only punish him but also his family as well.
-
What did he do wrong then ? :-/ :D
-
What did he do wrong then ? :-/ :D
Got caught. ;D
-
Exactly. :y
-
exactly he got caught and the rest of his family get punished, we all speed sometimes excessively, but the punishamnet has to fit the crime, punish the driver only without costing the tax payer a fortune
-
Why is it you all all joke when a biker gets caught over a 100mph yet condemn car drivers over 100mph.
Not only was this loon doing 2.5 times the roads limit. over twice the motorway limit.
You really do amaze me at times, plus there is the blatent piss taking of the head on speed traps you get away with.
Before you have a go at me, consider the same situation if a guy in a Veyron got caught. yes you would all be taking the piss he had been caught but adding that it served him right.
::) :-X
-
Speeding is considered much more anti social than burglary/kicking someones head in/criminal damage and most other "crimes" you care to mention ,these days.A combination of the green lobby and the PC lobby,personally I would glue the lot of them to the roads and run over the tinkers. :D ;D ;D
-
Why is it you all all joke when a biker gets caught over a 100mph yet condemn car drivers over 100mph.
Not only was this loon doing 2.5 times the roads limit. over twice the motorway limit.
You really do amaze me at times, plus there is the blatent piss taking of the head on speed traps you get away with.
Before you have a go at me, consider the same situation if a guy in a Veyron got caught. yes you would all be taking the piss he had been caught but adding that it served him right.
::) :-X
I dont differentiate between bikers and drivers on this issue Skruntie.I use my judgment for what speed I consider appropriate in a car or on a bike,sometimes thar will be under the posted limit,and sometimes more than. ;)
Having said that,when someone on a bike has a high speed crash they are more likely to kill themselves and less likely to kill others than a car driver in the same situation. :y
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
A speeding fine and a few points on his licence.....would have been more appropriate.........
You can burgle a house .....over and over....again and still not get a custodial sentence......Crazy. :-/ :-/ ;)
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
A speeding fine and a few points on his licence.....would have been more appropriate.........
You can burgle a house .....over and over....again and still not get a custodial sentence......Crazy. :-/ :-/ ;)
See, now we have him being defended.
Justifying it by comparison wasnt my point either.
Everything mentioned was/is breaking the law.
::) :-X
-
If he had perhaps kept his speed down to 159 while "familiarising" himself with the bike he might have got away with it! ::) ::) ::)
-
But what he did isnt a criminal offence,but is treated a lot more harshly than many criminal offences are. ;)
-
But what he did isnt a criminal offence,but is treated a lot more harshly than many criminal offences are. ;)
Speeding in itself is not dangerous, but that's what he admitted & got convicted of.
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
A speeding fine and a few points on his licence.....would have been more appropriate.........
You can burgle a house .....over and over....again and still not get a custodial sentence......Crazy. :-/ :-/ ;)
See, now we have him being defended.
Justifying it by comparison wasnt my point either.
Everything mentioned was/is breaking the law.
::) :-X
This is true Skruntie............but.......the other "crimes"....that I mention.......all have a phychological effect on their victims......which can haunt them for years....(just ask anyone who has been mugged.....raped....burgled.).etc... etc
A simple speeding offence ......is just that and nothing more.......
We need to get our priorities right... :-/ :y
-
Quite agree,speed doesnt kill,inappropriate speed does.The speed he was doing would automatically be considered as dangerous in the eyes of the law.He probably pleaded guilty in the hope of a less severe sentence.Looks like it didnt work. ;)
-
Optimist is sounding a bit right wing tonight,are we getting the message through ? :D ;D ;D
-
Live by the sword, die by the sword......
He got caught, he deserves whatever he gets and for anyone to come on here and try to justify it........???!!!!
He should consider himself lucky he is still alive and hasnt killed anyone else during his stupidity.....
And dont try and tell me this was the first time he had wound his bike up that much......
>:(
:y :y :y :y
-
should have a permanent ban from bikes and a hefty fine.
(http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff205/sterling800/fast2520bike-slow2520car.jpg)
but you have to be aware what could happen :o
-
I wiil conceed that if your going to do it you can expect a severe punishment in todays world.(unless your a policeman) ;)
-
should have a permanent ban from bikes and a hefty fine.
Aside from a permanent ban being illegal in itself, all that type of sentence does is create another disqualified driver (who obviously won't give a toss if they are banned for life).
-
For me personally, the most comforting thought (the above shocking photo being an exception) that it is normally the motorcyclist that comes off worst if he were to crash at any reasonable speed
-
Throw away the rather key !! >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
so a ban wont work if it is 5 years then by that logic,so maybe jail is the right way to go.
-
should have a permanent ban from bikes and a hefty fine.
Aside from a permanent ban being illegal in itself, all that type of sentence does is create another disqualified driver (who obviously won't give a toss if they are banned for life).
Why is a permanent ban illegal....??
If it is deserved then I would support a permanent ban to any idiot caught riding/driving with total disregard to the law
:y
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
People need to be charged for the consequences....of "what actually happened."......and not for "what might have happened."
If he had killed someone.....then that is a whole different ball game.....
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
-
so a ban wont work if it is 5 years then by that logic,so maybe jail is the right way to go.
A 5 year ban may or may not work (depends on the individual), but the recipient will be able to see light at the end of the tunnel.
I'll take it back to basics for you.
Stick an animal in a room with no exit other than the one you are stood in front of.
Unless you show that animal a way out, you are gonna get bitten (and humans are nothing more than animals at the end of the day).
Why is a permanent ban illegal....??
Courts are not allowed by law to give "indeterminate" sentences, and a life ban is deemed indeterminate.
If it is deserved then I would support a permanent ban to any idiot caught riding/driving with total disregard to the law
Anybody who has total disregard for the law isn't going to give a toss about a ban, no matter how long it is for.
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
People need to be charged for the consequences....of "what actually happened."......and not for "what might have happened."
If he had killed someone.....then that is a whole different ball game.....
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
Cant believe you said that. He was lucky not to kill anyone including himself pure and simple.
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
I believe in a sensible application of speed to the road/car/driver conditions. If a hazard had presented himself he would not have been able to stop.
Give me 5 mins alone with him and no jail sentence would be required >:(
-
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
He created enormous risk for every other road user around him.
I'm not the ark angel gabriel by any means, and I do expect people to be travelling a degree faster than what the limit says.....but 166 is taking the piss on a public highway IMO.
-
......
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
......
The road is in the middle of nowhere ......
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=21.856753,56.99707&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FW8DUgMd4L_L_w&split=0&hq=&hnear=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&ll=55.707917,-3.421941&spn=0.020262,0.055661&t=h&z=15
-
I agree that you cannot defend someone who drives a bike at those speeds on a stretch of road apparently just two miles long. Obviously it was not a motorway, with a very clear run of maximum visability, no pedestrians, wild animals, and crash barriers between oncoming traffic.
To travel that 2 mile stretch would take a minute, and then to stop in an emergency.....................!!
Do not get me wrong I am no sweet innocent angel, and I was only "road testing" the Merc to full output just the other day, but on a clear motorway - with half a mile in front, half a mile behind visable for reaction time, along with no pedestrians to take out, a crash barrier between me and on-coming traffic, no (hopefully!!) wild animals to cross my path. Just me, the machine at my command, and the tarmac!!
However, if things go wrong I know what the outcome could be; death, and if I am clocked at those speeds I accept it will be bye bye licence at least! :'( :'( :'( :'(
The chap with the bike was caught speeding in a stupid manner, in an inappropiate place where others could so easily get killed. So 9 months jail - end of!! ::)
You cannot judge other crimes penalties with this one. There are just too many factors, circumstances and outcomes involved. ;) ;)
-
.....but 166 is taking the piss on a public highway IMO.
Like I said, it's a quick road, but not that quick!! It's just another fast A road.
I am surprised though that he did manage to get up to that kind of speed on the A702, his 166 must have been very brief - (even without police intervention ;))
-
......
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
......
The road is in the middle of nowhere ......
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=21.856753,56.99707&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FW8DUgMd4L_L_w&split=0&hq=&hnear=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&ll=55.707917,-3.421941&spn=0.020262,0.055661&t=h&z=15
If it was a track or closed road then fair game....
...a road, wherever the break it is is still a road and still has other vulnerable road users on it. Are you saying because its in the middle of nowhere then noone but racing motorists should use it?
The mind boggles at people sometimes !
-
I f any of us drive/ ride above 70 mph then we cant argue about the law being broken,we are breaking the same law he did.We have already accepted that an individual can decide for themselves what they think is appropriate for the conditions/circumstances,we are simply arguing that everyone else should draw the line in the same place as we draw it.
166 is an extreme example granted,but on a long stretch of motorway at 6am on a summer morning (which this wasnt) it could be less dangerous to the public at large than 35mph past a primary school at 8.45 am on a school day. ;)
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
People need to be charged for the consequences....of "what actually happened."......and not for "what might have happened."
If he had killed someone.....then that is a whole different ball game.....
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
Cant believe you said that. He was lucky not to kill anyone including himself pure and simple.
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
I believe in a sensible application of speed to the road/car/driver conditions. If a hazard had presented himself he would not have been able to stop.
Give me 5 mins alone with him and no jail sentence would be required >:(
Two crimes.....
1......A speeding biker .....who causes ...no damage ...and no loss of life.......or trauma of any sort.
2......A...repeat offender ....who steals cars....and breaks into houses ......for the fun of it.....and leaves behind him a trail......of human misery .....and phychological damage........worry ....anxiety.....fear ....etc ...etc....
I know which I would see as the lesser crime. :y :y
-
......
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
......
The road is in the middle of nowhere ......
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=21.856753,56.99707&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FW8DUgMd4L_L_w&split=0&hq=&hnear=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&ll=55.707917,-3.421941&spn=0.020262,0.055661&t=h&z=15
But Andy I can see one junction to a residential area, two other country lane junctions, one a cross-roads, plus many residential properties lining the road from where children could emerge from, cars could exit, and pedestrians no doubt walk past! :o :o :o
This is no stretch of motorway! :( :(
-
I am surprised though that he did manage to get up to that kind of speed on the A702, his 166 must have been very brief - (even without police intervention ;))
You'll be surprised how quick certain bikes are, my 34 year old Z9 will reach 152mph from a standing start in 9.05 seconds (proven & recorded).
Granted I did throw a few grand at it, but that kind of performance is pretty much standard these days on the high end sports bikes.
-
There is really no need for argument on this issue. The guy got on his bike knowing he was going to speed, he had no idea what would happen during that time therefore it was a premeditated offence with no mitigating circumstances. He took a chance & was caught. He got what he deserved, it is just a pity his family has to suffer too, but that is incidental to the issue. :(
-
..... Are you saying because its in the middle of nowhere then noone but racing motorists should use it? ......
Not at all! But what's worse 166 in the middle of nowhere, or 60 in a 30? I'm not saying one is better/worse than the other but I can think of various places around home where it's quite easy to do double the speed limit on 30mph dual carriageways. But on the A702 at those speeds you're more likely to kill just yourself.
I agree that 166 on a public road is stupid, but not sure it requires a custodial sentance. :-/
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
People need to be charged for the consequences....of "what actually happened."......and not for "what might have happened."
If he had killed someone.....then that is a whole different ball game.....
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
Cant believe you said that. He was lucky not to kill anyone including himself pure and simple.
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
I believe in a sensible application of speed to the road/car/driver conditions. If a hazard had presented himself he would not have been able to stop.
Give me 5 mins alone with him and no jail sentence would be required >:(
Two crimes.....
1......A speeding biker .....who causes ...no damage ...and no loss of life.......or trauma of any sort.
2......A...repeat offender ....who steals cars....and breaks into houses ......for the fun of it.....and leaves behind him a trail......of human misery .....and phychological damage........worry ....anxiety.....fear ....etc ...etc....
I know which I would see as the lesser crime. :y :y
Just what is your argument here?
Ok put a young child on the road lets say she was hiking with her parents and climbed over a style onto that road. If you have never lost a close family member to someone speeding and being reckless let me tell you I would prefer to be burgled every night of my life than deal with the past 18 years that my family have! >:(
-
I am surprised though that he did manage to get up to that kind of speed on the A702, his 166 must have been very brief - (even without police intervention ;))
You'll be surprised how quick certain bikes are, my 34 year old Z9 will reach 152mph from a standing start in 9.05 seconds (proven & recorded).
Sounds like you own a Z1.....or Z900.....from the seventies KW....
But ......they never achieved ........those figures on the standard 82 BHP.......more like 12.5 secs.....at 108mph as standard. :y :y :y :y
Does yours ....still have the four pipes?.... :y :y :y
Granted I did throw a few grand at it, but that kind of performance is pretty much standard these days on the high end sports bikes.
-
......
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
......
The road is in the middle of nowhere ......
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=21.856753,56.99707&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FW8DUgMd4L_L_w&split=0&hq=&hnear=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&ll=55.707917,-3.421941&spn=0.020262,0.055661&t=h&z=15
But Andy I can see one junction to a residential area, two other country lane junctions, one a cross-roads, plus many residential properties lining the road from where children could emerge from, cars could exit, and pedestrians no doubt walk past! :o :o :o
This is no stretch of motorway! :( :(
Possibly further back clicky (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=21.856753,56.99707&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FW8DUgMd4L_L_w&split=0&t=h&hq=&hnear=A702,+Dolphinton,+South+Lanarkshire+EH46+7,+United+Kingdom&ll=55.730832,-3.379412&spn=0.036731,0.104456&z=14) that I'm thinking of. You'd have to drive the road a few times, it's 'good' road.
-
Looks like we all accept that it is OK to ignore the 70mph limit if we choose.The question then is,what is the absolute maximum speed we should drive at on public roads without being classed as a dangerous criminal?
I f we started a poll on this question I suspect most peoples answers would coincide with the highest speed that they have driven/ridden at on the road. ;)
-
Sounds like you own a Z1.....or Z900.....from the seventies KW....
But ......they never achieved ........those figures on the standard 82 BHP.......more like 12.5 secs.....at 108mph as standard. :y :y :y :y
Does yours ....still have the four pipes?.... :y :y :y
4 pipes??? (http://www.natadsltest2.clara.co.uk/img/rofl.gif)
It wears a 4-1 works Harris, Wiseco 1170 top end, 50 shot N2O with 2 stage progressive Schintz controller, JMC (Deep brace) swingarm, 38mm Mikki flats, 3 spoke mag alloys (pick them up with 2 fingers), shit loads of aluminium where the old steel crap used to be, and quite a few other mods.
I was nowhere near the fastest streetbike on the day though, that title went to a Busa that did an 8.4 in excess of 200.
-
Looks like we all accept that it is OK to ignore the 70mph limit if we choose.The question then is,what is the absolute maximum speed we should drive at on public roads without being classed as a dangerous criminal?
I f we started a poll on this question I suspect most peoples answers would coincide with the highest speed that they have driven/ridden at on the road. ;)
[/highlight]
There is no definitive answer to that question Albitz...
but I would say that 166 MPH......on a deserted motorway at 5.00 A.M.............on a Sunday morning......is probably statistically safer than 25MPH...past a junior school when the kids are out. :y :y :y
-
Looks like we all accept that it is OK to ignore the 70mph limit if we choose.The question then is,what is the absolute maximum speed we should drive at on public roads without being classed as a dangerous criminal?
If we apply the same train of thought that applies for a dangerous driving conviction, then the safest speed is what "any reasonable person" decides it is.
For me, the safest speed for any given conditions is pretty much the 85th percentile.
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
A speeding fine and a few points on his licence.....would have been more appropriate.........
You can burgle a house .....over and over....again and still not get a custodial sentence......Crazy. :-/ :-/ ;)
See, now we have him being defended.
Justifying it by comparison wasnt my point either.
Everything mentioned was/is breaking the law.
::) :-X
This is true Skruntie............but.......the other "crimes"....that I mention.......all have a phychological effect on their victims......which can haunt them for years....(just ask anyone who has been mugged.....raped....burgled.).etc... etc
A simple speeding offence ......is just that and nothing more.......
We need to get our priorities right... :-/ :y
What a load of 'dangle berries'
Simple (166MPH) my ARSE
-
Quite agree,speed doesnt kill,inappropriate speed does.The speed he was doing would automatically be considered as dangerous in the eyes of the law.He probably pleaded guilty in the hope of a less severe sentence.Looks like it didnt work. ;)
So what speed is the starting speed for some one getting killed?
-
Live by the sword, die by the sword......
He got caught, he deserves whatever he gets and for anyone to come on here and try to justify it........???!!!!
He should consider himself lucky he is still alive and hasnt killed anyone else during his stupidity.....
And dont try and tell me this was the first time he had wound his bike up that much......
>:(
:y :y :y :y
At last we have someone talking sence.
The whole point of my replies is simple.
We all speed.
100mph on a motorway which is reasonablty straight and all traffic supposedly going the same way is an instant ban.
This guy put his life and others at risk on a normal 60mph road.
But got caught.
What made me laugh is how you all seemed to justify it.
-
So what speed is the starting speed for some one getting killed?
I watched someone die after hitting the tarmac at 25mph one night on Chelsea Bridge, speed is simply one of MANY contributing factors.
-
..... speed is simply one of MANY contributing factors.
And there was me thinking that ''SPEED KILLS!!!!'' ::) ::) ::) ::) :y
-
I wiil conceed that if your going to do it you can expect a severe punishment in todays world.(unless your a policeman) ;)
Still no excuse, they have to drive with in the letter of the law and it's only us other road users that give them the right of way to travel in the manner that they do.
Speeding is accepted, but must be done in a safe way if the roads and conditions allow.
If they were caught doing 166mph on the same road road and not in pursuit they , I am sure would suffer the consquences.
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
People need to be charged for the consequences....of "what actually happened."......and not for "what might have happened."
If he had killed someone.....then that is a whole different ball game.....
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
Cant believe you said that. He was lucky not to kill anyone including himself pure and simple.
Would you be happy if it was the road outside your house where you kids go to and from school/friends/etc?
I believe in a sensible application of speed to the road/car/driver conditions. If a hazard had presented himself he would not have been able to stop.
Give me 5 mins alone with him and no jail sentence would be required >:(
Optimist lives in cloud cuckoo land I reckon. ::)
-
:-X
-
Looks like we all accept that it is OK to ignore the 70mph limit if we choose.The question then is,what is the absolute maximum speed we should drive at on public roads without being classed as a dangerous criminal?
I f we started a poll on this question I suspect most peoples answers would coincide with the highest speed that they have driven/ridden at on the road. ;)
[/highlight]
There is no definitive answer to that question Albitz...
but I would say that 166 MPH......on a deserted motorway at 5.00 A.M.............on a Sunday morning......is probably statistically safer than 25MPH...past a junior school when the kids are out. :y :y :y
Agreed. :y If I am on an empty motorway in good conditions I will do whatever speed I want to,and dont see anything wrong in it.If I am passing a junior school,I will be extremely careful.In fact I tend to stick very close to the limit in any built up areas,and sometimes well under it if circumstances (kids at roadside etc)suggest it is sensible to do so.
Basically ,I believe we should try hard not to put others at risk,but I wont have anyone dictate to me how much risk I am alowed to put myself at.
And I think that most of us know that in recent years all road safety efforts have been concentrated purely on the aspect of speed at the expense of all the other important areas of road safety,it hasnt made the roads any safer ,but it has got a lot of peoples backs up.
Educating people to be skilled road users will always be the answer imo. :y
-
And there was me thinking that ''SPEED KILLS!!!!'' ::) ::) ::) ::) :y
Only if you cut it with rat poison.
-
Did he kill anyone?...........no
Did he do any damage?......no
Did he mug an old lady?...no.
Did he break into a house ?.no
Did he cause GBH?.......no
Did he murder anyone?....no
Doesn't matter what didn't happen...at 166 on a public road, the potential for death is staring you in the face.
In fact, at 166mph, a bike will cut straight through a car and remove anybody from the gene pool who happens to be in the way.
People need to be charged for the consequences....of "what actually happened."......and not for "what might have happened."
If he had killed someone.....then that is a whole different ball game.....
Fact is ......he damaged no property......and no human life........It is a simple speeding offence....and nothing more. :y :y :y :y :y
So --- if I point a loaded gun at your head for a laugh, I get off scott free because I didn't actually pull the trigger, or if I fired it and missed I still get off because I didn't actually harm you ..... is thhat whhat you are advocating?
I can, however, see and, to some degree agree, with the point that you are making ( and I think is being missed) --- that other, potentially, more serious crimes have lesser punishments. Yes, the punishments meted out by the British Courts ARE totally out of step with the nature and/ or severity of the crime in mmany cases.
However, in this case, he was breaking the law (however out of place some might think that law to be) and he was creating the potential for some cataclismic mishap if things had (so easily) gone wrong.
10 mph over the limit is (although illegal) likely to happen regularly with modern inattention --- up to the ton is naughtier still --- but over a ton and a half is plain, utter stupidity. OK he might believe (and actually be able to) he can control the bike at that speed --- but there are other road users who could so easily have popped a spoke in his wheel.
-
I wiil conceed that if your going to do it you can expect a severe punishment in todays world.(unless your a policeman) ;)
Still no excuse, they have to drive with in the letter of the law and it's only us other road users that give them the right of way to travel in the manner that they do.
Speeding is accepted, but must be done in a safe way if the roads and conditions allow.
If they were caught doing 166mph on the same road road and not in pursuit they , I am sure would suffer the consquences.
I was referring specifically to the case a few years back,when a policeman took a new car (3.2 vectra ?) for a test drive.Iirc he was doing around 75 in a 30,95 in a 40,130 in a 60 and 160 ish in a 70.He wasnt in an emergency he was just testing the car.The judge accepted his defence that he was a highly skilled driver who was honing his skills and let him off scot free. ;)
-
Looks like we all accept that it is OK to ignore the 70mph limit if we choose.The question then is,what is the absolute maximum speed we should drive at on public roads without being classed as a dangerous criminal?
I f we started a poll on this question I suspect most peoples answers would coincide with the highest speed that they have driven/ridden at on the road. ;)
[/highlight]
There is no definitive answer to that question Albitz...
but I would say that 166 MPH......on a deserted motorway at 5.00 A.M.............on a Sunday morning......is probably statistically safer than 25MPH...past a junior school when the kids are out. :y :y :y
Agreed. :y If I am on an empty motorway in good conditions I will do whatever speed I want to,and dont see anything wrong in it.If I am passing a junior school,I will be extremely careful.In fact I tend to stick very close to the limit in any built up areas,and sometimes well under it if circumstances (kids at roadside etc)suggest it is sensible to do so.
Basically ,I believe we should try hard not to put others at risk,but I wont have anyone dictate to me how much risk I am alowed to put myself at.
And I think that most of us know that in recent years all road safety efforts have been concentrated purely on the aspect of speed at the expense of all the other important areas of road safety,it hasnt made the roads any safer ,but it has got a lot of peoples backs up.
Educating people to be skilled road users will always be the answer imo. :y
On a public highway you are always putting others at risk, even when driving within the law. You are piloting a heavy missile.
And remember -- you are not the only one on the road ( even if you are the only one you think you can see) --- "the biggest nut in a car is the one behind the wheel" and "drive as though everyone else is an idiot" serves well
-
I wiil conceed that if your going to do it you can expect a severe punishment in todays world.(unless your a policeman) ;)
Still no excuse, they have to drive with in the letter of the law and it's only us other road users that give them the right of way to travel in the manner that they do.
Speeding is accepted, but must be done in a safe way if the roads and conditions allow.
If they were caught doing 166mph on the same road road and not in pursuit they , I am sure would suffer the consquences.
I was referring specifically to the case a few years back,when a policeman took a new car (3.2 vectra ?) for a test drive.Iirc he was doing around 75 in a 30,95 in a 40,130 in a 60 and 160 ish in a 70.He wasnt in an emergency he was just testing the car.The judge accepted his defence that he was a highly skilled driver who was honing his skills and let him off scot free. ;)
That judge was a pillock as well as the copper, if those are the facts
-
I wiil conceed that if your going to do it you can expect a severe punishment in todays world.(unless your a policeman) ;)
Still no excuse, they have to drive with in the letter of the law and it's only us other road users that give them the right of way to travel in the manner that they do.
Speeding is accepted, but must be done in a safe way if the roads and conditions allow.
If they were caught doing 166mph on the same road road and not in pursuit they , I am sure would suffer the consquences.
I was referring specifically to the case a few years back,when a policeman took a new car (3.2 vectra ?) for a test drive.Iirc he was doing around 75 in a 30,95 in a 40,130 in a 60 and 160 ish in a 70.He wasnt in an emergency he was just testing the car.The judge accepted his defence that he was a highly skilled driver who was honing his skills and let him off scot free. ;)
We aint mind readers. ::)
-
.....I was referring specifically to the case a few years back,when a policeman took a new car (3.2 vectra ?) for a test drive.Iirc he was doing around 75 in a 30,95 in a 40,130 in a 60 and 160 ish in a 70.He wasnt in an emergency he was just testing the car.The judge accepted his defence that he was a highly skilled driver who was honing his skills and let him off scot free. ;)
Which is what I was hinting at ....... ;) ;)
If he had perhaps kept his speed down to 159 while "familiarising" himself with the bike he might have got away with it! ::) ::) ::)
This is what you wanted ...... :-X
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/4559173.stm
-
I wiil conceed that if your going to do it you can expect a severe punishment in todays world.(unless your a policeman) ;)
Still no excuse, they have to drive with in the letter of the law and it's only us other road users that give them the right of way to travel in the manner that they do.
Speeding is accepted, but must be done in a safe way if the roads and conditions allow.
If they were caught doing 166mph on the same road road and not in pursuit they , I am sure would suffer the consquences.
I was referring specifically to the case a few years back,when a policeman took a new car (3.2 vectra ?) for a test drive.Iirc he was doing around 75 in a 30,95 in a 40,130 in a 60 and 160 ish in a 70.He wasnt in an emergency he was just testing the car.The judge accepted his defence that he was a highly skilled driver who was honing his skills and let him off scot free. ;)
That judge was a pillock as well as the copper, if those are the facts
Seconded
-
.....I was referring specifically to the case a few years back,when a policeman took a new car (3.2 vectra ?) for a test drive.Iirc he was doing around 75 in a 30,95 in a 40,130 in a 60 and 160 ish in a 70.He wasnt in an emergency he was just testing the car.The judge accepted his defence that he was a highly skilled driver who was honing his skills and let him off scot free. ;)
Which is what I was hinting at ....... ;) ;)
If he had perhaps kept his speed down to 159 while "familiarising" himself with the bike he might have got away with it! ::) ::) ::)
This is what you wanted ...... :-X
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/4559173.stm
Thats the one Andy.The case is so famous and has been brought up so many times on OOF, I thought everyone would know what we were alluding to. :y
-
Death crash Police Constable jailed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8326133.stm
-
Death crash Police Constable jailed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8326133.stm
He looks like that bloke off 'life on Mars'
-
That idiot should never be allowed out imo.
But I see what your saying James, - being a copper doesnt automatically mean you get away with it,which is fair comment imo. :y
-
It's always nice to see debate on such matters, however in this case no amount of analysis can detract from the more than justified decision of the court.
There are speed limits imposed for very good reasons and I can see no excuse for exceeding them on public roads.
The short time I spent performing uniform duties taught me that while some people may have thought that it was exciting to take chances, their attitude soon changed when something went wrong and it was too late to do anything about it.
If any driver, rider or pedestrian had the unpleasant task of removing limp, broken bodies from the scene of road collisions perhaps they would think twice about their behaviour when using the road network.
-
We will have to agree to disagree on this one I think uncle Zulu.I believe that there should be a seperate and pretty stringent driving test for motorways and that the upper speed limit should then be removed from motorways,similar to the German Autobahns.
I have btw been a victim of a serious RTA and still suffer the consequences 33 years and 16 days later. ;)
-
We will have to agree to disagree on this one I think uncle Zulu.I believe that there should be a seperate and pretty stringent driving test for motorways and that the upper speed limit should then be removed from motorways,similar to the German Autobahns.
I have btw been a victim of a serious RTA and still suffer the consequences 33 years and 16 days later. ;)
I feel that before we remove the speed limits on the motorways we should improve their standards of construction and maintenance.
(By "we" I mean "Them" not "us"!)
-
Fair point HC,I realise I am being a tad unrealistic,but it is what I would like to see happen. :y
-
There are speed limits imposed for very good reasons and I can see no excuse for exceeding them on public roads.
To be honest, I really don't think there is one day in my entire driving career where I haven't exceeded the speed limit.
However, there is a big difference between exceeding the speed limit and driving at excess speed.
-
166mph on a public road is dangerous and stupid the affects of what could have happened dont bear thinking about.
I think the sentence given out might have been a bit harsh given the situation however he did break the law and as such he has to take what ever punishment he is given.
We all speed at some point on the road weather we admit it or not weather on the motorway of our favarite strech of road how many of us have had extra training to drive fast to be able to read the road and conditions.
Personally i have a competition license,I am also an advanced driver and have sat the police roadcraft test
I am licensed to drive bikes,cars and hgv/lgv class 1
ive been driving 25 years and i am still learning the art of driving.
I think it is time we started to educate all drivers on how to drive,the driving test as it stands is outdated and dose not include skid control,motorway driving,basic machanics,or speed and its affects either too fast on a road or to slow, you could pass your test tomorrow go on to the road on your own and be a danger to all road users with out ever speeding.
I have suffered the aftermath of a serious RTA 14 months in hospital 3 months in intensive care 9 months of physio-therepy metal in both legs back and forehead, AND i was stationary when i was hit from behind by a high court judge his speed estimated to be 80-90mph in a 30 zone. He was in a jaguar and i was on a motorbike to say i am lucky to be alive is a understatement.
-
Good points omegadan67 :y
I too have a bike, car and coach licence and have done roadcraft training, IAM assessment, skid pan training etc, but I still learn every day and still make mistakes.
I cannot understand the UK licence system where there are no updates on new rules and no periodic training, plus find the fact you can pass a car test and drive a Ferrari (if you caninsure it!) staright off. The bike system is better, but should have an intermediate power limit for a few years after a full test, only lifted after advanced training.
I taught my wife to drive (mostly) and have since gone down the roadcraft and skid pan training route with her and she is good at hazard perception and smooth progress.
I look back at some of the speeds and antics I took part in years ago and now shudder to think...its an age thing.
What I would have considered fine a few years back, now makes me indignant....what a hypocrite :-/
I side with the earlier points though that repeat burglary offenders get a slap on the wrist and they have caused more misery than this guy who has been made an example of.
What does anyone think of peridoic compulsory driver training?
-
There are speed limits imposed for very good reasons and I can see no excuse for exceeding them on public roads.
To be honest, I really don't think there is one day in my entire driving career where I haven't exceeded the speed limit.
However, there is a big difference between exceeding the speed limit and driving at excess speed.
....that's a very fair point K with which, on the basis of good sense, I agree.
There is a level of reasonable conduct that can be applied to most activity and whilst that level can be dealt with by some, others may be incapable of adhering to it thus extending their conduct to the unreasonable.
There needs to be an arbitrary cut-off – which one would hope to be realistic, fair and appropriate - and in the case of road behaviour this comes in the form of various regulations one of which is of course, speed limiting.
Many people using the road network can, and do, step outside the terms of the regulations and yet remain quite safe relative to their ability to deal with any unforeseen consequences resulting from their actions – others are not so capable and it’s the duty of those charged with assessing such excessive behaviour to decide to nature of the forfeit.
To remove the element of chance in these circumstances I would suggest that it’s easier to follow the regulations, especially where speed is concerned, but each to their own - however when making the decision to move outside the boundaries of, in this case road traffic regulations, the person doing so must submit to ‘big boys rules’ and take whatever penalty is deemed appropriate in the circumstances.
-
I was involved in a serious crash about 14 years ago. I was in a Ford Sierra with my mates on our way to a nightclub. I was driving like a complete knob, you know, 19 years old, 2.0 engine, thinking I was Michael Scumacher. Rounded a corner far too fast and lost control. Hit an Astra head on which was also full of people.
10 people (inc myself) were admitted into hospital. Luckily everyone made a full recovery with no what I would call serious, life threatening, injuries. (Cuts and bruises and a compacted knee bone were the worst)
At the time of the crash It was proven that I actually wasn't speeding, but my driving was inappropriate for the road.
I went to court about six months later where I was sent for reports. Once back in court I recieved a 3 month jail term (in a Cat B prison!) and a 3 year ban with the proviso I take an extended test before my licencse was returned.
Now personally (and im sure im opening myself up for a kicking here) I feel my sentance was unjustly harsh. My car was 100% legal, my speed was under the stated roads speed limit, I didn't have a drop of alcohol in me and when I went out that night it was not with the intention of hurting anyone.
Maybe if everyone recieved the same sentance for the same crime then I could maybe understand it better, but I, like im sure most of you, watch Traffic Cops, Road Wars etc and am always amazed at the sentances handed out.
How could I have been such a larger risk than someone who breaks into a house, steals a car, has a chase with a police car, ends up totalling it into someones living room and then only get a suspended sentance and an extension to the driving ban they were already serving!!!!
Like I said earlier, im sure most people think I got what I deserved, I just wish the courts were a bit more black and white!!!
By the way, 14 years on and not a day goes past when I don't regret my actions that night and realise what a lucky SOB I am for not killing anyone inc myself. This is much stronger than any prison sentance could every be!!!!
-
I was involved in a serious crash about 14 years ago. I was in a Ford Sierra with my mates on our way to a nightclub. I was driving like a complete knob, you know, 19 years old, 2.0 engine, thinking I was Michael Scumacher. Rounded a corner far too[size=12] fast[/size] and lost control. Hit an Astra head on which was also full of people.
10 people (inc myself) were admitted into hospital. Luckily everyone made a full recovery with no what I would call serious, life threatening, injuries. (Cuts and bruises and a compacted knee bone were the worst)
At the time of the crash It was proven that I actually wasn't speeding, but my driving was inappropriate for the road.
I went to court about six months later where I was sent for reports. Once back in court I recieved a 3 month jail term (in a Cat B prison!) and a 3 year ban with the proviso I take an extended test before my licencse was returned.
Now personally (and im sure im opening myself up for a kicking here) I feel my sentance was unjustly harsh. My car was 100% legal, my speed was under the stated roads speed limit, I didn't have a drop of alcohol in me and when I went out that night it was not with the intention of hurting anyone.
Maybe if everyone recieved the same sentance for the same crime then I could maybe understand it better, but I, like im sure most of you, watch Traffic Cops, Road Wars etc and am always amazed at the sentances handed out.
How could I have been such a larger risk than someone who breaks into a house, steals a car, has a chase with a police car, ends up totalling it into someones living room and then only get a suspended sentance and an extension to the driving ban they were already serving!!!!
Like I said earlier, im sure most people think I got what I deserved, I just wish the courts were a bit more black and white!!!
By the way, 14 years on and not a day goes past when I don't regret my actions that night and realise what a lucky SOB I am for not killing anyone inc myself. This is much stronger than any prison sentance could every be!!!!
Speeding maybe not.
But thaqt was either careless or even dangerous driving.
I am not going to make comment regards all of the above, but mix what you have said with the thought of the same accisent at 2.5 times the speed of that road (as per the biker doing 166 in a 60)
Neither of you intended going out and having an incident.
You had the accident and injured 10 at low speed.
He did excessive speed and managed to evade collisision. (this particular time)
I will say one thing for you matey, that took some balls to admit and post on a public forum and as you get older and wiser you will understand that 3 months was really noting compared to 10 possible fatalities. Your sentice will live with you for life, sadly the biker will be on the road looking for the same thrill the next time he rides a bike.
-
Having spent a little (too long) time in morgues and the like I think it would be a salutory lesson for offenders to pay a visit to see the ugly side of "joy"riding and the like, up close and personal.
-
There needs to be an arbitrary cut-off – which one would hope to be realistic, fair and appropriate - and in the case of road behaviour this comes in the form of various regulations one of which is of course, speed limiting.
We don't need "speed limiting" Zulu, we already have more than enough laws to cover what's going on out there and have had for god knows how many years.....it's called "what any reasonable person considers"
To remove the element of chance in these circumstances I would suggest that it’s easier to follow the regulations, especially where speed is concerned,
Rules are for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of the wise!
but each to their own - however when making the decision to move outside the boundaries of, in this case road traffic regulations, the person doing so must submit to ‘big boys rules’ and take whatever penalty is deemed appropriate in the circumstances.
Couldn't agree more....you make the choice, you live by the consequences (if there are any).
Edited because the so called security features of the forum (which ain't worth crap), quoted the wrong person.
-
There needs to be an arbitrary cut-off – which one would hope to be realistic, fair and appropriate - and in the case of road behaviour this comes in the form of various regulations one of which is of course, speed limiting.
We don't need "speed limiting" Zulu, we already have more than enough laws to cover what's going on out there and have had for god knows how many years.....it's called "what any reasonable person considers"
To remove the element of chance in these circumstances I would suggest that it’s easier to follow the regulations, especially where speed is concerned,
Rules are for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of the wise!
but each to their own - however when making the decision to move outside the boundaries of, in this case road traffic regulations, the person doing so must submit to ‘big boys rules’ and take whatever penalty is deemed appropriate in the circumstances.
Couldn't agree more....you make the choice, you live by the consequences (if there are any).
Edited because the so called security features of the forum (which ain't worth crap), quoted the wrong person.
We are not far off in agreement on this K - a place I seem to occupy quite regularly in relation to the majority of the opinions you post.
The only point I would make in specific reply is that there seems to be a prevalence of fools over wise men abound at the moment and I would suggest, that if wise men led by example, the task of dealing with the fools would be made much more achievable by those charged with doing so.
I should also add that the speed limiting I referred to was relevant to the presently regulated limits as posted on the road network and not any additional restriction.