Eescaped prison sentence for 140+mph
Not to mention the potential for mechanical failure, or tyre blow-out. I wonder what the chances are of these vehicles being correctly maintained?
(Out of curiosity, did you insert the 'awareness course' phrase as a badge of honour??)
The negative comments above make it sound like this is the worst thing ever and imply that driving at 90mph, like many people do, is perfectly safe when it also isn't.
Everything we do carries a risk, from the point we step out of the door, infact even before then.
Now let's imagine I cross the road to the corner shop, and oh, someone is texting when driving at 20mph or a lorry driver forgot to apply the handbrake down the road and I had my headphones on and didn't hear the police car,.....blah blah blah...speculation!
144mph was clearly safe in that example because no one was hurt. What ifs are just what ifs.
Everything we do carries a risk, from the point we step out of the door, infact even before then.
Now let's imagine I cross the road to the corner shop, and oh, someone is texting when driving at 20mph or a lorry driver forgot to apply the handbrake down the road and I had my headphones on and didn't hear the police car,.....blah blah blah...speculation!
144mph was clearly safe in that example because no one was hurt. What ifs are just what ifs.
ivandraganov
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 428
There are lots of HGV, slow moving farm machinery and lots of crossing roads on A19.Think is very irresponsible to go over 80mph on that road anyway...
Why 80? Why not 70 like the law states? And 80 in a Ferrari is probably safer than 70 in a Micra because one has better brakes than the other.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,695
- Location
- London\Essex
- Car
- E63s s213 2019, E55 2004 Silver-SOLD, E63 w212 Weistec AMG-SOLD, E55 2004-SOLD, C36 1997-SOLD
must be a cheap RS up for sale somewhere!
public roads with those sort of speeds , not good!
public roads with those sort of speeds , not good!
V12
MB Enthusiast
You are correct that there is a certain amount of risk to living life in general.
I think what most people are referring to is limiting risk. The difference between driving at 70mph and 140mph is a massive difference in the amount of risk.
Personally I wouldn't sit that close behind another car at 30mph, let alone 140mph. That's what I find most irresponsible, yes, speed is dangerous in the wrong hands and with others around, but doing so whilst so close to the bumper of the car in front, that's just stupidity.
They are increasing the probability that they will be included in the next natural selection statistics.
ivandraganov
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 428
Ideally should be 70mph,up to 80 would be reasonable depend on conditions, though there is no excuse when cought by speed camera..RWDpetrol said:
D
Deleted member 37751
Guest
If we were in Holland, we'd be able to smoke pot legally.
But we aren't, so we can't.
If they were, I would accept it - we all take calculated risks. But they're not, they're mixing the law with risk with being unkind to the drivers with what ifs with penalties with consequences. If this were in Germany, there would be no discussion. If it's the law 'we' are precious about, they got caught and penalised. Thankfully the judge did not serve a prison sentence.
Giantvanman
MB Enthusiast
RWDpetrol-144mph was clearly safe in that example because no one was hurt. What ifs are just what ifs.
I'm not sure I have understood you properly so please forgive me for asking.
Are you saying that if no one is hurt, it must have been safe?
And that being the case, are you saying we should make no allowances for quantifiable risks of possible outcomes based on, say, events that have gone before?
Whilst I agree there are a certain number of potential risks in everyday life, would you say that when individual chooses to drive like that, everyone else should just accept it and wait and see, hoping the driver never makes a mistake or has a mechanical problem?
I'm not sure I have understood you properly so please forgive me for asking.
Are you saying that if no one is hurt, it must have been safe?
And that being the case, are you saying we should make no allowances for quantifiable risks of possible outcomes based on, say, events that have gone before?
Whilst I agree there are a certain number of potential risks in everyday life, would you say that when individual chooses to drive like that, everyone else should just accept it and wait and see, hoping the driver never makes a mistake or has a mechanical problem?
D
Deleted member 37751
Guest
I have a clean license.
We do that when all others break the speed limit, don't we? It's pot luck if they get caught.
Giantvanman
MB Enthusiast
I am not sure I am grasping your point correctly. Are you saying that exceeding the speed limit is just that and these guys are no different to anyone else who speeds even if they are doing twice the speed limit?
Are you saying that if no one is hurt, it must have been safe?
And that being the case, are you saying we should make no allowances for quantifiable risks of possible outcomes based on, say, events that have gone before?
Last edited:
Yes, upto the last point because exceeding it is illegal for all.
The risk when exceeding is probably immeasurable and eg I would rather have a skilled driver passing me at 144mph than a distracted one behind me at 75mph.
D
Deleted member 37751
Guest
Where do I say that I've been over the speed limit?
What's the fastest you've been on a public road?
D
Deleted member 37751
Guest
And that's where your weak point falls down; it's all good and well a pro doing 144 mph, it's the other motorists around him not expecting a car to whoosh past at more than double the speed limit that's the problem.
1) Yes albeit with risk attached.
2) No, we should. We should punish but not with prison. And we should make more allowances for other more dangerous past outcomes/events like driving when distracted even within the speed limit.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
