• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Eescaped prison sentence for 140+mph

I'm saying (and I can't believe that it needs to be spelled out) that if you think it's fine to drive at 144mph on public roads whilst racing and tailgating another car then you made a foolish mistake long before you were caught.

Clearer for you now ?

Why are you telling me as though I don't know that? Read my posts, they were wrong, they broke the law and deserve to be punished.

And the relevance with c63? Please spell it out.
 
Why are you telling me as though I don't know that? Read my posts, they were wrong, they broke the law and deserve to be punished.

And the relevance with c63? Please spell it out.

I've read them and twice you stated that their only mistake was getting caught.

I think you can fathom out the C63 bit but again I'll indulge you. People who buy performance cars like to drive fast and often consider the speed limit to be irrelavent to them since the sheer brilliance of their car and their driving mean that everything they do is perfectly safe.
 
circumstances to a point but not for these levels of variation.
Copper was taking suspect back to station (not dangerous etc). The suspect reported driver for showing off cars top speed as he had felt unsafe in the vehicle.
the two lads in the cars is well documented here and the tailgating was obviously unsafe, if not to the public(doubtful) then certainly to each other.
The biker was on clear dry road with no danger the anyone but himself. (he lost his job, home and marriage as a result).
Just believe these massive sentencing variations are not justified
 
I think you can fathom out the C63 bit but again I'll indulge you. People who buy performance cars like to drive fast and often consider the speed limit to be irrelavent to them since the sheer brilliance of their car and their driving mean that everything they do is perfectly safe.

I have been sat at 70mph (cruise control on) and have had many 1.2 corsas / white van man or dare i say your average rep fly past me at 100mph plus. So i wouldn't class them as a performance car.
Not everyone who buys a performance car "drives it likes its stolen" every time they are behind the wheel.
 
I've read them and twice you stated that their only mistake was getting caught.

I think you can fathom out the C63 bit but again I'll indulge you. People who buy performance cars like to drive fast and often consider the speed limit to be irrelavent to them since the sheer brilliance of their car and their driving mean that everything they do is perfectly safe.

So any performance car, not just c63. Thanks!
 
Will/has high speed driving become more common place as vehicles become more stable and more powerful? I think so.
I usually have my cruise on at 70mph and have cars constantly thundering past me. I have also been known to travel at higher speeds, especially whilst on 2 wheels and on an empty motorway, but i've still had lots of vehicles cruise past me.

MB claim that a C220cdi W204 will do 144mph. So by my reckoning, pretty much every other car is capable of doing these speeds these days.
 
its the unfairness that gets me
copper doing 140mph - disciplined but not prosecuted
these two 140 mph - ban, fine & CS
biker 120 mph - 6 months in prison !!!

discrimination and bias me thinks

You can't be sent to prison for speeding, dangerous driving otoh....

The copper argued that it wasn't dangerous on an empty road with a trained driver. Not sure I agree but the courts did.

The biker had a child on the back without full leathers, in the wet, on a single carriageway approaching a bend. The court thought that was dangerous enough for some prison time.
 
interesting response proves more common than thought.
The copper tale hasn't been to court though !!!!! (another example) plus seems that civilians are never considered as being trained drivers .... very strange.

the biker... yep I remember that one too but different tale.

still unfair attitude. Bikers then automatically dangerous and severe penalty.
cars can go either way but custodial sentence is rare.

coppers always state.. ah well they are trained drivers. Reactions time of humans still gets impaired and the innocent public don't know whether its a copper or not. Too many RTA with coppers and their alleged higher level of training. Also note the one that wanted to test the top speed of his car so took it to 159 mph to try it out. only got a ban after public out cry.

not saying the bikers are innocent but a fair playing field would be nice.... personal experiences mate !!!!
 
interesting response proves more common than thought.
The copper tale hasn't been to court though !!!!! (another example) plus seems that civilians are never considered as being trained drivers .... very strange.

the biker... yep I remember that one too but different tale.

still unfair attitude. Bikers then automatically dangerous and severe penalty.
cars can go either way but custodial sentence is rare.

coppers always state.. ah well they are trained drivers. Reactions time of humans still gets impaired and the innocent public don't know whether its a copper or not. Too many RTA with coppers and their alleged higher level of training. Also note the one that wanted to test the top speed of his car so took it to 159 mph to try it out. only got a ban after public out cry.

not saying the bikers are innocent but a fair playing field would be nice.... personal experiences mate !!!!

Quite agree…………a level playing field would be nice. Fat chance of that though, IMHO.

Regarding so called 'trained drivers', true or not, I was told that the higher the level of training the less reaction time is a factor because of an enhanced ability to see problems before they arise. What do you reckon?

It was reported in December 2010 that Met drivers were having 12 accidents a day with, in the three years 2008-2010, five pedestrian fatalities and one cyclist fatality out of 22 fatalities including pursuits. London police seem to have lots of collisions but not many fatal ones in comparison to how many us mortals are having every year; is that the result higher level of training?
 
Last edited:
How did you decide that? I don't, like you, go for a blast on seemingly deserted roads to come back with a smile.

Remember this: you know your car, you know the road, you know your limits, but you never know what's round the corner.

I don't drive at extremes to get a buzz, I don't do track days, I don't modify my car for speed, performance or anything else. I drive from A to B like a poser in a Burberry jacket - look at me I have a 6.3, that's it.

My whole argument has been that speed is not the only factor to be concerned about. Nothing was mentioned about my inabilities, which you turned into abilities.



I don't "just go for a blast", I tend to be going somewhere. And I like to get there in one piece.

Actually, you started the whole thing. All of the above is in the posts that you've already made and the blaringly obvious blindness to the fact that doing 140 on a British A road is not good.

As for not seeing round corners, you're absolutely right. Look at this road.

2-hartsid4.jpg


Note the corners. Note how despite the corners you can see about a mile and a half of road (and everything on it) despite there being corners. Note by reading the road ahead you can make swift and legal progress. Note that this can be done without endangering anyone.

For the sake of everyone else at least do some advanced driving and learn something. You need to understand that advanced driving techniques does not mean driving like a lunatic but driving safely in whatever conditions are available. At 140 on an A road you will see a lot less of the present dangers on the road ahead than on a twisty A or B road where the speeds are less (and yes when you can't see round corners to read the road ahead so you slow down ffs).


I'll concede one victory to you - I normally don't get drawn into conversations with trolls, so well done.
 
I don't "just go for a blast", I tend to be going somewhere. And I like to get there in one piece.

Actually, you started the whole thing. All of the above is in the posts that you've already made and the blaringly obvious blindness to the fact that doing 140 on a British A road is not good.

As for not seeing round corners, you're absolutely right. Look at this road.

Note the corners. Note how despite the corners you can see about a mile and a half of road (and everything on it) despite there being corners. Note by reading the road ahead you can make swift and legal progress. Note that this can be done without endangering anyone.

For the sake of everyone else at least do some advanced driving and learn something. You need to understand that advanced driving techniques does not mean driving like a lunatic but driving safely in whatever conditions are available. At 140 on an A road you will see a lot less of the present dangers on the road ahead than on a twisty A or B road where the speeds are less (and yes when you can't see round corners to read the road ahead so you slow down ffs).

I'll concede one victory to you - I normally don't get drawn into conversations with trolls, so well done.

ok
 
Will/has high speed driving become more common place as vehicles become more stable and more powerful? I think so.
I usually have my cruise on at 70mph and have cars constantly thundering past me. I have also been known to travel at higher speeds, especially whilst on 2 wheels and on an empty motorway, but i've still had lots of vehicles cruise past me.

MB claim that a C220cdi W204 will do 144mph. So by my reckoning, pretty much every other car is capable of doing these speeds these days.

It's much safer to 140 mph than it used to be (better brakes, more grip, more stability, actual downforce etc. etc - basically technology has moved on..... but still not as safe as doing 70 under the same conditions and never will be. Biggest unknown in any driving is other drivers, their awareness and capability.

I have a problem with test pilots and hire car heroes (or any other driver - wouldn't want to discrimate against a particular model in a particular brand!?!) limited experience, capability, trained or not that endangers me or my family. That's where it becomes unacceptable.

From the original post (jeez, who started this!), knowing the A19 very well, I know there is no point on that road that 140 is anywhere near safe, no matter if it's busy or not at any time of day or night, perfect conditions or not. Anyone who thinks it is is sadly deluded.
 
Hi giantvanman
The argument of increased perception from advanced training is valid I think. It will improve reaction times. Very slightly though, milliseconds. I don't think it can be trotted out to defend police all the time though. Remember generally an 80 year old and 25 year old will have very different reaction times too but can both drive at 70 mph. It's all about appropriate use of speed within a given environment.
With regards to the London stats I think it is generally accepted that the likelihood of fatality reduces with speed of accident and in cities speed is usually lower so statistics can be misleading. You can often use them to prove both sides of an argument. Depending on how you present them.
Interesting debate though !!!
 
In the interest of fairness here's your entire post from which I quoted earlier:

So you've been over but just luckily not caught. These guys' mistake - getting caught.

And it doesn't in any way shrink the hole that you've dug for yourself does it ?
 
Hi giantvanman
The argument of increased perception from advanced training is valid I think. It will improve reaction times. Very slightly though, milliseconds. I don't think it can be trotted out to defend police all the time though. Remember generally an 80 year old and 25 year old will have very different reaction times too but can both drive at 70 mph. It's all about appropriate use of speed within a given environment.
With regards to the London stats I think it is generally accepted that the likelihood of fatality reduces with speed of accident and in cities speed is usually lower so statistics can be misleading. You can often use them to prove both sides of an argument. Depending on how you present them.
Interesting debate though !!!

Hi Grahamcarvlin
The older I get, greater is the realisation about how much I don't know which I why I ask questions.
Good thinking, that, if I may say so. And thank you.
 
On and On and Ariston...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom