http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/6457871.stm
The alleged offences include 159 mph on a motorway (70 mph limit)
131 mph on an A road (probably a 60mph limit)
and 91 mph on a 30 mph limit road
He was originally cleared of the same charge but the High Court overturned his acquittal and ordered a retrial.
Then he was found guilty of dangerous driving and given an absolute discharge. i.e. found guilty but given no punishment (other than the criminal record, I guess)
The officer appealed and now the High Court wants it looked at again.
In a statement read out in court, Pc Milton said: "I was advised to familiarise myself with vehicles, so when there was a need to respond at speed you were aware of its performance."
Now, I can understand the need for familiarity with the handling of the vehicle if you are going to need such speeds, but I can see no justification for doing it on public highways. Especially if you are not yet familiar with the vehicle.
I believe this incident occurred somewhere around midnight, and knowing the area a bit, it may be that there were empty stretches of motorway, but 91 in a 30 is going too far.
Originally posted by aging blitzerseems wierd that he was taken to court in the first place, as he was a policeman in an unmarked patrol car. i wonder what sort of police car does 160mph? the speeds done arent surprising, i know of places around london where you could safely do 90 in a 30 zone, and even 160 on the north circular road.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/6457871.stm
The alleged offences include 159 mph on a motorway (70 mph limit)
131 mph on an A road (probably a 60mph limit)
and 91 mph on a 30 mph limit road
He was originally cleared of the same charge but the High Court overturned his acquittal and ordered a retrial.
Then he was found guilty of ...[text shortened]... a bit, it may be that there were empty stretches of motorway, but 91 in a 30 is going too far.
Originally posted by eamon oWhere in London can you safely do 90mph in a 30mph zone?
seems wierd that he was taken to court in the first place, as he was a policeman in an unmarked patrol car. i wonder what sort of police car does 160mph? the speeds done arent surprising, i know of places around london where you could safely do 90 in a 30 zone, and even 160 on the north circular road.
Originally posted by lauseywell there are places on dual carriageways where the speed limit drops suddenly from 50 to 30, where the 30mph limit is "artificial", it is designed for the worst conditions ie. the dark, rain, crowded road/ tailbacks, lousy drivers, crap cars, drivers on the phone etc.
Where in London can you safely do 90mph in a 30mph zone?
In excellent dry bright conditions where there are no cars or people around, a good driver in a performance car can quickly reach high speeds without endangering anyone, and stop very quickly too.
the argument "what if a tyre blows?" is silly, if im driving down the busy narrow hight street with cyclists coming up the inside etc, and a tyre blows at 30mph then the same thing applies. Ive never had a tyre blow-out, i have high performance tyres suitable for speeds of up to 160 and they very rarely go over 100. Same thing on the motorway, ive often been on the m11 when there has not been another car in sight for miles, 70mph on a road like that could be dangerous because you might fall asleep with boredom
😴
Originally posted by eamon omaybe. but at 30 cyclists and pedestrians have got a chance.
the argument "what if a tyre blows?" is silly, if im driving down the busy narrow hight street with cyclists coming up the inside etc, and a tyre blows at 30mph then the same thing applies. Ive never had a tyre blow-out,
at 90 ?
really?
I've had a blowout on the motorway, and fortunately it was only at 60mph and the road wasn't busy.
it was only 1 example of something unexpected.
How about potholes then.
The faster you go the less chance you have of seeing them, let alone avoiding them.
Any number of other things.
its much riskier coming in to land in a huge plane with hundreds of people on board, thats what makes me nervous. my point was that speed is relative, high speed can be as safe as low speed depending on the conditions, the technology and the skill and alertness of the driver. remember were hurtling through space at high speed anyway. what is very dangerous is people sleep-driving around at low speed with phones clamped to their ears. at low speed it is very easy to lose concentration. basically, i feel that speed in itself is not dangerous.
A friend of mine was taken to court and got 6 points on his license for speeding. He is a fireman and was driving the pump to a fire with persons reported, at around 3am in a rural area. That call out brought 2 people down a ladder, no other way out for them. He told the magistrates he would do it again if he felt it was necessary to save lives as that is his job.
I think in this situation it was wrong of the magistrates to punish him with a risk to his license. 🙂
Originally posted by Pawn Qweenwe need a bit more common sense in the application of the law.
A friend of mine was taken to court and got 6 points on his license for speeding. He is a fireman and was driving the pump to a fire with persons reported, at around 3am in a rural area. That call out brought 2 people down a ladder, no other way out for them. He told the magistrates he would do it again if he felt it was necessary to save lives as that i ...[text shortened]... in this situation it was wrong of the magistrates to punish him with a risk to his license. 🙂
the judges are so out of touch its unreal. what about that senior judge who was recently convicted of exposing himself to a woman on a train
😲
Originally posted by eamon oHow do you work that out. Air travel is reported to be safer than road travel (by passenger miles).
its much riskier coming in to land in a huge plane with hundreds of people on board, thats what makes me nervous.
3200 UK road deaths in 2005
about 900-1000 worldwide deaths in airline disasters every year.
www.cover-mag.co.uk/public/showPage.html?page=435753
compare UK rail/road/air deaths
www.igreens.org.uk/uk_rail_accident_deaths.htm
Plane landings are very controlled affairs, compared to the organised chaos on the roads.
Originally posted by eamon oAnd yet you are still here to tell the tale.
you should have been on some of the landings ive experienced, especially at city airport
A testament to its safety.
Personally, I think using passenger miles travelled isn't a good measure of air travel safety. It should just be number of journey's because the major dangers are at take-off and landing.
yeah it all goes back to that old one about a tyre blowing-out on a car at speed. a bit like saying "what if youre running for a bus and a pulmonary artery blows out?" for gods sake.
and if you measured the number of car tyre blow-outs as a percentage of the number of wheel revolutions in the world per year......youre more likely to be hit by a falling dinosaur
😀
Originally posted by eamon oyeah, but if your pulmonary artery ruptures you fall down dead, you don´t keep going at 90mph in a large metal box on 3 working wheels.
yeah it all goes back to that old one about a tyre blowing-out on a car at speed. a bit like saying "what if youre running for a bus and a pulmonary artery blows out?" for gods sake.
and if you measured the number of car tyre blow-outs as a percentage of the number of wheel revolutions in the world per year......youre more likely to be hit by a falling dinosaur
😀