Originally posted by AThousandYoungPerhaps true, but missing the point.
I don't think his going at 70 would have saved a child.
Frequency of accidents, and casualty rates are positively correlated with speed. The standard of the driving still outweighs it as the critical factor, but speed stacks the odds against the driver.
At 172mph he requires 5x the stopping distance as compared to a 70mph vehicle. Obviously a kid running straight out certainly dies from 50mph upwards, but what of the vehicle pulling out half a mile up the road? If he sees it straight away, all is well, assuming the other driver doesn't manouevere inappropriately due to lack of speed perception.
If he doesn't perceive the vehicle immediately, he is covering 75 metres per second, and his vehicle maneouverability is around a quarter of that at 70mph. It will take him around 5 - 6 seconds to find himself in a position where he cannot avoid either collision, or catestrophic loss of control during avoidance.
Let's hope the road is not damp, or the other car wasn't quite so far up ahead, or it gets so much worse 🙂
PS the copper that got away with it - shouldn't have.
100mph is a discretionary ban in the UK, 130mph the fastest that highly trained traffic cops go after extensive advanced driver training - and only then with appropriate judgement.
172mph on a public highway is criminal, and even with appropriate skill and perception training, the driver cannot safely control the situation. Only luck saved this guy and any others, not the car, not whatever ability he had, or concentration he devoted.
What are these kids roaming the streets for anyway. Just trying to make us drivers miserable while we try to get home after a hard day of slave driving. I say bring back the chariott with the flasking blade wheels and let the peds beware. Get your snotty faces of the street. I don't want that crap smeared all over my windscreen.
Originally posted by cmsMasterI know this comment is tounge in cheek, but I do find the prevailing attitude towards speed and poor driving (mobile phones etc etc) in this country absurd.
I've driven a new 911 Carrera S and it's insane. I like the quote that says you travel 5 car lengths in the blink of an eye at those speeds. 🙂
Poor guy, punished to jail for having a little fun? What crap.
The same people who would utterly condemn an airline pilot for recklessly breaking the rules in the air, or a train driver for breaking the rules on the tracks, do not seem to feel the laws apply to them on the roads. They seem to think that the road safety brigade are somehow reflecting a big brother society that is out to spoil peoples fun.
600-700 people a year die as a result of criminal acts in the UK; over 5000 die as a result of poor driving. Thats a lower league football stadium full of corpses that were once family members.
Yet because the people who cause this carnage aren't 'criminals', and it was an 'accident' we abdicate any personal responsibility. To the 5000 families, I wonder if they see a distinction?
At 172 mph you pose as much risk to the innocent as someone dropping bricks off a motorway bridge, but people see the two as mutually distinct because of the concept of 'intent'.
If no one is hurt in this example, the majority see the latter act as criminal and reckless, and the former as just 'daft'. Yet if someone is killed, both get 5-10 years. What is the difference to the family I have to go and tell their loved one has been wiped out?
In 10 years, I have passed on around a dozen death messages. 11 were for road collisions, only one for a crime. The distress is the same.
I am also quite clear in the view that the same people that speed, are often the ones who also use their phones, don't wear their seat belts, and have the lowest hazard perception, and I am supported by national research. I see these people as being just as dangerous as many of the criminals I deal with, yet many of us view them as loveable rogues.
10 weeks in jail reflects the fact that this guy was a manslaughter / death by dangerous driving waiting to happen. His 'fun' could have been your mother,partner or daughter, being cut from a vehicle in several parts, and someone like me knocking on your door to give you the good news.
Some prize buffoon on a news programme I just watched made the comment "but formula one drivers go this speed and everyone enjoys the thrill - whats the difference?".
I genuinely don't have the energy to explain to someone so stupid just how many differences there are..... 🙂
Originally posted by z00tIts just a shame he hadn't crashed into a tree.
hmm that guy should find a job as a caretaker in a morgue as he seems to be singing "When will I see you again .....".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm
One less speed freak to worry about if he had.
Now us taxpayers have to feed him and give him shelter. ðŸ˜
1 edit
Stupid speed limits. Me driving 200mph on safe motorway is my dream. But nooo...in finland u are only allowed to drive at ~80mph, if the conditions are perfect.
Frankly speaking I agree with Policestate tho. World is full of bad drivers, and nobody should be allowed (except cops/ambulances) exceed 80mph on any road.
1 edit
Originally posted by PolicestateThe fact that speed correlates with accidents doesn't necessarily make speeding dangerous.
Perhaps true, but missing the point.
Frequency of accidents, and casualty rates are positively correlated with speed. The standard of the driving still outweighs it as the critical factor, but speed stacks the odds against the driver.
At 172mph he requires 5x the stopping distance as compared to a 70mph vehicle. Obviously a kid running straight out ce guy and any others, not the car, not whatever ability he had, or concentration he devoted.
In Germany there are several highways on which you MAY drive as fast as you would like to. If you drive faster than 75mph or some like that and you get involved in an accident, you are always responsible for all of the damage and so have to pay lots and lots of cash. Still, most Germans drive really fast there, and some journalists trying new fast cars go there and check them out. They too reach those incredible speeds, but almost never end up in crashes. I bevieve just one journalist ever crashed a car like that.
I think those speeds ar not necessarily dangerous. What makes the speed dangerous is the situation in which you speed. If the highway has good surface and three lanes, going just straight on, and is mostly empty, going really fast is not that dangerous if you are an experienced driver. The big problem is that there are only few places where it might be safe to go 150mph or faster. 😛 I think they imprisoned the guy probably for just reasons.
Don't forget that on most motorways the fast lane is not occupied by one car but often by up to a dozen cars at a few car lengths apart and anything happening to the guy in front will result in a huge smash up.
We all know what happens to the many people killed or seriously injured by speeding police cars doing 60 mph in a 20-30 pedestrian/built up area. There is a good reason that that speed limit is there, try going at 70 mph in a bend where the recommended is 20 mph and you could skid unless you are Shumacher in a Ferrari.
Originally posted by z00tLuckily the eejit was banned from driving for 3 years. Mind you he'll probably ignore that like he did the laws of the road. ðŸ˜
The register added a nice line :- [b]Judge parks 172mph Porsche driver for 10 weeks http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/24/speed_sentence/[/b]
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove3 years is pitiful. He showed a blatant disregard for the law and the safety of any other road user just for his own personal enjoyment. That level of social irresponsibilty deserves a much harsher punishment - take away his licence and permantly ban him from getting behind the wheel of a car.
Luckily the eejit was banned from driving for 3 years. Mind you he'll probably ignore that like he did the laws of the road. ðŸ˜