Originally posted by knightwestIt's irrelevant whether there were any victims in this particular case. The fines and sentences are a deterrent to other idiots who would be just as reckless if there were no penalties.
Honestly, where is the victim in this "crime"
There would soon be plenty of victims.
Originally posted by knightwestIf you read my post you would see that I too do not agree with sending him to jail at the tax payer's expense, I would however support sending him to jail if somehow he was made to pay for the cost. Mindless morons driving around at over 170 mph is not acceptable (especially in other people's cars without the owner's permission to drive it). As someone else said if he wants to do this let him pay for the hire of a special car at a racetrack rather than on a public road in stolen or at best 'borrowed without permission' car
Nevertheless, it was a victimless crime. If the police hadn't clocked him no one would be aware that this had ever occured.
I am not excusing his behaviour, but I think there is no point in sending him to jail. Disqualify him from driving, and for a long time, yes.
A custodial sentence is a stiff warning to any other people who endanger their own lives and those of the public in such a manner. The usual fine and 3 points on your licence is usually for people speeding i.e. doing 31mph in a 30 mph limit. This guy was not speeding. He was on some sort of death cruise in somebody else's car without permission.
Prince Naseem the boxer, was involved in a 90-mph three-car collision where some people were seriously hurt and he was jailed for 15 months. He was apparently "showing off" his £300,000 silver McLaren-Mercedes. Note how many times he had "motoring infringements" and whether a fine would have been appropriate given his deep pockets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naseem_Hamed#Controversy_outside_the_ring
In fact the 172 mph motorist escaped lightly considering that a guy was jailed for 5 months in 2003 for doing 156mph in a BMW M3 in Scotland in 2003. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/24/nspeed124.xml
Given the previous court cases and the fact he had no permission he should have had 8 months in the slammer.
It depends on how much you overspeed by. Overspeeding by a large extent is a criminal matter and you could be convicted of dangerous driving. Dangerous Driving as the 156 mph driver found out is met with time in the slammer. Don't worry if you get caught soon and spend time in the slammer - plenty of inmates are into chess.
The post that was quoted here has been removedI would say about 80% of drivers (incl me) drive over the speed limit, but I rarely go over 90mph these days, we aren't arguing over that, we are arguing over someone going to jail for doing over 170 mph! which you don't agree with either so you are also in the same camp.
Originally posted by marmalade teacakeDelivered death messages to not one, but two bikers families. One going 120mph at 4am (your post prompted the memory), who simply misjudged a bend in a residential area, and one going 90 in a 40 zone, who was no doubt driving very competently indeed. Shame about the guy who decided to turn right at that moment without checking his mirror.
Woo.......theres a big anti-speed brigade in here.......Guess not too many of you guys are bikers.......
As previously mentioned, speed itself doesnt kill. Its the situation. 80mph in rush hour is way more dangerous than 150+ at 4:30am
Not the bikers fault, but had he been going 40 - no orphans, and probably better hazard perception by the other party (who was expecting traffic to be going 40 mph)
I have to correct (again) the assertion that speed doesnt kill. It does, by reducing reaction times, punishing minor errors that otherwise would not endanger the driver (and other road users), increasing breaking distance, reducing manouverability, and increasing the likelihood of other road users (remember them?) misjudging the hazard you present. The fact that people can and do drive at such speeds, without incident, does not mean they are not taking a significant risk, or that high speed is safe.
Being a good driver reduces these risks - it cannot eliminate them. When compared per 100,000 population (equivalent), rates of fatalities/serious injuries are higher amongst racing drivers and police traffic drivers than the rest of the population. They are lowest amongst the over 55s. What does this tell you about the speed vs skill argument?
Ask an insurance broker to assess the risk for you. You will get a distinctly predicable answer. They are not on a morale crusade - simply assessing probability on the basis of the available research.
I say all drivers exceeding the speed limit by one mph be shot. They set the bad example for the 172 mph driver. So the 172 mph driver is really the victem. He should be compensated with free gasoline for life and exemption from all speeding violations.. Spare the rod and spoil the child. I say: spare the hotrod and you won't spoil the fun." Drive faster, and let the pedestrians beware. And other motorists knew the risks when the climbed into their chariots.. Let the good times roll.
Originally posted by knightwestThe guy
Honestly, where is the victim in this "crime"
- took a vehicle without permission (called aggravated vehicle taking to disquise that it is in fact theft)
- was driving dangerously at 172 mph when someone doing 156 mph went to jail for 5 months.
- he got off lightly indeed
Originally posted by z00tI have to agree with knightwest... they should have waited for the driver to KILL someone before they did anything at all.[/sarcasm]
The guy
- took a vehicle without permission (called aggravated vehicle taking to disquise that it is in fact theft)
- was driving dangerously at 172 mph when someone doing 156 mph went to jail for 5 months.
- he got off lightly indeed
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitThe 156 mph motorist did not kill anyone but yet was jailed. The law says dangerous driving warrants the slammer not killing anyone. In America that probably the case too unless your a celeb.
I have to agree with knightwest... they should have waited for the driver to KILL someone before they did anything at all.[/sarcasm]
P-