Seat Leon 154mph A11
Discussion
The thing is, these 'OMG, the children!!' what-ifs are irrelevant - it didn't happen. I could come up with some great ones, but again - what does it prove?
What did happen is that he exceeded the speed limit (by a lot). As Von said "The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by", which is entirely fair enough and I'm sure he'll get roasted.
No-one has said it's acceptable, but this sort of hyper-emotive crap winds me up.
What did happen is that he exceeded the speed limit (by a lot). As Von said "The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by", which is entirely fair enough and I'm sure he'll get roasted.
No-one has said it's acceptable, but this sort of hyper-emotive crap winds me up.
4rephill said:
Around 9pm on Friday March 18th - What are the chances of anyone else possibly using the A11 at that time of the night?
Bound to be completely deserted!
Here's the thing you need to take into account: The driver also either made an assumption that there was no one else on that section of road at that time, or, he simply didn't care if anyone else was there and the risk he represented to others by travelling at 154mph.
Tell you what: Go and stand next to a fast road (60 or 70mph limit), and see just how fast the cars pass you by - You'll be surprised just how fast it really is!
Then, picture a car passing you at that rate when you're already driving at 70mph - Perhaps that might put it into perspective for you.
If you can't see that driving at 154mph @ 9pm on a Friday evening, when there's a high probability of other motorists being on the same stretch of road as you is dangerous, then I'd be worried about the sort of speeds that you deem acceptable to drive at!
(And I'm saying that as someone who rarely sticks to the speed limits! 10~30mph over the limit is one thing, but 84mph over the limit? - at 9pm on a Friday? - That's just too crazy for words and should be covered by criminal negligence!)
I don't get why there is a fixation on the risk he posed to others so that dangerous driving couldn't be a suitable charge.Bound to be completely deserted!
Here's the thing you need to take into account: The driver also either made an assumption that there was no one else on that section of road at that time, or, he simply didn't care if anyone else was there and the risk he represented to others by travelling at 154mph.
Tell you what: Go and stand next to a fast road (60 or 70mph limit), and see just how fast the cars pass you by - You'll be surprised just how fast it really is!
Then, picture a car passing you at that rate when you're already driving at 70mph - Perhaps that might put it into perspective for you.
If you can't see that driving at 154mph @ 9pm on a Friday evening, when there's a high probability of other motorists being on the same stretch of road as you is dangerous, then I'd be worried about the sort of speeds that you deem acceptable to drive at!
(And I'm saying that as someone who rarely sticks to the speed limits! 10~30mph over the limit is one thing, but 84mph over the limit? - at 9pm on a Friday? - That's just too crazy for words and should be covered by criminal negligence!)
The law doesn't have that as a condition.
The law mentions risk of danger to ANY PERSON, so that includes the driver, or a risk of damage to property.
Driving like a god at high speed does not make the driver a good driver but does fit the definition of "the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver,"
Is driving at 154 mph expected of someone who is careful and competently? I think not. 154mph on a public road, 69 metres every second, is by any standard highly risky. If something came into vision that was to be avoided about 3 football pitches in front of the driver, then the vehicle would not even have begun to be slowed by the time the vehicle reached it. Is that dangerous? It's got to be hasn't it!
2A Meaning of dangerous driving.
(1)For the purposes of sections 1 and 2 above a person is to be regarded as driving dangerously if (and, subject to subsection (2) below, only if)—
(a)the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and
(b)it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.
(2)A person is also to be regarded as driving dangerously for the purposes of sections 1 and 2 above if it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving the vehicle in its current state would be dangerous.
(3)In subsections (1) and (2) above “dangerous” refers to danger either of injury to any person or of serious damage to property; and in determining for the purposes of those subsections what would be expected of, or obvious to, a competent and careful driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.
(4)In determining for the purposes of subsection (2) above the state of a vehicle, regard may be had to anything attached to or carried on or in it and to the manner in which it is a
Mike_Mac said:
The thing is, these 'OMG, the children!!' what-ifs are irrelevant - it didn't happen. I ,,could come up with some great ones, but again - what does it prove?
What did happen is that he exceeded the speed limit (by a lot). As Von said "The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by", which is entirely fair enough and I'm sure he'll get roasted.
No-one has said it's acceptable, but this sort of hyper-emotive crap winds me up.
Once a danger is realised then the danger is over. By definition something that is dangerous means that the bad outcome, made more likely by an action, is yet to happen.What did happen is that he exceeded the speed limit (by a lot). As Von said "The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by", which is entirely fair enough and I'm sure he'll get roasted.
No-one has said it's acceptable, but this sort of hyper-emotive crap winds me up.
4rephill said:
Pete317 said:
You're assuming that there was another person on that section of road at the time
Around 9pm on Friday March 18th - What are the chances of anyone else possibly using the A11 at that time of the night?Bound to be completely deserted!
Here's the thing you need to take into account: The driver also either made an assumption that there was no one else on that section of road at that time, or, he simply didn't care if anyone else was there and the risk he represented to others by travelling at 154mph.
Tell you what: Go and stand next to a fast road (60 or 70mph limit), and see just how fast the cars pass you by - You'll be surprised just how fast it really is!
Then, picture a car passing you at that rate when you're already driving at 70mph - Perhaps that might put it into perspective for you.
If you can't see that driving at 154mph @ 9pm on a Friday evening, when there's a high probability of other motorists being on the same stretch of road as you is dangerous, then I'd be worried about the sort of speeds that you deem acceptable to drive at!
(And I'm saying that as someone who rarely sticks to the speed limits! 10~30mph over the limit is one thing, but 84mph over the limit? - at 9pm on a Friday? - That's just too crazy for words and should be covered by criminal negligence!)
I was commenting on posters who jump to conclusions based on assumptions.
And you can leave your condescending attitude at the door as well.
cmaguire said:
On a separate note, if all road users looked properly, observed correct lane discipline and considered using their indicators then anything shy of 200mph could in principle be done wihout drama on many roads given the right vehicle and driver. 150 is easily achievable.
Yes it's being done at Siverstone this afternoon, However those speeds on the roads with your average roadcar/driver, No Thanks.cmaguire said:
I expect he'll get (I'm not using 'deserve') a 6 month ban if he puts on a good performance in court or nearer a year if he doesn't.
On a separate note, if all road users looked properly, observed correct lane discipline and considered using their indicators then anything shy of 200mph could in principle be done wihout drama on many roads given the right vehicle and driver. 150 is easily achievable.
Really? At that speed you could be closing on others at such a rate that unless they were staring in their mirrors then they've little chance of seeing you. On a separate note, if all road users looked properly, observed correct lane discipline and considered using their indicators then anything shy of 200mph could in principle be done wihout drama on many roads given the right vehicle and driver. 150 is easily achievable.
How would your scenario cope with me doing 148 and you doing 150 on a three lane stretch of motorway? There is very little motorway that is straight and flat enough to. OT mask someone doing that kind of speed when glancing in your mirrors. Don't quote Germany here, that's a completely separate discussion and autobahnen are now restricted in nearly 50% of cases. They're also a set of roads where every road user has grown up knowing the potential speeds, unlike here.
agtlaw said:
Back on topic:
- Should he be disqualified? [the available range is 1 day - life]
- If so, then for how long?
- Why? [What's the point of a ban?]
Yes- Should he be disqualified? [the available range is 1 day - life]
- If so, then for how long?
- Why? [What's the point of a ban?]
6 month ban
Whoever brought the charge has deemed the offence 'speeding'; not DD or reckless. Offender was probably very sane and 'normal' - apparently if your wheels are turning too fast you don't automatically become a stark staring murderous loon - who knew?!
I suspect he wasn't accompanied and though his driving exceeded the limit, that was the only infraction.
I will guess at an £850 fine.
I expect to be completely wrong also.... :-)
tapereel said:
Mike_Mac said:
The thing is, these 'OMG, the children!!' what-ifs are irrelevant - it didn't happen. I ,,could come up with some great ones, but again - what does it prove?
What did happen is that he exceeded the speed limit (by a lot). As Von said "The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by", which is entirely fair enough and I'm sure he'll get roasted.
No-one has said it's acceptable, but this sort of hyper-emotive crap winds me up.
Once a danger is realised then the danger is over. By definition something that is dangerous means that the bad outcome, made more likely by an action, is yet to happen.What did happen is that he exceeded the speed limit (by a lot). As Von said "The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by", which is entirely fair enough and I'm sure he'll get roasted.
No-one has said it's acceptable, but this sort of hyper-emotive crap winds me up.
If you are equating 'dangerous' actions and the potential 'bad outcomes' of them to justify the use, in this case, of 'what-ifs', then I don't see the relevance - as I've said, you could come up with an amazing range of 'what-ifs' to illustrate every potential danger that might occur - that means nothing.
If he was driving to the point where his actions were dangerous, then he'd have been done with Dangerous Driving, which encompasses exactly what I think you are talking about. He wasn't. He was done for speeding.
snorky782 said:
Really? At that speed you could be closing on others at such a rate that unless they were staring in their mirrors then they've little chance of seeing you.
How would your scenario cope with me doing 148 and you doing 150 on a three lane stretch of motorway? There is very little motorway that is straight and flat enough to. OT mask someone doing that kind of speed when glancing in your mirrors. Don't quote Germany here, that's a completely separate discussion and autobahnen are now restricted in nearly 50% of cases. They're also a set of roads where every road user has grown up knowing the potential speeds, unlike here.
Before I make any manoeuver I always take either 2 shorter looks or 1 longer look. In either case I am able to judge the closing speed of any vehicle. Based on experience it is not difficult to know near enough the max speed possible that an appearing vehicle may be doing (I don't assume everybody will be obeying the limit).How would your scenario cope with me doing 148 and you doing 150 on a three lane stretch of motorway? There is very little motorway that is straight and flat enough to. OT mask someone doing that kind of speed when glancing in your mirrors. Don't quote Germany here, that's a completely separate discussion and autobahnen are now restricted in nearly 50% of cases. They're also a set of roads where every road user has grown up knowing the potential speeds, unlike here.
As to your 148/150 scenario, at that speed overtaking would seem, to me, fairly pointless so I would just follow you at 148 in all likelyhood. I'm not suggesting that 150 could be a default cruising speed on arterial routes as there are limited places this could be maintained even without traffic. But 120 is comfortable in loads of places and used to be my chosen cruising speed at one time.
cmaguire said:
snorky782 said:
Really? At that speed you could be closing on others at such a rate that unless they were staring in their mirrors then they've little chance of seeing you.
How would your scenario cope with me doing 148 and you doing 150 on a three lane stretch of motorway? There is very little motorway that is straight and flat enough to. OT mask someone doing that kind of speed when glancing in your mirrors. Don't quote Germany here, that's a completely separate discussion and autobahnen are now restricted in nearly 50% of cases. They're also a set of roads where every road user has grown up knowing the potential speeds, unlike here.
Before I make any manoeuver I always take either 2 shorter looks or 1 longer look. In either case I am able to judge the closing speed of any vehicle. Based on experience it is not difficult to know near enough the max speed possible that an appearing vehicle may be doing (I don't assume everybody will be obeying the limit).How would your scenario cope with me doing 148 and you doing 150 on a three lane stretch of motorway? There is very little motorway that is straight and flat enough to. OT mask someone doing that kind of speed when glancing in your mirrors. Don't quote Germany here, that's a completely separate discussion and autobahnen are now restricted in nearly 50% of cases. They're also a set of roads where every road user has grown up knowing the potential speeds, unlike here.
As to your 148/150 scenario, at that speed overtaking would seem, to me, fairly pointless so I would just follow you at 148 in all likelyhood. I'm not suggesting that 150 could be a default cruising speed on arterial routes as there are limited places this could be maintained even without traffic. But 120 is comfortable in loads of places and used to be my chosen cruising speed at one time.
vonhosen said:
But to be fair it's not about you, it's about what passes for the minimum standard of a competent & careful UK driver.
Most UK drivers aren't competent full-stop from where I am watching. But I understand your point, and therefore I would fully expect a ban for doing big speeds even though it would irritate the hell out of me. It's the grey area from 96ish to 110ish where I do struggle to accept it (in view of the crap driving that so many get away with at much lower speeds).cmaguire said:
Before I make any manoeuver I always take either 2 shorter looks or 1 longer look. In either case I am able to judge the closing speed of any vehicle. Based on experience it is not difficult to know near enough the max speed possible that an appearing vehicle may be doing (I don't assume everybody will be obeying the limit).
As to your 148/150 scenario, at that speed overtaking would seem, to me, fairly pointless so I would just follow you at 148 in all likelyhood. I'm not suggesting that 150 could be a default cruising speed on arterial routes as there are limited places this could be maintained even without traffic. But 120 is comfortable in loads of places and used to be my chosen cruising speed at one time.
You can only judge the closing speed of a car behind you if you can see it. If someone is doing 85mph, which isn't uncommon, a car doing 70mph more than that will be on them in a very short space of time. Any small hills, or slight bends could easily mask your approach. As to your 148/150 scenario, at that speed overtaking would seem, to me, fairly pointless so I would just follow you at 148 in all likelyhood. I'm not suggesting that 150 could be a default cruising speed on arterial routes as there are limited places this could be maintained even without traffic. But 120 is comfortable in loads of places and used to be my chosen cruising speed at one time.
pinchmeimdreamin said:
Would you consider someone who sets the Cruise to 120 to be a competent & careful driver ?
I've never had cruise control, although my belief would be that a driver on cruise control is likely to be concentrating less than someone on the pedal. That partly answers your question. If I had it, I very much doubt I'd be using it above 80 on our roads as they currently operate.agtlaw said:
Back on topic:
- Should he be disqualified? [the available range is 1 day - life]
- If so, then for how long?
- Why? [What's the point of a ban?]
6 month ban.- Should he be disqualified? [the available range is 1 day - life]
- If so, then for how long?
- Why? [What's the point of a ban?]
He's right at the far margin of speeds recorded on UK roads. If the law lays down a ban as an option for speeding offences it's hard for me to see that this case doesn't warrant a significant ban. Even if the standard PH excuses of "conditions were good, traffic was light, no-one died" hold, he must have been aware that 154mph put him enormously above the proscribed limits, this had serious implications if he was caught and (presumably) he'd very much want to avoid those implications.. And yet, for whatever reason, he couldn't/didn't see the speed trap so the combination of conditions and his ability clearly weren't that good...
6 months is enough to seriously inconvenience him but given he (in the example) only has 3 points is relatively young and therefore doesn't appear to be a persistent pain in the arse I don't think it warrants any longer
No idea what would really happen.
pinchmeimdreamin said:
vonhosen said:
But to be fair it's not about you, it's about what passes for the minimum standard of a competent & careful UK driver.
Would you consider someone who sets the Cruise to 120 to be a competent & careful driver ?snorky782 said:
You can only judge the closing speed of a car behind you if you can see it. If someone is doing 85mph, which isn't uncommon, a car doing 70mph more than that will be on them in a very short space of time. Any small hills, or slight bends could easily mask your approach.
And if the road conditions are such then firstly the faster vehicle is unlikely to be going 70mph faster and in addition my observation would be increased to counter this anyway.The A1 Peterborough demonstrates your scenario perfectly. The 4 lane section can easily accomodate speeds in excess of 150 mph, there is good visibility and the road is wide and relatively straight. North of Peterborough in both directions the A1 is dual carriageway and has some sections that, although mostly straight, undulate significantly creating blind spots. On this section nobody sensible is like to be doing 150+. I would in addition modify my observation accordingly on this section.
It's all about the driver, not the speed. Which is why we don't have no limits, because most drivers are a bit sh@t at it. That however does not make high speeds automatically dangerous.
cmaguire said:
vonhosen said:
But to be fair it's not about you, it's about what passes for the minimum standard of a competent & careful UK driver.
Most UK drivers aren't competent full-stop from where I am watching.I'd like higher standards, I suspect most would say they do, but the standard currently applied/expected is what it is.
Some might argue that the current standard is high enough or even maybe too high, as EVERY driver falls short at some point or other, just some more often & for longer periods than others.
cmaguire said:
snorky782 said:
You can only judge the closing speed of a car behind you if you can see it. If someone is doing 85mph, which isn't uncommon, a car doing 70mph more than that will be on them in a very short space of time. Any small hills, or slight bends could easily mask your approach.
And if the road conditions are such then firstly the faster vehicle is unlikely to be going 70mph faster and in addition my observation would be increased to counter this anyway.The A1 Peterborough demonstrates your scenario perfectly. The 4 lane section can easily accomodate speeds in excess of 150 mph, there is good visibility and the road is wide and relatively straight. North of Peterborough in both directions the A1 is dual carriageway and has some sections that, although mostly straight, undulate significantly creating blind spots. On this section nobody sensible is like to be doing 150+. I would in addition modify my observation accordingly on this section.
It's all about the driver, not the speed. Which is why we don't have no limits, because most drivers are a bit sh@t at it. That however does not make high speeds automatically dangerous.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff