Speeding worse than drug taking? Public opinion.

[HertsBiker]

I was amazed when discussing drugs with my work colleagues, who have smoked pot, taken cocaine, heroin, extasy (sp?), speed, and other illegal and dangerous drugs...... Said my 'speeding' is worse.

We've lost. The soppy speed kills message has got to them, and drugs are okay now. Apparently.

In my life, I never had a smash due to excess mph. My colleagues have taken properly bad stuff,.yet how do they imagine they are less criminal then me?

Help me understand please.

[Dave Hedgehog]

Most people are mindless sheep with no ability to think for themselves, they follow what ever rhetoric is spoon feed to them.

[DanielSan]

Best I can come up with is that their stupidity is proof drugs are bad.

[Northernchimp]

I love driving fast and hate stoners... But.. They are both indulgences, and theirs don't put others at risk.

[GroundEffect]

Drug taking only really affects those who do it, to a point - weed really only does affect the user but some drugs like heroin obviously has knock-on effects.

Speeding directly impacts the safety of others.

Simple?

[Jasandjules]

GroundEffect said:

Speeding directly impacts the safety of others.

How does exceeding an arbitrary number do this?

Going further, how does adhering to an arbitrary number ensure "safety"?

[GroundEffect]

Jasandjules said:

GroundEffect said:

Speeding directly impacts the safety of others.

How does exceeding an arbitrary number do this?

Going further, how does adhering to an arbitrary number ensure "safety"?

Well it depends exactly what you are defining as 'speeding'. The numbers aren't arbitrary - why else would they be moving them down to 20mph in a lot of 30mph zones? 20mph is demonstrably safer than 30mph.

I'm sure when most people think of speeding they are imagining someone doing 80mph in a 50mph limit or some such.

[HertsBiker]

Meant to add some of my victimless crime speeding was on empty motorway at the sort of numbers plod would use to 'familiarise' themselves with a car. Apparently this is irresponsible! Even though no one else was present, and no accidents occurred... Yet this lot smokes weed everyday at university and drove after. Not to mention the coke and speed. I guess they never sped,.so its okay.

[otolith]

Hang on - is the comparison with taking drugs or with driving on drugs?

[Jasandjules]

GroundEffect said:

Well it depends exactly what you are defining as 'speeding'. The numbers aren't arbitrary - why else would they be moving them down to 20mph in a lot of 30mph zones? 20mph is demonstrably safer than 30mph.

I'm sure when most people think of speeding they are imagining someone doing 80mph in a 50mph limit or some such.

You made the assertion, I would assume you would be in a position to qualify it and express it clearly.

If the numbers are not arbitrary when and why was 30 chosen? Why 60 and then 70 for NSL. What was the basis of these decision which conclusively show that THEY are safe?3

[GroundEffect]

Jasandjules said:

GroundEffect said:

Well it depends exactly what you are defining as 'speeding'. The numbers aren't arbitrary - why else would they be moving them down to 20mph in a lot of 30mph zones? 20mph is demonstrably safer than 30mph.

I'm sure when most people think of speeding they are imagining someone doing 80mph in a 50mph limit or some such.

You made the assertion, I would assume you would be in a position to qualify it and express it clearly.

If the numbers are not arbitrary when and why was 30 chosen? Why 60 and then 70 for NSL. What was the basis of these decision which conclusively show that THEY are safe?3

No driving is SAFE (i.e. with next to no risk to any part) but driving at 70mph on the motorway is objectively safer than driving at 90mph or 100mph due to the energies involved.

[kiteless]

Jasandjules said:

How does exceeding an arbitrary number do this?

Going further, how does adhering to an arbitrary number ensure "safety"?

That reminds me of an e-mail exchange I had with a local radio presenter some years ago concerning "safety" cameras. His parting shot was, Look. I don't care if the cameras are there for safety reasons or not. All I care about is they catch law breakers

[HertsBiker]

otolith said:

Hang on - is the comparison with taking drugs or with driving on drugs?

Both.

[whp1983]

Although drugs do only affect those that do it healthwise.... They destroy the lives of thousands in the country's they come from. It's misery from producer to drug baron to dealer.

No-one has ever had to smuggle a sports car up their arse in order to sell it to someone that might shoot them.

Speeding is by far the lesser crime as the courts agree!

[whp1983]

Although drugs do only affect those that do it healthwise.... They destroy the lives of thousands in the country's they come from. It's misery from producer to drug baron to dealer.

No-one has ever had to smuggle a sports car up their arse in order to sell it to someone that might shoot them.

Speeding is by far the lesser crime as the courts agree!

[otolith]

HertsBiker said:

otolith said:

Hang on - is the comparison with taking drugs or with driving on drugs?

Both.

Taking drugs is a matter for the individual, IMO. Driving under the influence puts others at risk, and is therefore comparable with other illegal driving behaviours which are risky for others. The extent to which "speeding" is risky, and the extent to which different doses of different substances are risky is a length of string problem.

[Troubleatmill]

Depends on your perspective.

Hypothetically - If you lose control of your car (or bike) and wipe out my nearest and dearest; and I found out you have a habit of speeding...
Then there is nowhere on this planet that you and your family will be safe.
I would make it a mission to remove from this earth what you love the most.

Still have a heavy right foot?

Edited by Troubleatmill on Thursday 13th February 20:47

[Impasse]

Aren't most burglaries the result of a drug addict looking for a way to fund his next fix?

[Troubleatmill]

Gaz. said:

Troubleatmill said:

Depends on your perspective.

Hypothetically - If you lose control of your car and wipe out my nearest and dearest; and I found out you have a habit of speeding...
Then there is nowhere on this planet that you and your family will be safe.
I would make it a mission to remove from this earth what you love the most.

Still have a heavy right foot?

I'm sure that sounded awesome in your head.

Sadly... no - it didn't.

[HertsBiker]

Gaz. said:

Troubleatmill said:

Depends on your perspective.

Hypothetically - If you lose control of your car and wipe out my nearest and dearest; and I found out you have a habit of speeding...
Then there is nowhere on this planet that you and your family will be safe.
I would make it a mission to remove from this earth what you love the most.

Still have a heavy right foot?

I'm sure that sounded awesome in your head.

If a regular pot head drove a car and killed your family, I hope you would be as zealous, even if they were not speeding. But I did find myself agreeing with the last poster! Actually I'm very careful, hence empty roads with no people for my big number days. And one other thing, don't threaten people, it's not clever even if you think it's big. I bet you take drugs? Hmmm? Go on, answer please.