Seat Leon 154mph A11
Discussion
What gets me mad about the police is they base their prosecution on "what could've happened" the fact the guy did not crash or burn is totally irrelevant the police take on it is he may have crashed and caused some distress / death so let's stick that on him.
Was it a stupid thing to do? without knowing the conditions it is hard for me to judge as i have gone in excess of that speed in cars and on bikes , but the conditions have to be right.
Was it a stupid thing to do? without knowing the conditions it is hard for me to judge as i have gone in excess of that speed in cars and on bikes , but the conditions have to be right.
chippy348 said:
What gets me mad about the police is they base their prosecution on "what could've happened" the fact the guy did not crash or burn is totally irrelevant the police take on it is he may have crashed and caused some distress / death so let's stick that on him.
Was it a stupid thing to do? without knowing the conditions it is hard for me to judge as i have gone in excess of that speed in cars and on bikes , but the conditions have to be right.
The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by (amongst other things).Was it a stupid thing to do? without knowing the conditions it is hard for me to judge as i have gone in excess of that speed in cars and on bikes , but the conditions have to be right.
vonhosen said:
The prosecution is based on him exceeding the limit, the sentence is based on the amount he exceeded it by (amongst other things).
I know that, but in court and to the media there angle is "endangering others" when that may or may not be the fact. Yes he has been caught and should face the consequences.
chippy348 said:
I know that, but in court and to the media there angle is "endangering others" when that may or may not be the fact.
Yes he has been caught and should face the consequences.
I really struggle to see your argument. Where do you draw the line? The examples will become deliberately more ridiculous, but should challenge your thinkingYes he has been caught and should face the consequences.
It's Ok to speed everywhere up to 10mph over the limit as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to speed everywhere excessively, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to drink drive, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to run down the street waving a samurai sword (insert your own sharp object here) around, as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to fire a gun in a populated area, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
snorky782 said:
I really struggle to see your argument. Where do you draw the line? The examples will become deliberately more ridiculous, but should challenge your thinking
It's Ok to speed everywhere up to 10mph over the limit as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to speed everywhere excessively, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to drink drive, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to run down the street waving a samurai sword (insert your own sharp object here) around, as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to fire a gun in a populated area, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
I do see where you are coming from, but my point is this, it can be safe to do them speeds if you are sensible (just look at germany which is where i have done the speeds i was on about)this is not to say i condone racing on public roads that is a different matter but on a clear road in good conditions i see no problem with stretching your car's capabilities. It's Ok to speed everywhere up to 10mph over the limit as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to speed everywhere excessively, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to drink drive, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to run down the street waving a samurai sword (insert your own sharp object here) around, as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to fire a gun in a populated area, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
And as for hitting anyone you either have to lose control first OR the other car / person has done wrong.
chippy348 said:
snorky782 said:
I really struggle to see your argument. Where do you draw the line? The examples will become deliberately more ridiculous, but should challenge your thinking
It's Ok to speed everywhere up to 10mph over the limit as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to speed everywhere excessively, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to drink drive, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to run down the street waving a samurai sword (insert your own sharp object here) around, as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to fire a gun in a populated area, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
I do see where you are coming from, but my point is this, it can be safe to do them speeds if you are sensible (just look at germany which is where i have done the speeds i was on about)this is not to say i condone racing on public roads that is a different matter but on a clear road in good conditions i see no problem with stretching your car's capabilities. It's Ok to speed everywhere up to 10mph over the limit as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to speed everywhere excessively, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to drink drive, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to run down the street waving a samurai sword (insert your own sharp object here) around, as long as you don't hit anyone. Only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
It's OK to fire a gun in a populated area, as long as you don't hit anyone, only after you've hit them does it become a problem.
And as for hitting anyone you either have to lose control first OR the other car / person has done wrong.
He has been accused of exceeding the speed limit by a large margin (the conditions are irrelevant for that).
The speed limit doesn't define safe/unsafe, it is a control mechanism.
It is a control mechanism that plays a part in (not the sole factor in) limiting risk.
That person, traveling at 154mph along that road in that car, at that time, in those conditions, was likely to have been riskier than doing so at 70mph.
chippy348 said:
I do see where you are coming from, but my point is this, it can be safe to do them speeds if you are sensible (just look at germany which is where i have done the speeds i was on about)this is not to say i condone racing on public roads that is a different matter but on a clear road in good conditions i see no problem with stretching your car's capabilities.
And as for hitting anyone you either have to lose control first OR the other car / person has done wrong.
It's not about whether you think it's safe or not. The speed limit is a fixed figure that everyone knows about amd equally knows the consequences if caught exceeding it by a considerable amount. And as for hitting anyone you either have to lose control first OR the other car / person has done wrong.
Germany is a moot point, as we're not in Germany. There is a similar argument to the one I've used above around other countries laws vs ours. Which laws are you happy to apply from other countries and which not? Age of consent at 13 maybe? There are many laws out there that you'd find distasteful, m any in the Uk find the idea of an unrestricted motorway limit distasteful.
I'm not saying I do, btw, just that you have to consider others views. Finally, stretching your car in a country where it's legal is far less lie,let to end in a mess than in one where it's not legal. The not legal country is not going to have other drivers expecting someone to be driving at a speed so much over the limit.
snorky782 said:
It's not about whether you think it's safe or not. The speed limit is a fixed figure that everyone knows about amd equally knows the consequences if caught exceeding it by a considerable amount.
Germany is a moot point, as we're not in Germany. There is a similar argument to the one I've used above around other countries laws vs ours. Which laws are you happy to apply from other countries and which not? Age of consent at 13 maybe? There are many laws out there that you'd find distasteful, m any in the Uk find the idea of an unrestricted motorway limit distasteful.
I'm not saying I do, btw, just that you have to consider others views. Finally, stretching your car in a country where it's legal is far less lie,let to end in a mess than in one where it's not legal. The not legal country is not going to have other drivers expecting someone to be driving at a speed so much over the limit.
Keep it short as i am off to bed, up early to go to silverstone tomorrowGermany is a moot point, as we're not in Germany. There is a similar argument to the one I've used above around other countries laws vs ours. Which laws are you happy to apply from other countries and which not? Age of consent at 13 maybe? There are many laws out there that you'd find distasteful, m any in the Uk find the idea of an unrestricted motorway limit distasteful.
I'm not saying I do, btw, just that you have to consider others views. Finally, stretching your car in a country where it's legal is far less lie,let to end in a mess than in one where it's not legal. The not legal country is not going to have other drivers expecting someone to be driving at a speed so much over the limit.
Yes i understand the law on speeding, and accept the consequences of breaking it as we all do every time we go out in our vehicles.
However this lad did not kill anyone or crash he was just exceeding the speed limit and that is what the police need to keep in mind, not well he could have killed someone so let's push on that point which i think is irrelevant.
chippy348 said:
And as for hitting anyone you either have to lose control first OR the other car / person has done wrong.
Or maybe the other person wasn't expecting and hadn't been trained to expect someone barrelling down on them at over twice their speed? Or maybe you don't have the right to do what you want on the road when you share it with other people?I speed fairly regularly, but never to the extreme where I would endanger other people. 154mph may be possible and even mechanically safe to oneself - but it's manifestly reckless to do it in this country imo. So long as you accept that, and what it will mean if you get caught or worse live with the consequences of smashing into someone, then fill your boots. But don't cry when caught about autobahns or how you should be allowed to go any speed you want because you're a better than average driver with Brembo 4 pots.
Maybe relocation should be a penalty for courts to impose! If they put him in Berkshire he'd be lucky to get much above 50mph most of the time! 
Seriously though I am sure we have all exceeded the speed limit sometimes, but you have to judge the prevailing conditions and be prepared to face the consequences if you get caught.
It also sounds like some common sense has been applied because if he is only being charged with speeding it must have been at a quiet time of day and in a controlled manner, because otherwise I am sure he would have got charged with DWDC&A or maybe Dangerous Driving.
Also thought the PCC comments were F
K irrelevant, unless he lets his children play by the A11 in which case he needs to be prosecuted! Why are these people so moronic?
Seriously though I am sure we have all exceeded the speed limit sometimes, but you have to judge the prevailing conditions and be prepared to face the consequences if you get caught.
It also sounds like some common sense has been applied because if he is only being charged with speeding it must have been at a quiet time of day and in a controlled manner, because otherwise I am sure he would have got charged with DWDC&A or maybe Dangerous Driving.
Also thought the PCC comments were F
K irrelevant, unless he lets his children play by the A11 in which case he needs to be prosecuted! Why are these people so moronic?Durzel said:
Or maybe the other person wasn't expecting and hadn't been trained to expect someone barrelling down on them at over twice their speed? Or maybe you don't have the right to do what you want on the road when you share it with other people?
You're assuming that there was another person on that section of road at the timechippy348 said:
Keep it short as i am off to bed, up early to go to silverstone tomorrow
Yes i understand the law on speeding, and accept the consequences of breaking it as we all do every time we go out in our vehicles.
However this lad did not kill anyone or crash he was just exceeding the speed limit and that is what the police need to keep in mind, not well he could have killed someone so let's push on that point which i think is irrelevant.
And he's being done for speeding, so the charge meets the "crime" perfectly by your measure. Yes i understand the law on speeding, and accept the consequences of breaking it as we all do every time we go out in our vehicles.
However this lad did not kill anyone or crash he was just exceeding the speed limit and that is what the police need to keep in mind, not well he could have killed someone so let's push on that point which i think is irrelevant.
Mr Tidy said:
Maybe relocation should be a penalty for courts to impose! If they put him in Berkshire he'd be lucky to get much above 50mph most of the time!
Seriously though I am sure we have all exceeded the speed limit sometimes, but you have to judge the prevailing conditions and be prepared to face the consequences if you get caught.
It also sounds like some common sense has been applied because if he is only being charged with speeding it must have been at a quiet time of day and in a controlled manner, because otherwise I am sure he would have got charged with DWDC&A or maybe Dangerous Driving.
Also thought the PCC comments were FK irrelevant, unless he lets his children play by the A11 in which case he needs to be prosecuted! Why are these people so moronic?
On the last bit, what if the kids were in a car that he was barrelling past at least 84mph over the speed limit I.e. 220% of the legal limit. Seriously though I am sure we have all exceeded the speed limit sometimes, but you have to judge the prevailing conditions and be prepared to face the consequences if you get caught.
It also sounds like some common sense has been applied because if he is only being charged with speeding it must have been at a quiet time of day and in a controlled manner, because otherwise I am sure he would have got charged with DWDC&A or maybe Dangerous Driving.
Also thought the PCC comments were F
K irrelevant, unless he lets his children play by the A11 in which case he needs to be prosecuted! Why are these people so moronic?I'm certainly not one of the howling "think of the children" brigade but I'm quite surprised anyone is suggesting what the guy did is acceptable.
Someone mentioned drink driving earlier and it's pretty simple, if you're over you're over and I don't see too many threads where someone was "Only twice the limit but it was a quiet road so what's the harm?" yet somehow that applies to speeding?
I speed like I'm sure most people do, but to me "speeding" means I may see something starting with an 8 on a motorway - I wouldn't dream of trying to hit over 150mph.
Someone mentioned drink driving earlier and it's pretty simple, if you're over you're over and I don't see too many threads where someone was "Only twice the limit but it was a quiet road so what's the harm?" yet somehow that applies to speeding?
I speed like I'm sure most people do, but to me "speeding" means I may see something starting with an 8 on a motorway - I wouldn't dream of trying to hit over 150mph.
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!)
cmaguire said:
All that jazz said:
Yep. Also this :
"We really do need to make speeding as socially unacceptable as drink-driving if we are going to make Suffolk’s roads safer for everyone."
The same training school as Olly Martins, with his desire for 0% tolerance for speeding"We really do need to make speeding as socially unacceptable as drink-driving if we are going to make Suffolk’s roads safer for everyone."
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.
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.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff