woman killed in rta with hired R8
Discussion
MajorProblem said:
Probably because 99% of uninsured mongos thrashing sub letted supercars about are of a certain persuasian.
Really? And you know ths how? Does it matter that it's a letted supercar? Young lads have been thrashing around high performance cars for as long as there have been high performance cars. They've also been crashing them into other road users. It's not like you that inccident couldn't have happened in a Focus RS is it. I'm sure I could pull up any number of reports of similar crashes that involved drivers from a multitude of backgrounds. The name and ethnicity of the driver is an irrelevance and only of interest to people who would wish to use it as a way of justifying a predjudice.
How puzzling, speed has nothing to do with it. It's the fault of the other car for emerging without checking properly. (Well that's the position the people that support motorbikes doing 97mph and killing themselves will need to adopt to be consistent with their posts on the relevant thread anyway).
As regards a problem with a certain demographic driving with lunatic irresponsibility? That is as real as London muggers, tube bombers etc. etc.
Anybody that says it is racist to point that out, has an agenda. Of course that does not mean the problem is entirely restricted to the stereotype.
As regards a problem with a certain demographic driving with lunatic irresponsibility? That is as real as London muggers, tube bombers etc. etc.
Anybody that says it is racist to point that out, has an agenda. Of course that does not mean the problem is entirely restricted to the stereotype.
Mr GrimNasty said:
How puzzling, speed has nothing to do with it. It's the fault of the other car for emerging without checking properly. (Well that's the position the people that support motorbikes doing 97mph and killing themselves will need to adopt to be consistent with their posts on the relevant thread anyway).
Who has actually suggested the bike was blameless on the other thread?Mr GrimNasty said:
How puzzling, speed has nothing to do with it. It's the fault of the other car for emerging without checking properly. (Well that's the position the people that support motorbikes doing 97mph and killing themselves will need to adopt to be consistent with their posts on the relevant thread anyway).
As regards a problem with a certain demographic driving with lunatic irresponsibility? That is as real as London muggers, tube bombers etc. etc.
Anybody that says it is racist to point that out, has an agenda. Of course that does not mean the problem is entirely restricted to the stereotype.
Wasn't the biker doing 97 in a 60 or a 70 zone? As regards a problem with a certain demographic driving with lunatic irresponsibility? That is as real as London muggers, tube bombers etc. etc.
Anybody that says it is racist to point that out, has an agenda. Of course that does not mean the problem is entirely restricted to the stereotype.
The Audi here was going a far higher % over the limit. At some point the speeder is just going too fast for the other driver to realistically be expected to see whats coming.
agtlaw said:
How come someone who does 165 and who has previous convictions for driving whilst disqualified and without due car and attention wasn't jailed?
KFC said:
Wasn't the biker doing 97 in a 60 or a 70 zone?
The Audi here was going a far higher % over the limit. At some point the speeder is just going too fast for the other driver to realistically be expected to see whats coming.
To add to this, I use this junction everyday to and from work, from where the fiesta emerges looking left where the R8 is speeding from, there is a brow of a hill about 50 metres away, this would obscure the approaching Audi travelling at speed from the view of the fiesta driver, once over this brow and travelling at over twice the speed limit there was not much the fiesta driver could do to avoid the collision, its completely down to the speeder.The Audi here was going a far higher % over the limit. At some point the speeder is just going too fast for the other driver to realistically be expected to see whats coming.
jagracer said:
While it's no get out for the Audi driver it looks like the woman who pulled out got the rabbit in the headlights syndrome and stopped in front of the oncoming car.
He definately picked the wrong side of the fiesta to go round didn't he.Never has 'if in doubt, flat out' been more true. If the poor women had hoofed it she would still be with us
Jimmyarm said:
He definately picked the wrong side of the fiesta to go round didn't he.
Never has 'if in doubt, flat out' been more true. If the poor women had hoofed it she would still be with us
She is still with us, the passenger lost her life.Never has 'if in doubt, flat out' been more true. If the poor women had hoofed it she would still be with us
Not sure if hoofing it, with a car travelling at that speed, would've changed the outcome. Ifs and buts don't help.
Jimmyarm said:
jagracer said:
While it's no get out for the Audi driver it looks like the woman who pulled out got the rabbit in the headlights syndrome and stopped in front of the oncoming car.
He definately picked the wrong side of the fiesta to go round didn't he.Never has 'if in doubt, flat out' been more true. If the poor women had hoofed it she would still be with us
t in the R8!LoonR1 said:
Two daft comments given the one before this mentioning the brow of the hill and no time to react either way.
Not daft at all, you can see that she stops as soon as she realises the R8 is coming, the R8 appears to be trying to go around the back of her.I'm not suggesting she was at fault, at the speed the R8 was going she could never have judged which side he was going to pick but with more speed it may (or may not) have been a near miss instead of a fatal.
It may not help the deceased us discussing the 'ifs & buts' but it might help one of us one day...
Obviously all blame belongs to the Audi driver. But that doesn't mean the victim might not, in hindsight, have done something different. If my house get's burgled I want to lnow how they got in, because there may well be something I can do in future to make another incident less likely. I don't say "I am not to blame therefore I refuse to learn from it."
Dr Jekyll said:
Obviously all blame belongs to the Audi driver. But that doesn't mean the victim might not, in hindsight, have done something different. If my house get's burgled I want to lnow how they got in, because there may well be something I can do in future to make another incident less likely. I don't say "I am not to blame therefore I refuse to learn from it."
Except in the analogy they have killed your family so what's the point. Dr Jekyll said:
Obviously all blame belongs to the Audi driver. But that doesn't mean the victim might not, in hindsight, have done something different.
Not go out that day?Because there wasn't much else that could have been done. Drive forward? Audi might have been swerving and hit. Reverse? Same goes. So stay where you are and hope the f**kwit maggot brained worthless ass***e in the Audi has sufficient skill and ability (or luck) to attempt to avoid the impact.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff