150mph not dangerous (common sense from a court)
Discussion
He didn't have Nick Freeman as his brief, did he?
150mph not dangerous - a bit of common sense from the judge in separating speed from danger.
I thought the same about the VASCAR. One case for a biker fell through because this chap was clocked over about a tenth of a mile, giving a reading of 180+. His bike was incapable of doing that so the evidence was deemed unsound.
150mph not dangerous - a bit of common sense from the judge in separating speed from danger.
I thought the same about the VASCAR. One case for a biker fell through because this chap was clocked over about a tenth of a mile, giving a reading of 180+. His bike was incapable of doing that so the evidence was deemed unsound.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Not very
Perhaps the BiB here can comment but I thought 0.25 mile was the minimum permitted distance under Home Office Type approval conditions for Vascar.
According to Meggit’s data sheet for one model they make they claim +/- 2mile/hour. However at 149.9 mile/h the time taken to cover 0.227 miles is only 5.45 sec. If the generally accepted reaction time to operate the switches manually of +/- 0.3sec is included the band of error is +/- 8.25 mile/h i.e. he could have been travelling between about 141 mile/h and about 158 mile/h.
And this does not include parallax error or conscious or unconscious manipulation of the switches to give a higher reading.
I deplore the use by the police, CPS and courts of the bogus precision that readouts give that convey a false assurance of accuracy of measurement.
As for the predictable bleats from the ‘speed kills’ lobby like
Head of road safety numpty Kevin Clinton said:
"If he'd have had an accident at that sort of speed it would almost certainly have been fatal for him or anyone else involved
Rubbish – not a valid conclusion at all. An accident at under a 30 limit under different conditions ( vehicle pulls out from sideroad ) could have fatal consequences
they need to read
Recorder- Caroline Lister said:
He went fast for a short time only on a straight road with excellent visibility.
I’ve done the same many times in a Sierra Cosworth and a Mitsubishi Lancer.
Mary Williams in artice said:
"It has got to be one of the most horrendous speeding cases ever."
Er, this case was about the charge of dangerous driving.
The speeding (and no insurance) charge will be held separately, as per:
article continues said:
It's been very stressful leading up to the case. However, he will now face other charges of driving with excess speed and driving without insurance and could still lose his licence.
I still cant believe that these 'organisations' are still saying that excess speed is automatically dangerous.
They need to come with us (me) for a while and i will show you that it can be perfectly safe to do these speeds in the right circumstances and also show you some dangerous driving well within the posted speed limits.
In answer to an earlier question, we (i) work on the guidelines that anything above a distance of .20 is clear cut. Although in certain circs and in the past, ive reported for a lot lower.
Its a lot easier when youre using the Vascar or Pilot day in day out. But i must point out that im talking about high speeds here where theres no doubt that the vehicle is speeding, not your 40 in a 30.
Edited to say that i would point out some dangerous driving and NOT personally demonstrate it.
>> Edited by Tonyrec on Friday 27th January 09:47
They need to come with us (me) for a while and i will show you that it can be perfectly safe to do these speeds in the right circumstances and also show you some dangerous driving well within the posted speed limits.
In answer to an earlier question, we (i) work on the guidelines that anything above a distance of .20 is clear cut. Although in certain circs and in the past, ive reported for a lot lower.
Its a lot easier when youre using the Vascar or Pilot day in day out. But i must point out that im talking about high speeds here where theres no doubt that the vehicle is speeding, not your 40 in a 30.
Edited to say that i would point out some dangerous driving and NOT personally demonstrate it.
>> Edited by Tonyrec on Friday 27th January 09:47
Tonyrec said:
I still cant believe that these 'organisations' are still saying that excess speed is automatically dangerous. >> Edited by Tonyrec on Friday 27th January 09:47
I'm sure much of the motivation behind it is mere justification of the camera industry, i.e. the revenue propping it up and job protection.
Head of road safety Kevin Clinton said said:
Head of road safety Kevin Clinton said: "If he'd have had an accident at that sort of speed it would almost certainly have been fatal for him or anyone else involved."
Anybody ever seen or heard of any statistics from Germany for accidents at high speed on there unrestricted autobahns. I remember 2 specific accidents (1 Merc. & 1 Porsche) both +150mph accidents & both drivers walked away.Are those 2 the norm. or the exception ?.
"almost certainly" is that an uneducated guess ?
>> Edited by MartinD on Friday 27th January 09:56
>> Edited by MartinD on Friday 27th January 10:08
MartinD said:
Head of road safety Kevin Clinton said: "If he'd have had an accident at that sort of speed it would almost certainly have been fatal for him or anyone else involved."
Anybody ever seen or heard of any statistics from Germany for accidents at high speed on there unrestricted autobahns. I remember 2 specific accidents (1 Merc. & 1 Porsche) both +150mph accidents & both drivers walked away.Are those 2 the norm. or the exception ?.
"almost certainly" is that an uneducated guess ?
>> Edited by MartinD on Friday 27th January 09:56
>> Edited by MartinD on Friday 27th January 10:08
I also remember reading of a civic type r going into the back of someone on the autobahn going over 100Mph and a lot faster than the car he hit (pulled out in front of him), got out walked away. I think the "we don't know what does" comment is so funny it's untrue. I think if they started looking at dangerous and stupid driving they might get somewhere.
Does anyone know if he was actually uninsured to drive the car or his insurance has been invalidated for some reason?
angrys3owner said:
Does anyone know if he was actually uninsured to drive the car or his insurance has been invalidated for some reason?
21yo driving his dad's Porsche without permission?
Sounds like he's not a named driver and the "without permission" bit automatically invalidates any 3rd party cover he might otherwise have via a policy of his own.
{eta:} Having re-read the article, it doesn't actually state that he'd used the car w/o permission, but I think its a reasonable assumption given that they're trying to do him for no insurance.
>> Edited by pdV6 on Friday 27th January 11:25
pdV6 said:
Does anyone know if he was actually uninsured to drive the car or his insurance has been invalidated for some reason?
21yo driving his dad's Porsche without permission? Sounds like he's not a named driver and the "without permission" bit automatically invalidates any 3rd party cover he might otherwise have via a policy of his own.
Very good point, sent the bugger to jail, but make it clear it's for theft and lack of insurance!
Simple reference material is the German unlimited sections of Autobahn.
Do people drive dangerously every day there because somehow the speed suggest overall safety?
No, it's the misuse of speed, in any conditions, right down to going 20mph past a school at kicking out time which could also be leathal for any child running into the road suddenly.
Clearly it is safe then to go 150mph, because he didn't crash, and neither do the thousands who drive at high speed daily in Germany, and even in this country but never get caught!
Surely any sensible person would see Germanys autobahns and realise it's not speed alone, but the conditions that it is used in!?
Clearly we have dumbasses in our midst!
Dave
Do people drive dangerously every day there because somehow the speed suggest overall safety?
No, it's the misuse of speed, in any conditions, right down to going 20mph past a school at kicking out time which could also be leathal for any child running into the road suddenly.
Clearly it is safe then to go 150mph, because he didn't crash, and neither do the thousands who drive at high speed daily in Germany, and even in this country but never get caught!
Surely any sensible person would see Germanys autobahns and realise it's not speed alone, but the conditions that it is used in!?
Clearly we have dumbasses in our midst!
Dave
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff