180mph in shorts and t shirt - what bike?

[anonymous-user]

Anyone seen this?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-55079524

Not that I think wearing protective gear would of done much at 180mph on the road lol

Anyone know what bike it was?

[black-k1]

The Mail says it was a 'Blade

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8985951/N...

[the tribester]

I'm surprised it wasn't a stolen bike on false plates.

I guess he's been released on bail, so my money is on him failing to appear for sentencing in January, if not, 2 years in prison and 5 year ban.

[Prof Prolapse]

the tribester said:

I'm surprised it wasn't a stolen bike on false plates.

I guess he's been released on bail, so my money is on him failing to appear for sentencing in January, if not, 2 years in prison and 5 year ban.

2 years? Not much of an incentive to stop is it? I mean unless you run out of fuel of course...

A woman around here ramn over an old lady and killed her. Avoided prison entirely.

I don't condone either, but I'll never understand traffic offence sentencing.

[Iamnotkloot]

Question: No license, no insurance, 180mph, t-shirt and shorts

Answer: Twunt

[Drawweight]

No flip flops?

Pah lightweight.

[Iminquarantine]

Young and dumb.

He ran out of fuel. Lack of maturity leading to lack of prior planning and lack of strategy. He should watch the Ghost Rider videos. Complete circuit of the Paris ring road, intercity run in Sweden..... Ghostrider does not run out of fuel.

[Esceptico]

Prof Prolapse said:

2 years? Not much of an incentive to stop is it? I mean unless you run out of fuel of course...

A woman around here ramn over an old lady and killed her. Avoided prison entirely.

I don't condone either, but I'll never understand traffic offence sentencing.

Always difficult to figure out what an appropriate sentence is for these cases. Had he run someone over and killed them whilst going through red lights or riding on the pavement he would probably receive a long jail sentence. But it is just good fortune that didn’t happen and he clearly rode taking that risk into account. So shouldn’t the sentence reflect that?

[Iminquarantine]

I'm surprised there is no mention of the prosecutor saying he exceeded the cruising speed of the police helicopter. I Googled the helicopter the Met Police use, which is an EC145. The cruise speed is 153mph and the never exceed speed is 167mph.

[Zakalwe]

Unless you’re on a straight road, it’s surely pretty straightforward for a helicopter pilot to see where the road is leading and cut the corners accordingly

[Prof Prolapse]

Esceptico said:

Always difficult to figure out what an appropriate sentence is for these cases. Had he run someone over and killed them whilst going through red lights or riding on the pavement he would probably receive a long jail sentence. But it is just good fortune that didn’t happen and he clearly rode taking that risk into account. So shouldn’t the sentence reflect that?

Yes, but I suppose there's that inherent problem with "what if" scenarios. The reality is the net harm here is basically zero, but it's also exposing outside individuals to an unfairly high risk. Which needs punished of course.

I guess I'm derailing, I just don't understand in traffic offence why sentences where the actual harm is zero, go so heavily punished when you can literally kill someone due to negligence, and the punishment is effectively non-existent.

I do find it odd personallly that "ghost rider" et al, do this non-sense regularly and it's admired in many circles.

[Gweeds]

No insurance, those speeds, on fake plates.

That's prison time for me.

Oh, and not running out of fuel doesn't indicate 'maturity'. It just means you're a dick who plans slightly better. But still a fking dick.