139mph biker banned and fined
Discussion
ananova said:
139mph biker banned and fined
A motorcyclist has been banned for six months and fined £300 after speeding at 139mph on a country road.
Married Lee Hannah, 31, recorded one of the fastest speeds clocked by police when he raced along the single lane A272 just outside Winchester, Hants, on October 19.
The road, which is popular with motorcyclists, has a 60mph limit.
Civil engineer Hannah, of Eastleigh, Hampshire, pleaded guilty to speeding on his 1000cc Suzuki bike at Basingstoke Magistrates Court.
He was caught by a mobile laser gun set up by police on the road, the court heard.
Biker Andrew Osborne, 29, from Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, is thought to have been travelling at the fastest speed recorded by police equipment in the UK.
He was jailed for 28 days in July after being caught speeding at 157mph on the A412 near Buckingham.
Britain's fastest road user to be convicted is thought to be Daniel Nicks, who filmed himself at 175mph in Buckinghamshire on a 900cc bike in 2000.
The AA said motorcycle deaths in the UK have risen from 440 in 1996 to 609 in 2002.
Apologies if this has already been done, but I was on holiday last week
6 months ban and £300 fine versus jail for a difference of 18mph.
I suppose some camps will say it just proves that jail was far too much for the 157mph guy, others will say that the "slower" guy should have got the same treatment. Either way, it shows that there needs to be some standardisation or guidelines on the penalties for this sort of thing...
Edited to add:
Did the AA say how many more miles were covered on bikes in 2002 than in 1996??? Of course not. That would leave it open for a rational and considered judgement of the actual increase in deaths, which, by the way, I'm NOT saying are inconsequential!
>> Edited by miniman on Wednesday 5th November 17:02
I suppose some camps will say it just proves that jail was far too much for the 157mph guy, others will say that the "slower" guy should have got the same treatment. Either way, it shows that there needs to be some standardisation or guidelines on the penalties for this sort of thing...
Edited to add:
ananova said:
The AA said motorcycle deaths in the UK have risen from 440 in 1996 to 609 in 2002.
Did the AA say how many more miles were covered on bikes in 2002 than in 1996??? Of course not. That would leave it open for a rational and considered judgement of the actual increase in deaths, which, by the way, I'm NOT saying are inconsequential!
>> Edited by miniman on Wednesday 5th November 17:02
docevi1 said:
he deserved it, although he should have got the same punishment as the other guy for sure!
Thats just daft speeds, especially on country roads not Motor-ways! (I do appreciate how quick bikes can accelerate and decellerate mind)
I have been motorcycling for almost thirty five years, mercifully without ANY mishap or accident, I now own a modern Triumph, and am not adverse to the odd turn of speed myself BUT, have these morons ever stopped to consider what would happen if they had a front wheel blowout at these insane speeds????
Even if they don't get killed, they could end up in a wheelchair for the rest of their lives, maybe killing other road users coming the other way same applies to cars too, to a lesser extent.
Are you two for real? Stupid question I suppose. My R1 can get up to 130+ ridiculously fast from 70mph, maybe not a problem you have with the triumph 
.
Sad to say probably the only thing this chap did wrong was get caught, or do it in a completely anal country.
As for the act of doing 139 being inherently unsafe, complete rubbish. Only my opinion you understand.
The chap was only likely to kill himself in the event of an accident.
. Sad to say probably the only thing this chap did wrong was get caught, or do it in a completely anal country.
As for the act of doing 139 being inherently unsafe, complete rubbish. Only my opinion you understand.
The chap was only likely to kill himself in the event of an accident.
Opps sorry, absolutely right, he could also have catapulted off their front bonnet and smashed through the top window of a house where some unsuspecting elderly couple were tucked up in bed with their coco, thereby squishing them to death.
and, Oh my god, WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
and, Oh my god, WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Does anyone know the A272? There are some good bypasses etc down by Winchester where 140 would not be a problem if the location were to be transplanted to say Germany for instance. The mention that the road is popular with motorcyclists would indicate to me that many motorcyclists believe it is safe for a rider of their skills to ride the road quickly. It may astonish people but motorcyclists are not suicidal nutters.
DAZ
>> Edited by dazren on Wednesday 5th November 18:13
DAZ
>> Edited by dazren on Wednesday 5th November 18:13
no, I don't know the A172, just by it's notation it's a single-carriageway road.
And yes, I am for real, if it was a single-carriageway then he deserves everything he gets and more, dual-carriageway is slightly different, but only by a small margin. (motorway is a different beast all together).
When only yourself at risk, fair game - track-day (kinda), but when you are doing it on a public road, where there is completely no controlling outside factors 139mph is just plain stupid. No matter how fast your bike can get there from 70mph! (maybe a 70mph-oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-139mph-brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr-70mph=10seconds type thingy is mildly understandable tho.)
And yes, I am for real, if it was a single-carriageway then he deserves everything he gets and more, dual-carriageway is slightly different, but only by a small margin. (motorway is a different beast all together).
When only yourself at risk, fair game - track-day (kinda), but when you are doing it on a public road, where there is completely no controlling outside factors 139mph is just plain stupid. No matter how fast your bike can get there from 70mph! (maybe a 70mph-oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-139mph-brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr-70mph=10seconds type thingy is mildly understandable tho.)
Julian64 said:
Opps sorry, absolutely right, he could also have catapulted off their front bonnet and smashed through the top window of a house where some unsuspecting elderly couple were tucked up in bed with their coco, thereby squishing them to death.
and, Oh my god, WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Couldnt of put it better myself.
Edited to remove the chance of a major Police speedtraps near every airport in the SE every night next week!
>> Edited by elms on Wednesday 5th November 18:51
Julian64 said:
Opps sorry, absolutely right, he could also have catapulted off their front bonnet and smashed through the top window of a house where some unsuspecting elderly couple were tucked up in bed with their coco, thereby squishing them to death.
and, Oh my god, WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
No, he could have gone through someones windscreen or anything. Was a stupid speed and well done to the bibs who caught him.
As for the opinion that the rider should have got the same sentence as the other rider etc, do you feel that that should apply to any other offences (theft, arson etc).
Oh FFS holier than tho' lot in here tonight isn't there, or is it just me 
.
I prety much know the 272 and yes there are stretches where that speed is easily possible on a modern 'Sports Bike' in pretty much 'safe' conditions to anyone but the rider. The fine and ban may reflect a slightly better (for better read grown up) outlook in Hampshire to motoring IMHO.
As already been said most 'performance' bikers are a pretty good lot. For getting caught though, not a bad overall result IMHO
Harry
PS I will add I know the police do target the 272 a lot, with the education tour at the West Meon Hut and plain clothes Bikes. Bikers actually make up the majority of motoring fatailities in Hants, with the 272 claiming a fair share.
. I prety much know the 272 and yes there are stretches where that speed is easily possible on a modern 'Sports Bike' in pretty much 'safe' conditions to anyone but the rider. The fine and ban may reflect a slightly better (for better read grown up) outlook in Hampshire to motoring IMHO.
As already been said most 'performance' bikers are a pretty good lot. For getting caught though, not a bad overall result IMHO
Harry
PS I will add I know the police do target the 272 a lot, with the education tour at the West Meon Hut and plain clothes Bikes. Bikers actually make up the majority of motoring fatailities in Hants, with the 272 claiming a fair share.
I am begining to really worry, it was not that long ago when stories like this were treated with sympathy for the culprit for getting caught and being treated worse than a mugger. Now we have more posts who are against the speeding motorist/motorcyclist than for. Has this forum been infiltrated by the green anti motorist lobby or am I paranoid.More and more people are buying into this crap, we are being programmed daily by the ban everything brigade to conform to what the educated elite decide is good for us not what we want to do.
It sums up the grasp on reality our poloticians have when with all the problems of gun crime drugs etc that they waste time in parliment on discussing the way the two fat arse girls on pop idol were spoken to by Simon Cowell.
It sums up the grasp on reality our poloticians have when with all the problems of gun crime drugs etc that they waste time in parliment on discussing the way the two fat arse girls on pop idol were spoken to by Simon Cowell.
elms said:
Opps sorry, absolutely right, he could also have catapulted off their front bonnet and smashed through the top window of a house where some unsuspecting elderly couple were tucked up in bed with their coco, thereby squishing them to death.
and, Oh my god, WILL SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Couldnt of put it better myself.
Edited to remove the chance of a major Police speedtraps near every airport in the SE every night next week!
Here here.
Unless you have first hand experience.... then all you can do is speculate.
First hand experience gives you insight.
140 is fast... but not that fast..
160+ is where it starts to get 'silly'
but there we go.
I;m not saying he wasnt wrong to do the speeds, just that its wrong to jump on him JUST for a speed.
the blowout point, the thru the windscreen point, the running someone over and killing em point, all 100% valid, but JUST as valid at 70!
i doubt anyone will survive being hit by a bike at 70, and if they did... i dont know that they would want to!
so, we either wrap everyone up in cotton wool.. and limit everyone to walking..
or we teach people NOT to cross roads where its unsafe... and to OBSERVE.
anyway..
just my humble opinion.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff