whoops...

[Great Pretender]

I cannot help but think the courts have done us all a favour here. One less moron to worry about.

http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/15972...

[Lefty Two Drams]

Billings claimed he had been driving at about 65mph when the accelerator pedal jammed and his speed rapidly increased – just as he passed the police patrol.

[Mr Trophy]

Lefty Two Drams said:

Billings claimed he had been driving at about 65mph when the accelerator pedal jammed and his speed rapidly increased – just as he passed the police patrol.

[Great Pretender]

Lefty Two Drams said:

Billings claimed he had been driving at about 65mph when the accelerator pedal jammed and his speed rapidly increased – just as he passed the police patrol.

Clearly nobody told him his car was a Ford GT and not a Toyota Aygo.

[Lefty Two Drams]

Great Pretender said:

Lefty Two Drams said:

Billings claimed he had been driving at about 65mph when the accelerator pedal jammed and his speed rapidly increased – just as he passed the police patrol.

Clearly nobody told him his car was a Ford GT and not a Toyota Prious.

EFA

[steelej]

Don't really see why he's been done for dangerous driving though, speed in itself doesn't make the driving dangerous, I hate driving in this country it's so inconsistent with punishment for speeding, 127mph in that car is probably about a 4k rpm cruise

John.

[The Loon]

Ha ha

It was me and some of my work collegues that Richard was meeting that day at one of our construction projects

Normally he had been flying up and hiring a car, but on this occasion he took his Ford GT for "a run" up to the meeting.

It was the dark blue colour and it sounded fantastic, especially with the supercharger

[SSC!]

Not laughing at the owner you understand, just that Simon posted it.





Edit coz I in trouble for my usage of CTRL C CTRL V.

Edited by SSC! on Thursday 11th February 13:17

[Curry Burns]

There's a certain irony ain't there...

[paulqv]

Don't think any of us should be gloating on this! Whilst it is unarguable that the law needs to be obeyed it concerns me that the perception of people speeding or driving dangerously has swayed so much against common sense! If i can pose the question thus: What worries you more; someone assaulting another person; someone breaking into another persons house or someone driving at 127mph in a 70?

[willtvr]

steelej said:

Don't really see why he's been done for dangerous driving though, speed in itself doesn't make the driving dangerous, I hate driving in this country it's so inconsistent with punishment for speeding, 127mph in that car is probably about a 4k rpm cruise

John.

Unfortunately it seems that speed in excess of 100mph is regarded as dangerous driving by brainwashed authorities in most areas of the country regardless of the circumstances. If driving at such speeds is dangerous per se then presumably traffic cars doing the same speeds are equally dangerous?

[OlberJ]

willtvr said:

If driving at such speeds is dangerous per se then presumably traffic cars doing the same speeds are equally dangerous?

Afraid not, the drivers of said cars have had a whole 2 weeks training on the subject so they're fine.

[slipstream 1985]

noticed this in the p & j today. and in their usual biased reporting way, the "souped up" supercar.


i notice an old guy crashed his mini as well. no mention that mr x "who needs glasses to see properly or whose car is known for its sporting handling.


read the describtions of the cars and circumstances when theres a crash.

young driver and male = massive describtion about how the corsa is 16v sport or something to jazz up how it sounds.

young girls or older person. accident

[fluffnik]

paulqv said:

Don't think any of us should be gloating on this!

Indeed not. Speed does not equal Danger and any attempt to equate them should be regarded as an enemy action and resisted by all available means.

paulqv said:

Whilst it is unarguable that the law needs to be obeyed it concerns me that the perception of people speeding or driving dangerously has swayed so much against common sense!

Some of the law needs to be obeyed, other parts, arbitrary speed limits included, need to be brought into terminal disrepute.

paulqv said:

If i can pose the question thus: What worries you more; someone assaulting another person; someone breaking into another persons house or someone driving at 127mph in a 70?

Thugs, thieves and speed limits all need eliminating, so that they cease to be a source of worry...

[Craigie]

paulqv said:

Don't think any of us should be gloating on this! Whilst it is unarguable that the law needs to be obeyed it concerns me that the perception of people speeding or driving dangerously has swayed so much against common sense! If i can pose the question thus: What worries you more; someone assaulting another person; someone breaking into another persons house or someone driving at 127mph in a 70?

Paul, you will know better than anyone there is different levels of crime.
In my opinion, the simple fact of the matter that he was caught means he wasn't fully in control and aware.

An assualt could be a punch with no damage or it could lead to permanent injuries
Break in could be to steal a dvd from an empty house or it could be frightening for householders for years to come
Speeding could be harmless fun or could lead to lives being lost

Unfortunately you would need to look at the legal and court systems to explain why motorists get punished so heavily. Yes they are easy targets, very often evidence is very black and white and easy to process.

Would be interesting to get his viewpoint on it - doing 126 he would have been indicated 135mph. No radar detectors in car?

Now I am not a speeder as such but do speed occasionally but like most on here I am wary especially when there are bridges, slip roads usual suspects of unmarked cars, laybys etc. Which one of these normal "checks" was he oblivious to? And why?

[Great Pretender]

SSC! said:

Not laughing at the owner you understand, just that Simon posted it.

I think the key difference here is that I'd be less inclined to fabricate the most ridiculous lie to the Police (assuming the Express is correct of course), rather than put my hands up and admit what is otherwise a fairly minor indiscretion.

Of course, this assumes I'd be careless enough to get caught doing such a speed in the first place... Avril.

[Great Pretender]

paulqv said:

Don't think any of us should be gloating on this! Whilst it is unarguable that the law needs to be obeyed it concerns me that the perception of people speeding or driving dangerously has swayed so much against common sense! If i can pose the question thus: What worries you more; someone assaulting another person; someone breaking into another persons house or someone driving at 127mph in a 70?

Don't get me wrong; I'm as guilty as anybody of bending the speed limits, and it is unfortunate the man got caught.

The point of my OP however was to highlight the excuse used by the individual. He's clearly a (reasonably) intelligent man, so what makes him think the Police would believe such a farcical concoction?

[D_T_W]

SSC! said:

Not laughing at the owner you understand, just that Simon posted it.

Whilst I understand the irony in Si's post given his passion for going quickly and his sometimes fragile license, but nine rofls???

[Mitchmachine]

[daz4m]

Sorry mate, had to be done.