159 mph copper - Good sence prevails at last

[Guest]

There are some parts of your post that do cause me concern. I find the story regarding the driver in France a little unbelievable. As far as I am aware French motorways now check your times of receiving, and paying a ticket and compute your average speed automatically. Exceeding the limit means an automatic penalty there and then. From the speeds you have described this particular driver would have had his car impounded on the spot. You also mention the destination was Calais so I assume the 'friend' in question was about to travel to the UK and for all intents and purposes, planning on replicating his driving 'skills' here. Additionally I am concerned at your tolerance of this obvious 'madness'. I assume that when the person concerned finally gets it wrong, and it is inevitable that he will, and possibly kills someone, you will have to live with your conscience. You state you don't 'approve'. There is an easy way to action your disapproval. Therefore I am sure you would receive many plaudits if you were to convey this particular 'friend's' details to the Kent Constabulary so they could at least be forewarned of the potential for danger if this particular person was to arrive here again. After all 'shopping' a drink driver is now considered acceptable, and this person's activities have to be considered a danger to all of us..

If people wish to drive fast the let them use a race track, as indeed you have stated you did yourself. There they can do what ever they like and only cause harm to themselves. On the public highway we all have a duty to behave in a sensible manner, and a right to expect that from other road users.

 

[ProfJohnL]

John since reading another posting here on a different topic another thought has occurred to me. Should the speed of the car be restricted in the interest of both safety and economy the cost to the emergency services should be reduced as the accidents should not be so severe and requireing major medical aid. This would have a knock on effect on the spiraling costs of the various services whereby hopefully their costs would be reduced.

Hello Colin

I understand your thinking! However I am sure there will be many who WOULD shout 'nanny state' at you.

I do not know if you are old enough to recall that in the 1970's the national speed limits were reduced during the oil crisis, principally to reduce oil/petrol consumption.

I have nver bothered to follow up the records to see how much fuel was saved, but it probably would prove your point.

 

[cris_408518]

SL. Ten years ago was a little different on French roads and the guy was on a "race kitted" road legal bike.

I often work around fast vehicles and racing, the guy is someone I know, not a friend.

The guy needs his UK license so his driving and riding here differs.

Also don't believe all you read about French Autoroutes and continental roads and speed!

I think I mentioned elswhere about a chaufered rich guy driven in a Maybach on the continent at 130 - 140mph, in 2005 no fines at Toll booths and the driver has a substantial sum of cash to "alleviate any problem" when it occurs. Fact not fiction!

If you read my earlier post, can you tell me who I shop to the police first. They guy who rides the bike fast or the guy with the badly loaded caravan with the unsecure load that the police ignored. On the other hand do I shop the guy who is lacking sleep or the elderly caravanner at Trevornick last year who couldn't see properly or how about the woman my wife works with who everyone is scared to drive with. She never breaks the speed limit, but drives in and out of laybys and bus stops as she follows the kerbs. She has been reported but as she is vain she has the glasses in the car "incase of trouble" but does not wear them! ANd how about hose lighting fags and talking on mobiles.

I could of course report the guy I know of who drives a standard looking 5 series, a respectable businessman who has infact paid around 80k + to have his purpose built 5 series Alpina kept looking like a basic 5 so as not to "attract attention". If you know who Brabus are they sell plenty of cars and there is only one reason to pay their money for 6+ litre engines to be shoe horned into fairly standard looking cars!

Again it all comes back to people shouting about speeding when plenty of others practice bad driving practice and drive when they should never be on the road.

Our driving test is out of touch with vehicles potential and current road conditions, as much as you may shout about speeding and its horrors their are many speeding drivers who I would sit with rather than risk life and others lives with people to old to be safe on the roads with eye and other health defects or under the influence of drugs, lack of sleep or suffering anger rage through todays life and pressures.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Cris regarding your mention of the adrenalin flowing I can quite appreciate this fact. I was a member of both the South Wales Automoblile Club and the Port Talbot Motor Club in my younger days and have competed and marshelled on rallies which was a real buzz for me. However as Scotch Lad has stated there is a difference between competative driving on closed circuits and driving in a similar manner on the public highway. Those who climb mountains, sail the seas or drive in race/rallies are only generally putting themselves at risk and there is also far less chance of killing others. On the public highway there is a far greater risk of causing considerable death/injury as there are far more vehicles and also other drivers who have the same speed attitude. There is a time and place for all forms of adrenalin excitement but to me the public highway is not one of these places. If a fast driver is hell bent on taking the risks fair enough but he/she should give thought to the number of other people that could be maimed/killed in his actions should they go wrong - none of us are perfect.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Rather than speed in my coach and six or even my sedan chair I prefer to get my adrenalin buzz from watching Rosie milking the cows or Naughty Nina bending over whilst grooming my horses. I would even as a last resort prefer looking at Her Ladyship in her lace up corsets showing her ample bosoms :O)

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Cris regarding your mention of the adrenalin flowing I can quite appreciate this fact. I was a member of both the South Wales Automoblile Club and the Port Talbot Motor Club in my younger days and have competed and marshelled on rallies which was a real buzz for me. However as Scotch Lad has stated there is a difference between competative driving on closed circuits and driving in a similar manner on the public highway. Those who climb mountains, sail the seas or drive in race/rallies are only generally putting themselves at risk and there is also far less chance of killing others. On the public highway there is a far greater risk of causing considerable death/injury as there are far more vehicles and also other drivers who have the same speed attitude. There is a time and place for all forms of adrenalin excitement but to me the public highway is not one of these places. If a fast driver is hell bent on taking the risks fair enough but he/she should give thought to the number of other people that could be maimed/killed in his actions should they go wrong - none of us are perfect.

Exactly.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Lord B I presume from this latest posting that you are now back on the Viagra. Incidently it is nice to see you agreeing with me again. No hard feelings eh what what old sport.

 

[cris_408518]

You make some valid points, but climbing mountains and sailing put plenty of volunteers lives at risk when things go wrong.

Some speed beacause they can, others speed due to life and work pressures. Our society and government have a lot to answer for.

As I keep saying, the tool is there under the right foot or hand for many many to be tempted!

Vilify the person speeding, but tell me he is any more dangerous than my afore mentioned M25 Caravanner, and go tell my cousin ten years after the accident that wrecked her life. Hit by a woman driver who after a long time admitted that she was on anti depressant drugs and turned to tell of her child who was still screaming in the car from before she had left home.

Driving under the influence of drink or drugs be they prescription or otherwise is illegal and voids insurance, poor eyesite the same!

I've had these conversations before with wise heads who keep to speed limits as they sit at the golf club bar having a pint and a half as other wise heads talk of how the valium is helping them or how the wife is already back driving a couple of weeks after her hip replacement as the pain killers work well! It's also a fact that many high speed drivers maintain their vehicles and check road worthiness regularly!!

So who are you going to shop in, and please tell who is most dangerous. Another relatives ex fiance had a car crash on a fairly straight road, loss of concentration was blamed. Put in charge of 65 men who resented a 26 year old high flying graduate, she was under great pressure to hit targets from her employers. Late after a counselling appointment re her problems and on something akin to Valium she drifted across the road, Police report after witness reports was that speed was not the cause of the accident! She never admitted the truth about her problems and the medication, if the other vehicles driver had been 5 mph over the limit who would have been to blame, and who would be most guilty?

 

[mcghee]

You're making a lot of valid points Cris, points which I've tried to make myself in the past. For me, there are too many drivers on our roads who are a danger to everyone else, and consider themselves to be perfectly safe because they don't break the speed limits. Regarding the 159mph incident: If you or I had been caught at that speed we'd have spent 18 months in the big hoose, and this man's defense is no better than yours or mine.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Cris you have highlighted many points to support your argument re drink/drug driving, pressures from employment, etc. However two wrongs do not make a right. There was a case a few years ago where the driver was involved in an accident as a result of pressure from his employer to be at a certain appointment at a certain time. the employer was charged with aiding and abetting the accident by putting undue pressure on the employee. Surely the average motorist should ask themselves which is more important risking life and limb of both themselves and other road users or being late for an appointment - there is only so much that a person can take or manage. When I left my place of work I never took any work home with me. My line manager questioned me about this and I told him that outside the College gates was my time to spend as I see fit with my wife, family and friends. If my work was not done it was either a case of me being over pressured in work or I was not pulling my weight. I cannot for the life of me understand why teachers say they are up all hours doing school work. Mind you the same applies for industry. the more you are willing to do the more they will put on you. I worked to live and not lived to work. Sermon over and I think this is a case of agreeing not to agree.

 

[mcghee]

You're right Cris, it's the same in every industry, and I believe it's largely thanks to the people who work through lunches and work late for no extra pay. It's come to the point where it's expected of everyone thanks the these folk who think they're indispensible.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Cris,

This thread started when I expressed my supported for the re investigation of the Shropshire police officers action of speeding excessively. It was not so much that officer was exceeding the speed limit (which of course he was and I do not condone it given the circumstances) but by the extreme speeds that were recorded.

We call into question the need for such high speed vehicles as we have agreed, their use in a pursuit is discouraged these days.

I was appalled to read of your own admissions of attaining speeds in excess of the officer on public roads, and you imply that it was part of your job. I can think of no job that calls for such speed - unless you are a getaway driver, and then to it brings a different understanding to the title of 'job'. You claim that you made a judgement on the risks involved, as did the officer but who is to say that your judgment is better than mine?

You do make some valid points regarding the dangers of other driving habits, I am sure that most of us have some bad habits, but quoting all these other ills does not diminish the incredible increased risk to which you put yourself and others when deciding to use such high speeds in public places.

With regard to the encounters with other examples of poor driving, It's not a question of who to 'shop' as if we have a limit to one a month or so, each and every transgression that can be proved should be dealt with accordingly. Perhaps there should be some other offence to allow the police to stop dangerous drivers with a lower threshold of proof on the grounds of behaviour likely to endangering public safety.

I am gratified that you like me now seem to believe the need for such fast vehicles is diminishing, and I assume that you no longer are called on to drive in such a way. After all weren't you fed up of finding your self at the back of the queue of slow moving traffic?

 

[cris_408518]

John.

I don't quite know where you get it that any speed attained by me was due to my job!

Over the years I have driven in Germany and other countries where there is or has been no upper speed limit on some highways.

If you think that you can drive or ride at speed over 150 in average UK traffic conditions even I was never that mad.

But I know of plenty who have gone at extreme speed on UK roads. I have been honest about past deeds.

Putting the officer in the dock and spreading it all over the press just glorifies the speed to some, the tools are readily available. And you will have youngsters in STI Subaru's etc with no training videoing there speedo'd to send via mobile phones to show they can get away with it and go faster.

If people I know have a bad day, it normally means throwing something or hammering a PC keyboard and some are probably a bigger danger than the officers action when they hit the motorway on then way home!

All the talk about police rules and procedures still doesn't give a clear cut reasons for Police using 150mph vehicles as we seem to agree.

But what ever people views, how many here can say that they are always 100% when they hit the road and that all they do on the road is 100% legal. I've been honest and its about time a few more people were before they jump on the copper's case or any other road users.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

cris I dont profess to be an angel. I have drove at 40 in a 30 zone and 90 (rarely) in a 70 zone but theres a big difference in that and 84 in a 30 and 159 in a 70. OK I broke the law but by doing that if caught would have paid a lot higher penalty than the said policeman as done. Thats what other posters on here are trying to say I believe.

 

[cris_408518]

Not an Angel Lord B, my bubble bursted again ;-)

The opening heading was a little OTT to me LordB, and with all the points made about him being in uniform, no clear procedures etc, lack of a few lines in a training manual.

This should've been dealt with internally and not taking up court time and not waving it like a red rag to every boy racer out on the roads.

I guarantee that some young plonker will be selling a bit more dope to have his wheels chipped or a race waste gate fiteed with race can exhaust so he can out run the local plods.

When I was Kid the Police cars were tuned and it was kept quiet about what potential equipment had.

All the Ye Ha for every police or officials **** up helps who exactly.

We have motor way Police based not far from my home and other Police drivers.

Police Drivers driving whilst lighting fags, talking on mobiles, on Police Radio, eating and drinking and depositing takeaway food and drink packaging out the window. Trained well, but some would appear not to be that smart aaccording to my advanced training.

 

[Guest]

Unfortunately, I suspect this discussion is going nowhere. The argument that if the conditions are 'ok', justifies breaking the speed limits does not hold any water. There are no right conditions on a public highway. You have absolutely no idea what is going to happen in front of you, you can only pre-suppose, and, up to a point, hope for the best. If the unexpected happens, as it probably will, then a lower speed will undoubtedly give you a better chance of escaping fatalities.

I placed on another post an independent study done by Volvo which showed quite clearly that the braking distance at 100mph was double that at 70 mph. In fact they also showed clearly that the main contributing factor to the braking distance, was not the efficiency of the car, but the 'efficiency' of the driver. I know we all would like to think we are born again Fangio's, but reality needs to prevail. In addition many F1 drivers have had crashed both on, and off the racetrack. Their driver training is, I am sure all would agree, in excess of what many of us would hope to achieve, yet they too can get it wrong. On the racetrack, they usually, but not always, can survive. We can probably argue, and discuss, this until the sun goes down, but I think that 'scraping a teenagers brains off the road' is something I would never wish to be responsible for, and is a salutary reminder to all of us, that get it wrong, and it could be too late. Take 20 minutes more in your journey, and arrive home safely rather than the hospital, or morgue. If you know a 'speeding driver', then shop them. It could be your child they kill. Fast drivers always bring out the 'platitude' that accidents do happen at low speeds. Yes, of course they do. Put a human body against 1.5 tons of metal and guess who wins? One suggestion would be to ban all vehicles altogether, but that is not pactical in this modern world, so the best alternative is for everyone to act as safely as possible to minimise the eventualities.

 

[cris_408518]

So you suggest we all drive at a blanket 5mph with a man with a flag up front just in case Scotch Lad!

And its ok to drive at 70 mph with a 1960's mini but oh so dangerous to drive when the traffic is OK at 71mph with crumple zones, side impact bars,airbags, modern rubber and brakes, abs, traction and stability control, with lights that show you where you are going.

As an Ex Volvo driver I loved their cars, I am though so shocked that they have thrown their safety concerns to the wind selling a range of cars with the lowest top speed at 115mph right upto 155mph and then spoutng obvious stopping distance data.

Driving at higher speed means that you allow longer stopping distances and adjust for traffic flow and road conditions, if you can't make that judgement you are probably the type of fool that drives on the bumper of the car in front at 70mph or reces around a 20mph school zone at 45mph at 3pm.

Accidents do happen as we see with trains, times have changed and so has the car.

 

[Guest]

Cris,

I suspect you and I will never find common ground, which was one of the reasons I mentioned that the thread was going 'nowhere'. It is apparent from your many Posts that vehicles of all types dominate your life, and speed is an integral part of that lifestyle. That is your choice and is respected, if not necessarily agreed with. So possibly it is time to close this one down.