Re: 172 m.p.h.
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
uk.transport only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

uk.transport Profile…
 Up
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: Brimstone
Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:01

"Brian Robertson" wrote in message
news:4%%KJi.5123$X%%4.2411@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
> The fastest driver ever caught in a routine speed check in the UK is to be
> sentenced at Oxford Crown Court.
>
> More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm
>
> What should happen to someone who exhibits such reckless stupidity? Is a
> ban and/or prison an answer?

Do you consider that travelling at that is speed is automatically reckless
stupidity?
233 Comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: John Wright
Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:08

Brimstone wrote:
> "Brian Robertson" wrote in message
> news:4%%KJi.5123$X%%4.2411@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>> The fastest driver ever caught in a routine speed check in the UK is to be
>> sentenced at Oxford Crown Court.
>>
>> More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm
>>
>> What should happen to someone who exhibits such reckless stupidity? Is a
>> ban and/or prison an answer?
>
> Do you consider that travelling at that is speed is automatically reckless
> stupidity?

A lot depends on other factors. If it is in a built up area then yes, on
an otherwise empty motorway at 3am then probably not.

--
John Wright

I feel like an insane person with the ability to mimic sanity.
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: Brimstone
Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:15

"John Wright" pegasus.f2s.com> wrote in message
news:_4ednQ0mwb4x42rbnZ2dnUVZ8qXinZ2d@pipex.net...
> Brimstone wrote:
>> "Brian Robertson" wrote in message
>> news:4%%KJi.5123$X%%4.2411@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>>> The fastest driver ever caught in a routine speed check in the UK is to
>>> be sentenced at Oxford Crown Court.
>>>
>>> More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm
>>>
>>> What should happen to someone who exhibits such reckless stupidity? Is a
>>> ban and/or prison an answer?
>>
>> Do you consider that travelling at that is speed is automatically
>> reckless stupidity?
>
> A lot depends on other factors. If it is in a built up area then yes, on
> an otherwise empty motorway at 3am then probably not.

Quite.
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: Mortimer
Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:15

"Brimstone" yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:y6-dnT_OluV24WrbnZ2dnUVZ8qSnnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Brian Robertson" wrote in message
> news:4%%KJi.5123$X%%4.2411@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>> The fastest driver ever caught in a routine speed check in the UK is to
>> be sentenced at Oxford Crown Court.
>>
>> More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm
>>
>> What should happen to someone who exhibits such reckless stupidity? Is a
>> ban and/or prison an answer?
>
> Do you consider that travelling at that is speed is automatically reckless
> stupidity?
Show full article (1.93Kb)
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:15

Brimstone wrote:
> "Brian Robertson" wrote in message
> news:4%%KJi.5123$X%%4.2411@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>> The fastest driver ever caught in a routine speed check in the UK is to be
>> sentenced at Oxford Crown Court.
>>
>> More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm
>>
>> What should happen to someone who exhibits such reckless stupidity? Is a
>> ban and/or prison an answer?
>
> Do you consider that travelling at that is speed is automatically reckless
> stupidity?
>
>
Show full article (0.88Kb)
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: Adrian
Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:19

John Wright (john@pegasus.f2s.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :
>> Do you consider that travelling at that is speed is automatically
>> reckless stupidity?
> A lot depends on other factors. If it is in a built up area then yes,

It wasn't.
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: Fod
Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:21

> Even on an 'empty' road, I personally don't believe that there
> is one inch of public tarmac in the UK upon which a driver travelling at
> that speed would not be risking his life and the lives of others

You might be shocked to know that the same is true when you are
traveling at any speed, even a legal one.
Roads are dangerous places.
> or that
> he/she would be more than faintly in control of the vehicle.

Not haven driven the car type in question I couldn't comment. I do
know that some cars handle better that speed than others do and that
some cars are driven at similar speeds on roads abroad without a
correspondingly high death toll.

cheers,
Derek
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:42

Brian Robertson wrote:
> I personally don't believe that there is one inch of public tarmac in the
> UK upon which a driver travelling at that speed would not be risking his
> life and the lives of others or that he/she would be more than faintly in
> control of the vehicle.

And belief is so much more important than fact, eh?

A court has already accepted that a police officer travelling at a
similar speed is not recklessly endangering life.
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Date: Sep 24, 2007 02:57

Steve Firth wrote:
> Brian Robertson wrote:
>
>> I personally don't believe that there is one inch of public tarmac in the
>> UK upon which a driver travelling at that speed would not be risking his
>> life and the lives of others or that he/she would be more than faintly in
>> control of the vehicle.
>
> And belief is so much more important than fact, eh?
>
> A court has already accepted that a police officer travelling at a
> similar speed is not recklessly endangering life.

I think I am entitled to my belief, Steve. I'm not questioning your
right to believe otherwise. As a professional driver I think I am at the
very least entitled to hold an opinion.

We have aready established that you are, in all probability, a very poor
driver, so perhaps I actually have more of a right to an opinion on this
matter than you.

Regards,
Show full article (0.88Kb)
no comments
Re: 172 m.p.h.         


Author: Roadhog
Date: Sep 24, 2007 03:13

In message <1SLJi.5132$X%%4.3837@newsfe4-win.ntli.net>, Brian Robertson
writes
>Steve Firth wrote:
>> Brian Robertson wrote:
>>
>>> I personally don't believe that there is one inch of public tarmac
>>>in the
>>> UK upon which a driver travelling at that speed would not be risking his
>>> life and the lives of others or that he/she would be more than faintly in
>>> control of the vehicle.
>> And belief is so much more important than fact, eh?
>> A court has already accepted that a police officer travelling at a
>> similar speed is not recklessly endangering life.
>
>I think I am entitled to my belief, Steve. I'm not questioning your
>right to believe otherwise. As a professional driver I think I am at
>the very least entitled to hold an opinion...
Show full article (1.01Kb)
7 Comments

RELATED THREADS
SubjectArticles qty Group
[email][202.172.125.112 AU AS18390 202.172.124.0/22] tergt1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
[email][24.172.137.106 US AS12262 24.172.128.0/20] Pills for youl1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
[email][24.121.172.121 US AS25994 24.121.172.0/22] The way to make your girlfriend happy1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
[email][81.172.58.38 ES AS6739 81.172.32.0/19] expiratory1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
[email][200.172.11.190 BR AS4230 200.172.0.0/16] Re:1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
[email][86.110.172.65 RU AS35641 86.110.172.0/24] For every men of different ages unique decision!1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
[email][210.99.172.60 KR AS23577 210.99.172.0/24] Can we talk?1 news.admin.netabuse.sightings ·
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9