CC Rider

I am only speculating here, but I think that fines were used for years, but that it wasn't enough of a deterrent. And that's what the state is looking for with these sanctions... a deterrent effect.

They'd rather not lock up people for speeding. But some people have more money than brains and will just keep paying fines. It's easy to stay out of jail... don't drive over 90 or 100 (whatever the magic number is) on public roads. For those that don't get it, they get to visit the clink.

B7Quattro Pete

61 in a 40?
71 in a 50?
76 in a 55?

have you ever driven over 100 mph? have you ever driven 118? have you ever caused a collision?

are you saying that this guy is more dangerous to society than the average 80 yr. old doing 60 mph in traffic in a less capable car? I say he is much, MUCH less a risk to society (including himself).

look, I know the law is the law, but don't preach to me about risk when I see the roads full of idiots who a) never learned how to drive correctly and or b) could give a **** about their driving and or c) can't see 5' in front of them and or d) aren't paying attention to the road due to cell phones, applying make-up, reviewing their notes, gabbing with their friends and or e) are in some way mentally impaired etc, etc....

now if you can show me statistically where excessive speed (NOT INDUCED OR OTHERWISE IN CONJUNCTION WITH MENTAL IMPAIRMENT OR SIMILAR ROOT CAUSES) has caused a higher percentage of collisions than say your running red lights or drunk driving or being too old then I'll shut-up.

B7Quattro Pete

9 out of 19 acquired their drivers licenses (used to obtain plane tickets) from Va. the cards themselves were real/legal but the methods used to obtain those ID's were successful due to the terrorist's exploitation of weaknesses/loopholes in Va. DMV procedures.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/02/27/inv.fake.id.arrests/

I used this comparison more for dramatics and I agree it's not fair, but how ironic is it that Va. throws otherwise good citizens in jail for speeding yet was a key provider (incl. sanctuary) for half of the 911 mass murderers?

CC Rider

more often than not.

That is what the state is trying to avoid.

In my last post, I was careful to point out that the combination of <b>that road</b> at <b>that time</b> (rush hour) at <b>that speed</b> is seriously dangerous.

Change any one of those three variables, and it wouldn't be so bad. But I do not find that combination acceptable. I'm on that road at that time everyday. We don't need people doing 118 mph just because they can.

B7Quattro Pete

a wreck in that Olds of yours at anything over 40 is more dangerous than his Audi at 118! is that lap belt going to hold you in bro if things get wild at say 55? a wreck on any motorcycle at any speed could result in your death. do I hear another call for a ban on convertibles and motorcycles because they're too risky? yoo-hoo, Ralf Nader, where are you?

the dude was on it for 10 seconds, off it with engine braking and he's down to legal limits in much less time. I didn't hear anything about him flying around rush hour traffic. 56 in a 35, say in a residential area, is way more hazardous considering apparent and not so apparent obstacles with limited space, visibility/reaction time.

I bet you 10-1, if you travel to Germany and find yourself on the autobahn in a turbo'd-up whatever, you probably blow by 118? guess what, you've driven the same speed for a longer span of time with more traffic and less lanes to play with......have you become public enemy #1?

you haven't answered my question. have you ever driven over 118 mph on public roads? another one for you, do you smoke?

CC Rider

Have I driven 118 on public roads? Would that nullify my input? I've done it, yes. But I don't recommend it. But since you seem hung on this point, I did it on a limited access highway, with low usage. The Dulles Toll Road is not a limited access highway. Never was. Never will be. At 118 mph near Whiele Ave you will pass two or three exits and entrance ramps. That's just plain reckless. Take it somewhere else.

Jretal

he was doing 118 where he shouldn't have and got caught. End of story. Have any of us done this before? yeah, we just got away with it... whether it be right or wrong.

Even in those 10 seconds though, if something were to come off a car and go infront of you, animal in the road, whatever and he lost control... and there were others on the highway, he would have taken out himself in addition to other drivers. period, end of point, no questions asked. Kinda like, is it fair to endanger the lives of others? That's JUST like drunk driving in my book, because you're being haphazard and putting other people at risk for your own entertainment/stupidity. So though it may seen extreme to charge someone as if those two are the same, in the end you might be endangering lives the same way by excessive speeding than you do drunk.

When going that fast, you need stellar reaction time to avoid some moron pulling out infront of you, cutting you off, etc... and no matter how good/safe the car is no one can foresee what someone is going to do or react fast enough to what they did at those speeds.

And just because a car is safe at 118, does that make it right? leave this to rest. Your point has been made 10 times already, quit beating it to death.

nadrealista

Can you recomend a good lawyer?