Is this a record?

[T.C]

I have been involved in cases in the past where drivers have been handed 3, 5 or 10 years disqualifications from driving, but 80 years?

I know that he can apply for his licence back after half the disqualification period has been served, but that is still 40 years away

Maybe a few more courts ought to follow this example

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...-car-full-of-passengers/ar-AAskQny?li=BBoPRmx

 

[andyBeaker]

There is an argument - that I don't agree with - that a ban such as this can be self defeating as there is nothing for the scrotes to aim for in terms of getting back on the road.

Personally I would lock him up and throw,away the key.

 

[Centaur]

A trifle harsh, Andy. A bit like putting bikers in jail for speeding when no-one is hurt.

 

[T.C]

An error and correction has now been pubished. It was just a 2 year ban with extended re-test

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-41362923

 

[andyBeaker]

An error and correction has now been pubished. It was just a 2 year ban with extended re-test

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-41362923

Two years is even more stupid than eighty years.

 

[andyBeaker]

A trifle harsh, Andy. A bit like putting bikers in jail for speeding when no-one is hurt.

Ok, I'll bite....

Not in my view. Nobody has any right whatsoever to choose when and where to break the law.

It's called democracy.

 

[derek kelly]

Ok, I'll bite....

Not in my view. Nobody has any right whatsoever to choose when and where to break the law.

It's called democracy.

Surely in a true democracy then they have the right to break the law, just as the law has the right to punish them for doing so.

 

[andyBeaker]

Surely in a true democracy then they have the right to break the law, just as the law has the right to punish them for doing so.

Perhaps I will look again at becoming a JP............ providing the sentences that can be handed out are unlimited opposed to the slaps on the wrist system currently in place.......

 

[Centaur]

I was about to ask if you had never knowingly broken the speed limit but then I realised the answer was obvious. Every bike I have had in the last twenty years has been maxed out on the Irish M1. Waited for a long bit of empty road and so caused no danger to myself or anyone else. Two years and an extended test seems fair to me. The increase in his insurance for years will be a big penalty too.

 

[Cougar377]

Perhaps I will look again at becoming a JP............ providing the sentences that can be handed out are unlimited opposed to the slaps on the wrist system currently in place.......

The Hanging Judge is back.....

 

[lumpy]

A trifle harsh, Andy. A bit like putting bikers in jail for speeding when no-one is hurt.

I guess it's the same if someone is carrying a loaded gun but doesn't shoot anyone is it?

 

[andyBeaker]

I was about to ask if you had never knowingly broken the speed limit but then I realised the answer was obvious. Every bike I have had in the last twenty years has been maxed out on the Irish M1. Waited for a long bit of empty road and so caused no danger to myself or anyone else. Two years and an extended test seems fair to me. The increase in his insurance for years will be a big penalty too.

Yes I have broken the speed limit and rightly been punished.

nobody has the right to decide when and where they want to break the speed limit - there are no grey areas, it is very black and white and limits are there for everybody's well being. If a) it was only the speeders that suffered, b) nobody had to clear the mess up, c) didn't cost the taxpayer a fortune in emergency services and d) it didn't inconvenience anyone else I would say............... 'go for it'.

Someone mentioned on here the other day that they cruised at 90 on the motorway - can't remember who it was but it doesn't really matter - is THAT acceptable??

Save it for the track.

 

[Centaur]

I guess it's the same if someone is carrying a loaded gun but doesn't shoot anyone is it?

I have often carried a loaded gun but have rarely shot anyone!

 

[lumpy]

Yes I have broken the speed limit and rightly been punished.

nobody has the right to decide when and where they want to break the speed limit - there are no grey areas, it is very black and white and limits are there for everybody's well being. If a) it was only the speeders that suffered, b) nobody had to clear the mess up, c) didn't cost the taxpayer a fortune in emergency services and d) it didn't inconvenience anyone else I would say............... 'go for it'.

Someone mentioned on here the other day that they cruised at 90 on the motorway - can't remember who it was but it doesn't really matter - is THAT acceptable??

Save it for the track.

Nah fuck that, it's a choice. I would accept the ramifications as I am aware of them everytime I do over 150mph. I adopt a risk assessive mindset as to where and when I do my speeding. I take into account the known risks, and the chances of being caught. 30s and 40s are taboo for speeding, and remember this is the MAXIMUM SPEED, not a target to achieve. I enjoy the freedom of riding and speed is a way I can express the epitomy of a powerful machine, mindful of the risks and potential for 'self harm'. People are far more dangerous weaving in traffic than simple speeding in a calculated manner.

 

[lumpy]

I have often carried a loaded gun but have rarely shot anyone!

so like speeding, if you are permitted to carry a firearm it is lawful and there are no ramifications. If you are NOT permitted to carry a firearm should you be allowed to as long as you don't use it or is this disallowed and illegal for a good reason. Why should someone be prosecuted if nothing happens?

 

[Centaur]

Yes I have broken the speed limit and rightly been punished.

nobody has the right to decide when and where they want to break the speed limit - there are no grey areas, it is very black and white and limits are there for everybody's well being. If a) it was only the speeders that suffered, b) nobody had to clear the mess up, c) didn't cost the taxpayer a fortune in emergency services and d) it didn't inconvenience anyone else I would say............... 'go for it'.

Someone mentioned on here the other day that they cruised at 90 on the motorway - can't remember who it was but it doesn't really matter - is THAT acceptable??

Save it for the track.

In the right place and time, yes, it is perfectly acceptable. You are a symptom of the nanny state, Andy. I assume you have never ridden or driven on the autobahns. The speed limit on the open roads was brought in as a temporary measure in the early 70s during the fuel crisis but obviously never rescinded. No government has had the balls to rescind it. 60mph on a quiet main road and 70mph on a quiet motorway is utter bollocks.

 

[Centaur]

so like speeding, if you are permitted to carry a firearm it is lawful and there are no ramifications. If you are NOT permitted to carry a firearm should you be allowed to as long as you don't use it or is this disallowed and illegal for a good reason. Why should someone be prosecuted if nothing happens?

Very clever, Lumpy. America has shown that allowing virtually all citizens to have a gun is ridiculous but Germany has shown that certain roads in certain conditions do not require a speed limit. For America to allow so many guns but limit freeways to 55mph shows how stupid politicians can be.

 

[andyBeaker]

In the right place and time, yes, it is perfectly acceptable. You are a symptom of the nanny state, Andy. I assume you have never ridden or driven on the autobahns. The speed limit on the open roads was brought in as a temporary measure in the early 70s during the fuel crisis but obviously never rescinded. No government has had the balls to rescind it. 60mph on a quiet main road and 70mph on a quiet motorway is utter bollocks.

That all assumes that every road user a) is capable of going at high speed or b) more importantly, wants to go at high speed. As a for instance, assuming no speed limit, if I am happy to set the cruise control at 100 as I think that is a safe and appropriate speed - is it 'the right time and place' for others to set theirs at 140 and go flying past me, potentially putting me in danger?

I do not accept that anyone has the right to make the judgement of 'the right place and time' when the consequences affect other people. As speed increases, so does risk, even for the many god like riders out there: it doesn't matter how good a rider you are if a car pulls out right in front of you, or you hit a pot hole/debris/diesel.... I could go on.

Not sure you are right about why speed limits were brought in - my recollection is that excessive speeds on the M1 when it opened in the 1960s was the reason.

 

[andyBeaker]

You are a symptom of the nanny state, Andy. .

That is a ridiculous comment. My appetite for risk by way of speed is obviously lower than yours. Is that wrong? I could just as easily say that people who speed are out of control lunatics that have no respect for the law or consideration for others.

 

[Centaur]

That is a ridiculous comment. My appetite for risk by way of speed is obviously lower than yours. Is that wrong? I could just as easily say that people who speed are out of control lunatics that have no respect for the law or consideration for others.

You already said that in as many words.