Joined
·
194 Posts
It wouldn't slow them down. For anyone dumb enough to go 168 on public freeways in major cities threat of loss of life is not a powerful enough negative incentive.
High-Speed Motorcycles Proving Too Fast for Chicago Cops.
21 - 40 of 68 Posts
Joined
·
44 Posts
My problem is that as ridiculous as it is to do 170 on the open road, doing say 110 somewhere out in South Dakota might be reasonable. Some folks are safe at triple digit speeds and others are dangerous in the parking lot. Speed is the only thing they can put a hard number to and get guilty pleas so it gets ruthlessly enforced while I have never seen someone over for far more dangerous infractions like weaving through traffic and talking on cell phones.
Plus there's the added discrimination against motorcylists. When's the last time you've heard of someone having his car seized for a traffic offense?
Plus there's the added discrimination against motorcylists. When's the last time you've heard of someone having his car seized for a traffic offense?
Rule the Universe!
Right on! Death Sentence for Speeders! Death Sentence for Anyone who Ever breaks Any Rule of Any kind Ever! Yes Sir, lot less of those "non-Rule followers" around then. Why it'd be Heaven on Earth if only Everyone would Always follow All the Rules, 'course we'd need more Rules just to make sure that no matter what you do you'd be breaking some rule.
Right on! Death Sentence for Speeders! Death Sentence for Anyone who Ever breaks Any Rule of Any kind Ever! Yes Sir, lot less of those "non-Rule followers" around then. Why it'd be Heaven on Earth if only Everyone would Always follow All the Rules, 'course we'd need more Rules just to make sure that no matter what you do you'd be breaking some rule.
I read the article. What a load of crap. Bikes that routinely het 200. Last time I checked the MotoGP bikes only hit 200 on certain tracks. Remember that the drag increases by the square od f the speed increase. (That means that 200 is really really hard to reach)
Sounds like "lou" is a figment of someone's imagination. 168 (indicated?) is a fishy number. Boy he is a really cool customer to be able to do all of that at "168". I am way to engaged with where I am going at those speeds to worry about what is behind me.
Yeah I speed. I do it in a considered way - at the track. Light or no traffic. Good roads. No cops. Medical ,if I screw up. By the way a 100 mph corner is way more interesting than 140-150 on a straight (excepthwhen it comes to braking for the corner). And a fast lap at the track is way more fun and way more difficult.
Spend your money on track days. Your stock bike is way more capable than you probably are as a rider. Yeah, it is humbling and difficult. Depending on the track and depending on the woman ia treack day can be better than sex. (Well maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration. But you get the point.)
After I ride a track day, when I get back on the road (I ride every day commuting) All of those curbs, trees, fences and driveways ( and cops) look ever more dangerous. Top speed runs are just boring, require no talent and less brains.
Nuf outa me.
Hey stupids - go to the track!
Sounds like "lou" is a figment of someone's imagination. 168 (indicated?) is a fishy number. Boy he is a really cool customer to be able to do all of that at "168". I am way to engaged with where I am going at those speeds to worry about what is behind me.
Yeah I speed. I do it in a considered way - at the track. Light or no traffic. Good roads. No cops. Medical ,if I screw up. By the way a 100 mph corner is way more interesting than 140-150 on a straight (excepthwhen it comes to braking for the corner). And a fast lap at the track is way more fun and way more difficult.
Spend your money on track days. Your stock bike is way more capable than you probably are as a rider. Yeah, it is humbling and difficult. Depending on the track and depending on the woman ia treack day can be better than sex. (Well maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration. But you get the point.)
After I ride a track day, when I get back on the road (I ride every day commuting) All of those curbs, trees, fences and driveways ( and cops) look ever more dangerous. Top speed runs are just boring, require no talent and less brains.
Nuf outa me.
Hey stupids - go to the track!
Joined
·
4,129 Posts
Re: Rule the Universe!
I did not say death to speeders. I said death to those who evade law enforcement officers. If you see lights you pull over. If you do not pull over then the cops should have every right to stop the idiot that has created the problem in the first place. So the rant you wrote will not hold water for me. Try again.
I did not say death to speeders. I said death to those who evade law enforcement officers. If you see lights you pull over. If you do not pull over then the cops should have every right to stop the idiot that has created the problem in the first place. So the rant you wrote will not hold water for me. Try again.
Begin flame
OK, but why not just prosecute them if they crash or hurt someone else. Put them away if they voluntarily take actions that hurt or kill someone. Treat THAT as a the big crime. (BTW same for DUI)
Deadly force will only result in an escalation of force between the parties. As if killing an insurgent in Iraq will stop them from fighting. Get real. You're gonna kill some 17 yr old because he runs? Get real man. What if he was YOUR kid. Just because you are from a perfect family that doen't mean that your kids won't go nuts every now and then. Look some kid's mother in the eye and tell her her kid "got what he deserved." You are real cold. Do you even ride? Never broke a law, eh?
BTW I spent 12 years as a District Attorney so I have paid my dues. I earend a reputation for prisecuting hard cases, but put our energy toward real crime - Like corporate crime. My belief is that speed by itself is not a problem. (See Autobahn, see jet aircraft, see Bonneville) Why not have one night a month when the interstate (a section) is open for top speed runs? Have the cops prtect the motocycilsts not try to eliminate them. Like prohibition making big fines for speeding won't stop it. THere's a reason that Goose (in Top Gun ) said "I feel the need for speed." It's part of us to want to go faster.
What does bail bond have to do with speeding? Insurance cpmpanies are corporations that have a monoply (auto insurance) so referring to that doesn't give you any credibility in my eyes. Cops have their agenda too. I know, having workrd with them for a long time. Sme of the fastest riders I know are cops (but they have "immunity")
THat being said. I detest squids and their behavior. Give them an outlet, banning them and their behavior never works.
End of flame
OK, but why not just prosecute them if they crash or hurt someone else. Put them away if they voluntarily take actions that hurt or kill someone. Treat THAT as a the big crime. (BTW same for DUI)
Deadly force will only result in an escalation of force between the parties. As if killing an insurgent in Iraq will stop them from fighting. Get real. You're gonna kill some 17 yr old because he runs? Get real man. What if he was YOUR kid. Just because you are from a perfect family that doen't mean that your kids won't go nuts every now and then. Look some kid's mother in the eye and tell her her kid "got what he deserved." You are real cold. Do you even ride? Never broke a law, eh?
BTW I spent 12 years as a District Attorney so I have paid my dues. I earend a reputation for prisecuting hard cases, but put our energy toward real crime - Like corporate crime. My belief is that speed by itself is not a problem. (See Autobahn, see jet aircraft, see Bonneville) Why not have one night a month when the interstate (a section) is open for top speed runs? Have the cops prtect the motocycilsts not try to eliminate them. Like prohibition making big fines for speeding won't stop it. THere's a reason that Goose (in Top Gun ) said "I feel the need for speed." It's part of us to want to go faster.
What does bail bond have to do with speeding? Insurance cpmpanies are corporations that have a monoply (auto insurance) so referring to that doesn't give you any credibility in my eyes. Cops have their agenda too. I know, having workrd with them for a long time. Sme of the fastest riders I know are cops (but they have "immunity")
THat being said. I detest squids and their behavior. Give them an outlet, banning them and their behavior never works.
End of flame
Joined
·
4,129 Posts
Bail bonds means I've spent that 10 years getting morons out of jail for this exact thing. Being an insurance agent means that my year-end production numbers for any insurance company are affected by the claims people make for this, as well. And cops and lawyers do have agendas. As you know since you were a lawyer for the state. So your re-butt for my previous remarks blow big hairy chunks.
If my seventeen year old kid were killed for being stupid, would I hold the police responsible? Hell no- they are doing their job. Would I go to every defensive driving course I could attend and tell my story of my former childs stupidity? Hell yes!! If you show things by example then sometimes messages get through.
If you are so irresponsible as to put the public in danger with your actions then you need to be removed from the situation- even if that means you loose your life because of it.
Last night in Atlanta a group of motorcyclist were riding a stretch of I-20 at over 100 mph. The police chase that began around I-285. They all were going around 140 when they came up on Penola Rd. Squid #1 (now tango-uniform) departed his bike after it hit a MOVING lumber truck at around 130 or so the cops think. Squid took flight and lost his life. It was late so it was light traffic. The outcome fits the situation because of stupidity. If the squid would have stopped it would have been a simple excessive speeding ticket (probably jail for a $300 bond) and life goes on with points on you record. But he chose to run and now his momma is crying boo-hoo to the police for the chase. Who's right Mr DA? The momma who thinks that the cops shouldn't be chasing or the cops that enforce the law?
If you screw with the law (we are a nation built on the "rule of law") the a price has to be paid. If it endangers others and the price is death for one instead of the possible death of the innocent then so be it......
If my seventeen year old kid were killed for being stupid, would I hold the police responsible? Hell no- they are doing their job. Would I go to every defensive driving course I could attend and tell my story of my former childs stupidity? Hell yes!! If you show things by example then sometimes messages get through.
If you are so irresponsible as to put the public in danger with your actions then you need to be removed from the situation- even if that means you loose your life because of it.
Last night in Atlanta a group of motorcyclist were riding a stretch of I-20 at over 100 mph. The police chase that began around I-285. They all were going around 140 when they came up on Penola Rd. Squid #1 (now tango-uniform) departed his bike after it hit a MOVING lumber truck at around 130 or so the cops think. Squid took flight and lost his life. It was late so it was light traffic. The outcome fits the situation because of stupidity. If the squid would have stopped it would have been a simple excessive speeding ticket (probably jail for a $300 bond) and life goes on with points on you record. But he chose to run and now his momma is crying boo-hoo to the police for the chase. Who's right Mr DA? The momma who thinks that the cops shouldn't be chasing or the cops that enforce the law?
If you screw with the law (we are a nation built on the "rule of law") the a price has to be paid. If it endangers others and the price is death for one instead of the possible death of the innocent then so be it......
Holy cow dude you sound like some nazi, I thought america was built on "freedom" not the "rule of law". Your telling me you would happily let the police kill your children and then go around and tell people how stupid your kid was??? Why not tell em how stupid you were for buying him a motorcycle that is capable of these speeds, or not teaching him some responsibility???
End of that lol, I think opening up a stretch of the highway once a month would be a great idea, line people up and let one rip every 30 seconds, have an ambulance or two around and some supervision and everyone could get out their need for speed.
End of that lol, I think opening up a stretch of the highway once a month would be a great idea, line people up and let one rip every 30 seconds, have an ambulance or two around and some supervision and everyone could get out their need for speed.
The 186mph thing is only an indicated speed. There's nothing (aside from needing the required power to do so) stopping any bike coming out of Japan from going faster than 186mph, it's just that the stock speedometers fitted to the bikes won't display any speed higher than this.
Re: Rule the Universe!
Okay, if you want to reason about it, then try this on for size.
If someone is stupid enough to try to evade the police, and in your own words you're sactioning the use of deadly force, then I put this question to you.
Which is more dangerous? Some nut doing 170-200mph in "control" of their vehicle, for whatever that means, to avoid hitting cars/people/whatever. Or doing what you propose and police using "deadly force" and shooting the rider and killing/maiming then and now we're left with a 170-200mph totally out-of-control object barreling down the road towards innocent people?
Don't know about you, but I'll take my chances for being unharmed by a 170-200mph idiot who's consciously controlling his vehicle as opposed to an effective 170-200mph out of control missile.
Oh, but hey! These guys deserve to die, and screw the consequences! Is that what you're effectively saying? You sure you thought this one through? If you're representative of thinking that goes into the legal fraternity, then it's no wonder there's a whole host of messed up laws in the world.
Okay, if you want to reason about it, then try this on for size.
If someone is stupid enough to try to evade the police, and in your own words you're sactioning the use of deadly force, then I put this question to you.
Which is more dangerous? Some nut doing 170-200mph in "control" of their vehicle, for whatever that means, to avoid hitting cars/people/whatever. Or doing what you propose and police using "deadly force" and shooting the rider and killing/maiming then and now we're left with a 170-200mph totally out-of-control object barreling down the road towards innocent people?
Don't know about you, but I'll take my chances for being unharmed by a 170-200mph idiot who's consciously controlling his vehicle as opposed to an effective 170-200mph out of control missile.
Oh, but hey! These guys deserve to die, and screw the consequences! Is that what you're effectively saying? You sure you thought this one through? If you're representative of thinking that goes into the legal fraternity, then it's no wonder there's a whole host of messed up laws in the world.
More reading material for mr hanner.
"Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan told the Senate Banking Committee one time, "There is no question that if you run substantial and excessive deficits over time, you are draining savings from the private sector, and other things equal, you do clearly undercut the growth rate of the economy." The problem occurs because -- as the administration, which tried for a while to argue this Economics 101 point, now concedes -- the greater competition for capital drives up interest rates. Mr. Mankiw summed this up nicely in his best-selling economics textbook: "When the government reduces national saving by running a budget deficit, the interest rate rises, and investment falls. Because investment is important for long-run economic growth, government budget deficits reduce the economy's growth rate." more info for david hanner
"Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan told the Senate Banking Committee one time, "There is no question that if you run substantial and excessive deficits over time, you are draining savings from the private sector, and other things equal, you do clearly undercut the growth rate of the economy." The problem occurs because -- as the administration, which tried for a while to argue this Economics 101 point, now concedes -- the greater competition for capital drives up interest rates. Mr. Mankiw summed this up nicely in his best-selling economics textbook: "When the government reduces national saving by running a budget deficit, the interest rate rises, and investment falls. Because investment is important for long-run economic growth, government budget deficits reduce the economy's growth rate." more info for david hanner
Think about laws.
This is kind of in responce to Mr. Kill anyone that runs.
Think about why speeding is illegal... the ONLY reason speeding is illegal is because they think it increases your chances of an accident which can cause death or injury.
But
1. speeding doesn't = and increase your chances of an accident, there have been several studies that show this.
2. It's alread illegal to kill some one or injure some one, we already have all these manslaghter laws etc.
Soooo... really the speeding laws are trying to be 'preventative' laws. There is nothing inherently wrong with speeding.
So if you kill people for breaking the speeding law and not stopping on the basis that they're breaking a preventative law your breaking some of the very laws that preventative law was writen to help.
In my opinion preventative laws are in large retarted and should pretty much all be done away with.
At some point you have to trust people to know that doing a certain thing may lead them to comiting a crime.
If you start down the road of preventative laws you just end up with a lot of extra laws and where do you stop? And if your actualy killing people over preventative laws... well all you have is a way to reduce population.
Guns can be used to kill people, killing people is illegal so guns are illegal some places... another retarted preventative law.
And YES you could even do away with stop sign laws on this basis, it could still be the rule that you stop and if you don't and there's an accident you would be at fault but otherwise nothing would happen.
I believe not much would change if you say got rid of many of these preventative laws. Look at it this way the only time people are worried about getting a ticket for running a stop sign is when they see a cop, so all the times they don't see a cop it's just like if there was no law against it.
This is kind of in responce to Mr. Kill anyone that runs.
Think about why speeding is illegal... the ONLY reason speeding is illegal is because they think it increases your chances of an accident which can cause death or injury.
But
1. speeding doesn't = and increase your chances of an accident, there have been several studies that show this.
2. It's alread illegal to kill some one or injure some one, we already have all these manslaghter laws etc.
Soooo... really the speeding laws are trying to be 'preventative' laws. There is nothing inherently wrong with speeding.
So if you kill people for breaking the speeding law and not stopping on the basis that they're breaking a preventative law your breaking some of the very laws that preventative law was writen to help.
In my opinion preventative laws are in large retarted and should pretty much all be done away with.
At some point you have to trust people to know that doing a certain thing may lead them to comiting a crime.
If you start down the road of preventative laws you just end up with a lot of extra laws and where do you stop? And if your actualy killing people over preventative laws... well all you have is a way to reduce population.
Guns can be used to kill people, killing people is illegal so guns are illegal some places... another retarted preventative law.
And YES you could even do away with stop sign laws on this basis, it could still be the rule that you stop and if you don't and there's an accident you would be at fault but otherwise nothing would happen.
I believe not much would change if you say got rid of many of these preventative laws. Look at it this way the only time people are worried about getting a ticket for running a stop sign is when they see a cop, so all the times they don't see a cop it's just like if there was no law against it.
Do you realize speeding doesn't even mean your more likely to have an accident??
Do you realize the speedlimit laws are retarted?
yet you would still let the police kill your kid for breaking some retarted law and trying to get away with it?
In europe they have much safer roads with no speed limits what so ever.
No speed limits is ACTUALY safer, there have been studies.
Of couse you work with insurance companies and they'll take an excuse to rase some ones rate.
Do you realize the speedlimit laws are retarted?
yet you would still let the police kill your kid for breaking some retarted law and trying to get away with it?
In europe they have much safer roads with no speed limits what so ever.
No speed limits is ACTUALY safer, there have been studies.
Of couse you work with insurance companies and they'll take an excuse to rase some ones rate.
21 - 40 of 68 Posts
Join the discussion
