Advertiser Today...

[mesmerized]

how is he luckly not to be dead? He could of been going 80 and went into the back of a ute and lost his head on some timber. Fact is speed has never killed anyone (apart from the drug) people are going to continue to speed so some of you saying it's making it harder for the rest of you must be dulisional. I've riden a motorcycle at nearly that speed plus 80 clicks and i'm not dead.

If you beleive "speed kills" like the government would have us believe you are a fool.

Who cares he got caught now hes gonna pay for it.

And now you say "ohh he could of hurt someone" well no shit but he didn't so who cares? he could kill someone at 80 just as well as he could at 200.

umm, how can u deny that doing 250% more speed than other drivers on road doesn't increase your chances of an accident, especially if your weaving in and out of traffic. and u admit to doing 200km/h on a bike, now that's stupid. Speed HAS killed plenty of people on the roads eg, taking a corner too fast. the faster u go, the longer it takes to stop, it's that simple. 4 people at my high school were killed in a car crash bcoz they took a corner too fast and lost control. every1 speeds, yes, but doing 200 in a 80 zone is just ludicrous....

[Sambo33]

He tells the cops he was tired and "Didn't realise how fast he was goin"!!!

thats such a lame excuse, u would most definately know if u were doing 200

[~Astro~]

Statistics show that there is an increased likely hood of having an accident when speeding. Its black and white. It doesn't only come down to the control factor- what if the car hadn't been maintained, wasn't roadworthy etc. These factors would only compound the likelyhood of an accident.

The fact that his g/f was in the car- frankly she is the brainless one who allowed him to speed. I'm sure she could've opened her mouth if she wasn't comfortable. Dumb x2. People make choices- sadly they are not always the right choices.

[andz]

If you beleive "speed kills" like the government would have us believe you are a fool.

Who cares he got caught now hes gonna pay for it.

And now you say "ohh he could of hurt someone" well no shit but he didn't so who cares? he could kill someone at 80 just as well as he could at 200.

he could kill a member of your familly at 40k's.

sure 40 or 80 will cause damage, but the point is, 200 is cause a LOT more damage

i do believe 'speed kills'

[Deluxe]

i do believe 'speed kills'

I agree, Rules aren't there to be broken, they are there as a comprimise for everyone, they are the "safest" way about things! It's not hard to follow, If you can't grow up and live life following those rules then go back to your mum and suck on her tit some more!!!!

I couldn't give a rats ass if this guy had died.......... He speeds, His issue! BUT when there is other innocent people involed, then it becomes more of a community thing!

Edited June 4, 2007 by Deluxe

[Pauly33GTS-t]

I reckon anything over 80 in an accident and your f**ked regardless unless you happen to crash into a pillow factory which happens to have bolsa wood walls.

[Deluxe]

I reckon anything over 80 in an accident and your f**ked regardless unless you happen to crash into a pillow factory which happens to have bolsa wood walls.

Geez that almost sounds tempting to giv it a go..........LOL

[webng]

how is he luckly not to be dead? He could of been going 80 and went into the back of a ute and lost his head on some timber. Fact is speed has never killed anyone (apart from the drug) people are going to continue to speed so some of you saying it's making it harder for the rest of you must be dulisional. I've riden a motorcycle at nearly that speed plus 80 clicks and i'm not dead.

If you beleive "speed kills" like the government would have us believe you are a fool.

Who cares he got caught now hes gonna pay for it.

And now you say "ohh he could of hurt someone" well no shit but he didn't so who cares? he could kill someone at 80 just as well as he could at 200.

Yeah speed doesn't kill... it's the sudden deceleratation that gets you every time.

I'm guessing 200 in a 80 zone has a far higher chance of killing yourself or someone else when compared to 80 in a 80 zone. If you say otherwise then you're dreamin... and have fun on the 'other side'.

[Pauly33GTS-t]

I think its more dangerous that other road users wont know you are speeding, and there fore will do something to cause you to crash. and hence why you should only do 60 on a 60 road. even tho I wont lie, I may have sped occasionaly in the past, but only under perfect "safe" circumstances.

[Deluxe]

Yeh well speeding is one thing........ Being STUPID is another! We've all sped a some stage, we've all got a speeding fine no doubt, BUT to be involed in a fatal crash is another thing!

[Hotwire]

but only under perfect "safe" circumstances

There is no such thing as Perfect Safe circumstances. There is only reduced risk

But this thread reminds me of a quote on a "No Fear" poster from the mid 90's

"It's not the pace of life that concerns me. It's the sudden stop at the end."

[Tangles]

personally, speeding (ie 100 in 60 metro zone) in a built up area is a big NoNo in my mind, whereas speeding in a rural zone to me is 'sortof' ok. as long as you are prepared to accept the consequences for your actions.

[kralster]

There is no such thing as Perfect Safe circumstances. There is only reduced risk

But this thread reminds me of a quote on a "No Fear" poster from the mid 90's

"It's not the pace of life that concerns me. It's the sudden stop at the end."

Ok then. When overtaking a car you are only allowed to do so at the posted speed limit. So if a car is doing 95 in a 100 zone you can only legally overtake at 100. I personally perfer to spend as little time as possible in the worng lane. But if you want to crawl past while spending around a kilometer in the wrong lane go ahead.

[Hotwire]

Ok then. When overtaking a car you are only allowed to do so at the posted speed limit. So if a car is doing 95 in a 100 zone you can only legally overtake at 100. I personally perfer to spend as little time as possible in the worng lane. But if you want to crawl past while spending around a kilometer in the wrong lane go ahead.

I think you missed the point of my post. I wasn't saying that I you shoul never speed, however, There is literally no "perfect safe" place to do it. I agree that when overtaking, do it as quick as reasonably possible (you are reducing the time on the wrong side) and then return to the speed limit as quick as possible. This way you have reduced the risk which was the point of my post. You can only ever reduce the risk, you can never eliminate it. That is what I was trying to point out

[kralster]

theres no "perfect safe" with anything in life.

As homer said "You could wake up dead tomorrow"

Australia is such a draconian country as it is. We are the biggest pussies around. We complain about shit the government does but never ever do a thing about it.

[J_Red33]

the problem is this doesn't stop idiots from driving.

there was a thing on the radio about a guy down at Christies being caught for drink driving for the 17th time, and he was driving with out a license. There really is no way to keep idiots off the road, short of locking them up, and i don't want to pay more taxes to keep em in the slammer

In actual fact the amout of money it costs in injuries & deaths caused by these dickheads, far outweighs what it costs to lock them up & prevent the accidents happening.

how is he luckly not to be dead? He could of been going 80 and went into the back of a ute and lost his head on some timber. Fact is speed has never killed anyone (apart from the drug) people are going to continue to speed so some of you saying it's making it harder for the rest of you must be dulisional. I've riden a motorcycle at nearly that speed plus 80 clicks and i'm not dead.

If you beleive "speed kills" like the government would have us believe you are a fool.

Who cares he got caught now hes gonna pay for it.

And now you say "ohh he could of hurt someone" well no shit but he didn't so who cares? he could kill someone at 80 just as well as he could at 200.

I think the key thing that's always missed is it's not how fast you go, it's where you do. There is such a thing as INAPROPRIATE speed. Personally I don't have a problem with someone doing 200 km/h on an open straight piece of road in daylight, but a busy suburban street at night is another story. Granted it may not have been the case with this 18 y.o. (not enough info) but he proved how street wise he was by getting caught in the first place.

[Pauly33GTS-t]

I meant on a track. but. ok.

[Richie33]

Ok then. When overtaking a car you are only allowed to do so at the posted speed limit. So if a car is doing 95 in a 100 zone you can only legally overtake at 100. I personally perfer to spend as little time as possible in the worng lane. But if you want to crawl past while spending around a kilometer in the wrong lane go ahead.

I couldn't agree more with this statement. You should spend as little time as possible on the wrong side of the road.

Does anyone know the true laws governing this? Is "I was passing a truck" a valid excuse for speeding? I think it is, but will it hold up in court?

I grew up in a country town so I've done lots of country driving over the years and I am appalled when I see a family car attempt to pass a huge truck without going over the speed limit. Put your foot down or might not survive the pass.

[mesmerized]

Does anyone know the true laws governing this? Is "I was passing a truck" a valid excuse for speeding? I think it is, but will it hold up in court?

I grew up in a country town so I've done lots of country driving over the years and I am appalled when I see a family car attempt to pass a huge truck without going over the speed limit. Put your foot down or might not survive the pass.

no its not valid excuse as u would still be breaking the law. if the car in front of you is going a little slow, then bad luck. if they're going well below the speed limit, then u shouldn't have an issue overtaking them doing the speed limit

[Pauly33GTS-t]

Amen to that, I remember my old man going 118 to over take a car going 90 in 100km zone.

cop got him, pulled him over, in the end dad almost got a 250 dollar fine, but, since the victorian cop was on the SA side of the border, he couldnt do shit. issued the fine anyway, dad never got it, never paid.

Edited June 7, 2007 by Pauly33GTS-t