Article: Man caught at 234km/h

DrJohnZoidberg said:
You would have been locked up too if they caught you. It's not only putting other peoples lives at risk but also your own as well as all the money that must go to paramedics, rescue teams, etc when something goes wrong.

If people want to race around go to a track! That's what they are designed for.
Click to expand...

How would crashing on a track be different to crashing on the road he was talking about? You would still need paramedics etc etc.
 
ChocolateBadger said:
How would crashing on a track be different to crashing on the road he was talking about? You would still need paramedics etc etc.
Click to expand...

You are less likely to be crashing into someone who is crossing the road. Or into a cow. Or into one of the many stupid and careless drivers on the public roads.

At least on a track, all the cars are going in the same direction, and everyone has some experience dealing with fast cars, both the one they are driving and the ones around them. On a public road, you come up behind some old granny in a Morris Minor at 200km/h, she will freak and there is no predicting what she will do.

The track is safer - so less chance of a crash, even though you are going faster.
 
ChocolateBadger said:
How would crashing on a track be different to crashing on the road he was talking about? You would still need paramedics etc etc.
Click to expand...

Other peoples lives... the crashing fast moving car cant sideswipe a family filled sedan into oblivion... only people who paid to be at the race track and accepts the inherent risks along with it.
 
ChocolateBadger said:
How would crashing on a track be different to crashing on the road he was talking about? You would still need paramedics etc etc.
Click to expand...

Racing tracks are designed to handle vehicles coming unstuck.
They have over run areas on corners and/or sand traps to arrest vehicles, they have no obstructions close to the track such as on public roads (trees, concrete bridge pillars, etc.)
They are designed to stop a vehicle safely if control is lost.

Racing tracks have paramedics on standby that can respond in minutes - not a 2 hour wait after a phone call while someone bleeds to death.
Ditto for fire crews.

Racing tracks are where people go if they want to risk life and limb for a thrill.
Public roads are meant to be used for safe transport.
If you want to endanger other people's lives go do it on a track where everyone is a willing participant.
 
zippy said:
Oh dear. A "When-we".

Thought you lot where extinct by now
Click to expand...

Not at all.
If it wasn't for us, gravy train riders like Mugabe, Kaunda and the Spear would not have anyone to blame for their highly visible deficiencies.

I well remember, on many occasions, that murderous piece of dung (Kaunda) snivelling into his white handkerchief and blaming all his screw-ups on colonialism. It never helped Alice Lenshina and her followers that he butchered.
 
Last edited:
DrJohnZoidberg said:
I don't believe there are actually people defending speeding. Would you defend a drunk driver?
Click to expand...

What is wrong with speeding if you didn't kill someone? You can also kill someone at lower speeds and in fact more accidents occur at lower speeds because congestion becomes and issue...
 
Nicodeamus said:
What is wrong with speeding if you didn't kill someone? You can also kill someone at lower speeds and in fact more accidents occur at lower speeds because congestion becomes and issue...
Click to expand...

What is wrong with driving drunk if you didn't kill someone?
 
DrJohnZoidberg said:
And this is the mentality that ensures South African roads will always be some of the most dangerous in the world.
Click to expand...

yeah because accidents can't occur to sober people. We have some of the highest accidents because our roads are to congested. High congestion = more accidents!

But tell me, what is wrong with drunk driving if you didn't kill someone?

In fact, why don't we ban alcohol outright... and fat food, they also kill people..

Instead of using ad hominen fallacies maybe you should try and come up with coherent arguments!
 
Nicodeamus said:
yeah because accidents can't occur to sober people. We have some of the highest accidents because our roads are to congested. High congestion = more accidents!

But tell me, what is wrong with drunk driving if you didn't kill someone?

In fact, why don't we ban alcohol outright... and fat food, they also kill people..

Instead of using ad hominen fallacies maybe you should try and come up with coherent arguments!
Click to expand...

If you cannot see that speeding and driving drunk increases the likelihood of causing an accident then I don't know what else I can say to you on this matter. There are plenty of studies done that you can view online, here is a nice one on drunk driving http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh27-1/63-78.htm.

I'm pretty sure you can find a lot of people who have killed entire families as a result of driving intoxicated who probably had the same mindset you have now.
 
Nicodeamus said:
yeah because accidents can't occur to sober people. We have some of the highest accidents because our roads are to congested. High congestion = more accidents!

But tell me, what is wrong with drunk driving if you didn't kill someone?

In fact, why don't we ban alcohol outright... and fat food, they also kill people..

Instead of using ad hominen fallacies maybe you should try and come up with coherent arguments!
Click to expand...

You are unnecessarily increasing the odds of killing another innocent road user or youself.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=178352 (alcohol vs accidents)

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=451664 (speed vs pedestrian deaths)

I'm sure there are more similar examples..
 
Last edited:
Turbo_Aspiration said:
You are unnecessarily increasing the odds of killing another innocent road user or youself.

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=178352 (alcohol vs accidents)

http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=451664 (speed vs pedestrian deaths)

I'm sure there are more similar examples..
Click to expand...

Eating fatty foods increases the likelihood of dying earlier, should we ban that too?
Alcohol increases the likelyhood of being beaten up in a bar.....

We should we have a stupid law on 'odds' and lets be honest, speeding laws didn't stop people from speeding as much as drug laws stopped people from smoking weed. It is pointless and only a political money making scheme.

A reduction in the speed level will not reduce accidents because congestion goes up (unless you can remove some cars from that road, ie better public transport) then it can work... but simply reducing the speed limit for the sake of reducing it will only cause more accidents.

The main issue with drinking and driving is once again a lack of reducing congestion on the roads, if I go out at night I do not have any means of getting home other than taking my car, the taxis can't be trusted, shuttles are too expensive and bus services/ trains are out of the question.
 
Last edited:
DrJohnZoidberg said:
If you cannot see that speeding and driving drunk increases the likelihood of causing an accident then I don't know what else I can say to you on this matter.
Click to expand...
how is banning speeding and drunk driving going to stop people from speeding and driving drunk.. and how is it going to reduce accidents?.

Just because it is a law doesn't mean it is right and doesn't mean that people will obey it...

I'm pretty sure you can find a lot of people who have killed entire families as a result of driving intoxicated who probably had the same mindset you have now.
Click to expand...
I can find more people who died as a result of religion - lets ban that.... and more people who died of cardiovascular diseases, lets ban red meat...
 
scudsucker said:
So you admit your arguement is for selfish reasons?
Click to expand...

Yes it is so selfish of my to speed when there are no cars on the road and when I am not going to put someone elses live in danger. O how selfish I am for considering that I might injure someone and taking some caution before I decide to speed at 2am in the morning when no one is on the road as oppose to 4pm during rush hour.
 
Nicodeamus said:
Eating fatty foods increases the likelihood of dying earlier, should we ban that too?
Alcohol increases the likelyhood of being beaten up in a bar.....

We should we have a stupid law on 'odds' and lets be honest, speeding laws didn't stop people from speeding as much as drug laws stopped people from smoking weed. It is pointless and only a political money making scheme.

A reduction in the speed level will not reduce accidents because congestion goes up (unless you can remove some cars from that road, ie better public transport) then it can work... but simply reducing the speed limit for the sake of reducing it will only cause more accidents.


The main issue with drinking and driving is once again a lack of reducing congestion on the roads, if I go out at night I do not have any means of getting home other than taking my car, the taxis can't be trusted, shuttles are too expensive and bus services/ trains are out of the question.
Click to expand...

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457505001247

Read the abstract there. One cannot deny the link between speed and fatal crashes as one cannot deny the link between fatty foods and heart disease (although the risk of being killed by somebody eating fatty foods seems less likely that being killed by somebody drinking and driving or speeding or both).

However, we cannot immediately correlate between speed LIMITS and the fatal crashes. I feel this could be indirectly studies using data regarding South African drivers' attitudes towards speed limits.. data I cannot find and I doubt exists in conclusive form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X