pinball wizard
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 34,368
I don't know of any road in SA that has a speed limit of higher than 120km/h imposed anyway, so what the **** are you lot crying in your soup about?
Probably the type who accelerates when being overtaken.I don't know of any road in SA that has a speed limit of higher than 120km/h imposed anyway, so what the **** are you lot crying in your soup about?
It’s a big deal. For all three people who own Volvos.You'd swear everyone based on these responses. A bit lost as to how this is even an issue for 99% of people.
Yes, because 180km/h is not high speed, South African just love to appear woke. At least the second guy is asking a sensible question.
I agree, how many feel like they want to pay the insurance excess if they crash in their exotic metal cages?How many in this thread drives their Volvo 180 km/h and beyond?
This is stopping people from crashing, not beta kuks being soy boys. Who honestly needs to drive their Volvo more than 180?What is a 'Boy Racer'? (lol)
Seems another company joining Gillette...
I deeply resent the idea that the machine can override my instructions in what is otherwise a perfectly legitimate mechanical manoeuvre.
That's my business, not Volvo's.Since when is driving 180km/h in a 120km/h zone legitimate?
You'll get locked up at those speeds.
Quite apart from the obvious exceptions in Section 60 of National Road Traffic Act (1996),
Emergency situations are not unknown in this life.
‘‘Certain drivers may exceed general speed limit 60. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 59, the driver of a fire-fighting vehicle, a fire-fighting response vehicle, a rescue vehicle, an emergency medical response vehicle or an ambulance who drives such vehicle in the carrying out of his or her duties, a traffic officer or a person appointed in terms of the South African Police Service Act, 1995 (Act No. 68 of 1995), who drives a vehicle in the carrying out of his or her duties or any person issued with the necessary authorisation and driving a vehicle [while engaged in civil protection as contemplated in any ordinance made in terms of section 3 of the Civil Protection Act, 1977 (Act No. 67 of 1977)], may exceed the applicable general speed limit: Provided that— (a) he or she shall drive the vehicle concerned with due regard to the safety of other traffic; and (b) in the case of any such fire-fighting vehicle, fire-fighting response vehicle, rescue vehicle, emergency medical response vehicle, ambulance or any vehicle driven by a person [while he or she is so engaged in civil protection,] issued with the necessary authorisation, such vehicle shall be fitted with a device capable of emitting a prescribed sound and with an identification lamp, as prescribed, and such device shall be so sounded and such lamp shall be in operation while the vehicle is driven in excess of the applicable general speed limit.’’.
Stuff like this makes me nihilistic. I can deal with stupid people being stupid, but then you see someone supposedly educated question whether it is right or wrong to exceed the speed limit in an emergency, I don't think there's much hope for the future.I must be misunderstanding that. In no way does that amendment appear to absolve Arthur (and any other people here that break the law by speeding) from breaking the law.
Since when is driving 180km/h in a 120km/h zone legitimate?
You'll get locked up at those speeds.
Cause crashing and acidents only happens at speeds > 120? Zug zug.I agree, how many feel like they want to pay the insurance excess if they crash in their exotic metal cages?
This is stopping people from crashing, not beta kuks being soy boys. Who honestly needs to drive their Volvo more than 180?