+- Fazer Owners Club - Unofficial (https://foc-u.co.uk/mybb)
+-- Forum: General (https://foc-u.co.uk/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=65)
+--- Forum: General (https://foc-u.co.uk/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=69)
+--- Thread: 165? (/showthread.php?tid=64795)
Pages:
1
2
165? - steeeve66 - 31-07-13
If he'd been on a bike he'd have gone to jail I reckon, one rule for us etc.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-23524736
Re: 165? - Skippernick - 31-07-13
Quite agree with you.
Re: 165? - Buzz - 31-07-13
.. a vid right next to that story proves your point!
122 mph on a bike and jailed for 8 months.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22453465
Re: 165? - peejay - 31-07-13
He was probably banged up for Perverting the Course of Justice! As a certain ex MP and his wife found out!
Re: 165? - Doddsie - 31-07-13
It was Liverpool, he had to go that fast to stop some little scrote from nicking his wheels!!!!
Re: 165? - Chillum - 31-07-13
I don't think that guy was imprisoned for the driving offence, it was for perverting the course of justice (by lying and then bragging about how he was going to get out of his conviction online).
Try this one, a bit more comparable (but a bit less Daily Mail)..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-20259544
Re: 165? - dazza - 01-08-13
"Followed by a police helicopter" :eek Another foccin angle to look out for.
Re: 165? - nick crisp - 01-08-13
(01-08-13, 03:04 AM)dazza link Wrote: "Followed by a police helicopter" :eek Another foccin angle to look out for.
Not a new thing - I had this happen to me on the M11 back in '86/'87. Each time I slowed for a bit, the helicopter started to move away. So I thought , I'm imagining this, but when I speeded up again that damn thing moved right back to the motorway, still more or less level with me. Only after I'd settled to legal speed for a good few miles did it finally head off. Surface to Air missiles I could use!
Re: 165? - fireblake - 01-08-13
A hell of a speed but on an empty motorway, big whoop, exactly where I would do it.
No harm done, what's the problem.
The biker was a twat for lying and he was caught out. Lesson learnt, don't boast about cheating the system
Mickey
Re: 165? - maddog04 - 01-08-13
I agree, if it were a biker then the biker would've got gaol. This manc balloon should've been gaoled and made an example of............what a complete cnut for saying what he said...........in my book its worse than the actual offence
I use this road every day and rarely do you see a bizzy car, the chopper was out the other day and I did reign it in a bit for reasons above :lol
as for you doddsie...................if you're ever visiting then I'll have yer wheels in a flash never mind yer hub caps :b
Re: 165? - Doddsie - 01-08-13
Top Gear Liverpool joke (stolen Porsche 911 Turbo S wheels)
:lol :lol :lol
Re: 165? - maddog04 - 01-08-13
ssssshhhhhhh they're in me garage :rolleyes
Re: 165? - Skippernick - 01-08-13
This guy had already been banned and caught whilst banned.
When in front of the magistrate he said "i'll do it again, try and catch me"
He's a nutter and needs locking up..
Re: 165? - fireblake - 01-08-13
Quite right too. If he's banned then needs punishing. But looking at the vid I can't see anything wrong. Nice empty motorway means flat out IMHO. I heard on the news some hand wringing liberal say the potential to cause harm and possible death or something similar. Utter tosh. Life has the potential to cause harm or possible death. If unlimited speeding is good enough for our European friends the Germans then its good enough for me.
Where it's safe to do so
Mickey >
Re: 165? - stevierst - 01-08-13
The only difference fireblake is that our continental cousins are used to doing it. If you were to suddenly open the speed limits in the UK, there would be deaths everywhere! Every man and his fast machine would head for the motorway. We have a completely different way of thinking to the rest of Europe, it just wouldn't work over here.
As for the Dick in the Audi, well he needs locking up if he's been previously banned! The consequences of something going wrong at those speeds doesn't bear thinking about.
Re: 165? - ChristoT - 01-08-13
(01-08-13, 02:47 PM)fireblake link Wrote: Quite right too. If he's banned then needs punishing. But looking at the vid I can't see anything wrong. Nice empty motorway means flat out IMHO. I heard on the news some hand wringing liberal say the potential to cause harm and possible death or something similar. Utter tosh. Life has the potential to cause harm or possible death. If unlimited speeding is good enough for our European friends the Germans then its good enough for me.
Where it's safe to do so
Mickey >
Ya know, what with modern sensors, I reckon ALL motorways should have variable limits. Slower than 70 when congested (as speeding IS dangerous then), but then much faster when the roads are empty. As you say, empty road, no danger to others. But then make Dangerous Driving charges more severe.
How about Autobahn style derestriction between 11pm and 4am?
Re: 165? - stevierst - 01-08-13
(01-08-13, 09:33 PM)ChristoT link Wrote: [quote author=fireblake link=topic=9175.msg91769#msg91769 date=1375364845]
Quite right too. If he's banned then needs punishing. But looking at the vid I can't see anything wrong. Nice empty motorway means flat out IMHO. I heard on the news some hand wringing liberal say the potential to cause harm and possible death or something similar. Utter tosh. Life has the potential to cause harm or possible death. If unlimited speeding is good enough for our European friends the Germans then its good enough for me.
Where it's safe to do so
Mickey >
Ya know, what with modern sensors, I reckon ALL motorways should have variable limits. Slower than 70 when congested (as speeding IS dangerous then), but then much faster when the roads are empty. As you say, empty road, no danger to others. But then make Dangerous Driving charges more severe.
How about Autobahn style derestriction between 11pm and 4am?
[/quote]
Couldn't agree more bud! We need a bit of freedom over here, and vary the speeds at off peak times. We then need stronger penalties for breaking those rules.
It'd be great if it happens, but bloody unlikely!
Re: 165? - fireblake - 02-08-13
What gets me is that yiu could go to prison for longer for speeding than you can for killing someone, albeit an accident. How does that work.
Re: 165? - nick crisp - 02-08-13
Higher speed limits mean less revenue from speeding fines - can you imagine any British government going for that?! Or have I just reached new heights in cynicism? (I'm working on actually transcending physical existence via sarcasm and cynicism, a new kind of meditation :lol )
Re: 165? - ChristoT - 02-08-13
(02-08-13, 07:08 PM)nick crisp link Wrote: Or have I just reached new heights in cynicism?
If you have, I'm a lost case. :rolleyes