168 in a 90 zone gets a solid fine!

c_c™ said :

To put it another way, if he slammed into a car coming in the other direction, that would make an impact speed of 260km/h… or the same as getting hit by a Blackhawk at cruise. No one would walk away, and on some stretched of that road, it wouldn’t take much of miscalculation to do it.

Idiot.

No not really, both cars would act as an immovable object, cancelling out the others speed. Yes there would be a lot of kinetic energy to dissipate but the maximum velocity of the collision would be 168km/h. The force on the people in the car travelling at high speed will be the same no matter if they hit a wall or another car.

No one would walk away, but no point making wild scientific statements with no basis.

mareva said :

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

I read the other day that Canberrans are better educated than most of the rest of Australia. If the above is the best we can do I think it’s time I migrated to Uranus.

Uranus? I could…ah…no…it’s just not worth it…:-)

goggles13 said :

on what basis is a jail term justified?

Reckless endangerment of others lives.

Six months at the Hume Hilton should be his reward.

mareva said :

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

I read the other day that Canberrans are better educated than most of the rest of Australia. If the above is the best we can do I think it’s time I migrated to Uranus.

Hmm Uranus would be a shite place to go to 🙂

bundah said :

c_c™ said :

To put it another way, if he slammed into a car coming in the other direction, that would make an impact speed of 260km/h… or the same as getting hit by a Blackhawk at cruise. No one would walk away, and on some stretched of that road, it wouldn’t take much of miscalculation to do it.

Idiot.

Can i suggest you watch the Mythbusters episode where they do experiments in relation to the physics of head on collisions,for i suspect you will be surprised.

Great episode

Anyone that goes any speed above the limit or drinks and drives around this time of year is an idiot because every year the cops have a revenue raising ” road safety blitz” …….. did he want to get caught and lose his licence so he had an excuse not to see his family on Christmas….. shame on you

DrKoresh said :

goggles13 said :

on what basis is a jail term justified? yes it is a stupid act, but excessive speed doesn’t necessarily cause an accident. it does mean the driver has less time to react if someone else pulls out in front of him. surely the person pulling out in front of him would be at fault and should be penalised?

drink and drug driving are more serious offences and it amazes me how small the penalties for these can be

Ah the old “It’s your fault I was driving too fast to avoid hitting you” defense. Classic.

no I was trying to understand how an immediate jail term is justified for high range speeding.

if I happened to be doing 65 in a 60 zone and a driver pulled out on me and caused both of us to crash resulting in one death or more, who would cope the wrath of the public – the slightly speeding driver, or the inattentive driver? who would be judged at fault?

I don’t equate speeding with drink or drug driving.

despite what the ads say, speeding does not kill – there is usually some other cause.

doing 65 in a 60 zone is speeding, but if it is dry clear day, there is minimal danger that a driver will lose control unless distracted. if is a wet day, there is a higher chance of a driver losing control – bad tyres or bad roads etc. this is the definition of inappropriate speed which never gets addressed adequately by road safety authorities.

goggles13 said :

on what basis is a jail term justified? yes it is a stupid act, but excessive speed doesn’t necessarily cause an accident. it does mean the driver has less time to react if someone else pulls out in front of him. surely the person pulling out in front of him would be at fault and should be penalised?

drink and drug driving are more serious offences and it amazes me how small the penalties for these can be

Ah the old “It’s your fault I was driving too fast to avoid hitting you” defense. Classic.

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

I read the other day that Canberrans are better educated than most of the rest of Australia. If the above is the best we can do I think it’s time I migrated to Uranus.

Doing these sort of speeds should qualify to be charged with attempted murder, seeing as if you hit a pedestrian, cyclist or even another car, they are dead.

bundah said :

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

By that rationale high range drink drivers or say someone like Mully should be put to death?

Now there’s a good idea.

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

on what basis is a jail term justified? yes it is a stupid act, but excessive speed doesn’t necessarily cause an accident. it does mean the driver has less time to react if someone else pulls out in front of him. surely the person pulling out in front of him would be at fault and should be penalised?

drink and drug driving are more serious offences and it amazes me how small the penalties for these can be

c_c™ said :

bundah said :

c_c™ said :

To put it another way, if he slammed into a car coming in the other direction, that would make an impact speed of 260km/h… or the same as getting hit by a Blackhawk at cruise. No one would walk away, and on some stretched of that road, it wouldn’t take much of miscalculation to do it.

Idiot.

Can i suggest you watch the Mythbusters episode where they do experiments in relation to the physics of head on collisions,for i suspect you will be surprised.Having said that there is absolutely little doubt that a head on collision where one car is doing 168 km/h and the other say 100 km/h would result in certain death or at the very least brain damage depending on the point of impact.

Can I suggest you not equate science with the Mythbusters. They’re a fun show and there’s some genuine fact involved, but it ‘s not that reliable.

The energy involved does not add up as neatly as the closing speed does in a collision. However their test focused on the effect on vehicles and the dissipation and transfer of energy between two vehicles, not on the occupants.

Precisely and your comment of 260 km/h is misleading for it infers that the energy the occupants would be subjected to relates to that combined speed which is inaccurate as was proven in the Mythbusters experiment.If one hit a wall at 260 km/h the car would be totally obliterated.

bundah said :

c_c™ said :

To put it another way, if he slammed into a car coming in the other direction, that would make an impact speed of 260km/h… or the same as getting hit by a Blackhawk at cruise. No one would walk away, and on some stretched of that road, it wouldn’t take much of miscalculation to do it.

Idiot.

Can i suggest you watch the Mythbusters episode where they do experiments in relation to the physics of head on collisions,for i suspect you will be surprised.Having said that there is absolutely little doubt that a head on collision where one car is doing 168 km/h and the other say 100 km/h would result in certain death or at the very least brain damage depending on the point of impact.

Can I suggest you not equate science with the Mythbusters. They’re a fun show and there’s some genuine fact involved, but it ‘s not that reliable.

The energy involved does not add up as neatly as the closing speed does in a collision. However their test focused on the effect on vehicles and the dissipation and transfer of energy between two vehicles, not on the occupants.

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

Immediate imprisonment? A speedy trial? A lengthy prison sentence? Let us reflect upon the enlightened jurisdiction we are in. Be satisfied with the vicious finger-wagging he will get.

How Canberran.

1337Hax0r said :

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

By that rationale high range drink drivers or say someone like Mully should be put to death?

c_c™ said :

To put it another way, if he slammed into a car coming in the other direction, that would make an impact speed of 260km/h… or the same as getting hit by a Blackhawk at cruise. No one would walk away, and on some stretched of that road, it wouldn’t take much of miscalculation to do it.

Idiot.

Can i suggest you watch the Mythbusters episode where they do experiments in relation to the physics of head on collisions,for i suspect you will be surprised.Having said that there is absolutely little doubt that a head on collision where one car is doing 168 km/h and the other say 100 km/h would result in certain death or at the very least brain damage depending on the point of impact.

How is it that people can do those speeds and not be put in jail? Okay, 10 km/h over the limit = fine, 20 over limit = fine plus suspension. 30over the limit should equal suspension and community service. 40+ over the limit should equal permanent loss of license and jail time. Especially if it is a second offense. 78 km over the limit should have equaled immediate imprisonment with a speedy trial followed by a lengthy prison sentence.

36 years old?

You’d think by that age you’d be mature enough to think through the possible consequences of your actions.

To put it another way, if he slammed into a car coming in the other direction, that would make an impact speed of 260km/h… or the same as getting hit by a Blackhawk at cruise. No one would walk away, and on some stretched of that road, it wouldn’t take much of miscalculation to do it.

Idiot.

You’d think they’d change it from demerit. You have no demerit points then you get them for doing bad things and they go away after a while.

If you lose 12 demerit points isn’t that starting a clean slate.

What a complete tool. Double demerits have been around during long weekends and holiday periods for how long? You’d think that by the age of 36 one would know better.

Going fast in and of itself is not the issue here, it’s the discrepancy in speed to others on the road that makes this downright deadly.

They should chop his arms off so he can never drive again.