[svxistentialist]

Originally Posted by b3lha

In the interest of good conversation, somebody has to take the contrary view:

Inappropriate speed is certainly dangerous and stupid, but on the basis of the information given, are we so sure that his speed was inappropriate? I don't believe that high speed on public roads is necessarily unsafe. I would certainly do it if I found myself on a German autobahn. Wouldn't you?

The road in question is described as a four lane divided highway. I presume that means it is a wide fairly straight road with a good surface and crash barriers. Not too different from an autobahn. He was not far from home, so presumably he knows the road quite well. In a rural area in the middle of the night there would (presumably) be little or no other traffic around. The car is a very capable machine and being only two years old is likely to be in good roadworthy condition.

Would it be different if it had been a more experienced driver, perhaps a cop or medic driving at 142mph on their way to save somebody's life? What do you consider to the be maximum safe speed in these circumstances? I would say it's a good deal higher than 55 mph.

In 2005 the premise that high speed equals dangerous driving was put to the test in a British court. The judge decided that PC Mark Milton was not driving dangerously despite doing 159mph in circumstances similar to those above. This link gives a good explanation: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/milton.html

Gee Phil, you're as left wing as ever

I suppose you were setting off fireworks when you heard the news about Pinochet?

Whatever about dangerous driving, which carries a criminal conviction over here, I still maintain doing such a speed and not being aware that the long arm of the law is feeling your collar is at the very least inattentive.

Joe