100 MPH plus
01-01-2005, 08:35 PM
#16
Originally Posted by houldsworth1
Jim,
I understand where you are coming from and agree with you on the point about it being a very bad idea to drive too fast on New Years Eve – far too many idiots that have already had one too many before heading out.
However, I have to disagree a little bit beyond that. Your view is that what he did was reckless. I might also venture that you might have the ‘speed kills’ message ringing around in the background somewhere.
My problem is this – on a clear straight highway with no traffic in a modern Porsche in good condition 100mph is hardly reckless – the car is designed to handle speeds nearly double that.
I didn’t grow up in the U.S. but I know a lot of people here who have never exceeded 100mph and honestly believe that to that fast is foolish. However growing up in Europe these speeds were common. I commuted 40 miles each way by motorcycle for 5 years and hardly ever went below 85-90 on the M1 – never had a problem and the cops didn’t even bother to look at us because everyone – Mom, Pop and Grandpa – were all doing the same thing in cars with a top speed probably not much more than 20mph over that.
What is my point? It is not speed that kills – it is inappropriate speed that kills. Someone doing 35mph when everyone else is doing 80mph is an accident waiting to happen.
In this case he said it was a clear highway with good weather so (New Years Eve aside) I think the biggest risk he was taking was in getting arrested.
Barry
I understand where you are coming from and agree with you on the point about it being a very bad idea to drive too fast on New Years Eve – far too many idiots that have already had one too many before heading out.
However, I have to disagree a little bit beyond that. Your view is that what he did was reckless. I might also venture that you might have the ‘speed kills’ message ringing around in the background somewhere.
My problem is this – on a clear straight highway with no traffic in a modern Porsche in good condition 100mph is hardly reckless – the car is designed to handle speeds nearly double that.
I didn’t grow up in the U.S. but I know a lot of people here who have never exceeded 100mph and honestly believe that to that fast is foolish. However growing up in Europe these speeds were common. I commuted 40 miles each way by motorcycle for 5 years and hardly ever went below 85-90 on the M1 – never had a problem and the cops didn’t even bother to look at us because everyone – Mom, Pop and Grandpa – were all doing the same thing in cars with a top speed probably not much more than 20mph over that.
What is my point? It is not speed that kills – it is inappropriate speed that kills. Someone doing 35mph when everyone else is doing 80mph is an accident waiting to happen.
In this case he said it was a clear highway with good weather so (New Years Eve aside) I think the biggest risk he was taking was in getting arrested.
Barry
The circumstances and driver actions to me are much more important factors than speed when it comes to driving recklessly. I often drive at triple digit speeds, but you won't see me doing it on a crowded road, weaving thru traffic, cutting people off, tailgating, racing, etc. I have a vehicle that's well maintained and very capable of handling the situation and I have experience driving fast. I'm also very aware of my surroundings and won't take chances. Does that make it right for me to speed? No, but I'm not being reckless either or putting others at risk.
Cabman, don't be so hard on yourself. You didn't do anything foolish...although, I wouldn't push my luck on New Year's Eve.
01-01-2005, 08:56 PM
#17
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Carlsbad, Ca.
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have all done it and are lucky not to get caught....New years eve is a little bit of a bad chioce as the cops are really looking for drunks etc...
Ripping it up in the mountains I almost crushed a deer at 70 in a tight turn....Scared the hell out of me and now I am much more cautious....Deer would have crushed me is more like it.
Robert
Ripping it up in the mountains I almost crushed a deer at 70 in a tight turn....Scared the hell out of me and now I am much more cautious....Deer would have crushed me is more like it.
Robert
01-01-2005, 09:42 PM
#18
Rennlist Member
Hi Barry...
Thx for the post. Actually, I don't view his admission of excess speed as reckless. I view it just the way I said--as negligent. Recklessness and negligence in the law are two very different things. Negligence is a legal concept that is based on the standard of due care that a 'reasonable person' would exercise in any given circumstance. Recklessness has a wide range of meanings that are usually defined differently in local ordinances and laws. Generally reckless behavior implies wifulness or carelessness, etc.
What is a 'reasonable person' in this circumstance of driving down a highway? The law would view a reasonable person as a common everyday driver of an automobile traveling down a roadway at the posted speed. IOW, obeying the posted speed laws, drives dilligently, etc. Its just that simple.
Lets say there was an accident and damage or loss of life was sustained by another because one was driving at 110 MPH. Based on the 'reasonable person' standard that person is negligent. If a person is traveling down a road greater than the posted speed looses control of the car and another was injured or killed, in addition to traffic violations, (one of which most likely will be "reckless driving") criminal violations for loss to property or life, the driver having breached his duty of due care (not acting in the manner of a reasonable person) most likely will be sued by the injured individual or his heirs under the a negligence theory.
Yes, a good defense attorney, would probably try to argue that a 100 - 115 mph for an experienced P/car driver is not negligent especially if it could be proven that the driver was highly skilled, had performance driving training, and the roadway was completely clear, etc, The only problem here is that it isn't just the two attorneys fighting it out...they are playing to the jury of his peers (and I'm certain there wouldn't be 12 Porsche drivers sitting in the Jury box). Juries don't like speeders especially where loss of life is sustained. I'll tell you this, somebody who admits to excessive speed in which another was killed...that person is going to do time (in many jurisdictions across the US) after the jury convicts him.
Look, this is just what I think. Its dumb to drive those speeds on open hiways unless you're on the autobahn or up in Montana where it isn't unlawful to do so. If you want to drive 110 mph do it on the track and have a good time while doing it.
Have a good new year Barry...good talking to you...
Jim
Thx for the post. Actually, I don't view his admission of excess speed as reckless. I view it just the way I said--as negligent. Recklessness and negligence in the law are two very different things. Negligence is a legal concept that is based on the standard of due care that a 'reasonable person' would exercise in any given circumstance. Recklessness has a wide range of meanings that are usually defined differently in local ordinances and laws. Generally reckless behavior implies wifulness or carelessness, etc.
What is a 'reasonable person' in this circumstance of driving down a highway? The law would view a reasonable person as a common everyday driver of an automobile traveling down a roadway at the posted speed. IOW, obeying the posted speed laws, drives dilligently, etc. Its just that simple.
Lets say there was an accident and damage or loss of life was sustained by another because one was driving at 110 MPH. Based on the 'reasonable person' standard that person is negligent. If a person is traveling down a road greater than the posted speed looses control of the car and another was injured or killed, in addition to traffic violations, (one of which most likely will be "reckless driving") criminal violations for loss to property or life, the driver having breached his duty of due care (not acting in the manner of a reasonable person) most likely will be sued by the injured individual or his heirs under the a negligence theory.
Yes, a good defense attorney, would probably try to argue that a 100 - 115 mph for an experienced P/car driver is not negligent especially if it could be proven that the driver was highly skilled, had performance driving training, and the roadway was completely clear, etc, The only problem here is that it isn't just the two attorneys fighting it out...they are playing to the jury of his peers (and I'm certain there wouldn't be 12 Porsche drivers sitting in the Jury box). Juries don't like speeders especially where loss of life is sustained. I'll tell you this, somebody who admits to excessive speed in which another was killed...that person is going to do time (in many jurisdictions across the US) after the jury convicts him.
Look, this is just what I think. Its dumb to drive those speeds on open hiways unless you're on the autobahn or up in Montana where it isn't unlawful to do so. If you want to drive 110 mph do it on the track and have a good time while doing it.
Have a good new year Barry...good talking to you...
Jim
Originally Posted by houldsworth1
Jim,
I understand where you are coming from and agree with you on the point about it being a very bad idea to drive too fast on New Years Eve – far too many idiots that have already had one too many before heading out.
However, I have to disagree a little bit beyond that. Your view is that what he did was reckless. I might also venture that you might have the ‘speed kills’ message ringing around in the background somewhere.
My problem is this – on a clear straight highway with no traffic in a modern Porsche in good condition 100mph is hardly reckless – the car is designed to handle speeds nearly double that.
I didn’t grow up in the U.S. but I know a lot of people here who have never exceeded 100mph and honestly believe that to that fast is foolish. However growing up in Europe these speeds were common. I commuted 40 miles each way by motorcycle for 5 years and hardly ever went below 85-90 on the M1 – never had a problem and the cops didn’t even bother to look at us because everyone – Mom, Pop and Grandpa – were all doing the same thing in cars with a top speed probably not much more than 20mph over that.
What is my point? It is not speed that kills – it is inappropriate speed that kills. Someone doing 35mph when everyone else is doing 80mph is an accident waiting to happen.
In this case he said it was a clear highway with good weather so (New Years Eve aside) I think the biggest risk he was taking was in getting arrested.
Barry
I understand where you are coming from and agree with you on the point about it being a very bad idea to drive too fast on New Years Eve – far too many idiots that have already had one too many before heading out.
However, I have to disagree a little bit beyond that. Your view is that what he did was reckless. I might also venture that you might have the ‘speed kills’ message ringing around in the background somewhere.
My problem is this – on a clear straight highway with no traffic in a modern Porsche in good condition 100mph is hardly reckless – the car is designed to handle speeds nearly double that.
I didn’t grow up in the U.S. but I know a lot of people here who have never exceeded 100mph and honestly believe that to that fast is foolish. However growing up in Europe these speeds were common. I commuted 40 miles each way by motorcycle for 5 years and hardly ever went below 85-90 on the M1 – never had a problem and the cops didn’t even bother to look at us because everyone – Mom, Pop and Grandpa – were all doing the same thing in cars with a top speed probably not much more than 20mph over that.
What is my point? It is not speed that kills – it is inappropriate speed that kills. Someone doing 35mph when everyone else is doing 80mph is an accident waiting to happen.
In this case he said it was a clear highway with good weather so (New Years Eve aside) I think the biggest risk he was taking was in getting arrested.
Barry
01-01-2005, 10:11 PM
#19
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NW NJ
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim,
If you are saying that people (and the law in particular) are going to come down hard on you if there were an accident and you were driving over 100mph then you will get no argument from me.
Personally I would welcome a multi-tier driving licence that worked along the lines of...if you pass the basic test you are allowed to drive up to 55mph. If you pass an advanced driving test (which must be re-taken periodically) then you are allowed to use additional lanes (sort of an HOV type of thing) and allowed to drive up to 80mph assuming conditions permit. Hopefully, since only those with advanced training would be using those lanes, those people would know when it is inappropriate to go at those types of speeds.
But, these are all just opinions and everyone is entitled to have their own...
Best regards,
Barry
If you are saying that people (and the law in particular) are going to come down hard on you if there were an accident and you were driving over 100mph then you will get no argument from me.
Personally I would welcome a multi-tier driving licence that worked along the lines of...if you pass the basic test you are allowed to drive up to 55mph. If you pass an advanced driving test (which must be re-taken periodically) then you are allowed to use additional lanes (sort of an HOV type of thing) and allowed to drive up to 80mph assuming conditions permit. Hopefully, since only those with advanced training would be using those lanes, those people would know when it is inappropriate to go at those types of speeds.
But, these are all just opinions and everyone is entitled to have their own...
Best regards,
Barry
01-02-2005, 12:26 AM
#20
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cape Cod
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Start at the hearing and work backwards.
You are sitting in the witness chair and the DA asks you whether or not you knew that 120 mph was over the posted speed limit? Then asks whether you have any experience at these speeds? (Consider the "reasonable person" argument mentioned before) Then he asks you to please explain to the jury how your loss of control, had the blowout/ animal contact/ jerk that pulled out in front of you/or any other item not caused by you that caused you to encounter whatever you encountered( it wasn't your fault)..... would have caused the same outcome as what happened when you were not going 50 to 70 mph over the speed limit! You have to do some pretty good tap dancin' to smoke that one by the jury! Especially jurors who had no idea what P-cars are easily capable of. Remember they drive Tercels or pickups! Perhaps they could even be directed to be envious by your opposing council! And remember....all P-car drivers are rich so they should be able to pay for ALL damages!
DEs are a really good investment!
You are sitting in the witness chair and the DA asks you whether or not you knew that 120 mph was over the posted speed limit? Then asks whether you have any experience at these speeds? (Consider the "reasonable person" argument mentioned before) Then he asks you to please explain to the jury how your loss of control, had the blowout/ animal contact/ jerk that pulled out in front of you/or any other item not caused by you that caused you to encounter whatever you encountered( it wasn't your fault)..... would have caused the same outcome as what happened when you were not going 50 to 70 mph over the speed limit! You have to do some pretty good tap dancin' to smoke that one by the jury! Especially jurors who had no idea what P-cars are easily capable of. Remember they drive Tercels or pickups! Perhaps they could even be directed to be envious by your opposing council! And remember....all P-car drivers are rich so they should be able to pay for ALL damages!
DEs are a really good investment!
01-02-2005, 10:12 AM
#22
i've found radars to be a mixed blessing... they sometimes give you a false confidence.. i refuse to have one, as that prevents me from speeding all the time by thinking i'm safe.. thus being more alert all the time when speeding, instead of putting my faith in a box that won't help me... cops are pretty smart now at avoiding radar detectors, especially with lasers and such...
tickets with a valentine 1 in 2 years = 4
tickets without a valentine 1 in 2 years = 0
my experiences and beliefs.. false confidence = not a good thing...
sure the v1 saved me a few times, but for all the times it didn't.. i could have prevented knowing i had no protection.. kind of like going on a first date without a condom.. you know subconciously you aren't gonna have sex, so you act different than if you had one.. (nice relation to a radar detector, i know, but it makes sense, doesn't it?
)
tickets with a valentine 1 in 2 years = 4
tickets without a valentine 1 in 2 years = 0
my experiences and beliefs.. false confidence = not a good thing...
sure the v1 saved me a few times, but for all the times it didn't.. i could have prevented knowing i had no protection.. kind of like going on a first date without a condom.. you know subconciously you aren't gonna have sex, so you act different than if you had one.. (nice relation to a radar detector, i know, but it makes sense, doesn't it?
)
01-02-2005, 11:11 AM
#23
USMarine
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by houldsworth1
Jim,
... I have to disagree a little bit beyond that. Your view is that what he did was reckless. I might also venture that you might have the ‘speed kills’ message ringing around in the background somewhere.
My problem is this – on a clear straight highway with no traffic in a modern Porsche in good condition 100mph is hardly reckless – the car is designed to handle speeds nearly double that.
Barry
... I have to disagree a little bit beyond that. Your view is that what he did was reckless. I might also venture that you might have the ‘speed kills’ message ringing around in the background somewhere.
My problem is this – on a clear straight highway with no traffic in a modern Porsche in good condition 100mph is hardly reckless – the car is designed to handle speeds nearly double that.
Barry
01-02-2005, 11:14 AM
#24
USMarine
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by houldsworth1
Jim,
Personally I would welcome a multi-tier driving licence that worked along the lines of...if you pass the basic test you are allowed to drive up to 55mph. If you pass an advanced driving test (which must be re-taken periodically) then you are allowed to use additional lanes (sort of an HOV type of thing) and allowed to drive up to 80mph assuming conditions permit. Hopefully, since only those with advanced training would be using those lanes, those people would know when it is inappropriate to go at those types of speeds.
But, these are all just opinions and everyone is entitled to have their own...
Best regards,
Barry
Personally I would welcome a multi-tier driving licence that worked along the lines of...if you pass the basic test you are allowed to drive up to 55mph. If you pass an advanced driving test (which must be re-taken periodically) then you are allowed to use additional lanes (sort of an HOV type of thing) and allowed to drive up to 80mph assuming conditions permit. Hopefully, since only those with advanced training would be using those lanes, those people would know when it is inappropriate to go at those types of speeds.
But, these are all just opinions and everyone is entitled to have their own...
Best regards,
Barry
Your opinion is my opinion here as well.
01-02-2005, 12:56 PM
#25
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly, if I am going fast on a HW, I am not the one the cops should be worried since because I KNOW how my car will react under a panic stop and/or manoeuver. That is one of the BEST things the track teaches me. Besides, as verybody has stated here, when I go fast, I do not do stupid things like cutting off cars and swerve in and out of traffic. And I most certainly drive to the road conditions.
What cops SHOULD worry about are those STUPID people with minivans, old trucks or cars that go 90+ MPH on the HWs that DO NOT have the tires, handling and the knowledge of how their cars will react to a panic stop or manoeuver situation.
I get specially furious when I see mom driving minivans full of kids going 90+ MPS on the HW. Way to go....
What cops SHOULD worry about are those STUPID people with minivans, old trucks or cars that go 90+ MPH on the HWs that DO NOT have the tires, handling and the knowledge of how their cars will react to a panic stop or manoeuver situation.
I get specially furious when I see mom driving minivans full of kids going 90+ MPS on the HW. Way to go....
01-02-2005, 01:27 PM
#26
USMarine
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by smdb01us
What cops SHOULD worry about are those STUPID people with minivans, old trucks or cars that go 90+ MPH on the HWs that DO NOT have the tires, handling and the knowledge of how their cars will react to a panic stop or manoeuver situation.
I get specially furious when I see mom driving minivans full of kids going 90+ MPS on the HW. Way to go....
I get specially furious when I see mom driving minivans full of kids going 90+ MPS on the HW. Way to go....
No Doubt! That's trippy ...and they usually got "H" rated tires doing 90mph+ for an hour, in addition to a few wreckless cut-offs waiting for everyone, a hand full off rage and, few un-seatbelted brats in the back sticking out their tounges while flip'n you a mini-bird!
.
.
.
Last edited by DoubleNutz; 01-03-2005 at 02:20 AM.
01-02-2005, 10:45 PM
#27
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 807
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amigos, I find this topics very interesting, there are so many viewpoints here which only confirms how life is completely relative. I am not sure if the wine is catching up with me or what, but here are my thoughts.
1. Most if not all 996 Owners have a true passion for Automobiles and the art of driving, the ability of own a PROSCHE 996 is a reward of that passion. With that said, passion knows no boundaries. It understands no logic. The 996 is designed bring out that passion. To have a level of constraint daily requires much discipline, not to experience the level of performance is almost unheard of. When a quick ride to the local supermarket is a treat, where else can you get that much fun without a prescription? So with that said, let’s not be hastily to judge. Can we truly say we do not faultier when driving your 996?
2. No, neither Man or Woman should feel a sense of guilt buy driving their 996 at higher speeds, (providing no traffic is present) these fine automobiles are built for speed and more importantly braking and handling. Cruising in triple digits in very light to no traffic is a daily event for me. Though I pay much attention as the speeds increase, I can react perfectly with the ability that only a Porsche can provide me with. Hard braking while maintaining my position is a daily event, this doesn’t mean that I am a reckless driver; it simply means that I have more room to work with because of the type of cars we drive.
3. I Forgot my last point - It’s the wine, definitely
1. Most if not all 996 Owners have a true passion for Automobiles and the art of driving, the ability of own a PROSCHE 996 is a reward of that passion. With that said, passion knows no boundaries. It understands no logic. The 996 is designed bring out that passion. To have a level of constraint daily requires much discipline, not to experience the level of performance is almost unheard of. When a quick ride to the local supermarket is a treat, where else can you get that much fun without a prescription? So with that said, let’s not be hastily to judge. Can we truly say we do not faultier when driving your 996?
2. No, neither Man or Woman should feel a sense of guilt buy driving their 996 at higher speeds, (providing no traffic is present) these fine automobiles are built for speed and more importantly braking and handling. Cruising in triple digits in very light to no traffic is a daily event for me. Though I pay much attention as the speeds increase, I can react perfectly with the ability that only a Porsche can provide me with. Hard braking while maintaining my position is a daily event, this doesn’t mean that I am a reckless driver; it simply means that I have more room to work with because of the type of cars we drive.
3. I Forgot my last point - It’s the wine, definitely
01-02-2005, 11:13 PM
#28
Racer
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NW NJ
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by smdb01us
What cops SHOULD worry about are those STUPID people with minivans, old trucks or cars that go 90+ MPH on the HWs that DO NOT have the tires, handling and the knowledge of how their cars will react to a panic stop or manoeuver situation.
This was also in an area that I know the cops often hang out in – alas, not today
Now THAT was inappropriate speed…
Barry
01-03-2005, 02:12 AM
#29
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Houldsworth1, I had a similar experience about a month ago. Two Mitsubishi Evo's came up behind me in the left lane doing 90+ in heavy freeway traffic on 880. The first one came up on my bumper, then went left into the breakdown lane and started to pull up next to me. The second one came right up behind both of us. Needless to say, I moved to the right and slowed down A LOT to give those idiots room to kill themselves in front of me. Last I saw, they were chasing each other through traffic, and I'm just glad I didn't see a crash a couple miles down the road.
smdb01us: I can top the minivans. On I-5 today between LA and SF I saw a gigantic RV cutting through traffic like it thought it was a Porsche. Changing into the left lane, it cut off a Mercedes in front of me, but was 2 car lengths short on space. Forced the Mercedes onto the shoulder, and lucky it didn't cause an accident.
smdb01us: I can top the minivans. On I-5 today between LA and SF I saw a gigantic RV cutting through traffic like it thought it was a Porsche. Changing into the left lane, it cut off a Mercedes in front of me, but was 2 car lengths short on space. Forced the Mercedes onto the shoulder, and lucky it didn't cause an accident.
01-03-2005, 02:19 AM
#30
USMarine
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Gnome
smdb01us: I can top the minivans. On I-5 today between LA and SF I saw a gigantic RV cutting through traffic like it thought it was a Porsche. Changing into the left lane, it cut off a Mercedes in front of me, but was 2 car lengths short on space. Forced the Mercedes onto the shoulder, and lucky it didn't cause an accident.