|
Street Racing (pg. 20)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Final GTS |
I'm sorry, but anyone who views that as anything more than a way of making money is sadly mistaken.
Your government up there is no better than ours when it comes to knee-jerk legislation. A couple people died, a small minority screamed bloody murder, things happened, so they go and re-write the law books to fix a non-issue of a problem.
Look up the stats- what kills more people? drunk driving or speeding? hell, even ACTUAL street racing? Now, what has stiffer penalties? yeah- it doesnt make sense, does it?
Sorry to tell you guys, but cars are safer than ever at high speeds, stop faster, yet speed limits are still the same from 30 years ago or more! Again, doesnt make sense- does it? It has been proven time and time again, RAISING THE SPEED LIMITS REDUCES ACCIDENT RATES. When the limit is higher, people generally pay more attention to the road, dont try and rush/weave traffic, and it reduces road rage. Obviously, this only works to a point, but we arent at it yet!
And I wont even go into what constitues street racing... 50 kmh over does NOT constitue street racing. And the thought that some cop up there can slap you with this, YOU CANNOT FIGHT IT, and then the insane penalty? Give me a ing break.
Next time one of you people who agrees with this law gets pulled over, think about how that officer can slap you with this if you piss him off- and you cant do a damn thing about it. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Not in Canada anymore.
On a side note, I am also all for a "variable" limit based on license class and car type. I think there should be an extra lane on highways like the QEW with a speed limit in the 150's. However, you have to apply for a different license, and drive a car approved to be safe at those speeds. Obviously, this limit only applies in good conditions. Rain/snow reverts it back to normal. |
|
|
| Sly_Guy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
Disagree. 50 over is really not that much - if you were racing, you'd be over far more than that. In July, I got busted doing 130 in an 80. It was through Algonquin Park, on Saturday morning (so there was no one else on the road). I know when I drive recklessly, and that wasn't it. 100 over the limit sounds more accurate to nab street racers, not just speeders. |
Anyone ever heard of the autobahn? |
|
|
| Spam |
I have a buddy who I have always be scared to ride in the car with while he'd driving. He used to consistently drive 160 and routinely lost control on curves. He didn't believe he wasn't a good enough driver to be driving 160. There were multiple times where I quite possibly saved our lives by telling him to slow down before he tried taking the 401E-410N exit doing 140. Now that this law is in place, he hovers at 140 max, and is a much, MUCH safer driver. There's no other explanation for his sudden increase in driving ability, the only habit that is changed is his speed has dropped by 20km/h.
I don't care if you agree with the law or not, I know first-hand that it's making the roads at least a little bit safer. There's no need to drive 150km/h, ever. Can you get away with it on an empty road? Sure. Have I driven 150 or more before? Yes, but you'll never hear me claiming that it was safer than driving at 120. You want to speed? Speed, but you know the law, so don't cry about it when you're caught. Afraid that cops will abuse their power and write you up for doing 50+ when you were doing 40+? Go 30+, slow down, smell the roses, life's too short to waste it all living under the constant stress of being in a hurry. Obey the law, and you don't get caught. Driving is not a right, it is a privilege, one that's supposed to be earned by following the rules laid out by the powers that be.
All that aside, 100km/h is ing slow, they should raise the speed limit on 400 series highways to 115 at least. |
|
|
| Final GTS |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
I have a buddy who I have always be scared to ride in the car with while he'd driving. He used to consistently drive 160 and routinely lost control on curves. He didn't believe he wasn't a good enough driver to be driving 160. There were multiple times where I quite possibly saved our lives by telling him to slow down before he tried taking the 401E-410N exit doing 140. Now that this law is in place, he hovers at 140 max, and is a much, MUCH safer driver. There's no other explanation for his sudden increase in driving ability, the only habit that is changed is his speed has dropped by 20km/h.
I don't care if you agree with the law or not, I know first-hand that it's making the roads at least a little bit safer. There's no need to drive 150km/h, ever. Can you get away with it on an empty road? Sure. Have I driven 150 or more before? Yes, but you'll never hear me claiming that it was safer than driving at 120. You want to speed? Speed, but you know the law, so don't cry about it when you're caught. Afraid that cops will abuse their power and write you up for doing 50+ when you were doing 40+? Go 30+, slow down, smell the roses, life's too short to waste it all living under the constant stress of being in a hurry. Obey the law, and you don't get caught. Driving is not a right, it is a privilege, one that's supposed to be earned by following the rules laid out by the powers that be.
All that aside, 100km/h is ing slow, they should raise the speed limit on 400 series highways to 115 at least. |
OK, so you prove my point. a few people who ruin it for EVERYONE ELSE. I knoew a few people who think they are gods gift to driving- they shouldnt even have a lisence, let alone the speed factor. Will any of this ultimately change anything? no, it wont. bad drivers are bad drivers- they will pile up regardless. 10 or 20K on top of 140 isnt going to change the outcome all that much at all!
Judging from a few of your posts, you sound VERY much like a democrat, loving to tell other people how they should run their lives based on YOURS. Dont get me wrong, I love Canada for a few reasons, but You belong in Canada... where the government presides and the people SUBSIDE regularly. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by Final GTS
OK, so you prove my point. a few people who ruin it for EVERYONE ELSE. I knoew a few people who think they are gods gift to driving- they shouldnt even have a lisence, let alone the speed factor. Will any of this ultimately change anything? no, it wont. bad drivers are bad drivers- they will pile up regardless. 10 or 20K on top of 140 isnt going to change the outcome all that much at all!
Judging from a few of your posts, you sound VERY much like a democrat, loving to tell other people how they should run their lives based on YOURS. Dont get me wrong, I love Canada for a few reasons, but You belong in Canada... where the government presides and the people SUBSIDE regularly. |
Where did I tell you how to live your life? I said that based on my experience, the law is definitely making our roads safer. That is a fact. If even just ONE driver slows down, and at least ONE has, then the law is achieving it's stated purpose. Anyone who believes they have as much control over their car doing 160 as they do driving 120 doesn't have any understanding of the physics involved. As you speed up, your kinetic energy increases exponentially.
From Wikipedia:
Note that the kinetic energy increases with the square of the speed. This means, for example, that if you are traveling twice as fast, you will have four times as much kinetic energy. As a result of this, a car traveling twice as fast requires four times as much distance to stop (assuming a constant braking force. See mechanical work).
Have you ever been in an accident where you hit a stopped object while doing 20, or been hit while stopped by a person doing 20? Going as slow as 20km/h can ruin the front end of a car, and your body gets jarred during the impact. Now imagine that same impact occurring, except at 8x the speed, or 160km/h. The impact would be 64 TIMES more powerful. So that slight jerk that occured going at 20km/h is now you flying through your windshield, or the side of your car being smashed through your body. One of the guys here posted a picture of a car that bashed a bunch of 3-5inch thick trees. Had that driver been going the speed limit, or even just 20 over, the car would not have recieved much of the damage it did, and all 4 people in the car might still be alive. In fact, that accident wouldn't have occurred at all, because the driver would have been able to control the vehicle, rather than flying off the road at a group of trees. "But Spam, the car I hit is going 100, so it's only like hitting a stopped object while going 60, or 6 times more powerful." Yes, but how hard are you hitting the wall to your left? Or the tree to your right after you lose control? Or the car that had to make an emergency pull-over in the wrong place at the wrong time? What about the possibility of the accident being entirely avoided because you drove 120 instead of 160 and were able to avoid the car going 100?
To illustrate my point a little bit. Did you know that out of a collection of accidents involving pedestrians, of the accidents that occurred with the car traveling at 20mph resulted in 5% of fatal injury. Of the accidents that involved a car doing 30mph, 40% of the accidents resulted in death. And finally of the accidents where the car was going 40mph, 90% of the accidents involved death. Yes, those stats involve pedestrians, and not other cars, but it perfectly illustrates how small increases in velocity can cause an exponential amount of additional damage. In this case, going twice the speed, resulted in around 18x or 1800% more deaths.
To put it another way, a car traveling at 40mph when a pedestrian steps out onto the road 100 feet in front of them will still be going 38mph upon impact. Had that driver been going 25mph, the car would stop before hitting the pedestrian.
SOURCE
The math and physics involved don't change just because you're on the highway and not a busy downtown street. While there may be less obstacles, collisions can still occur, and you're much more likely to survive that collision if you're driving the speed limit, rather than driving 60 over. Whether you are speeding or not, it is a FACT that lower speeds cause less deaths. You can ignore that if you want and maintain that you're driving just as safe as anybody else while you boot along at 160, but the laws of physics work against your opinion.
Justifying dangerously high speeds because other people don't know how to drive properly while going the speed limit is an empty justification. You don't get to drive dangerously fast just because another person drives dangerously slow. Both groups lack common sense and are dangerous on the road, and both groups should lose their licenses.
I'm not telling you how to run your life. In fact I clearly state that if you want to speed, then go right ahead. I speed all the time. But unlike most of the people arguing in favour of higher speeds, I recognize that I'm putting my, and others, safety at risk while I do so. You know the consequences, so it's nothing but stupidity if you start complaining after you break the law and get caught, or kill someone when you get in an accident one day. It's like the drunk driver who blames the car that hit him for his shiny new jail-term... if he hadn't been driving drunk to begin with, he wouldn't be in jail.
You know the laws, you know the consequences, if you don't want to deal with said consequences, then obey the law. If you don't want to obey the law, then whatever, that's your choice, but the consequences are there for if and when you're caught. So when I hear someone bitching because they got their car impounded for driving 160 on the 401, I have no respect for their argument. But I have a heap of respect for the guy who shakes his head while his car gets towed away and says "Damn, I ed up." |
|
|
| Dr. DAS |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zentac_75
That was a fun EDITORIAL.
(Isn't that why photo radar got tossed???because the mailed ticket did not allow the accused to plea not guilty???) |
There was no 'not guilty' option on photo radar tickets because there's no way to argue you aren't guilty when the have you on camera, time/date/speed stamped. Those tickets were issued to the vehicle, not the driver (to appease all the "I let my friend borrow the car, it must have been him" defences)...why not bring that back instead of this new law. Mount the cameras on light standards and just mail out the $2000 tickets. You can keep your car unless your marked as a repeat offender. There, no more Gestapo...just speeders paying fines. Don't want a fine? Slow down. |
|
|
| Dr. DAS |
| quote: | Originally posted by Final GTS
You belong in Canada... where the government presides and the people SUBSIDE regularly. |
...coming from an American? |
|
|
| Euphorica |
cruising at 160 with no one around is not agressive driving.
lol god this province is more of a ty place every week.
this law is stupid and just a cash grab. 4.6mil for 2300 drivers at the minimum fine. thats like 4.5 mil more then they wouldve had .
our speed laws are outdated. nothing wrong with cruising at speeds mentioned as long as conditions warrant it. if you get caught...ok you get a ticket, but the ticket shouldnt be that high + it gives cops way to much power. the old laws were fine the way they were.
nothing much more to say about it really. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
cruising at 160 with no one around is not agressive driving.
lol god this province is more of a ty place every week.
this law is stupid and just a cash grab. 4.6mil for 2300 drivers at the minimum fine. thats like 4.5 mil more then they wouldve had .
our speed laws are outdated. nothing wrong with cruising at speeds mentioned as long as conditions warrant it. if you get caught...ok you get a ticket, but the ticket shouldnt be that high + it gives cops way to much power. the old laws were fine the way they were.
nothing much more to say about it really. |
the majority of time there are going to be other cars around....I can't think of a single time I've driven down a highway and there hasn't been another vehicle on the road.
Personally, I still don't think the laws are even close to strict enough....I agree that the speed limit on highways should be higher....120 but should be enforced strictly. If you are caught speeding at 150 or higher I think you should have your licence taken away immediately and never be allowed to have a licence again. |
|
|
| zoogla |
| someone close this thread already |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by fayraree
someone close this thread already |
I'll close you
:D |
|
|
|
|
