Going too far?

[Jim Goose]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...01/2999039.htm

Driver clocked at 117kph over speed limit

Posted 2 hours 2 minutes ago

A 31-year-old Melbourne man faces several charges after he was allegedly clocked driving at 117 kilometres per hour over the speed limit.

Police say the Delahey man was doing 197kph in an 80kph zone on the Calder Highway in Keilor on Monday night.

The charges include conduct endangering life and driving while suspended.

His car was also impounded for 48 hours.

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

driving while suspended.

Not much we can do when people do the wrong thing time and again.

[BOSHOG]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

Not much we can do when people do the wrong thing time and again.

in this case jail time might be needed. i know its not really going to deter (spelling?) people in the future but it really is a fitting punishment

[Scott]

Poor bugger probably thought he was rightly doing 97 in a 100 zone.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by GTP006

Poor bugger probably thought he was rightly doing 97 in a 100 zone.

Except he was doing 197...!!

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Except he was doing 197...!!

97kph or 197kph, it's so hard to tell for some people

[Scott]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

97kph or 197kph, it's so hard to tell for some people

Correct, afterall it is only one digit.... how bad could it really be?

[flappist]

Or maybe he just didn't care or thought the law did not apply to him.

After all, everyone on here never break or ignore laws like..... emissions....ADRs....engineering....let alone the unfathomable maze that is known as the "Traffic Act".

P.S. 4V...... Ho, ho, ho, merry pinnacle.....

[BOSHOG]

Originally Posted by flappist

Or maybe he just didn't care or thought the law did not apply to him.

After all, everyone on here never break or ignore laws like..... emissions....ADRs....engineering....let alone the unfathomable maze that is known as the "Traffic Act".

flappist, stop making sense on a public internet forum, youre wrecking it for the rest of us lol

[XlR8TED]

Originally Posted by flappist

Or maybe he just didn't care or thought the law did not apply to him.

After all, everyone on here never break or ignore laws like..... emissions....ADRs....engineering....let alone the unfathomable maze that is known as the "Traffic Act"

You need to compare apples with apples.

That much over the speed limit is obviously a very real danger to other people. The things you have mentioned are not so much.

It's like trying to justify a murder by saying "but I bet you blokes have probably flattended someone before!"

[flappist]

Originally Posted by XRSex

You need to compare apples with apples.

That much over the speed limit is obviously a very real danger to other people. The things you have mentioned are not so much.

It's like trying to justify a murder by saying "but I bet you blokes have probably flattended someone before!"

Ok, well lets compare apples with apples.......the penalties applied.

1) Doing 200 in a 100 zone. Loss of license (which he does not have), a fine of maybe $1000 and confiscating his car for 2 days.

2) Removing his catalytic converter (emissions). $10,000 fine and de-registration and probable confiscation of car.

3) Forgetting to pay his rego for a couple of days. Loss of license, $1000 fine and confiscation of car for period.

4) ACTUALLY hurting someone seriously (but not with a car) $100 fine, 2 year good behavior bond.

5) Failing to pay tax. $squillions fine, custodial sentence, confiscation of all assets (including any cars) and bankruptcy.

The media does not need to beat anything up all it takes is the "He is naughty but I am good mummy" crowd to bleat about how terrible this all is and how he should be shot against a wall because he got caught doing something and you never do anything wrong EVER.....

[charles_wif_xf]

Originally Posted by flappist

Ok, well lets compare apples with apples.......the penalties applied.

1) Doing 200 in a 100 zone. Loss of license (which he does not have), a fine of maybe $1000 and confiscating his car for 2 days.

2) Removing his catalytic converter (emissions). $10,000 fine and de-registration and probable confiscation of car.

3) Forgetting to pay his rego for a couple of days. Loss of license, $1000 fine and confiscation of car for period.

4) ACTUALLY hurting someone seriously (but not with a car) $100 fine, 2 year good behavior bond.

5) Failing to pay tax. $squillions fine, custodial sentence, confiscation of all assets (including any cars) and bankruptcy.

The media does not need to beat anything up all it takes is the "He is naughty but I am good mummy" crowd to bleat about how terrible this all is and how he should be shot against a wall because he got caught doing something and you never do anything wrong EVER.....

You raise some very good points flappist. Here's some rep for ya (not that you need more lol).

[zdcol71]

Originally Posted by flappist

Ok, well lets compare apples with apples.......the penalties applied.

1) Doing 200 in a 100 zone. Loss of license (which he does not have), a fine of maybe $1000 and confiscating his car for 2 days.

2) Removing his catalytic converter (emissions). $10,000 fine and de-registration and probable confiscation of car.

3) Forgetting to pay his rego for a couple of days. Loss of license, $1000 fine and confiscation of car for period.

4) ACTUALLY hurting someone seriously (but not with a car) $100 fine, 2 year good behavior bond.

5) Failing to pay tax. $squillions fine, custodial sentence, confiscation of all assets (including any cars) and bankruptcy.

The media does not need to beat anything up all it takes is the "He is naughty but I am good mummy" crowd to bleat about how terrible this all is and how he should be shot against a wall because he got caught doing something and you never do anything wrong EVER.....

Taking the penalty factor out of it,(definitely in points 4 and 5, and at best I would suggest, a tenuous connection with point 3),is the guy then being absolved of wrong doing because, apparently, we've all been "guilty" at some stage??

[flappist]

Originally Posted by zdcol71

Taking the penalty factor out of it,(definitely in points 4 and 5, and at best I would suggest, a tenuous connection with point 3),is the guy then being absolved of wrong doing because, apparently, we've all been "guilty" at some stage??

Why am I not surprised that you don't get it?

No he should not be absolved and yes he should be penalised.

The point I am making is that all of the (mostly hypocritical) wailing and gnashing of teeth on this forum about how terrible it all is and villifying him as the anti-christ and the source of all evil is the ammunition used by the do-gooders to promote their agenda of banning ALL performance cars outright.

Just read scrooby's drivel to get a glimpse into his and others' ideas of the future of driving and motor vehicles in Australia.

[XlR8TED]

Please delete.

[HULK EF]

emmisions or 100 km OVER the limit? HHMM!!! I know whickh one would most likely kill myself or others 1st!

[barra265t]

That road was originally 100km/h zone with 2 lanes (divided highway). In '07 they resurfaced the road and added another lane in each direction. Its a pretty much dead straight with about 2 km visibility. Then they dropped the limit to 80km/h. Further up the calder, its 110km/h and the road is 2 lane in both directions. After living here for more than 15 years there has not been one fatality on that stretch of road that I've heard of.

[4dlvr]

Originally Posted by barra265t

That road was originally 100km/h zone with 2 lanes (divided highway). In '07 they resurfaced the road and added another lane in each direction. Its a pretty much dead straight with about 2 km visibility. Then they dropped the limit to 80km/h. Further up the calder, its 110km/h and the road is 2 lane in both directions. After living here for more than 15 years there has not been one fatality on that stretch of road that I've heard of.

i dont understand what your saying???

are you trying to justify this idiot doing 197km/h or 117kph over speed limit on a public road???

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by 4dlvr

i dont understand what your saying???

are you trying to justify this idiot doing 197km/h or 117kph over speed limit on a public road???

I don't think anyone could justify going 117kph over the limit, I thing the arguement is the road should be posted 110 not 80.

[barra265t]

Originally Posted by 4dlvr

i dont understand what your saying???

are you trying to justify this idiot doing 197km/h or 117kph over speed limit on a public road???

Not justifying anything, what he did was wrong, but in perspective at that time/place/speed he would have been most likely endangering his own life. If that speed was down a suburban street with intersections, etc, he should've been hung, drawn and quartered.

[Sorted]

Another Statistic added to the HOON driver list

Does't matter if they have a licence or not - as long as they can get those HOON stats up so they can add more cameras and add harsher penalities - oh did i say penalties - i meant fines - cash cash cash for the Government

[3vXT]

Originally Posted by barra265t

Not justifying anything, what he did was wrong, but in perspective at that time/place/speed he would have been most likely endangering his own life. If that speed was down a suburban street with intersections, etc, he should've been hung, drawn and quartered.

So he was maybe risking only his own life. Assuming that is accurate (and he's on a public road so its not), it doesn't make it ok. When he does make a mistake and kills himself, his family and friends won't care that he didn't take anyone with him.
Its incredibly ignorant to think this kind of behaviour is fine as long as he is only risking his own life. He's risking hurting his family too.

And yes, before anyone says it, i know that sounds like a lame rta ad

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by barra265t

That road was originally 100km/h zone with 2 lanes (divided highway). In '07 they resurfaced the road and added another lane in each direction. Its a pretty much dead straight with about 2 km visibility. Then they dropped the limit to 80km/h. Further up the calder, its 110km/h and the road is 2 lane in both directions. After living here for more than 15 years there has not been one fatality on that stretch of road that I've heard of.

and

Originally Posted by 4dlvr

i dont understand what your saying???

are you trying to justify this idiot doing 197km/h or 117kph over speed limit on a public road???

I go along there every day.

Firstly, 197kph, the guy wasnt hooning, he was a plain idiot.

Secondly, there are intersections all along that road that make it seemingly dangerous at 100kph, but not at 80.

Thirdly, its not the intersections that make it dangerous, its the many drivers who pull out from either side roads or u-turn accessways without any regard for the traffic travelling along the highway. They just pull out regardless of whats coming.

I know at the Organpipes Rd. intersection, there are "no right turn" signs. But every morning at 6.15am, there is a queue of cars doing right hand turns there waiting to join the hwy.

I have come across serious accidents along that road, whether it was 100kph or 80kph, it doesnt matter. Not sure about deaths however.

The 80kph limit along there is meaningless, you get run over by other vehicles even if you stay in the left lane.

The government is not spending a cent on that road. My suggestion is to close off about 3/4 of the entry/exit ways along there, put roundabouts at the rest and return it to 100kph, similar to what they did with Mooroduc Hwy past Frankston,and will make it much safer.

Or better still, put in overpasses at the few intersections that really need to be there (should really have been provisioned and paid for by the land developers years ago). But the gov't wont spend a cent.....

[barra265t]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

and



I go along there every day.

Firstly, 197kph, the guy wasnt hooning, he was a plain idiot.

Secondly, there are intersections all along that road that make it seemingly dangerous at 100kph, but not at 80.

Thirdly, its not the intersections that make it dangerous, its the many drivers who pull out from either side roads or u-turn accessways without any regard for the traffic travelling along the highway. They just pull out regardless of whats coming.

I know at the Organpipes Rd. intersection, there are "no right turn" signs. But every morning at 6.15am, there is a queue of cars doing right hand turns there waiting to join the hwy.

I have come across serious accidents along that road, whether it was 100kph or 80kph, it doesnt matter. No sure about deaths however.

The 80kph limit along there is a vehicles, even if you stay in the left lane.

The government is not spending a cent on that road. My suggestion is to close off about 3/4 of the entry/exit ways along there, put roundabouts at the rest and return it to 100kph, similar to what they did with Mooroduc Hwy past Frankston,and will make it much safer.

Or better still, put in overpasses at the few intersections that really need to be there (should really have been provisioned and paid for by the land developers years ago). But the gov't wont spend a cent.....

The news article states it was Calder Highway past Keilor, not Taylors Lakes. I agree that the Taylors Lakes stretch, towards the Calder Raceway is a dangerous stretch and 80 is appropriate. The stretch past Keilor has one on ramp from Keilor Park Drive and an Off Ramp to Green Gully Road. 2km's on is the Melton Hwy exit. This stretch is well known for drivers putting the foot down at odd hours, hence the cops were there past midnight or whenever the incident happened.

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by barra265t

The news article states it was Calder Highway past Keilor, not Taylors Lakes. I agree that the Taylors Lakes stretch, towards the Calder Raceway is a dangerous stretch and 80 is appropriate. The stretch past Keilor has one on ramp from Keilor Park Drive and an Off Ramp to Green Gully Road. 2km's on is the Melton Hwy exit. This stretch is well known for drivers putting the foot down at odd hours, hence the cops were there past midnight or whenever the incident happened.

Sorry, thought it was West side of Keilor.... still uncertain.

[KITBAG]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Or better still, put in overpasses at the few intersections

That is what is marked in my latest melways map.....

[jaysway]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

But the gov't wont spend a cent.....

how true, unless its on more speed cameras of course

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

and
Secondly, there are intersections all along that road that make it seemingly dangerous at 100kph, but not at 80.

Intersections are deadly, what is needed are grade separated interchanges.

Thirdly, its not the intersections that make it dangerous,

Our stats, indeed those of every nation tell us intersections; unsignalised and signalised are inherently 'dangerous'. . . . .

its the many drivers who pull out from either side roads

Not a freeway then. . . .

or U-turn accessways without any regard for the traffic travelling along the highway. They just pull out regardless of whats coming.

THIS is a key 'design' aspect as to why our freeways will remain at 110km/h. However, NSW RTA on its F3 are installing "gatelock" U-Turn bay treatments to restrict idiots doing U-tuns on freeways! Example of crash type that the new treatments seek to prevent:-
http://www.smh.com.au/national/freew...0109-lzi5.html

Regards.

[Polyal]

The calder is a shocker as for as planning goes, tightwads dont want to spend a cent. Should be alot more over passes than there is.

Its that bad that i know go the back way to Geelong and not along the Calder and M1.

[4dlvr]

thank you, nicely said