Motorcyclist clocked at 193 mph on NY highway - in the rain!
- Thread starter MitchJi
- Start date
liveforphysics
100 TW
The guy caused no harm, and now other people are causing him harms because of it.
grindz145
1 MW
liveforphysics said:
Even though that is crazy excessive, I kind of agree. Although I bet he rides like a dickhead.
fizzit
10 kW
Stop this 'speeding is a victimless crime" stuff. If he is anything but perfect as a rider he could cause serious harm to others when he crashes because th momentum of a motorcycle going 193mph is huge. Even if he doesn't hurt someone he could cause others harm indirectly if they have to perform evasive maneuvers to avoid him and they crash, plus he will take up valuable space in a hospital er and maybe take an organ donation or blood transfusion.
liveforphysics
100 TW
fizzit said:
Who was his victim then?
When you get a speeding ticket, it's a 3rd person thought crime. Some other person who is likely dead by now had a fear that exceeding x speed on x road would result in higher potential for harms. Yet, the same elevated potential for harm has been done as when the cop walks up to you to give you a ticket with his gun on his belt, or when you sit at a stoplight with traffic wizzing past in front of you, either way, you're one personal action/mistake away from causing harms, but you have not caused any harm.
Until they want to write traffic tickets for jogging up to an intersection to wait to cross (because you could trip and fall into traffic if you made a mistake), or a billion other similar situations, then it remains the only people causing harms are the people writing the tickets.
liveforphysics
100 TW
Lets say hypothetically that I regularly travel at >150mph on public roads on a superbike, inherently only in places that worked out fine to do it, because it's never caused a problem.
Can you show me the harm caused? A tiny bit more wear on the road perhaps, similar to if a car drove over rather than a motorcycle?
Can you show me the harm caused? A tiny bit more wear on the road perhaps, similar to if a car drove over rather than a motorcycle?
Kingfish
100 MW
Hypothetically, those conditions could only apply in Germany. Now that is a country with respective road laws! 8)
Beyond that, I’m not a betting man. Going that fast, other than perhaps in the desert where's there's not a soul for miles, is an invitation for disaster. A person driving that fast might be the safest best-trained in the world, and perhaps even the traffic that is being passed might also include these sorts of people. However the world ain’t perfect, and neither are the roads, the conditions, nor the vehicles. Someone gets a blowout, crosses into the acceleration-afflicted path, and there are going to be some powerful mashups... 20/20 hindsight is useless at this point, as is speculation and "what-ifs".
The idea of speed-control (whether we like it or not) is to level the playing field and allow those with lesser-capable vehicles, intellect, and physical reaction to negotiate the byways within a modicum of reasonable safety. :|
Regardless, I think the guy was reckless, his bike ought to be impounded, driver’s license forfeit for 5 years, and that he serve 90 days in the pokey, plus 6 months cleaning litter the highways. I mean let’s be serious: A person with this much drive to attempt a feat of this caliber should instead consider flying fighter jets. Or with the right sponsorship - professional racing. :wink:
Ready, Steady… KF
Beyond that, I’m not a betting man. Going that fast, other than perhaps in the desert where's there's not a soul for miles, is an invitation for disaster. A person driving that fast might be the safest best-trained in the world, and perhaps even the traffic that is being passed might also include these sorts of people. However the world ain’t perfect, and neither are the roads, the conditions, nor the vehicles. Someone gets a blowout, crosses into the acceleration-afflicted path, and there are going to be some powerful mashups... 20/20 hindsight is useless at this point, as is speculation and "what-ifs".
The idea of speed-control (whether we like it or not) is to level the playing field and allow those with lesser-capable vehicles, intellect, and physical reaction to negotiate the byways within a modicum of reasonable safety. :|
Regardless, I think the guy was reckless, his bike ought to be impounded, driver’s license forfeit for 5 years, and that he serve 90 days in the pokey, plus 6 months cleaning litter the highways. I mean let’s be serious: A person with this much drive to attempt a feat of this caliber should instead consider flying fighter jets. Or with the right sponsorship - professional racing. :wink:
Ready, Steady… KF
Jeremy Harris
100 MW
Depends where you do it. Going at crazy speeds on the open highway, with no traffic around, no pedestrians etc doesn't have much chance of causing harm to others. Doing the same in a town, with people and other vehicles around certainly does have a pretty massive potential for causing harm.
Around 25 to 30 years ago (when the Z1100 first came out) some friends (and my younger brother) had a game where they'd ride down a hill in a local town at multiples of the speed limit. One of them went down at 60mph (it was a 30mph limit). The next went down at 90mph, and so on. They reckon my brother was doing 5 times the speed limit (his speed didn't register on the speed trap the cops put up) and they had to put a road block up a mile or two down the road to catch him.
He argued in court that the road was empty and that he'd caused no harm. The police showed some photos of his riding and gave the time he would have had to react to a car or pedestrian around a bend in the road that he couldn't have seen. There was no question that he was putting people in harm's way by riding at an estimated 150 mph in a 30 mph zone.
Around 25 to 30 years ago (when the Z1100 first came out) some friends (and my younger brother) had a game where they'd ride down a hill in a local town at multiples of the speed limit. One of them went down at 60mph (it was a 30mph limit). The next went down at 90mph, and so on. They reckon my brother was doing 5 times the speed limit (his speed didn't register on the speed trap the cops put up) and they had to put a road block up a mile or two down the road to catch him.
He argued in court that the road was empty and that he'd caused no harm. The police showed some photos of his riding and gave the time he would have had to react to a car or pedestrian around a bend in the road that he couldn't have seen. There was no question that he was putting people in harm's way by riding at an estimated 150 mph in a 30 mph zone.
fizzit
10 kW
I'd say that the situations you presented are not inherently dangerous barring some external factor. Cops are screened and are supposed to have good judgement as to when to use a firearm, and sitting at an intersection is really not comparable to riding a motorcycle at 150mph as far as risk goes.
When you ride a motorcycle at high speed you are doing something that other road users do not expect and are not prepared for. There may be no immediate victims but the ticket is intended as a preventive measure. If we only fined people for causing crashes, why would the tickets make any difference? Your vehicle already plowed into the back of a minivan and killed the family inside, a fine isn't going to bring them back.
If an incompetent rider says "I am perfect, I can go as fast as I want and never crash" (as they often do say) he will just go as fast as he wants. But maybe with speeding penalties in place he will think "I can't afford the ticket" and save his own or someone elses life.
Sorry for typos im using my ipod
Edit: darn people came up with better replies than mine while I was typing, I was responding to Lfp
When you ride a motorcycle at high speed you are doing something that other road users do not expect and are not prepared for. There may be no immediate victims but the ticket is intended as a preventive measure. If we only fined people for causing crashes, why would the tickets make any difference? Your vehicle already plowed into the back of a minivan and killed the family inside, a fine isn't going to bring them back.
If an incompetent rider says "I am perfect, I can go as fast as I want and never crash" (as they often do say) he will just go as fast as he wants. But maybe with speeding penalties in place he will think "I can't afford the ticket" and save his own or someone elses life.
Sorry for typos im using my ipod
Edit: darn people came up with better replies than mine while I was typing, I was responding to Lfp
deVries
100 kW
Kingfish said:
+1
If the rain was recent, then oil slicks arise on the pavement until washed off the roadway. If the rain could wash the oil away, then it is likely there was enough water in low spots to plane the tire off the pavement and fly on water before it can regain traction. What happens next at 190+mph ?
Suicide and a potential murder too...
cbr shadow
1 kW
Ok a cop carrying a gun is far less risky than going 200mph down the highway. A jogger waiting at an intersection is just an odd arguement because there's very little risk there. Going 200mph anywhere is pretty risky. I've been doing motorcycle track days all over Illinois for the last 5 or so years, and have ridden high powered sportbikes for 12 years, many of which were in late teens and early 20's taking huge risks. I've gone 170mph at Road America which is was very controlled - doing that and faster on the street is a risk to everyone around you. Not everyone you're going to be passing knows what to do when they see/hear a motorcycle flying up behind them. One thing you can't predict is other people's reaction to a situation they aren't normally in. People are used to cops carrying guns and used to joggers waiting to cross an intersection.
Example: I was going 80mph in a 45mph road which had 2 lanes going each way. I was in the left lane and a minivan was in the right lane about 100 yards ahead of me. When I got up to her (very quickly) she was surprised and swereved into my lane to "get out of the way". She ran me off the road and into a ditch where I luckily kept the bike upright until about 15 mph where I hit some water and fell over. I was covered in mud but not hurt, and the bike only had minor damage. She stopped to see if I was ok and appologized, but made sure to add that I was going way too fast. Honestly I have to say she had a valid point! She made a stupid move by jerking "out of my way", but if I wasn't going nearly double the speed limit it wouldn't have happened. The point is that you can't expect everyone to react the correct way when you are going so fast, especially 200mph.. The guy got some very well deserved tickets.
Example: I was going 80mph in a 45mph road which had 2 lanes going each way. I was in the left lane and a minivan was in the right lane about 100 yards ahead of me. When I got up to her (very quickly) she was surprised and swereved into my lane to "get out of the way". She ran me off the road and into a ditch where I luckily kept the bike upright until about 15 mph where I hit some water and fell over. I was covered in mud but not hurt, and the bike only had minor damage. She stopped to see if I was ok and appologized, but made sure to add that I was going way too fast. Honestly I have to say she had a valid point! She made a stupid move by jerking "out of my way", but if I wasn't going nearly double the speed limit it wouldn't have happened. The point is that you can't expect everyone to react the correct way when you are going so fast, especially 200mph.. The guy got some very well deserved tickets.
liveforphysics
100 TW
Potential, potential, potential.
Potential harms are not harms.
He has caused no harm. Why would you choose to do real harms, real damage to him as trade for the thought of him potentially causing harm?
The potential to cause harms are so great for everyone everyday. A single accidental loosened bit of pressure on the foot of a brake pedal on the SUV waiting at the intersection with wizzing by has the potential to cause the death of a dozen families. If someone relaxes their ankle at a stoplight do we jail them?
Potential harms are not harms.
He has caused no harm. Why would you choose to do real harms, real damage to him as trade for the thought of him potentially causing harm?
The potential to cause harms are so great for everyone everyday. A single accidental loosened bit of pressure on the foot of a brake pedal on the SUV waiting at the intersection with wizzing by has the potential to cause the death of a dozen families. If someone relaxes their ankle at a stoplight do we jail them?
You know its funny, I have all 4 of the original Ghost rider Dvds, not the Nick Cage movie :lol: I am talking about the anonymous all black rider in Europe on a pimped up Hyabusa, I love those clips, sure they are scary but after watching them all its amazing how accustomed to it you get and how safe it looks, primarily because he is going so fast that he has gone past most folks before they have even thought about making a manoeuvre, sure most of the riding was on the highway where there were no pedestrians but still it kind of makes high speed look safer.
Also reminds me of a story my father used to tell about the Vincent black shadow, one of the first production motorbikes to break the 100mph limit, there was a guy that used to race to work through a local village on his new Vincent, after a few days the police were alerted and were waiting with stopwatches either side of the village, the guy came roaring though as usual and the police timed his speed at over 100 mph, a few days later they managed to stop the guy in traffic in a local town to give him a talking to, the Policeman gave the guy the full hair dryer treatment and finished his rant with this " for goodness sake man, this is a sleepy little village and we clocked you doing over 100mph! dont you think you should have thought about slowing down? to which the rider responded I was slowing down through the village :lol: ha ha.
Ghostrider
Vincent Black Shadow
Also reminds me of a story my father used to tell about the Vincent black shadow, one of the first production motorbikes to break the 100mph limit, there was a guy that used to race to work through a local village on his new Vincent, after a few days the police were alerted and were waiting with stopwatches either side of the village, the guy came roaring though as usual and the police timed his speed at over 100 mph, a few days later they managed to stop the guy in traffic in a local town to give him a talking to, the Policeman gave the guy the full hair dryer treatment and finished his rant with this " for goodness sake man, this is a sleepy little village and we clocked you doing over 100mph! dont you think you should have thought about slowing down? to which the rider responded I was slowing down through the village :lol: ha ha.
Ghostrider
Vincent Black Shadow
deVries
100 kW
liveforphysics said:
Thousands of DUI/DWI drivers navigate the roadways everyday without causing harm to themselves or others, so does this mean the few that are arrested that cause no harm are harmless???
knoxie said:
This is exactly one of many reckless endangerment scenarios... someone coming-up from behind IN THE RAIN at 120mph faster than you're driving in the rain at 70mph??? Guy checks rear-view mirror, nothing in view, changes lanes & motorcycle slams into rear at 100+mph impact??? It's "involuntary" murder that would likely happen with a dead motorcycle driver too. Even if the motorcycle driver misses the vehicle the bike could still fly into oncoming traffic & kill several people causing a chain reaction.
If someone want to be "insane enough" to drive a motorcycle at 190+mph on a dry road with no traffic on his side of a divided hwy, then hypothetically he's just endangering himself but that's the problem... it's just hypothetical & not real world for most locations.
liveforphysics
100 TW
knoxie said:
Yes, exactly. I am proof you can ride however the hell you want, at any speeds you want, for over a decade, and not have a single bad thing come of it.
This doesn't mean that newbs don't die everyday pulling out of their driveways on motorcycles. It doesn't mean I couldn't die leaving work tonight. It means you can't inherently tie speeding in appropriate places to speed with harms.
When I was enjoying the Autobahn in the RS5 in Germany (made the run clear down to Switzerland and back up), my host commented that he has never had another American just immediately and seamlessly merge into the fast lane, understand the intuitive etiquette, and blaze down the autobahn overtaking everything reasonable to pass and leave him feeling safe and comfortable in the passenger seat. I told him it's not much different than how I drive/ride at home, just safer because I'm not constantly having to look for cops. (which I think is the single greatest danger/distraction to my normal riding/driving)
Kingfish- You want to see this man's property stolen and stuck in a cage because he traveled at a rate of speed outside your personal comfort zone. Would you also jail everyone on the autobahn? The autobahn itself felt more tricky to navigate at speed than most roads here in CA, and they definitely have plenty of places where traffic can pull out and do random stupid things like change lanes in front of you etc. Does a different arrangement of ink on a sign somehow alter your thoughts of traveling at speed, so that one person you recommend stealing from and jailing, and another you might say, "that's the autobahn, the arrangement of paint on the sign is different, and the road has lots of good flat sections with other people going fast". Obviously the road this guy did his 190mph run on was plenty straight and flat enough, because he managed to do it in the rain after all...
cal3thousand
10 MW
liveforphysics said:
That's like saying I can shoot a gun in the air where ever I feel like it as long as nobody was actually struck by my bullet.
His potential for harm was increased to a level that would have been fatal. That's the reason. If you allow this jerk with "skill and balls" to do this without penalty, there will be more "less-skilled" jerks doing the same thing with more disastrous results.
Thud
1 MW
Speaking as a staunch libertarian, I think 13 tickets for a single incedent is laughable...
Don't get me wrong....we need speed limits for the minimum of saftey out on the open roads.....its a training thing & sheeple are prety much programed to react to other vehicles operating in a like fasion (within reason) 3X any speed limit is careless. I don't care if its a school zone in 2-way trafic, or 2 lanes going one way. (so speeding & carless driving...the rest i have to assume was no insurance,fleeing & aluding, & what else could i be forgetting?)
The guy got caught.....by cops doing their job...(not by the whoafully un-sporting camera speed moniters
) se lave'
the system worked....who gives a f#@K HOW fast he was going? The peneltys for habitual offenders is a progressive scale...don't gage the infraction by some volume of how "bad" he broke the law.
NOW what the cops really need to focus on is getting all the fat, slobby, idiots who continuosly drive in the left (passing) lane...& ticket those clowns $65 (same as a no seat belt fine) I typicly drive 10-15 over the posted speeds on the highway...(never the fastest guy on the road either) & these clowns have no idea of what bad ettique they display.......that sh*t wouldn't fly on the autobahn....drive right is the law as I understand it.....it shouldn't fly on I-96!
opps, lil rant
for the record: it would be an accidental death, & manslaugter if an incedent occured...not suicide & murder.
lets not over state things like it was our motor ratings
Lucky for me my misdimenering days are behind me. Sure I still get crazy sometimes & don't buckle my seat belt till I get out on the open road........its just my little way of sticking it to the MAN!
Quote Baby form dirt dancing: " Your WIld!"
Don't get me wrong....we need speed limits for the minimum of saftey out on the open roads.....its a training thing & sheeple are prety much programed to react to other vehicles operating in a like fasion (within reason) 3X any speed limit is careless. I don't care if its a school zone in 2-way trafic, or 2 lanes going one way. (so speeding & carless driving...the rest i have to assume was no insurance,fleeing & aluding, & what else could i be forgetting?)
The guy got caught.....by cops doing their job...(not by the whoafully un-sporting camera speed moniters
) se lave'the system worked....who gives a f#@K HOW fast he was going? The peneltys for habitual offenders is a progressive scale...don't gage the infraction by some volume of how "bad" he broke the law.
NOW what the cops really need to focus on is getting all the fat, slobby, idiots who continuosly drive in the left (passing) lane...& ticket those clowns $65 (same as a no seat belt fine) I typicly drive 10-15 over the posted speeds on the highway...(never the fastest guy on the road either) & these clowns have no idea of what bad ettique they display.......that sh*t wouldn't fly on the autobahn....drive right is the law as I understand it.....it shouldn't fly on I-96!
opps, lil rant
for the record: it would be an accidental death, & manslaugter if an incedent occured...not suicide & murder.
lets not over state things like it was our motor ratings
Lucky for me my misdimenering days are behind me. Sure I still get crazy sometimes & don't buckle my seat belt till I get out on the open road........its just my little way of sticking it to the MAN!
Quote Baby form dirt dancing: " Your WIld!"
deVries
100 kW
liveforphysics said:
That may be you Luke, but would you ride your motorcycle at 193mph 283 feet per second in the rain on the hwy with lane traffic on your side and do it safely every time???
Also, how many experienced motorcycle drivers can safely drive their motorcycle over 120mph in the rain even if they've driven that fast on dry pavement??? What about 193mph?
I'd wager you don't even have the reflex reaction ability to do it safely even 10 times out of 10 attempts at 193mph real world -not hypothetically.
The media is also at play here, fast bike stories always make the news as they are far more common and relatively easy to achieve on just a couple of thousand worth of bucks of a motorbike, as a biker I also feel that the 99% majority of car driving newsroom editors see bikers as an alien species on the roads ,shows like top gear love to lord it up about fast cars but wobetide jonny on 2000 dollar GSXR whipping the pants off me in my 1/2 mill dollar racing car. They also treat motorcyclists far harsher than car drivers and in some cases murderers here in the UK, see this video from the late great and much missed youtuber svengalie.
[youtube]wVyq6GCnKWo[/youtube]
[youtube]wVyq6GCnKWo[/youtube]
Stone Meadow
10 W
We've never met so I can't say for sure that you're trolling, but just in case I wanted to "plus 1" you for the epic job you've done of it on most of your respondents here. :lol:liveforphysics said:
Kin
10 kW
Yo :O that's worse than leaving Lipo charging unattended.
Gordo
100 kW
Luke,
I think you should be charged with rape, not speeding. You carry that potential around with you all the time. You only ride like an idiot a small fraction of that time.
Enjoy the act, not the potential.
I think you should be charged with rape, not speeding. You carry that potential around with you all the time. You only ride like an idiot a small fraction of that time.
Enjoy the act, not the potential.
liveforphysics said:
liveforphysics
100 TW
Gordo said:
Good point. It seems only fair to charge all men or women with rape if they are ever in contact proximity of someone else (man or woman) right? You're carrying the potential for it. What if you're walking to your car at night through an alley, and pass someone else walking to their car, now you've taken away many of the layers of protection preventing that potential rape, you should be charged with increased rape potential and get at least 14 violations for that, and have your genitals stolen from you and get imprisoned for a while. Because evidently it's not related to actually causing any harms, the "crime" is in having an increased potential to cause harms (possible imaginary future harms).
The simple reality is, if you speed at 190mph down a road and hit nothing, you just gained that amazing human experience, and that's it. There was no harms, there was no victim, you just enjoyed riding your motorcycle. Then afterwards, confused people feel they have the right to cause real harms to you in exchange for your experience causing them to feel fear.
The meaning of life is simple, seek experience and embrace it.
If you actually want to reduce real and potential harms on the road, ticket everyone driving absurd vehicles with dangerous braking distances and inability to perform maneuvers to avoid collisions in emergency situations, like most every SUV and pickup (lifted ones in particular) etc.
TylerDurden
100 GW
liveforphysics said:
Erogo
100 W
Ha ha good call Tyler.
Yeah, society sets up laws that reflect the desire of the majority of its citizens. Some of them are preventative, targeting some situations of increased risk - driving drunk, driving too fast, leaving babies at home unattended etc etc. Presumably the citizens of that society have felt that those situations result in a high enough risk (unlike passing someone in an alley) that they have to be discouraged by punishment.
If you don't like that society, you go live somewhere else. Or if enough people don't like that law, it gets changed/repealed.
No?
Yeah, society sets up laws that reflect the desire of the majority of its citizens. Some of them are preventative, targeting some situations of increased risk - driving drunk, driving too fast, leaving babies at home unattended etc etc. Presumably the citizens of that society have felt that those situations result in a high enough risk (unlike passing someone in an alley) that they have to be discouraged by punishment.
If you don't like that society, you go live somewhere else. Or if enough people don't like that law, it gets changed/repealed.
No?