Yeah, really. People should try to avoid posting while they're still suffering the effects of psychotropic drugs.
Kitchener man charged with racing – 177 km/h in 80 zone on motorcycle
- Thread starter mchatel
- Start date
Yeah, really. People should try to avoid posting while they're still suffering the effects of psychotropic drugs.
Judging by that mess he posted, it must be some good ****.
ETR, dude, hook a brother up.
torontoZX6R
Well-known member
Wow, ETR. After reading through that mess, I would almost rather listen to Turbo....
Almost
Almost
The street is not a track, and the huge spectrum of hazards we face every single mile on the street can't be emphasized enough. Bad pavement, oil, sand, gravel, wildlife, blind turns, inattentive cagers...the list goes on and on and on. There are enough hazards that the street itself presents that we sure don't want to add any hazards of our own by "pushing our limits".
If we are street riders, the best and most important skills for us to develop are the skills that allow us to forsee and avoid the street's hazards.
not become one ourselves.
not become one ourselves.
The North American police mentality is based on the idea of catching you because traffic violations are apparently more important than other things. Some cities/counties have guidelines they have to follow that will force them to give up chase, but until they reach that point, Mr Officer will pursuit.
As another member here mentioned on a different thread, traffic violations in Europe aren't considered a big deal so therefore they don't really chase to begin with and are perfectly fine with stock vehicles with Police schemes on them.
That would never work here in North America.
I'm sorry that I don't fully understand what you're saying but if you're in the mindset that the civilian use of motorcycles on city streets only has one purpose and that's to go fast, then I'm laughing pretty loudly. Based on what you're saying, this can then be applied to cars as well. "Buy a BMW, look good and go fast."
When it comes to any vehicle that is designed for sport, the manufacturers make them "fast" because they need to be...ON THE TRACK! This applies to both cars and bikes. Manufacturers care more about how well they do on the track than they do with street use. As a matter of fact in most, if not all, vehicle manuals it tells you to "use your car/bike responsibly and abide by your local traffic laws".
Having owned 2 cars that did well over 200kmh (and I'll admit I've visited that area of my spedometer quite often a few years ago), I could easily tell the Crown Vics I drove would reach those speeds if I were given enough road and a proper environment. When I gave the first one a good boot, I did reach 160kmh and there were plenty of horses left unused, it's easy to tell. Having worked in the delivery of vehicles in the past, I have had the opportunity to drive well over 250 different models of cars, anywhere from Hyundais to Ferraris.
That's if the rider maintained his speed until the police officer was on his tail.
Read the part where I said something to the effect of "when the rider sees the police lights, he lets go of the throttle and begins to slow down and pull over right away, out of honesty and owning up to his mistakes".
You'd be surprised, some people actually DO pull over as soon as they see police lights in their mirrors after they've done something they know is illegal. (i know this because I have done it a couple times, and luckily avoided tickets this way).
Last edited:
ETR - 2 questions:
1. Do you think the mother of the 5 year old who was killed would feel differently if her daughter was hit by a bike doing 177, rather than a mindless texting drone?
2. Would you feel differently about your own accident if you were hit by a bike instead of a car, given that his bike is meant to go fast anyway so he really wasn't doing anything wrong according to you?
Alan
1. Do you think the mother of the 5 year old who was killed would feel differently if her daughter was hit by a bike doing 177, rather than a mindless texting drone?
2. Would you feel differently about your own accident if you were hit by a bike instead of a car, given that his bike is meant to go fast anyway so he really wasn't doing anything wrong according to you?
Alan
I'm not going to debate the rights or wrongs of doing 177kph in an 80, but one thing that's very apparent from this discussion (or others like it on this forum) is the way speed limits in this province are actually established is never discussed. Science forms absolutely no part in it! (I think we're all aware of the ridiculous blanket policy that covers speeds on provincial roads.) Since the last Tory government, municipal speed limits have been set by the municipalities themselves. As a result, here's the basic scenario:
Taxpayers move to main roads and then complain to their representatives in local governments that cars are "speeding" by their houses. Representatives who want to be re-elected by their constituents then see to it that the speed limit is reduced on that road. No science at all involved here. Also ignores the fact that many more tax paying road users use that road to get from A to B than live on it.
Also, in my experience, Ontario seems to have the lowest speed limits in the civilized world. I rarely see ANYONE observing the speed limits in Ontario, and so I would suggest that most motorists are voting for the correct speed limits with their throttles. (Oh right, need to earn revenue from people exceeding the posted... I can't seriously consider 60 in a 50 (or even 90 in an 80) as "speed"!)
Lastly, Ontario also appears to be the only jurisdiction in the world (again in my experience) that uses traffic lights to HINDER traffic flow, rather than enabling it. All in the name of eliminating "speeding"... Driver frustration is just aided by this stupidity.
We need a provincial French Angry Bikers protest to correct matters.
Taxpayers move to main roads and then complain to their representatives in local governments that cars are "speeding" by their houses. Representatives who want to be re-elected by their constituents then see to it that the speed limit is reduced on that road. No science at all involved here. Also ignores the fact that many more tax paying road users use that road to get from A to B than live on it.
Also, in my experience, Ontario seems to have the lowest speed limits in the civilized world. I rarely see ANYONE observing the speed limits in Ontario, and so I would suggest that most motorists are voting for the correct speed limits with their throttles. (Oh right, need to earn revenue from people exceeding the posted... I can't seriously consider 60 in a 50 (or even 90 in an 80) as "speed"!)
Lastly, Ontario also appears to be the only jurisdiction in the world (again in my experience) that uses traffic lights to HINDER traffic flow, rather than enabling it. All in the name of eliminating "speeding"... Driver frustration is just aided by this stupidity.
We need a provincial French Angry Bikers protest to correct matters.
Jeero,
I can assure you that European countries take traffic offences quite seriously and have police cars to match. I chatted to a nice Swiss policeman once in a police Porsche Turbo on the border crossing to Basel and asked him how he liked his car. He had a very big grin on his face.
I can assure you that European countries take traffic offences quite seriously and have police cars to match. I chatted to a nice Swiss policeman once in a police Porsche Turbo on the border crossing to Basel and asked him how he liked his car. He had a very big grin on his face.
Speeds have been pretty much established following these guidelines.
Optimal fuel efficiency as set in the mid-1970's (highways).
Engineered road-design tolerances that are based upon the optimized speed limit and volume of vehicles using the roads, vs the wear and tear expected/experienced, minus a 20% safety cushion. Simply put, the more vehicles travelling the road, and the faster the vehicles are going, the quicker the road deteriorates. Roads cost money to build, maintain, and rebuild.
Speed limits are also influenced by statistical analysis of accidents/incidents over time.
Median abilities of the average Ontario driver as compared to other areas of the world .. lets face it, the term 'mediocre' comes to mind very quickly. Throw the legalized speed-demons into the mix with those fresh from the Crackerbox Driver's Acadamy, and Joe Old Fart who can't keep between the lines at 90 km/h.. recipe for incrimentally increasing disaster as the speeds would theoretically be correspondingly increased, as per the present state of Ontario's licencing standards. The phrase 'vehicular bloodbath' comes to mind..
So we should ignore the fact that all residences/businesses/communities/regions are serviced by roadways, and that those inordinately affected should just STFU? What does it matter if a road has 10 houses alongside of it, vs 100? We all pay into the road tax system equally - and i'm sure that 90% of us who pay taxes in would not appreciate vehicles screaming by at inappropriate rates of speed and sound volume. This applies whether we live in housing subdivisions, alongside the highway (those highway barriers aren't just for vehicles to play vehicular pin-ball..) or in rural areas that are "lightly inhabited".
Unless it's a revenue-motivated speed trap, which i agree is dirty pool, or you've been pulled over for being a numpty for other reasons .. most cops generally will ignore a certain percentile over the posted speed limits in Ontario. The same can't be said in many US states, where the speed limits are much more zealously enforced. Ever been pulled over for 4 mph over the posted 55 mph? I have .. can't say that i've really had a similar experience here in Ontario.
No real comment on this other than lights are supposed to be more or less properly synchronized to allow for reasonable traffic flow continuity at or near the traffic speed limitations. If you are jack-rabbiting to 65-70 in a 50 zone.. you are going to bump up against a red light more times, than not. Would you rather have speed bumps, instead? Also, European/British style roundabouts are a relatively recent experiment here, and they do appear to work to both control overall speed, and allow traffic to re-route as is necessary - but it takes time and money, to re-design roadways.
Traffic congestion because of a high population density in a relatively small geographic area, creates driver frustration. No other cure for that other than to build more roads, and spend money. Aren't the taxes that you pay, high enough already?
Fight... For your Right.. to Speed!
Pure comedy gold.
Last edited:
An SS can speed up to 177 very quickly and it takes very little to slow down to, say, 120-ish. There can be stretches of the road where the quick boost may not really "endanger children". The article doesn't state exactly what the rider was doing. He could have been going 170+ all the way, or it could have been a quick blip to "feel the speed". The first is generally a lot more dangerous than the other. No general statement regarding safety on either side can really be accurate.
Finally somewhere you can feel like you belong.
Not interested in debating how dangerous it is or who it endangers. But anyone who thinks twice the limit is just as safe as the limit is a moron. It seems to mostly be the noobs who can't keep the rubber side down at idle speed who believe this the most.
I was just going by what another member here said in a different thread. Perhaps he/she was referring to a different country within Europe other than Switzerland. I am sure every nation there has different views on traffic infractions.
I did not mean to say that they all put traffic on the backburner, but in many videos I do see basic cars used as police fleet and I kind of chuckle knowing that something like a Mazda3 could outrun that easily.
I am sure they all have special units for special cases as well, such as a Police Porsche and similar.
(read: Ghost Rider from Sweden)The regular patrol vehicles may be small, but all the major European countries have their various versions of high-powered, high-speed interceptors, whether two-wheeled or four, and they do chase the high-milers. In addition to that, their laws generally embrace the use of speed cameras and the vehicle owner's license is often held accountable for what happens with the vehicle even when the driver cannot be identified.I was just going by what another member here said in a different thread. Perhaps he/she was referring to a different country within Europe other than Switzerland. I am sure every nation there has different views on traffic infractions.
I did not mean to say that they all put traffic on the backburner, but in many videos I do see basic cars used as police fleet and I kind of chuckle knowing that something like a Mazda3 could outrun that easily.
I am sure they all have special units for special cases as well, such as a Police Porsche and similar.
Roadside suspensions and vehicle impounds have been in place in Europe long before it was ever a thought in Ontario, and driver testing and vehicle inspection and licensing requirements are much more rigorous than you'll see anywhere in North America. I'd bet that many of the self-proclaimed uber-skilled on this forum would have a difficult time there, first in getting their license to begin with and then barring a major change in attitudes, in being able to keep that license.
Except...
In Germany, on the autobahn, the speed limit is generally 130km/h and there are sections where there is no speed limit.
In Greece the speed limit on the freeway can be as high as 140km/h.
In Greece the cops don't generally react to every traffic violation, including "rolling stops" (which are more common than actually stopping).
etc.
It seems that the mentality there is different.
Poland: "Kids, be very careful when you're crossing the street. Look twice before going".
North America: "Drivers, go half of the speed limit near schools, or better yet, don't drive there at all."
*shrug*
