Walker banned from the roads for speeding - 130mph...

[BootsOntheSide]

£1,000 fine and 2-month driving ban for The Stalker:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/n...re/4181783.stm

To be honest I think this is a very lenient penalty. It sets a dreadful example for a competitive racer to drive so far over the speed limit. How many lives will be lost by people copying Chris' idea? I don't think a racing ban should be given for something like this, as it's a pure private life issue, but the £1,000 penalty is pretty derogatory - if the ban is to be reduced, the fine should surely be increased in kind, especially as Chris can afford it.

[Fireblade]

Just glad that you don't sit on the bench in the magistrates courts I have had the misfortune to attend then.

Hark at you huffing and huffing.................disgraceful.....................shocking.......................damn motorcyle hooligans..................bring back National Service etc etc

[Slippy Diff]

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

£1,000 fine and 2-month driving ban for The Stalker:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/n...re/4181783.stm

To be honest I think this is a very lenient penalty. It sets a dreadful example for a competitive racer to drive so far over the speed limit. How many lives will be lost by people copying Chris' idea? I don't think a racing ban should be given for something like this, as it's a pure private life issue, but the £1,000 penalty is pretty derogatory - if the ban is to be reduced, the fine should surely be increased in kind, especially as Chris can afford it.

And all those films that show illegal road racing and events like the Gumball etc don't???? The promoters of the Gumball actively promote the speeding part.
To ask the question "how many lives will be lost by people copying Chris' idea" is just plain daft. Would it also help if he was an un-competitive racer?

[Aysedasi]

I don't give a **** who he is. He's plain short of a substantial number of brain cells driving at that speed on a public road. Period.

[BootsOntheSide]

Most people can tell the difference between fictitious entertainment (in which people, by and large, do get hurt, but only on screen) and real-life dangerous driving from someone who should know better. It's a shame you can't - perhaps soem different circumstqances in your life would change your attitude.

[Slippy Diff]

[QUOTE=BootsOntheSide]Most people can tell the difference between fictitious entertainment (in which people, by and large, do get hurt, but only on screen) and real-life [QUOTE]

Not according to some campaigners. Why do people link fictitious computer games to suicides, killing sprees etc. Not to mention song lyrics.

[QUOTE=BootsOntheSide]It's a shame you can't - perhaps soem different circumstqances in your life would change your attitude.[QUOTE]

I never said I can't. Instead of immediately jumping on the self righteous band wagon so prevelant on subjects such as this one, I take it for what it is, something of very little importance in the grand scheme of things. Agreed, it was not exactly the right thing to be doing when you have a responsibility to your team, sponsors etc, but just how many of his fans do you think own superbikes and regularly hit more than 130mph? A large proportion I would expect.
If you saw Walker jump into a fire, would you do the same?

[SALEEN S7R]

Originally Posted by Slippy Diff

but just how many of his fans do you think own superbikes and regularly hit more than 130mph? A large proportion I would expect.

Maybe in New Zeland and Australia yeah, but GB dosent have a lot of outback in comparissan, especially where u can get to 130mph. The only places u can really get to 130mph relativly safely in GB is on the motorway's in the dead of the night, and even then it isnt safe. I find it highly doubtful that most bikers top 130mph on public roads in the UK, a small proportion perhaps, maybe 10%. Thats not to say the majority dont speed, Im just pointing out that most dont do almost double the national speed limit.

[Kicking-back]

He was in a car at the time, rather than a bike - but it's still absolutely ludicrous.

[Hazza]

It sets a bad example for the sport. No iffs, no buts.

He should be made to (by the British Motorcylcle Authority) do a road saftey campeign. Similar to the one that John R did: "Racing on the street is dangerous and risks lives" etc.

[Airhead]

I'll take the 5th Ammendment on this one...

[garcon]

I have to admit I just chuckled and thought "silly boy". The magistrates should be a little more inventive in these cases. The ban and fine are perfectly reasonable, but as a well known bike racer he should also be asked to front a road safety campaign.

I'm not going to get all high and mighty and righteous on this though. Dunno if slippy diff or saleen ride a bike or not (I don't but I have quite a few biker mates), but on today's sports bikes you really don't need much of a straight to get up to that kind of speed and down again for the next bend. I have to admit I've hit 130 in my car a few times in reasonable safety ... just not in front of a patrol car! (I'm not trying to say that's clever, it isn't and you and I should not do it, even if the road's completely clear and you have clear vision for a mile a blowout at 130 will be lethal...)

Did anyone watch Traffic Cops on BBC1 last night? Followed Cheshire constabulary, some of it filmed on the Cat & Fiddle just down the road from me. I wasn't happy when they dropped the limit to 50, but if that alongside the high presence policing has halved casualties then it's difficult to argue.

[BootsOntheSide]

Good idea about the road safety campaign - that would probably have more positive effect than a fine or ban of any length.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by garcon

I have to admit I just chuckled and thought "silly boy". The magistrates should be a little more inventive in these cases. The ban and fine are perfectly reasonable, but as a well known bike racer he should also be asked to front a road safety campaign.

Perhaps if they'd had the power to be that inventive they would have jumped at the chance......

[garcon]

Fair point. The Magistrates' hands are often tied. But would such an initiative need legislation or just a resourceful police force traffic division?

[Alex Hodgkinson]

oh dear now my dad'll be taking the **** next time he sees him...

[Heebeegeetee]

Originally Posted by garcon

even if the road's completely clear and you have clear vision for a mile a blowout at 130 will be lethal...)

I've had a front tyre blow out at the ton (in a car ) and nothing happened. We were returning from a 12 car rally, so I assume I'damaged the tyre on event.

How many tyres 'blow out' in normal circumstances?

I don't buy many of the comments made in this post. 130 in daytime on a dual track is naughty, but that doesn't mean 130 is always naughty. IMO.

[garcon]

Blow outs aren't entirely common obviously, but if one does happen into three figures let's face it, you're a passenger - if you can just back off and do nothing (i.e. DON'T BRAKE!!!) chances are you can keep it in a straight line and gradually come to a halt, but if there's anything in the way you're gonna either hit it or spin...

But taking the possibility of sudden mechanical failure out of it, you're right - given the right conditions 130 is not inherently dangerous. If it was, you'd never see a police traffic car reaching 130+ on a response call.

"Speed kills". Crass oversimplification. Speed doesn't kill. It's the sudden unplanned stop that kills...
...usually as a result of not looking where you're going and poor hazard perception.

It's a bit like saying a road is "dangerous". Roads aren't dangerous, they just sit there. It's the incompetent riders and drivers that use them that are dangerous...

[Nordic]

Its madness to to do 140mph on a dual carriageway, not for the driver, but the other road users the cyclists, people walking alongside, other divers and riders. If a car goes out of control at those sort of speeds it will travel a heck of a long way doing serious damage to anthing in its path.

The same is true on a motorway, should something go wrong with you car at high speed the knock on effect can be horrific, the driver may walk away, others may not be so lucky.

[SALEEN S7R]

Yes but on a Dual carrigeway that's speed limit is the national speed limit there should by law be no pedestrians or cyclists anyway. The same applies for motorways, no pedestrians or cyclists, so if u do crash at least u are likely to crash into another car, sure u could crash into a motorbike but theres far more cars on the road so chances are it will be a car, meaning the chances of survival for both parties isnt that bad, particulary if both cars are modern and have side impact bars..

[Nordic]

Cyclist are allowed on a dual carraigeway, the speed limit can also vary on a dual carrigeway.

As has been proved this week in Essex, pedestrians do sometimes wander onto the motorway. A huge death wish, that in this instance was granted, the tragic side effect is the driver of the gritting lorry doing only 50mph swerved into the path of another leaving him in hospital with serious injuries.

Imagine the carnage if instead of a lorry doing 50 it was a car doing 130mph, the reflex to swerve would be huge, what chance would another motorist have to avoid that?

At 130mph side impact bars will not be of any use, nor would airbags seat belts or a crash helmet.

If some idiot doing 130mph on a motorway hits a car you or any member of your family are in, I don't think the phrase 'chances of survival for both parties isnt that bad' would be correct. Maybe you should have said 'chances of survival would not be that good'

[asha]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Perhaps if they'd had the power to be that inventive they would have jumped at the chance......

i guess he could've requested that Walker contact the 'Safe Driving' advertising wing and offer to be a spokesman.

Perhaps Walker should anyway?