• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What should be penalty for 20mph+ over limit speeding?

What should happen for the over 20mph violation example given?

  • Acknowledge the no-traffic and quality of vehicle in consideration.

    Votes: 3 5.6%

  • Severe chastizing but only written warning.

    Votes: 2 3.7%

  • A ticket, but written for under 20 over due to circumstance.

    Votes: 2 3.7%

  • Write a ticket for over 20 mph but under 100 mph

    Votes: 2 3.7%

  • Write a ticket forthe full 170 mph

    Votes: 21 38.9%

  • A huge $$ fine

    Votes: 10 18.5%

  • Permanently seize car and forfeture it.

    Votes: 3 5.6%

  • Jail time

    Votes: 3 5.6%

  • Suspend driver's license for 1 year

    Votes: 7 13.0%

  • Suspend driver's license for years.

    Votes: 1 1.9%
  • Total voters
    54
JayDubya said:
I think most people wouldn't like the criminal and civil liability that comes along with vehicular manslaughter.
Click to expand...

And yet so many are short sighted enough to drive 100 over or whilst intoxicated. At some point society should seek to deter behavior that drastically increases the likelihood of vehicular manslaughter, not merely the act itself.

On the other hand, I'm unfond of any law that penalizes those who have not harmed others. If you hit someone or something with your car, that's harming others because you couldn't control your vehicle.
Click to expand...

The law seeks to and does penalize those who have shown a disregard for the safety of others. Driving 100 mph over falls into that category. Facing the wrong direction at the firing range or a shot placed six inches above your neighbors head does as well. Not every action that falls just short of the real deal should be absolved from legal repercussions.
 
6 months in jail, big fine (dollar amount depends on how rich/poor they are), permanent license suspension and the word "IDIOT" branded on their forehead.
 
I actually sat in a court case that was interested in the ticket of a speeder (this was 87mph) on a clear four lane freeway. The defendant argued that the statute had a provision that allowed for "the condition of the road" to determine a reasonable speed. The prosecution argued that the speed limit sign is a condition of the road, needless to say the prosecution won the argument. The man had to pay his ticket.
 
Hiram said:
LOL,,,,I've been around,,,,,just not here. You flatter me with the welcome wagon reception,,,,,where's my basket? lol
Click to expand...

so from your life experience you can tell if I am an attorney or not? that was the point i was addressing
 
a351 said:
And yet so many are short sighted enough to drive 100 over or whilst intoxicated. At some point society should seek to deter behavior that drastically increases the likelihood of vehicular manslaughter, not merely the act itself.



The law seeks to and does penalize those who have shown a disregard for the safety of others. Driving 100 mph over falls into that category. Facing the wrong direction at the firing range or a shot placed six inches above your neighbors head does as well. Not every action that falls just short of the real deal should be absolved from legal repercussions.
Click to expand...

Not hurting anyone else doesn't fall just short of hurting someone else.

It is a binary opposite.
 
joko104 said:
A highway patrol car on a good condition 4 lane divided highway with a 70 mph speed limit, no other cars on the highway in a remote area picks up a sole car doing 170 mph heading his way on the other side empty and flat open area 2 lanes. A new Corette ZR 1 designed to go 200 mph. When the officer pulls across the center medium, the ZR1 driver (no passenger) pulls over anticipating being stopped.

What should the officer do and what should the penalty be?

Multiple choice, public vote.
Click to expand...

4 lane highways outside of metropolitan areas shouldn't have speed limits only laws to keep slow pokes and trucks out of the left lane when not actively passing someone. Even in Metro areas where multiple lanes are available, the characteristics of the vehicle and what the driver was doing, other than speeding should be taken into account. A corvette can handle much higher speeds at the same level of safety as say a prius or a semi.

However, the 'vette clearly broke the law, so write the ticket or make the arrest, depending on local law, and let the court decide.
 
JayDubya said:
Not hurting anyone else doesn't fall just short of hurting someone else.

It is a binary opposite.
Click to expand...
How bout you tell me what neighborhood you live in, so me and some friends can grab our guns, go there, and fire rounds straight up in the air.


No harm, no fowl, right? No one is being hurt by us firing bullets into the sky, right?
 
JayDubya said:
Not hurting anyone else doesn't fall just short of hurting someone else.

It is a binary opposite.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, no. The example I gave, firing a bullet inches above your neighbors head while he's washing his car, technically falls short of harming anyone, but is still quite obviously a menace to public safety and well being that should result in legal repercussions. The same goes for going 100 mph over the speed limit, facing the wrong way at the firing range, or the Chinese sweetening their toothpaste with antifreeze.
 
I don't care what sort of road you are on, short of a closed course...170 mph is too fast in the US. You'd be hard pressed to get a ZR1 up to 170 on road Atlanta, let alone a PUBLIC highway. At 170 mph, you travel almost 280 feet per second. Each second. There is a reason why many German autobahn cruisers are governed to 155mph. Past a certain speed, you're just not safe for others around you, even if you're Mario Andretti. The ZR1 is a fast car, yes. But does anyone here know what starts to happen to the rubber in tires after 145mph? Or have any clue what happens when you touch the brakes at 150mph or higher?



This guy should have his license revoked for a while.
 
KevinKohler said:
How bout you tell me what neighborhood you live in, so me and some friends can grab our guns, go there, and fire rounds straight up in the air.


No harm, no fowl, right? No one is being hurt by us firing bullets into the sky, right?
Click to expand...

Why are you threatening me because I disagree with you politically?

You know falling bullets can hurt people and damage property all over my neighborhood. Best case scenario, you're littering.


Meanwhile someone driving along a road not hitting anyone is not hurting anyone...
 
Sometimes I think we should have special licensing requirements to drive some cars on public roads...but it wouldn't work, and it would be too expensive.

But so many well off, mid life crisis suffering adults the world over buy status symbols with little to no clue what 500+ hp actually means.
 
Yank the car away. This person obviously does not deserve it. Only a fool stops at 170mph simply because they saw a cop.

There's a video on youtube of a motorcycle doing 170 on an interstate as he passes a trooper in the median. The bike never slows down and makes a quick exit a minute or so later. That's how you do it.
 
JayDubya said:
Why are you threatening me because I disagree with you politically?

You know falling bullets can hurt people and damage property all over my neighborhood. Best case scenario, you're littering.


Meanwhile someone driving along a road not hitting anyone is not hurting anyone...
Click to expand...

Perfect. Instead of guns, me and my buddies will bring our cars. And booze.



We'll have fun all over you're neighborhood trying our best not to hit anything or hurt anyone, lol. So...address?
 
Falling bullets hurt people, but drunks careening around in 200+hp, 3,000+ pound vehicles barely able to straight...perfectly harmless. No potential there, right?
 
KevinKohler said:
Perfect. Instead of guns, me and my buddies will bring our cars. And booze.



We'll have fun all over you're neighborhood trying our best not to hit anything or hurt anyone, lol. So...address?
Click to expand...

Drinking and driving, now? Wow.

You and your friends are some classy dudes.

:roll:

Drinking and driving penalties are not harsh enough. Equating speed limits and prohibitions on drinking and driving is intellectually lazy in the extreme.
 
Castration. After public flogging. And the perpetrator must be required to wear the Russian fur hat - ushanka - for the rest of his life.
 
Good luck going 170 mph, drunk or not, in my neighborhood at all, let alone doing so without wrecking your car or killing someone.
 
JayDubya said:
Drinking and driving, now? Wow.

You and your friends are some classy dudes.

:roll:

Drinking and driving penalties are not harsh enough. Equating speed limits and prohibitions on drinking and driving is intellectually lazy in the extreme.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm.....I do believe I detect the taste of foot in my mouth. I jumped into this halfway through...and for some reason, I thought you were argueing that driving intoxicated was fine since no one is being hurt....or something.


Heh. My bad. Sorry.
 
JayDubya said:
Not hurting anyone else doesn't fall just short of hurting someone else.

It is a binary opposite.
Click to expand...
Sitting behind the wheel of what's basically a guided missile comes with certain responsibility. Sure, you haven't hurt anyone when you flout four or five traffic laws while driving nearly 200 mph. But, that's besides the point. The point is you shunned the responsibility that goes with being given the privilege to drive a guided missile.
 
joko104 said:
A highway patrol car on a good condition 4 lane divided highway with a 70 mph speed limit, no other cars on the highway in a remote area picks up a sole car doing 170 mph heading his way on the other side empty and flat open area 2 lanes. A new Corette ZR 1 designed to go 200 mph. When the officer pulls across the center medium, the ZR1 driver (no passenger) pulls over anticipating being stopped.

What should the officer do and what should the penalty be?

Multiple choice, public vote.
Click to expand...

That happened to me at about that speed in some desert. We chatted about fast cars and how neat it is to zoom down the autobahn at 200 mph. We really got on well. I did not complain to get a warning and he told me how important it was not to drive that fast.

I liked being treated that way and would say it is the last thing we should tolerate. When the police do not enforce the law a country has a problem.
 
Back to OP...


I do also believe that on certain roads, 55, 60, even 70 mph...is too slow. On 3 lane or higher interstates, there should be one lane where higher speeds...80, 90, 100 mph should be allowed. But doing this would require rule changes currently observed on the interstate, and SERIOUS repercussions for those that violate those rules.
 
joko104 said:
There are many, many areas where open, divided highway is common. There are NO "closed courses" that allow a production car as-is to drive at such speeds.

One reason I posted to poll is to explore just how much American culture has changed towards radical control, intense fear, an endless demand for more severe punishments, and endlessly filling more prison cells. Your "OMG!!! Going over 100?!!!!" is an example. A ZR1 can more safely go 120 than most small SUVs can go 70. ZR1s don't roll over if they have a blowout at 120, since they have run-flat tires.

In the situation I gave, the only person endangered was the driver.

Do you think if a person is caught driving while high on pot or drunk the person should never be allowed to drive again, car seized and jail time? That does definitely endangers others.
Click to expand...

The only person endangered is the driver... But only in the fantasy universe where nobody else can possibly be on the road. Something the driver has no ability to predict.

And yes, DUI should absolutely land you in jail and car-less. **** those people.
 
I always liked the Germans autobahns idea of no blanket speed limits for cars on the highways, motorways etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom