Man Arrested Making YouTube Video

vengence said:
You can get away on a bike once or twice. If you make any kind of a habit though they'll simply setup a trap for you.
Click to expand...

Sounds good in theory, but since I haven't been on a sportbike in a few years I won't be able to confirm it one way or another.
 
that's a felony speeding arrest... that's an automatic go to jail and loose your license type of deal... I am pretty sure.
 
Cobalt2112 said:
PS: Drove on the Autobahn in Germany.. didn't impress me.... I see faster traffic on I-95 on the way to work near NYC.
Click to expand...

Gonna be there in July, pretty excited to drive on the Autobahn, at least to say "I have driven on the Autobahn". ><
 
eh, dude was not arrested for making a youtube video. he was arrested for being a dumbass.
 
Yeah, this Russian definitely qualifies as the idiot of the day. :D

I wonder if YT still has his vid or if someone took it down.
 
Cobalt2112 said:
I hit 125mph on a stretch of highway between NJ and NY ... got busted by a local cop who was on the right-side of the on-ramp. Since I had a family member FOP/PBA shield on my front glass, he let me go with a 83$ ticket! And, it didn't show on my auto insurance, it's been over a year now!

I had just gotten the car brand new 2 weeks earlier and was trying to see how fast this '09 Hyundai Sonata V6 would go... it could have gone more since it wasn't floored!

The fastest I've gone is a bit over 130mph on the NJ Garden State Parkway southbound.
Click to expand...
That FOP/PBA shield (whichever it was) sure saved you!

Doing 130 mph on the GS Pkwy means the toll booths come at you every few min. :eek:

I got busted once on the NJ Turnpike for doing over 80 mph back when it was a 55 mph limit but the cop wrote me up for 1-14 above, thankfully. I stopped excessively speeding after that. :(
 
Did he hurt anyone? Nope. Did he put anyone except himself in danger? You could say nope. It took a cop to stop him and then arrest him. Which says, nothing happened, except he was speeding. Why is this wrong?
 
Methadras said:
Did he hurt anyone? Nope. Did he put anyone except himself in danger? You could say nope. It took a cop to stop him and then arrest him. Which says, nothing happened, except he was speeding. Why is this wrong?
Click to expand...

Right, so if I walk outside and start shooting a gun into the air, I haven't done anything wrong until a bullet strikes and kill someone, is that it?
 
Methadras said:
Did he hurt anyone? Nope. Did he put anyone except himself in danger? You could say nope. It took a cop to stop him and then arrest him. Which says, nothing happened, except he was speeding. Why is this wrong?
Click to expand...

I can apply that same logic to many other things.
 
vengence said:
Right, so if I walk outside and start shooting a gun into the air, I haven't done anything wrong until a bullet strikes and kill someone, is that it?
Click to expand...

Well I think the difference between the article and your example is that a gun when used properly is designed to be a lethal instrument, whereas a car or motorcycle is not.

The danger comes from the irresponsible or incorrect usage of the car or motorcycle, but that could be said for a number of things; power tools, household chemicals, and medical devices just to name a few.
 
he's an idiot, not because he was speeding but because he got caught.

Get a Valentine or escort 9500 next time, jackass.
 
Cobalt2112 said:
PS: Drove on the Autobahn in Germany.. didn't impress me.... I see faster traffic on I-95 on the way to work near NYC.
Click to expand...

Maybe you were on the restricted part of the Autobahn? It is very rare to not see a car speeding over 200 km/h on the unrestricted part of the Autobahn.
 
westrock2000 said:
Speed doesn't kill. Attitude kills. Speed merely affects the intensity of the event that poor attitude created.

Speed does not inherently hurt people.
Click to expand...

Reality check? Really? Tell that to a skydiver on impact into a ground b/c their parashoot didn't open versus someone whose parashoot fails near the ground and survives with just a broken leg b/c they weren't going as fast?

View: Statistics about reaction time required to avoid an upcoming car. Determine if faster speed gives you more or less time to react via common sense. Speed decreases available time to react. If anything, playing games should teach you that even those with really fast reflexes do eventually mess up and get killed because of it.

See: Missed interrupts with a 1-s to 2s cast time in wow or not panning fast enough to someone you see coming from your right and you get shot up. The difference is a missed dodging of an upcoming car at 140mph is not like a video game where you get another life/chance. Your dead and you possibly took others with you.

Irony: The attitude you have that speed is inheritantly not dangerous thefore its ok to go really fast as long as you act maturely about going really fast, wear the leather jacket from Top Gun and be sure to include the shades is the attitude that gets people killed?
 
Methadras said:
Did he hurt anyone? Nope. Did he put anyone except himself in danger? You could say nope. It took a cop to stop him and then arrest him. Which says, nothing happened, except he was speeding. Why is this wrong?
Click to expand...

Oregon & Washington are pretty forgiving when it comes to speeding. Yes you'll get a ticket, but only when you do 100+mph is where it becomes reckless driving on a felony level. I'm all for speeding, but the cop wasn't lying about the winds & forget a dip, he could have done a simple dodge move & would have been in the bushes somewhere.

I really wish there was a speed limit of 80mph, because people do that anyways, but if you feel the need to speed Oregon/Washington has raceways to do just that.
 
Methadras said:
Did he hurt anyone? Nope. Did he put anyone except himself in danger? You could say nope. It took a cop to stop him and then arrest him. Which says, nothing happened, except he was speeding. Why is this wrong?
Click to expand...

Why is it wrong? Fast forward three months ahead in time when he + three teenagers he ran into with his car are dead because he routinely goes extremely fast giving him little to no time to react to changing road conditions. Infact, if he goes so fast that over a 30 minute period of driving, there's only a 1% chance of getting in accident verus 0.001% at the speed limit, it seems like not a big deal. However, with a 1% chance, roll the dice 300 times on this guys drive to work over a period of a year and he's probably gotten into an accident killing or crippling himself and others a few times over.

I understand you saying its fine because one incident didn't result in a crash. Heck with a 1% chance 99 times there would be no crash. The problem is the one time there is a crash and it really only takes once.

Really, its like you taking a gun with a lot of barrels that fires from both ends and playing Russian roulette with a bunch of people at the mall. Heck, it has 100 chambers. There's only a 1 in a 100 chance of you killing someone, so what's the problem with pulling the trigger everyday for a few years? Yes, why would this be wrong indeed? Its a very puzzling question Methadras.
 
WBurchnall said:
Reality check? Really? Tell that to a skydiver on impact into a ground b/c their parashoot didn't open versus someone whose parashoot fails near the ground and survives with just a broken leg b/c they weren't going as fast?

View: Statistics about reaction time required to avoid an upcoming car. Determine if faster speed gives you more or less time to react via common sense. Speed decreases available time to react. If anything, playing games should teach you that even those with really fast reflexes do eventually mess up and get killed because of it.

See: Missed interrupts with a 1-s to 2s cast time in wow or not panning fast enough to someone you see coming from your right and you get shot up. The difference is a missed dodging of an upcoming car at 140mph is not like a video game where you get another life/chance. Your dead and you possibly took others with you.

Irony: The attitude you have that speed is inheritantly not dangerous thefore its ok to go really fast as long as you act maturely about going really fast, wear the leather jacket from Top Gun and be sure to include the shades is the attitude that gets people killed?
Click to expand...

NHTSA Study: Speed a Critical Factor in 5% of Crashes
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2008/12/nhtsa-study-speed-a-critical-factor-in-5-of-crashes/
 
JMccovery said:
Driving is a privelge, NOT a right, you were not born with a car, and "supreme deity of your choice" did not give you one in a glorious event.
Click to expand...

There have been numerous court cases in state courts defining driving as a right, and the SCOTUS in Bell v Burson decided that driving is not a simple privilege.

Also read:
Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago, 169 NE 22
Thompson v Smith, 154 SE 579
Kent v Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125.
Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293
State v Johnson, 243 P. 1073, 1078
Barney v Board of Railroad Commissioners; State v City of Spokane, 186 P. 864
Dickey v Davis S.E. 781
Teche Lines v Danforth, 12 So.2d 784
 
Showbiz said:
Well I think the difference between the article and your example is that a gun when used properly is designed to be a lethal instrument, whereas a car or motorcycle is not.

The danger comes from the irresponsible or incorrect usage of the car or motorcycle, but that could be said for a number of things; power tools, household chemicals, and medical devices just to name a few.
Click to expand...

Right, a .50BMG (the biggest, baddass sniper weapon used in all the movies) has a muzzel energy of upto 20kJ max load. A standard 4000lb car traveling at 140mph has 3553kJ of energy. Now please continue to tell me the bullet is more dangerous. :rolleyes:
 
vengence said:
Right, a .50BMG (the biggest, baddass sniper weapon used in all the movies) has a muzzel energy of upto 20kJ max load. A standard 4000lb car traveling at 140mph has 3553kJ of energy. Now please continue to tell me the bullet is more dangerous. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

What I'm trying to say is anything when used that irresponsibly is insanely dangerous. Would you run around a room as fast as you can with a chainsaw running full throttle? Cars are inherently dangerous. There are numerous cases where cars have gone crashing through crowds killing several people at a time. Hell just look at rally cars when a rally car loses control and flys off the course and into some spectators who were standing in a prohibited area. Those cars are only traveling at half that speed.
 
terrybogard21 said:
Oregon & Washington are pretty forgiving when it comes to speeding. Yes you'll get a ticket, but only when you do 100+mph is where it becomes reckless driving on a felony level. I'm all for speeding, but the cop wasn't lying about the winds & forget a dip, he could have done a simple dodge move & would have been in the bushes somewhere.

I really wish there was a speed limit of 80mph, because people do that anyways, but if you feel the need to speed Oregon/Washington has raceways to do just that.
Click to expand...

Reckless is only a class A misdemeanor in Oregon, minimum 90 license suspension but could lead up to 1 to 3 year suspension.
 
vengence said:
Right, a .50BMG (the biggest, baddass sniper weapon used in all the movies) has a muzzel energy of upto 20kJ max load. A standard 4000lb car traveling at 140mph has 3553kJ of energy. Now please continue to tell me the bullet is more dangerous. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well to continue with your line of reasoning that its all about KJ, it could also be said that an airplane is more dangerous than a car. However there were no US airline fatalities last year.

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2011-01-21-RWaircrashes20_ST_N.htm

All I was saying is that you cannot compare the irresponsible use of a vehicle to the irresponsible use of a lethal instrument. One is designed for killing, the other is not.
 
vengence said:
What I'm trying to say is anything when used that irresponsibly is insanely dangerous. Would you run around a room as fast as you can with a chainsaw running full throttle? Cars are inherently dangerous. There are numerous cases where cars have gone crashing through crowds killing several people at a time. Hell just look at rally cars when a rally car loses control and flys off the course and into some spectators who were standing in a prohibited area. Those cars are only traveling at half that speed.
Click to expand...

I seems to me that it was the irresponsible people who were in the wrong place that was inherently dangerous. I don't know what story specifically you are referring to, but I'm wondering if the driver of said rally car survived the accident. It seems to me that with the inventions of Seat belts, ABS systems, airbags, crumple zones, firewalls, is a very safe machine.
 
Methadras said:
Did he hurt anyone? Nope. Did he put anyone except himself in danger? You could say nope. It took a cop to stop him and then arrest him. Which says, nothing happened, except he was speeding. Why is this wrong?
Click to expand...

It is only wrong because it has been deemed illegal by that areas law enforcement to go over a set speed limit. It is also set like that, not for safety but so someone can ticket you and collect money for that same area. The Auto-bahn has less traffic accident than we do here though in the states. So I think the money thing comes into play quite often when it comes to setting interstate speed limits.
 
Dylan80 said:
People who ride street bikes see this a lot.... not surprising. I know someone who actually did the same thing but ran because thats what the people do that I know (they never get caught), and wrecked because he was running too fast from the cops and tried to take one of those circle off ramps too fast.... ate it into the grass/pond thing that's there and he had it all for camera/recording purposes on his helmet cam (haven't seen it yet, sucks)

But it doesn't matter, over 25+ MPH of the limit and all your shit is gone if you're stupid and unslick enough to get caught. . Your license, your bike, gone.

And never stop when you see the lights behind you, I know someone who did that and the cops were total dicks for him being nice and pulling over..... even kicked over his bike supposedly and he didn't say anything smart ass or anything.
Click to expand...

Honestly, it depends on the area. Logically, it seems stupid to run, primarily because of the what-ifs, like what if they finally catch up to you? What if you total the vehicle and potentially injure yourself in the process? If you thought the cops were being dicks for no reason when you willingly put over, imagine what will happen if you try to run and get caught.

Attempting to top out your vehicle or speeding in general only serves the purpose of wasting gas, time, and tax money on catching you, and it puts other drivers on the road at risk. Take it to the race track next time.
 
Showbiz said:
Well to continue with your line of reasoning that its all about KJ, it could also be said that an airplane is more dangerous than a car. However there were no US airline fatalities last year.

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2011-01-21-RWaircrashes20_ST_N.htm

All I was saying is that you cannot compare the irresponsible use of a vehicle to the irresponsible use of a lethal instrument. One is designed for killing, the other is not.
Click to expand...

A bat isn't designed for killing but can handle the job pretty easily, so what's your point?

A crash at 140+ MPH can easily kill someone in any number of ways.
 
Showbiz said:
Well to continue with your line of reasoning that its all about KJ, it could also be said that an airplane is more dangerous than a car. However there were no US airline fatalities last year.

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2011-01-21-RWaircrashes20_ST_N.htm

All I was saying is that you cannot compare the irresponsible use of a vehicle to the irresponsible use of a lethal instrument. One is designed for killing, the other is not.
Click to expand...

Right, except that someone used a pair of airplanes to take down a couple of buildings.

They've also got strict regulations and harsh penalties if the pilots don't obey the laws BECAUSE of the danger.

World wide there were 1,115 fatalities reported to the ARCO last year, that's planes carrying 6 or more people, so it doesn't even include all the people who died (or killed others) while piloting thier cessnas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top