Why does it matter if there was speeding involved or not? You killed cyclists, it shouldn’t matter how that happened. Only exception would be intended or not.
Because it does matter how it happened. Most legal systems, as well as most people’s moral judgements on the issue, are going look at the totality of the circumstances.
Someone going 3x the speed limit is creating a more dangerous situation and should face a higher penalty than someone who was, say, following all the rules but sneezed and accidentally hit a cyclist.
It doesn’t feel reasonable to say someone who gets wasted and swerves into a cyclist has the same degree of responsibility as someone who fails to see the victim. Both bad, but drunky made worse choices and introduced more danger. Similarly, speeders have less time to react, lower levels of control, and have exponentially increased the impact forces in a crash.
Obviously, intentionally hitting someone and killing them is the worst but personal choices that increase risk raise culpability.
Indeed, he killed while going %150 over the speed limit. That should be considered reckless/gross negligence manslaughter and shouldn’t be punished with just community service. It should be punished with jail time and they should make public service announcements out of events like this so people don’t act like idiots.
I suppose if the offender was an immigrant, they would make him bleed out of his ass.
clearly the defense had a good lawyer. I would be suing for every penny to their name and use it to vindictively smear the defense for the rest of their lives with the money.
new job? new billboard outside your job with your face plastered on it calling you a murderer.
move to a new city? ad campaign on social media within your face and name with similar message.
the only thing that would make me feel whole is if that person feels not just remorse, but absolute unyielding despair. I don’t want them to die, I want them to want to die every moment they exist.
He was clocked going 75 in a 50. That’s nothing for rural roads. In modern cars, you won’t even feel the difference at travel speed.
For reference, I’ve been driving for 30 years and haven’t had a ticket in 20 years, and even i will look down in amazement that I am going as fast as I am. There’s nothing reckless about it, and that’s why the judge ruled this way.
75mph on rural roads? I’ve also been driving for 30 years, and have done a lot of that on rural roads. You are out of your mind if you don’t feel the difference between 50 and 75. On the interstate, with zero traffic? Maybe. On a winding rural road? Bullshit.
There is no assumption. They think you’re opinion is wrong and so do I. Deal with it and don’t resort to childish name calling because an internet stranger told you what they think of your opinion. Maybe talk to someone about your anger issues too.
See a therapist about the narcissism. All of you, really.
So you can dish out personal attacks but are too much of a snowflake to take them? Why bother being such an asshole if you didn’t want those replies in kind?
… you understand that this is very literally narcissistic behavior, yeah?
It is not just about curviness though, chance of death for a hit pedestrian sharply increases after 40mph and is practically 100% at above 60mph. To be fair it is also quite high at 50mph so this is not just an issue of “if he went with 50 they certainly wouldn’t die” (though they would have had better chance for sure). But this is to say, when they put these limits, they don’t just pull them out of their asses to torture drivers.
If you can’t tell whether or not you’re going 50% over the speed limit at what you call “travel speed”, then you should not be operating a motor vehicle. Seriously, that is not a small difference.
I think this case alone already nullifies your argument. Rules like this exist for exactly this reason, not for people to say “that is fine I am a good driver so I can go faster than the rules”. I have been driving for quite a while too (10 years or so) and the fact that you can’t see a difference between 80km/h and 120km/h just means you have gotten too comfortable. 90? Quite possibly, 100 ok fine but at 120 you should already be feeling off unless you are on a highway. On top of this, attention and reflexes only wane with age, so unless situations like this are harshly punished people will keep causing accidents just like this.
I didn’t say it was fine to drive like that. I said it was understandable how someone would do that and not have acted maliciously or even negligently. Cars are waaaay too smooth and it’s way to comfortable to drive them faster than they should be driven by civilians in 99.9% of contexts.
I know I’ve been in a car with my brother and thought, “wow, we must be going 80” and he was doing well over 100. Empty highway, sunday morning, so the only risk would have been a dumbass ticket and he’s one of those entitled, connected people so it wouldn’t have even mattered. But still. I wouldn’t have agreed to ride at those speeds (and I haven’t been in his car since.)
If you’re driving a car at a speed much faster than you intended to, by definition you’re being negligent. Speedometers are very easy to check and by failing to regularly check your speed you’re acting negligently.
He was clocked going 75 in a 50. That’s nothing for rural roads. In modern cars, you won’t even feel the difference at travel speed.
Bullshit. If that was the case, the speed limit would just be 75 there.
For reference, I’ve been driving for 30 years and haven’t had a ticket in 20 years, and even i will look down in amazement that I am going as fast as I am.
Oh, well since you’re reckless and lucky I guess it’s okay.
Why does it matter if there was speeding involved or not? You killed cyclists, it shouldn’t matter how that happened. Only exception would be intended or not.
Because it does matter how it happened. Most legal systems, as well as most people’s moral judgements on the issue, are going look at the totality of the circumstances.
Someone going 3x the speed limit is creating a more dangerous situation and should face a higher penalty than someone who was, say, following all the rules but sneezed and accidentally hit a cyclist.
It doesn’t feel reasonable to say someone who gets wasted and swerves into a cyclist has the same degree of responsibility as someone who fails to see the victim. Both bad, but drunky made worse choices and introduced more danger. Similarly, speeders have less time to react, lower levels of control, and have exponentially increased the impact forces in a crash.
Obviously, intentionally hitting someone and killing them is the worst but personal choices that increase risk raise culpability.
Indeed, he killed while going %150 over the speed limit. That should be considered reckless/gross negligence manslaughter and shouldn’t be punished with just community service. It should be punished with jail time and they should make public service announcements out of events like this so people don’t act like idiots.
I suppose if the offender was an immigrant, they would make him bleed out of his ass.
Apparently, it was revisited and his speed was considered/acknowledged and his sentence was substantially increased.
what, 125 hours instead of 120?
clearly the defense had a good lawyer. I would be suing for every penny to their name and use it to vindictively smear the defense for the rest of their lives with the money.
new job? new billboard outside your job with your face plastered on it calling you a murderer.
move to a new city? ad campaign on social media within your face and name with similar message.
the only thing that would make me feel whole is if that person feels not just remorse, but absolute unyielding despair. I don’t want them to die, I want them to want to die every moment they exist.
I think it was 15 months in prison and a multi-year ban on driving.
He was clocked going 75 in a 50. That’s nothing for rural roads. In modern cars, you won’t even feel the difference at travel speed.
For reference, I’ve been driving for 30 years and haven’t had a ticket in 20 years, and even i will look down in amazement that I am going as fast as I am. There’s nothing reckless about it, and that’s why the judge ruled this way.
75mph on rural roads? I’ve also been driving for 30 years, and have done a lot of that on rural roads. You are out of your mind if you don’t feel the difference between 50 and 75. On the interstate, with zero traffic? Maybe. On a winding rural road? Bullshit.
I don’t think it is mph. It probably Km/h. But it still is much to fast!
it is mph, as stated in the articles
Why would there be a speed limit of 50 mph in the netherlands???
If you are askint why mph in particular, it is probably because the news source is British so they likely converted it
50 mph is almost exactly 80 km/h, which isn’t all too uncommon in the rest of the EU.
I like how you just assume I am wrong instead of thinking that maybe your dumbass doesn’t understand that rural roads aren’t all curvy.
See a therapist about the narcissism. All of you, really.
There is no assumption. They think you’re opinion is wrong and so do I. Deal with it and don’t resort to childish name calling because an internet stranger told you what they think of your opinion. Maybe talk to someone about your anger issues too.
Dang I didn’t realize they still made people this dumb
Cool so you’re just an asshole? Thanks for posting! Super useful bits of information you’ve shared.
So you can dish out personal attacks but are too much of a snowflake to take them? Why bother being such an asshole if you didn’t want those replies in kind?
… you understand that this is very literally narcissistic behavior, yeah?
It is not just about curviness though, chance of death for a hit pedestrian sharply increases after 40mph and is practically 100% at above 60mph. To be fair it is also quite high at 50mph so this is not just an issue of “if he went with 50 they certainly wouldn’t die” (though they would have had better chance for sure). But this is to say, when they put these limits, they don’t just pull them out of their asses to torture drivers.
I’m sure it’s “if he were going the speed limit he should have had time to see and react, given the road characteristics “
no we assume you’re an asshole from the things you write and post here bill. and your confidence is DISTURBING! -
" I’ve been driving for 30 years and haven’t had a ticket in 20 years, and even i will look down in amazement that I am going as fast as I am. "
what the fuck
Lol
If you can’t tell whether or not you’re going 50% over the speed limit at what you call “travel speed”, then you should not be operating a motor vehicle. Seriously, that is not a small difference.
Yea. I thought the whole “cant tell the difference in speed” was shit as well.
It’s also shit because you can LOOK AT YOUR FUCKING SPEEDOMETER even if you can’t feel the difference in speed.
If you don’t notice a difference between 80 km/h (50 mph) and 120 km/h (75 mph), you shouldn’t be driving.
I think this case alone already nullifies your argument. Rules like this exist for exactly this reason, not for people to say “that is fine I am a good driver so I can go faster than the rules”. I have been driving for quite a while too (10 years or so) and the fact that you can’t see a difference between 80km/h and 120km/h just means you have gotten too comfortable. 90? Quite possibly, 100 ok fine but at 120 you should already be feeling off unless you are on a highway. On top of this, attention and reflexes only wane with age, so unless situations like this are harshly punished people will keep causing accidents just like this.
I didn’t say it was fine to drive like that. I said it was understandable how someone would do that and not have acted maliciously or even negligently. Cars are waaaay too smooth and it’s way to comfortable to drive them faster than they should be driven by civilians in 99.9% of contexts.
I know I’ve been in a car with my brother and thought, “wow, we must be going 80” and he was doing well over 100. Empty highway, sunday morning, so the only risk would have been a dumbass ticket and he’s one of those entitled, connected people so it wouldn’t have even mattered. But still. I wouldn’t have agreed to ride at those speeds (and I haven’t been in his car since.)
If you’re driving a car at a speed much faster than you intended to, by definition you’re being negligent. Speedometers are very easy to check and by failing to regularly check your speed you’re acting negligently.
In what world does that not count as negligent?
Bullshit. If that was the case, the speed limit would just be 75 there.
Oh, well since you’re reckless and lucky I guess it’s okay.
if you can’t tell the difference between 75 in a 50 it’s time to turn in your license.
seriously, do it before you murder or maim someone.
Especially on a rural road. Nothing but ruts, patches and pot holes.
and animals crossing, and farm vehicles, and downed limbs from trees… yep, rural roads are prime speed and fuckin die real estate.
I had a family member that felt this way about driving. He died wrapped around a pole and took his passenger with him.
I feel bad for his passenger.
deleted by creator
Just to clarify, we’re talking kph, not mph, right?
Because there’s a difference between drunk driving and swerving to avoid a deer
…so it does matter how it happened?