$12,000.00 Speeding Ticket
in [Motorcycles]
|
From: David T. Ashley on 30 Aug 2008 23:20 "Steve T" <rm2(a)no48panspam.com> wrote in message news:14jjb4drp98nlcbrah9uhrl32k9acrtk7q(a)4ax.com... > "David T. Ashley" <dta(a)e3ft.com> wrote: > > :You aren't thinking straight. > > Yes I am. If you operate a bike at 160 MPH, the amount of energy is enormous and the stopping distance is too great. It is reckless behavior: same as firing a gun into the air in a populated area. You might not kill anybody, but you might. Please explain to me why you feel that reckless behavior shouldn't be criminal only becuase it involves a vehicle rather than some other instrument ... If someone runs you over deliberately with a car, don't you feel that they should be charged with murder? The fact that a car is involved doesn't mean that one can't use the car to do something criminal ... Explain your point of view ...
From: Polarhound on 31 Aug 2008 00:25 David T. Ashley wrote: > "Steve T" <rm2(a)no48panspam.com> wrote in message > news:14jjb4drp98nlcbrah9uhrl32k9acrtk7q(a)4ax.com... >> "David T. Ashley" <dta(a)e3ft.com> wrote: >> >> :You aren't thinking straight. >> >> Yes I am. > > If you operate a bike at 160 MPH, the amount of energy is enormous and > the stopping distance is too great. It is reckless behavior: same as > firing a gun into the air in a populated area. You might not kill > anybody, but you might. > > Please explain to me why you feel that reckless behavior shouldn't be > criminal only becuase it involves a vehicle rather than some other > instrument ... > > If someone runs you over deliberately with a car, don't you feel that > they should be charged with murder? > > The fact that a car is involved doesn't mean that one can't use the car > to do something criminal ... If someone runs you over with a car while walking, it is attempted vehicular manslaughter, with probable years of jail time. If someone runs you over with a car on your motorcycle, it is failure to yield, a $50 fine and an apology for delaying the rest of your day.
From: David T. Ashley on 31 Aug 2008 00:32 "Steve T" <rm2(a)no48panspam.com> wrote in message news:sl6kb49l4d66vo7cufhavk1q8rdtvergr9(a)4ax.com... > "David T. Ashley" <dta(a)e3ft.com> wrote: > > :Explain your point of view ... > > The fine was obscene, cruel and unusual. Based on what standard? That fine was in the ballpark for reckless behavior that may kill or seriously injure another human being. $12,000 might represent about a half-year of work for most individuals. I'm not seeing what is cruel or unusual about that for willful reckless behavior.
From: Twibil on 31 Aug 2008 02:48 On Aug 30, 9:32 pm, "David T. Ashley" <d...(a)e3ft.com> wrote: > I'm not seeing what is cruel or unusual about that for willful reckless behavior. Never heard the old saw about "none is so blind as him who will not see", hmmm?
From: David T. Ashley on 31 Aug 2008 11:00
"Twibil" <jose.noway6(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:3aca0e8f-1eb4-40df-a465-a7369bc34260(a)r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com... On Aug 30, 9:32 pm, "David T. Ashley" <d...(a)e3ft.com> wrote: > I'm not seeing what is cruel or unusual about that for willful reckless > behavior. > >Never heard the old saw about "none is so blind as him who will not >see", hmmm? Ever heard the old saw about the person who can't defend their point of view rationally and so posts old saws instead? More justification about why $12,000 is unreasonable for reckless behavior, less old saws. |