tommy525 wrote:I suppose he will lose his license for quite some time, plus get some real time in a slammer (well deserved tho).
As I guy who advocates driving safely, I would still like to challenge this statement. I only challenge it because I've put a lot of thought to the "justice" system recently, and have taken to the idea, based on that if one hasn't actually harmed anyone, one hasn't necessarily done anything wrong.
So here's how I see this motorcycle speeder and arguments based on the video just posted.
1) From the video evidence I have seen, the rider hurt nobody.
2) If the rider could be charged with "dangerous driving/riding", then "dangerous driving/riding" must be a manner which is specific and can be measured and quantified scientifically.
4) If dangerous driving/riding is an opinion only and cannot be quantified scientifically, then there should be no such a charge.
5) If "dangerous driving/riding" can be a law, and as I have not seen unquestionable facts or science, surrounding this type of charge, then any law can be written by opinion only, and can be implemented and used to charge people, even in the face of opinion. I would add, as most people have already been raised to accept "dangerous driving/riding" as a credible situation and as a fact of circumstance, even in a non eventful situation such as in this video, that the logic base for supporting "dangerous driving" can also be applied to all kinds of other areas. We could, for example have "dangerous walking", "dangerous texting", "dangerous usage of equipment", "dangerous teaching", "dangerous coaching", and all other manner of silly things.
I may need remind people that "risk" is an element within all activities and certainly in the case of travelling, can never be reduced to a factor of zero. This being so, then really any person involved in travelling, and based upon the loose logic of "dangerous driving/riding" is guilty of "dangerous travelling".
3) If the rider could be found guilty of "dangerous driving/riding", based on opinion alone, then to be fair, then the motorcycle manufacturer should also be found guilty of being implicit in the production of a vehicle that's design factoring makes its performance best suited to braking national speed restrictions, or "driving/riding dangerously." Furthermore, the government who provided the licence to this motorcycle and company should in all fairness also be found guilty of conspiracy or being implicit in the matter of "dangerous driving/riding".
Now anyone is free to question my logic here, as I'm sure some very emotional people will undoubtedly. I agree that the disrespect of other road users is indeed a nuisance which I also find to be very ill mannered and detrimental to the peace of society at times. But in all fairness, I am trying to use logic here and fairness when dealing with an emotional situation such as this one.
We shouldn't mindlessly go around branding this or that person as criminal based on opinion only. I think this is why we finally came about with common laws in the first place. They were and still are a manner in which society can operate peacefully, without the need to be subjecting each other to each other's differing opinions.