Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Ritzy Private school kids street racingFollow

#52 Sep 09 2011 at 7:37 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
I've taken a few professional driver courses, and they let us drive Impalas, Crown Vics, and Chargers. God damn that **** is fun.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#53 Sep 09 2011 at 8:07 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
How do you accidentally hit 100mph? What kind of car were you driving? The only time I've ever done that, I was well aware of the fact that I was near that speed, and the car was sure to let me know by the fact that it was rattling (piece of crap) or floating (family sedans aren't meant to go that fast apparently.

Actually, come to think of it, I did hit near that first time I drove the 300 I used to have and was shocked to find out I was going anywhere near that.


It was sometime in the first month after buying my G8. I made a quick lane change to get around a slow moving car and sped up because there was a faster moving car coming up in that lane behind me. In just the couple seconds it took to make the lane change and then glance down at the speedometer, I was doing 100mph and still accelerating.

It actually took me a while to learn *not* to step on the gas as much while driving that car.


I guess what I'm getting at is that the excessiveness of the speed in question really does depend on the car you're driving in. My car isn't close to the performance of the cars in the OP, but 120 is pretty easy to hit and while I wouldn't want to have to make any fast lane changes while at that speed, unless I hit a moose or something, I'm not going to lose control on a straight road. Frankly for the cars in the OP, as long as there aren't other slower moving cars on the road, that's a safe cruising speed on a relatively straight road.

I'm not condoning what they were doing at all, but I also don't happen to think driving 120mph should result in losing your car, unless there were other mitigating circumstances which made what you were doing exceptionally dangerous (intoxicated, road with intersections, road with pedestrians along side it, etc). Even then, it should be about consistent fines and penalties for the same crime. Confiscating a car punishes the guy with the more expensive car for no really good reason at all. Was his action more dangerous? Then why punish him more?


I just think it violates the principle of equal protection under the law.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#54 Sep 09 2011 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
**
589 posts
Whats worse for some little rich kid or family seeing a high end car crushed or seeing their rich little brat serve 180 days in county or how what ever Canada calls county lock up.

I wish they stated if the 5 up for getting their cars crushed had 2 strikes already. If so then they would have gotten 2 warnings already. Would explain why only five are up for crushing. Either way they are buying their freedom.
#55 Sep 10 2011 at 2:41 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
So they should have their license revoked until thet are 21. Agreed.

Yes



Douchebag rich kids should be summariy punished.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#56 Sep 10 2011 at 11:24 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,512 posts
gbaji wrote:

Frankly for the cars in the OP, as long as there aren't other slower moving cars on the road, that's a safe cruising speed on a relatively straight road.
Are you retarded? It says right in the article that they had two people going slow to hold up traffic.
#57 Sep 11 2011 at 5:00 AM Rating: Excellent
****
9,526 posts
Also, it doesn't matter what your opinion of a safe driving speed is, gbaji - they were going more than double the legal speed limit.
#58 Sep 11 2011 at 6:08 AM Rating: Good
Hooligans like Gbaji have no respect for the law. They should be locked up for the good of society.
#59 Sep 12 2011 at 7:19 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Death penalty should be on the table for any offense. See how quickly people shape up when we execute a jay walker.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#60 Sep 12 2011 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Death penalty should be on the table for any offense. See how quickly people shape up when we execute a jay walker.

It would be much more efficient to simply allow the cars run them over.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#61 Sep 12 2011 at 8:06 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
10 points!
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#62 Sep 12 2011 at 8:40 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,512 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Death penalty should be on the table for any offense. See how quickly people shape up when we execute a jay walker.
It works for Texas.
#63 Sep 12 2011 at 3:05 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sweetums wrote:
gbaji wrote:

Frankly for the cars in the OP, as long as there aren't other slower moving cars on the road, that's a safe cruising speed on a relatively straight road.
Are you retarded? It says right in the article that they had two people going slow to hold up traffic.


It does say that, doesn't it? Imagine that!


I'm not condoning what they did. However, I do think that the punishment in this case far far far outweighs the crime, and represents a case of punishing people for being wealthy.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#64 Sep 12 2011 at 3:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
As several people have pointed out, that's 124mph. That's fast, but not ridiculously so.

It's considered "reckless" in every state to have a reckless driving designation. Depending on the state by 25-45 mph over the the line.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#65 Sep 12 2011 at 3:41 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
As several people have pointed out, that's 124mph. That's fast, but not ridiculously so.

It's considered "reckless" in every state to have a reckless driving designation. Depending on the state by 25-45 mph over the the line.


Again though, that's really not the point. The question is whether permanently confiscating the vehicles involved is a normal thing, or is an abnormal thing being done in this case because the people involved are wealthy.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#66 Sep 12 2011 at 4:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
As several people have pointed out, that's 124mph. That's fast, but not ridiculously so.

It's considered "reckless" in every state to have a reckless driving designation. Depending on the state by 25-45 mph over the the line.


Again though, that's really not the point. The question is whether permanently confiscating the vehicles involved is a normal thing, or is an abnormal thing being done in this case because the people involved are wealthy.


Which brings up a good question. Do we know if this is an abnormal punishment for BC or not?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#67 Sep 12 2011 at 4:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Again though, that's really not the point.

It's a valid point in regards to "not ridiculously fast".
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#68 Sep 12 2011 at 4:13 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
These canuckleheads seem to have gotten off a little light.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#69 Sep 12 2011 at 4:17 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Yeah, it didn't seem to me like they got some crazy harsh penalty.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#70 Sep 12 2011 at 4:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts


Sir Xsarus wrote:
Yeah, it didn't seem to me like they got some crazy harsh penalty.


Huh?

Quote:
Police issue about 10,000 tickets, annually, for excessive speeding. As of Sept. 20, a charge of excessive speeding will trigger a mandatory seven-day impoundment for a first offence, a 30-day impoundment for a second, and 60 days for subsequent excessive speeding offences within two years.

...

Street racers are also affected by the new rules. While street racing differs from excessive speeding, because it involves two or more vehicles trying to out-distance each other, under the new impoundment provisions, both are subject to a minimum impoundment of 7 days.


I'm missing the part where it says that your car will be confiscated permanently. I'm still waiting for *anyone* to show that this is a normal punishment for doing what they were doing. All the evidence I see is that they are being treated far more harshly than is normal.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#71 Sep 12 2011 at 4:31 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm missing the part where it says that your car will be confiscated permanently.
You probably also missed that part in the original story. Since it doesn't actually appear anywhere in it.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#72 Sep 12 2011 at 4:39 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Yeah, it didn't seem to me like they got some crazy harsh penalty.
Apparently they were fined half what normal people are typically fined. I guess to some people any punishment of the spawn of rich people is a harsh one!
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#73 Sep 12 2011 at 4:41 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm missing the part where it says that your car will be confiscated permanently.
You probably also missed that part in the original story. Since it doesn't actually appear anywhere in it.
Yea, I must have missed that part as well because I don't remember anyone's car getting impounded permanently. It does note that they'd like to impound them longer than 7 days, but doesn't specify permanently.


Edited, Sep 12th 2011 7:45pm by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#74 Sep 12 2011 at 5:26 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
the OP wrote:
They all lost access to their vehicles for a week
I'm not sure what Gbaji is reading. Maybe he just assumed they all got their cars taken away permanently? I guess it's only one word different. Reading the article might have taken away from his policy of not getting his news from anywhere.

Edited, Sep 12th 2011 6:30pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#75 Sep 12 2011 at 5:56 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
the OP wrote:
They all lost access to their vehicles for a week
I'm not sure what Gbaji is reading. Maybe he just assumed they all got their cars taken away permanently? I guess it's only one word different. Reading the article might have taken away from his policy of not getting his news from anywhere.


Huh? Are you guys just deliberately misreading things now? The whole point of the story is that the government is trying to take them permanently:

Quote:
The 13 cars were supposed to be released Thursday after being in an impound lot for seven days. Instead the case has been referred to the B.C. Civil Forfeiture Office after the RCMP's Lower Mainland District Traffic Services provided information to the Federal Integrated Proceeds of Crime Section, which evaluated the Sept. 1 incident.

...

They all lost access to their vehicles for a week but now may lose much more.


Reading comprehension fail?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#76 Sep 12 2011 at 5:57 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
You know what I find amazing? For this entire thread, it's been pretty darn obvious that every single person understood that this was about these kids losing their cars permanently. Now, suddenly you're all pretending that this isn't the case?

That's freaking bizarre. It really is.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 268 All times are in CST
Barudin314, Anonymous Guests (267)