Six months imprisonment for motorcyclist caught riding at 120mph.

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
You've probably already aware of this via the news so I'll avoid repetition and post a link to Sky News for clarity

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Speeding-Motorcyclist-Robert-Bennett-Has-Been-Jailed-For-Riding-With-Son-On-Back-At-122mph/Article/200903115232326?lpos=UK_News_Third_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region__4&lid=ARTICLE_15232326_Speeding_Motorcyclist_Robert_Bennett_Has_Been_Jailed_For_Riding_With_Son_On_Back_At_122mph

What do you think?

I think that a jail sentence is outrageous for something that is only a summary traffic offence. Speeding is NOT a crime.

Nobody came to any harm. Since when has 'What if?' been against the law?

I sincerely hope that Robert Bennett appeals to the justice system and is given an unconditional discharge.
 

herb

modherbrator
Moderator
Points
457
From
west midlands
Car
Seat Leon Cupra
You've probably already aware of this via the news so I'll avoid repetition and post a link to Sky News for clarity

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Speeding-Motorcyclist-Robert-Bennett-Has-Been-Jailed-For-Riding-With-Son-On-Back-At-122mph/Article/200903115232326?lpos=UK_News_Third_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region__4&lid=ARTICLE_15232326_Speeding_Motorcyclist_Robert_Bennett_Has_Been_Jailed_For_Riding_With_Son_On_Back_At_122mph

What do you think?

I think that a jail sentence is outrageous for something that is only a summary traffic offence. Speeding is NOT a crime.

Nobody came to any harm. Since when has 'What if?' been against the law?

I sincerely hope that Robert Bennett appeals to the justice system and is given an unconditional discharge.
when i initially read the post i was going to agree with you but after reading and seeing what he did i think the sentence is justified
imo its not just a case of what ifs its the fact that he dosent care about himself his son or other road users i mean he was doing 122mph in the wet with his son on the back (with no protective gear on) while approaching a bend and hopefully this will send a message out to all the other idiot motorcyclists out there!!!
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
I can equate with your reasoning. I thought that the son was wearing all protective gear apart from gloves. Clearly I need to watch the video again. But how much help would gloves be at only 70mph?

There are very few idiot bikers out there. Most are superb road users who use vision, anticipation and perception to high standards.

In sentencing it appears that the judge set aside the fact that there was minor riding as a pillion passenger and instead focussed upon the speed issue.

This seems to conflict with the fact that Robert Bennett was charged with the offence endangering the life of a minor, as opposed to the speed at which he was riding.

In which case why was the child passenger set aside and the speed taken into consideration if this was not the original charge applied?
 

twopointfive

Wrench Pro
Points
153
From
Southport, England
Car
Legacy 4 cam 2.5
I have a great respect for biker's, but, this guy lets them down. It's absolutely irresponsible !! to carry a passenger, especially a youngster at high speeds in dangerous road conditions. Bennett, clearly has ability and skill, but, putting his passenger and other road users at risk is totally selfish. I feel the judge made valid points in his summing-up. He deserves his fate.
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
I have a great respect for biker's, but, this guy lets them down. It's absolutely irresponsible !! to carry a passenger, especially a youngster at high speeds in dangerous road conditions. Bennett, clearly has ability and skill, but, putting his passenger and other road users at risk is totally selfish. I feel the judge made valid points in his summing-up. He deserves his fate.
Sorry, but I still disagree. A jail sentence is outrageous for nothing other than a statutory traffic offence. The message being conveyed to all is that you can drive as badly as you like provided that you do so within the posted speed limit.

Bikes such as those ridden by Robert Bennett are capable of going between 70 and 120 mph and back to 70 again in less time that your average family bus can get between 0 and 40 mph.

I have no concern for the young passenger - the law requires that a suitable helmet is worn. All is in order in my opinion.

And I will reiterate this - NO ONE WAS HURT OR INJURED!
 

twopointfive

Wrench Pro
Points
153
From
Southport, England
Car
Legacy 4 cam 2.5
Sorry, but I still disagree. A jail sentence is outrageous for nothing other than a statutory traffic offence. The message being conveyed to all is that you can drive as badly as you like provided that you do so within the posted speed limit.

Bikes such as those ridden by Robert Bennett are capable of going between 70 and 120 mph and back to 70 again in less time that your average family bus can get between 0 and 40 mph.

I have no concern for the young passenger - the law requires that a suitable helmet is worn. All is in order in my opinion.

And I will reiterate this - NO ONE WAS HURT OR INJURED!
It's 26 weeks, the guideline for sentence (dangerous driving, speeding.) so the judge has the right to give the six month sentence. Robert Bennett, should read the law before taking such foolhardy chances, it's his own fault.

The message, is telling road user's that, if you break the law, the courts will execute heavy penalties, and this is proven by Bennett's sentence.

The ability of his bikes performance has no bearing on his offence. His disregard for his sons safety is astonishing, to say the least. Sensible bikers always wear full protective clothing. Only idiots ride in tee shirts and trainers.

Martyn
 

pgarner

TC ModFather
Moderator
Points
417
From
Lockerbie, SW Scotland
Car
Octy smoke machine
The ability of his bikes performance has no bearing on his offence.
Martyn
without reading the whole story, only seem a snip it on the news. i just want to clarify this point.

the performance of the vechile has been taken into consideration in the past where, iirc, a porsche driver was driving a high speed through section of a road where he was clocked for a long section, more than the 3rd of a mile required, at speeds well in excess on 100mph - point at which most licences are taken off you.
the judge went softer on this driver as the car had the performance to cope with these speeds easily and the driver had the ability and experience at driving at these speeds as a regular track day enthusiast.
he ended up just with a driving ban and fine.

it stupid that this country bangs up a man for 6 months for speeding and endangering a minor where as someone who assist it the brutal treatment, and eventually death, of there own child can get of scot free
 

obi_waynne

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Points
887
From
Deal, Kent UK
Car
A3 1.4 TFSI 150 COD
Justice rarely happens, the law is a complicated ass!

A bit harsh to lock him up for 6 months IMO - what will that do to his life with a custodial sentance on his record? He'll probably lose his job as well. I would have more sympathy for him if it was without his son and on a long straight of road. This chap has been made an example of and they threw the book at him.

Would he have had the same ban if he were in a car? Did the Judge hate bikers?
 

2fast2catch

Torque Master
Points
77
From
the moon
Car
punto
Nobody came to any harm. Since when has 'What if?' been against the law?
see now i totally disagree with your comment here!

would you apply the same 'what if' rule to:

drink drivers........ are they ok as long as they dont kill anyone

what i dont get is how someone can ride a bike, fully kitted up for the occasion then have their son on the back and not have them kited up the same..... yes the law does state that only a helmet be worn but the fact remains that the damage that would have been done to that little boys hands from not wearing any gloves if something had happened would have been horrendous, imaging scraping bare skin on tarmac doing 20mph never mind 120mph, this guy has shown a total lack of respect for the life of his child never mind anything else...... fair enough if he wanted to do that speed on his own, came off and killed himself then fair enough he took his 'own' life into his 'own' hands but to have his child (or anyone else) on the back and do it is totally wrong. IMO he may not have been given a custodial sentance if the roads were dry.

i have know people who have had their feet, hands and everything inbetween saved due to them wearing the correct protection.

I agree with the sentance he recieved however i am also aware of just how screwed up the justice system is in this country. there are forever crys of prisons being overcrowded but still they choose to set free reoffenders and people commiting more serious offences.
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
I know the sentencing guidelines and I know they're been followed. What I'm suggesting is that the guidelines are WRONG!!

NO-ONE WAS HURT. It is patently wrong to continue giving the anti-speed messages as it tells us that you can do whatever you like provided you do it within the speed limit.

It's also a poke in the eye for the brigade that keep telling us that all roads should have lower limits, x% of accidents involve excessive speed etc etc.

Sadly, they can't prove a negative - this man was 52 mph over the speed limit and no accident occured.

What do we conclude from this? Perhaps we should all ride and driver faster?
 

twopointfive

Wrench Pro
Points
153
From
Southport, England
Car
Legacy 4 cam 2.5
without reading the whole story, only seem a snip it on the news. i just want to clarify this point.

the performance of the vechile has been taken into consideration in the past where, iirc, a porsche driver was driving a high speed through section of a road where he was clocked for a long section, more than the 3rd of a mile required, at speeds well in excess on 100mph - point at which most licences are taken off you.
the judge went softer on this driver as the car had the performance to cope with these speeds easily and the driver had the ability and experience at driving at these speeds as a regular track day enthusiast.
he ended up just with a driving ban and fine.

it stupid that this country bangs up a man for 6 months for speeding and endangering a minor where as someone who assist it the brutal treatment, and eventually death, of there own child can get of scot free
"it stupid that this country bangs up a man for 6 months for speeding and endangering a minor where as someone who assist it the brutal treatment, and eventually death, of there own child can get of scot free"[/quote]


>I'm not sure what you mean her..budd?


The example of the Porsche driver ; The circumstances are very different. There is no mention of Bennett, having any track racing skills. He was also riding a motorbike and, in the wet, approaching a corner..also at speed. Fast motorbikes are notoriously difficult to see, especially in rain conditions, this just adds to his stupidity. Judges pass sentence on a whole lot of mitigating circumstances. and use the guidlines that best suit the offender. I personally think the Porshe driver should have more self control and, respect for drivers who use the limits. Not everybody feels..the need for speed.

Martyn
 

twopointfive

Wrench Pro
Points
153
From
Southport, England
Car
Legacy 4 cam 2.5
I know the sentencing guidelines and I know they're been followed. What I'm suggesting is that the guidelines are WRONG!!

NO-ONE WAS HURT. It is patently wrong to continue giving the anti-speed messages as it tells us that you can do whatever you like provided you do it within the speed limit.

It's also a poke in the eye for the brigade that keep telling us that all roads should have lower limits, x% of accidents involve excessive speed etc etc.

Sadly, they can't prove a negative - this man was 52 mph over the speed limit and no accident occured.

What do we conclude from this? Perhaps we should all ride and driver faster?
..................................................................
"I know the sentencing guidelines and I know they're been followed. What I'm suggesting is that the guidelines are WRONG!!"

>Well, the law works for most road users, just imagine, three of four bikers speeding into that corner.. a few hotheads trying out there drifting skills in the wet, one mistake and you have carnage. That's why the boundaries are so narrow were the law is concerned. In other words.. put lives at risk... and we will put you in prison.

"NO-ONE WAS HURT. It is patently wrong to continue giving the anti-speed messages as it tells us that you can do whatever you like provided you do it within the speed limit."


>I don't understand that conclusion, what do you mean; " you can do whatever you like provided you do it within the speed limit."

"Sadly, they can't prove a negative - this man was 52 mph over the speed limit and no accident occured."

> They don't need to prove a negative, the court has proof of speeding and dangerous driving, it does not matter if no accident happened.

"What do we conclude from this? Perhaps we should all ride and driver faster?[/quote]"

> I conclude; don't get caught if you need to speed.

Martyn.
 

lyndsey

Tuner
Points
67
From
birmingham
Car
focus st-2
You've probably already aware of this via the news so I'll avoid repetition and post a link to Sky News for clarity

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Speeding-Motorcyclist-Robert-Bennett-Has-Been-Jailed-For-Riding-With-Son-On-Back-At-122mph/Article/200903115232326?lpos=UK_News_Third_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region__4&lid=ARTICLE_15232326_Speeding_Motorcyclist_Robert_Bennett_Has_Been_Jailed_For_Riding_With_Son_On_Back_At_122mph

What do you think?

I think that a jail sentence is outrageous for something that is only a summary traffic offence. Speeding is NOT a crime.

Nobody came to any harm. Since when has 'What if?' been against the law?

I sincerely hope that Robert Bennett appeals to the justice system and is given an unconditional discharge.
i think your right in a way that he shouldnt off got that, seens the judges around here let blokes who rape children walk, but he did have his son on the back so pretty bloody stupid
 

steve09

Track Warrior
Points
67
Car
Honda NSR 125R
I ride a bike and think that doing 122 in a 30 (think it was a 30) is WAAYYYY to fast even for a 'busa. ok they will do 187 (not 200 their limited) but you dont need to use that power where there is a chance of hurting yourself or someone else.

And with his son on the back you would have thought that he would have kept it slow??

Is it just me or is it normal to try and scare the hell out of your passenger?


Now yes, he is a monumental idiot, and I 'Did' have a small bit of sympathy but that was before this came out



"He said: "When I realised what I had done I felt very ashamed and had to get rid of the bike as soon as possible — I didn't want it to happen again.
"In hindsight, I don't know why manufacturers make bikes that fast, they should be speed-restricted

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."


now after 30 years of driving then coming out with something like that, he just said it to try and get off on a lighter sentance/fine.

I think he was put in prison purely because he had his kid on the back.

all in all, he's a bit of an idiot
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
The A361 North Devon Link Road is either 60 or 70 depending upon whether single or dual carriageway. There are some three lane sections which allow swift passing of HGVs etc.

I know it extremely well and there are sections of that road where 120mph is not at all outrageous given other criteria are met.
 
Last edited:

steve09

Track Warrior
Points
67
Car
Honda NSR 125R
ah K well thats where I am wrong, I wasnt sure on the speed limit and have never been down the road so I know nothing about how fast you can go down it.

but in all honesty, doing 122 with a young kid on the back is very stupid, what if the kid fell off? I dont think he would be getting up again.

yes Ok doing 122 on your own, its up to you and its likley that only you will be hurt, but with a young child, very stupid.
 

pgarner

TC ModFather
Moderator
Points
417
From
Lockerbie, SW Scotland
Car
Octy smoke machine
"it stupid that this country bangs up a man for 6 months for speeding and endangering a minor where as someone who assist it the brutal treatment, and eventually death, of there own child can get of scot free

>I'm not sure what you mean her..budd?


The example of the Porsche driver ; The circumstances are very different. There is no mention of Bennett, having any track racing skills. He was also riding a motorbike and, in the wet, approaching a corner..also at speed. Fast motorbikes are notoriously difficult to see, especially in rain conditions, this just adds to his stupidity. Judges pass sentence on a whole lot of mitigating circumstances. and use the guidlines that best suit the offender. I personally think the Porshe driver should have more self control and, respect for drivers who use the limits. Not everybody feels..the need for speed.

Martyn

if you were up in scotland you would understand, think they big ho ha about baby p, now think that the mother sat and got stoned offered vodka to a neighbours 18 month daughter then her boyfriend used her boy as a punch bag while she watched - kid died that night.
he got a short prison prison sentence for doing it and she got of scot free even thou she was there through the whole experience, and refused to help even when someone else at the party saw the child spewing up blood

Basically im saying the whole judicial system needs shaking up. judges need to have a something set that decides how the punishment is set and not leave it up to themselves. one judge could have let him off with this where as another may have gave a harder sentence.

That's why the boundaries are so narrow were the law is concerned. In other words.. put lives at risk... and we will put you in prison.
I conclude; don't get caught if you need to speed.
now lets say you are caught doing 80 on the motorway with a kid in the car, perfectly illegal, are you willing to go to jail for 6 months ?
at the end of the day its just an argument about the numbers if not.
please dont try saying you dont speed, everyone does maybe unintentionally, but ive yet to see anyone that holds the speed limit right up to the sign unless a) police cars infront or behind them or b) theres a speed camera or c) there a learner. exact same story when coming into a 30

Well, the law works for most road users
Just
Daily Mail Monday May 9 2005
by Ray Massey, Transport Editor
Speed cameras have helped to send the number of drivers with penalty points on their licence soaring, a major survey reveals today. Forty-two per cent now have points, compared to 29 per cent in 2003. And the figure rises to 48 per cent among those aged 41 to 50.
and youll see this was in 2005, before using the phone became illegal

not having a go mate but other than the excess speed hes not broke the law. and if we banged up everyone that was stupid we wouldnt have many folk on the streets, as for the overcrowding in the jails. tough they should live with it

Paul Garner
 

twopointfive

Wrench Pro
Points
153
From
Southport, England
Car
Legacy 4 cam 2.5
if you were up in scotland you would understand, think they big ho ha about baby p, now think that the mother sat and got stoned offered vodka to a neighbours 18 month daughter then her boyfriend used her boy as a punch bag while she watched - kid died that night.
he got a short prison prison sentence for doing it and she got of scot free even thou she was there through the whole experience, and refused to help even when someone else at the party saw the child spewing up blood

Basically im saying the whole judicial system needs shaking up. judges need to have a something set that decides how the punishment is set and not leave it up to themselves. one judge could have let him off with this where as another may have gave a harder sentence.




now lets say you are caught doing 80 on the motorway with a kid in the car, perfectly illegal, are you willing to go to jail for 6 months ?
at the end of the day its just an argument about the numbers if not.
please dont try saying you dont speed, everyone does maybe unintentionally, but ive yet to see anyone that holds the speed limit right up to the sign unless a) police cars infront or behind them or b) theres a speed camera or c) there a learner. exact same story when coming into a 30



Just

and youll see this was in 2005, before using the phone became illegal

not having a go mate but other than the excess speed hes not broke the law. and if we banged up everyone that was stupid we wouldnt have many folk on the streets, as for the overcrowding in the jails. tough they should live with it

Paul Garner

Paul,
I agree, the law is not perfect. In Bennett's case though, I say, he deserved the sentence.

Steve09 posted :

"He said: "When I realised what I had done I felt very ashamed and had to get rid of the bike as soon as possible — I didn't want it to happen again.
"In hindsight, I don't know why manufacturers make bikes that fast, they should be speed-restricted

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."

>With that level of hindsight, he's a danger on the road. He's saying that he does not know the true performance of his own bike.

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."

>I was dumbfounded when i read that, is this guy for real or has he escaped from la la land. Such comments would suggest to the Judge, that Bennett was an even more danger to the road,as he has revealed that he is not aware of his bikes capability's. Proper bikers know their machines.

"now lets say you are caught doing 80 on the motorway with a kid in the car, perfectly illegal, are you willing to go to jail for 6 months ?"

> No! never willing, But if i had been travelling into a corner,in wet conditions and, maybe my son had no seatbelt on, a corner just ahead, then yes, i would expect a heavy sentence and maybe prison.


"please dont try saying you dont speed, everyone does maybe unintentionally,"

>I can, and do so regually drive from A-B using the speed limits, it's a great lesson in self discipline. I have a stream of motoring offences that date back to the early seventy's, some of which nowaday's would put me in the nick. So, i'm no angle:bigsmile:.

I didn't think you was having a go, Paul. No problem budd, it's good to be honest and say how you think.

Martyn.
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
"He said: "When I realised what I had done I felt very ashamed and had to get rid of the bike as soon as possible — I didn't want it to happen again.
"In hindsight, I don't know why manufacturers make bikes that fast, they should be speed-restricted

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."

>With that level of hindsight, he's a danger on the road. He's saying that he does not know the true performance of his own bike.

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."

I am not disputing the fact that Bennett said all of this. Was it, perhaps, something that he'd been advised, by his brief, to say in a hope to mitigate against an ever stiffer sentence?

Or perhaps to assist others in avoiding the fate he's incurred himself, namely that of a jail sentence.

Id like to know for how long he'd been travelling at the 122mph recorded. Sports bikes can get between 70 and 120 and back to 70 again far more quickly than even a quick sports saloon can can get to 70mph in the first place. Transient speed should NOT be considered in this way by the courts.

The case notes to me seem to be splattered with irregularities, especially with the missives presented by the presiding judge whilst passing sentence.

The judge apparently set aside the fact that a minor (Bennett's own son) was riding pillion when he (the presiding judge) was passing sentence and instead focussed specifically upon the speed recorded and thus presented by the prosecution.

It's wrong. Robert Bennett should not be in custody. He's going to have hell on Earth in there to deal with. Proper criminals behave in the same manner, in or out of jail.

It'll break him - possibly destroy his relationship with his son for good. He'll also be released with a criminal record for a simple moving traffic offence. Job gone, life gone. And such lifelong psychological prescriptive and legally imposed torture is unforgivable as a sentence for what is nothing more than an infringement of traffic legislation.

AGAIN - NO ONE INCURRED ANY INJURY WHATSOEVER.

Surely we should all be grateful that no-one came to harm.
 

twopointfive

Wrench Pro
Points
153
From
Southport, England
Car
Legacy 4 cam 2.5
"He said: "When I realised what I had done I felt very ashamed and had to get rid of the bike as soon as possible — I didn't want it to happen again.
"In hindsight, I don't know why manufacturers make bikes that fast, they should be speed-restricted

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."

>With that level of hindsight, he's a danger on the road. He's saying that he does not know the true performance of his own bike.

"My advice to any bikers out there would be to just get rid of your bike and take the risk away."

I am not disputing the fact that Bennett said all of this. Was it, perhaps, something that he'd been advised, by his brief, to say in a hope to mitigate against an ever stiffer sentence?

Or perhaps to assist others in avoiding the fate he's incurred himself, namely that of a jail sentence.

Id like to know for how long he'd been travelling at the 122mph recorded. Sports bikes can get between 70 and 120 and back to 70 again far more quickly than even a quick sports saloon can can get to 70mph in the first place. Transient speed should NOT be considered in this way by the courts.

The case notes to me seem to be splattered with irregularities, especially with the missives presented by the presiding judge whilst passing sentence.

The judge apparently set aside the fact that a minor (Bennett's own son) was riding pillion when he (the presiding judge) was passing sentence and instead focussed specifically upon the speed recorded and thus presented by the prosecution.

It's wrong. Robert Bennett should not be in custody. He's going to have hell on Earth in there to deal with. Proper criminals behave in the same manner, in or out of jail.

It'll break him - possibly destroy his relationship with his son for good. He'll also be released with a criminal record for a simple moving traffic offence. Job gone, life gone. And such lifelong psychological prescriptive and legally imposed torture is unforgivable as a sentence for what is nothing more than an infringement of traffic legislation.

AGAIN - NO ONE INCURRED ANY INJURY WHATSOEVER.

Surely we should all be grateful that no-one came to harm.
" AGAIN - NO ONE INCURRED ANY INJURY WHATSOEVER."

> Capitols are not necessary!! and i'm well aware that no one suffered injury.

"I am not disputing the fact that Bennett said all of this. Was it, perhaps, something that he'd been advised, by his brief, to say in a hope to mitigate against an ever stiffer sentence?"

> Pretty poor advice, i don't think a lawyer would suggest a stupid excuse like that, very childlike, imo.

"He'll also be released with a criminal record for a simple moving traffic offence."

> Hardly a simple offence, doing 122 MPH in potentially lethal weather conditions. I don't think a 6 month sentence will have much effect on his future, though, i expect he won't be searching for a driving job. The judge has made an example from this case, it should deter many from doing similar speeds. The judge is playing by the rules, Bennett is paying the price, that's all there is to it. Life can be cruel.

Martyn.
 

steve09

Track Warrior
Points
67
Car
Honda NSR 125R
I do agree with that, that it is a bit much to imprison someone for driving a bit fast, but in all honesty, in a car you have a bit more control if it starts to go, whereas on a bike you have very little control if it starts to let go of the road.

all in all in my opinion, yes, he was an idiot for doing that speed with a child on the back, but doing that in a car is a 'little' bit stupid, if I have anyone in the car or on the back of the bike I wouldnt put them at risk and drive like a loon.

it might be a bit much to put him in prison for speeding, Ill just leave it at that.
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
I think the ban and fine are wholly appropriate. I also think that the law should require leathers or kevlar clothing to be worn in the same way that a bash hat is mandatory.
 

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Points
637
From
Buckinghamshire UK
Car
Passat 2.0 TDi
Paul,

I would see that driver as..irresponsible.

Martyn.
What about a driver in a very fragile yet technically roadworthy (ie. MoT and docs all intact) Metro doing 69.9 mph with a child in the back? Note that in both cases I'm meaning that the child has been properly restrained in an approved child seat.
 

prevtec

Pro Tuner
Points
0
From
ireland
Car
prelude 2.2vtec jap
the guy was driving at 122mph, ( often did myself)
but it was raining, its a bike (2 wheels = easier to slide)
his son was on the back, and its on a bend

a kick in the bollicks is what he should have got
whatever about himself, but his son on the back, no way
 
Top