Nebraska Judge Says 128 mph Not 'Reckless'

Squid - you are incredible, and never cease to amaze me.

But alas, you are right. And I'm going to change my mindset right now and start thinking outside the box. To hell with all those beliefs (laws) that have been thrust upon me throughout the years.

I've got to go now...I got a liquor store to rob. On my way home, I'm going to stop by the local middle school to get me a girl.

It's okay though. The liquor store clerk accepted the risk of getting shot....and the little girl accepted the risk of being molested which made it okay that I "thought outside the box". Would this still be okay if one or both of them were members of your immediate family?

 

<_<

Wow, talk about going over-board on semantics... Obviously, time and place for "everything" does not include heinous acts by any means.

Can't make everyone happy I guess.. :lol:

 

This thread seems to be an argument now about whether speeding (5, 25, 50 mph over the limit?) should be inherently defined as reckless.
I think for the purposes of the law it is better not to always tie these two things together. Someone can be driving recklessly (ex. swerving all over the road) and still be going the speed limit. Someone could be exceeding the speed limit and not necessarily driving recklessly. I think Schmika pointed out something about Ohio law that says that at some extreme level beyond the speed limit then it is an automatic that that person will be considered driving recklessly. That seems reasonable...now it is just a matter of agreeing on where to set that level.
In this situation with the Nebraska speeder, it seems many responding to this thread feel that he should have been hit with the reckless driving charge. Well, I don't think many would say that if he was going 2 mph over the limit then it should be considered reckless driving cause then just about all of us would be guilty of reckless driving on a daily basis. What it comes down to is a matter of where you set that automatic crossover level when X mph over the limit=reckless driving. Now we get into legislation, voting, some consensus or at least majority decision.

 

Oh yeah, and I forgot to say, "blipity blahbiddy do whop shoo waaaaa!"
Hehe, that was just to reach 100 posts.

 

And that, my friend, is why we have such laws in place. Choosing which ones to obey and which to break is the reason the citation and penal system are in place - to prevent similar occurance or to refrain from them ever happening again.....to protect the public and so that law abiding citizens can exercise their right to live long, healthy lives.

Every action has a consequence.

 

Now that was reckless posting.

 

yeah...but thankfully, no one got hurt this time.

 

In the ideal world, yes. However, the bad guy really does tend to win. I've got a 70%-80% chance of beating any ticket/fine/penalty I get, should I get caught. This is based on my personal performance in various Magristrate offices, and Judicial Appeals over the last 6 years. Some wins were offenses I'm sure you'd consider far serious than I, for when it comes down to it, it's nothing but a pissing match of who can out "detail" who. B) You want to know how perverse it is? I've seen cops leave the courtroom with their heads down in utter disgust as to how some punk kid they pulled over, put them through the wringer, and won.

I'm not trying to brag, I'm just stating a fact. Your perception of this matter is naive at best.

 

I agree whole heartedly with Evan's Posts to this thread as with others who agree that 128 mph on the public roadways is inherently reckless. (That 40 mph can also be reckless has no bearing on this point.)

What puzzles me, Mystery Squid, is your presence in this thread as the Prius is such a non-performance car.

 

<_<

 

As the article stated, the judge would have ruled guilty in those conditions. Anyway this was actually an issue of semantics -- speeding is already illegal and obviously the guy was speeding and would have paid a large fine for going... 50? mph over the speed limit. But the cops didn't give him a speeding ticket! They charged him for reckless driving instead, and the judge ruled he wasn't necessarily being reckless.

 

It's a moot point in Virginia where by definition if you're going more than 20 over the limit it's reckless driving. Never mind the fact that it might be a limited access divided highway with the limit set to 30 and you're going 50. Oh the horror of driving 50 -- it's purely a revenue generating gimmick.

Another reality is that in many places it's much more dangerous to drive the speed limit and to stay with the traffic.

 

Nope. Some people here think the law is the law, that sign says go 65, you go 65, for it's set that way for a reason, with tons of supportable research behind it. :lol:

 

look, all I'm trying to get through here is that there's a big difference between what we're led to believe, and just how damn dangerous being out on the road is. Likewise with the belief the justice system in situations as such will likely prevail.

It's kind of like COPS, by watching it, you get the impression the law is far more effective than it really is. My concern would be that pool of people who DON'T get caught...

h34r:

 

My perception is quite clear on this issue.

It is quite clear that you have a history with the court system and have managed to con your way out of some situations in which you broke the law instead of "fessing-up" to your actions.

The perception is clear that you have little to no respect for authority, whether it be law enforcement, the courts, seniors, peers, etc. It's all about yourself and your perception that you are somehow above the law.

The perception is clear that you are probably about 21-22 years old and have lived a spoiled life, been given everything you wanted, and were never disciplined.

The perception is clear that respect for other human beings was never morally established in your life. Your actions, and how they effect those around you, either directly or indirectly are not considered in your decision making process.

As a Navy Chief of 20 years, I've seen kids like you come and go - mostly go. They felt they were above the law which endangered other people and were counterproductive. Though this society in which we live is definately not a military organization by far, they are both parallels on the same course.

If you still believe that I am niave on this issue - you have a lifetime of catch-up to do, and many courses in the school of hard knocks yet to take.

Back to the subject - though speed and reckless driving are not always related and there are grey areas on how they could be tied together, I feel that the speed WAS reckless. Just because a lawyer found a loophole doesn't make it right. The Judge has then set a precedence - which could have far reaching effects.

 

"Con"? Absolutley not. Not my fault if the cop doesn't take enough notes, or gets blindsided with some question/situation he's not prepared for, which ultimately results in the loss.

The "fessin-up" concept is hilarious. Do you think for one moment you would be extended the same courtesy if the situation were reversed? I've seen cops flat out lie, or attempt to twist situations to their advantage, if for no reason, simply so they can win. Obvsiously, not all, but I'd peg it at 40% if I had to make a rough estimate. I have no problems reciprocating.

You're right on with the respecting authority case. That's why I could never tolerate the military. If you told me to drop and do 20, I won't BS you, I'd give you the finger. This whole "let's be humble" philosophy makes me sick.

 

Research smesearch, it's set that way as a deterrent knowing that most people will be going 10-15 miles over and they are afraid that if they set it higher people will go that much faster (plus they get more revenue from speeding tickets).

"Minimum Speed Limit: No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic"

You can actually get a ticket for going too slow, especially in the left lane.