Remember the 122mph biker

I agree its a bit harsh and that the prison space could be put to better use BUT...at the end of the day, the limit on that stretch of road is 60mph from memory we all know theres a risk of a penalty of some sort if and when we speed.
Regardless of if he had a child on the back or not, he still decided to break the law by speeding and now has to live with the penalty.
If he was doing 60mph in a 30mph limit in the wet, theres a chance the penalty would have been similar.
He admitted he had broken the law, He will now have to pay the price for it.

Its not like hes going to be hanged for it.

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

The kid is/was 14.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Which I would wager means that he was tall enough to get his feet on the pegs, He's wearing a helmet which is all the law requires....

I wouldnt have done it, but then its his child and his choice. If he deems that an acceptable risk, I'm not about to tell somebody else how to bring up their child.

well in which case I stand corrected and humbled.. Maybe I should put more effort in my Reading before becoming so opinionated in future.. Still think the guys silly though LOL...

It's quite funny actually because I wondered why no one seemed bothered... Because the kid wasn't a child!!

Il get my coat...

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by speedplay

I agree its a bit harsh and that the prison space could be put to better use BUT...at the end of the day, the limit on that stretch of road is 60mph from memory we all know theres a risk of a penalty of some sort if and when we speed.
Regardless of if he had a child on the back or not, he still decided to break the law by speeding and now has to live with the penalty.
If he was doing 60mph in a 30mph limit in the wet, theres a chance the penalty would have been similar.
He admitted he had broken the law, He will now have to pay the price for it.

Its not like hes going to be hanged for it.

probably raped though.

Originally Posted by Dave20046

probably raped though.

He may think twice about his actions in the future then...

"Will i be F***ed if this goes wrong? = probably"

[Dave20046]

Originally Posted by speedplay

He may think twice about his actions in the future then...

"Will i be F***ed if this goes wrong? = probably"

No one would expect a custodial sentence though would they so the risk seems worth it. This is the exact reason he got it I suppose...still BS though. If it was a car I'd understand it a bit more.

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by BluePete

It's not my decision. The CPS do that now.

Theirin lies the problem, read this story about a cyclist who was killed by a driver. The driver was never charged after the CPS decided not to prosecute.

So you can get away with killing someone but you can't get away with not killing someone

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2...s_cps_decision

I don't condone this riders actions but jail for not kiling someone?

[Dave20046]

The CPS are morons. As has already been referenced lord ahmed (I think) 'performed a sex act on himself before losing control of his car on the motorway killing someone' Basically he was cracking one off at 70+mph, stupid effing country. Or that terrorist scum that got the comp for being investigated. Where as my uncle smacked a mugger (that turned out to be 17) and just escaped prison. grrr gettin riled.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Which I would wager means that he was tall enough to get his feet on the pegs, He's wearing a helmet which is all the law requires....

I wouldnt have done it, but then its his child and his choice. If he deems that an acceptable risk, I'm not about to tell somebody else how to bring up their child.

+1. I bet the kid enjoyed it hugely. It's way over the top.

Originally Posted by speedplay

He may think twice about his actions in the future then...

Doubt it, he could get in a car, DUI with no insurance/tax/mot or license and kill a few people (forget the specific story) and get nothing more than a fine.

The problem was he was partially obeying the law.


Next time he will simply ride with false plates.

Based on this ruling, someone that actually kills another person using a motorbike/car with excessive speed should get epically long sentence ya?

Will they?

no.

[maviczap]

Originally Posted by hob

Doubt it, he could get in a car, DUI with no insurance/tax/mot or license and kill a few people (forget the specific story) and get nothing more than a fine.

The problem was he was partially obeying the law.


Next time he will simply ride with false plates.

Based on this ruling, someone that actually kills another person using a motorbike/car with excessive speed should get epically long sentence ya?

Will they?

no.

+1