"Giving evidence to the committee, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said it saw no need for motorbikes that can comfortably exceed the 70 mph limit twice over."
Why then, is the favoured bike of the ROSPA motorcycling groups, the Honda Pan European, which can do 140mph+?
"The charity suggested that engine size be limited to 125cc"
Scary stuff, but the 125cc thing is completely laughable. A classic example of some ****-wit who knows nothing of the subject making suggestions.
It wouldn't be so bad, if they could explain how a 125cc is safer on the motorway than a 500cc bike, or for that matter, a litre bike? Because they are
not safer, end of.
I was at a (car) IAM meeting a while back and the subject of powerful bikes was brought up. There was only me and an ex-police head of traffic (who didn't actually ride) who knew anything at all about bikes. The general consensus was that "186mph bikes can only ever be used properly illegally". I pointed out that there wasn't a car in the car park that couldn't reach 100 and a fair number that would reach 140+, yet how many of them would welcome limiters in their cars? I also explained about people going abroad to places where speed limits are more relaxed (or non-existant) and also track days to use them to their full power. They genuinely seemed not to of considered these possibilities. I imagine the people proposing this are of a similar mindset.
Anyway sod 'em, if bikes are made illegal, I'd just be an illegal biker and as such, wouldn't have anything to loose, so would ride considerably faster/more illegally on the road. :P