See if this will work
http://www.bikerspost.com/forum/topics/biker-caught-doi.....n-the-ba Nope, that doesn't work, Gloom, are you sure that's the URL?
Ha ha you're right Gloom, THAT does work
~~~~~~~
EDITED:
FGS!! once I had posted my post the URL didn't work again.
I give in, here...
...A reckless biker who was caught riding in the dark at 110mph with his 11-year-old on the back has been let off with just a 56-day ban.
Greater Manchester Police recorded Kenneth Jones, 47, riding his Yamaha XJR 1300 along a dual carriageway at almost twice the speed limit.
And they were stunned when they pulled him over and discovered his young daughter riding on the back.
I can beat that , my mate Nige (never was a biker) was caught at 146mph on the M6 with his 12 year old son on the back . 56 day ban . He wasn't a 'born again' . He just fancied having a bike . He did the direct access , bought a gixer( against my advice) still couldn't go round corners at even a moderate speed. So to enjoy the buzz , he rode flat out on motorways . Test pass to ban 11weeks. Pleased to say , he's never been on a bike since ... Dusty
i used to take my son on the back age 7...couldnt comment on whether i would have been doing 110mph in the dark on a dual carriageway etc but....is it the kids age thats the issue or just the whole scenario (sorry didnt read the whole article - should i have?) - coz i see some frightening driving from people with cars full of kids and no one seems to bat an eyelid.
No I think it's a perception issue . 110 mph with a car full of kids would also have been reported as reckless . It's just that people think that the kids are safe in a car. Coz of the seat belts and they are enclosed in a steel shell . If you can call 22 gauge a steel shell. You can't fall off a car .
agree to a point Dusty but as i said i took my lad on the bike from age 7....of course i considered the safety aspect of it as im sure this fella did. my son took her 4 yr old everywhere on her bike.
only the parent can make that decision as to what is safe for the child and what the child is capable of...you wouldnt for instance but a fidgetty kid on the back or one with poor co-ordination etc
its easy for some journo at a paper to condemn without knowing the ins and outs of the decision to do what he did and whether he considered it reckless or whether it was the norm. The problem with newpapers etc is you only hear THEIR version and theres frequently more than 2 sides to everything.
While there is no law on the age of a pilly it does state that they must be able to place both feet on the pegs. That aside no child can make an informed decision on the risks of travelling at such high speed and all the excuses in the world about how safe a rider or driver they are does not take account of some poor sod pulling out because they did not realise that the oncoming bike/car was doing over 150 feet a second. I say poor sod because the chances of survival at those speeds is slim and they have to live with the fact that their action contributed to the death of a child. So sorry I'm with our cousins over the pond. Do something crazy on the road and it's a treated the same as over here, do it with a child onboard and you are looking at 3 years as a minimum for a federal offence. Some will say it's about freedom of choice but the victim also has a say.
There is no need to make an eye test compulsory. The highway code is quite clear on being able to read a number plate. It's down to enforcement but with the current cut backs don't hold your breath.
Just in passing, for any that think it is all down to how good they are rather than anything else go lookup the late great Mike Hailwood. You're not as good at your best as he was at his worst.
i certainly wouldnt assume i was the best rider in the world - but what has Mike Hailwood to do with it......he was a racer - totally different scenario.... while we are on racing did you know a "child" can race at age 12....is THAT an informed decision as to the dangers???
Sorry I'm an old fart and think 1981 is yesterday for everyone I forget it's 31 years ago
On Saturday, 21 March 1981, Mike Hailwood set off in his Rover SD1 with his children Michelle and David to collect some fish and chips. As they returned along the A435 Alcester Road through Portway Warwickshire near their home in Tanworth-in-Arden,
a truck made an illegal turn through the barriers into the central
reservation, and their car hit it. Michelle, aged nine, was killed
instantly; Mike and David were taken to hospital, where Mike died two
days later due to severe internal injuries, he was 40 years old. David
survived. The truck driver was fined £100.
My brother once told me that anyone who takes kids on the back of their bike should be charged with attempted manslaughter!! -This from a guy who once towed my broken down car at 90mph on 10' of rope -
The frightening thing is, he's quite "normal" and reflects the views of quite a large cross section of society. (basically either stupid or ill-informed) I would say that anyone who drives recklessly (car or bike) should be prosecuted but speed is, as ever, not really the issue. 110mph on an empty road sounds entirely safe to me, pillion or not. I take friends and their kids out for rides and ride with their safety in mind. It's not difficult really to work out what's safe and what isn't.
thanks for the explanation Gloom....i knew Mike Hailwood was killed in a car crash but didnt know any of that......but what? I still dont really understand the point youre trying to make Adults AND children are killed in accidents every day....and i use the term accident loosely coz theres usually someone at fault but Jerry is right - speed isnt the issue.....as it depends on circumstance.
As is typical of THIS particular newspaper report....it written from "an angle" so its supposed to make you sympathise with the authors views....which may not the reality of the situation.
The point I was trying to make is that anyone can be caught out and because of that if they have a child on the back they should not increase the risks by excess speed.
I have been told by mates so meny times. Im a good rider at that speed you have passed it before it's a risk to you. I have seen a few off on there last jorney and Im sure I will see some more go that way.
You are only as good as the worst around you and if you pass him/her dont mean your safe just meands thay can now run into the back of you.
30mph is the speed you'l attain if you jump off a four story building . Excessive speed (the sort that will kill you ) is anything over eight miles per hour. We all judge other people based on our own opinion. We all decide what's reckless based on our own opinion We all decide what's right or wrong based on our own opinion. An argument is a difference of OPINION not a debate about facts. FREEDOM OF CHOICE suffers because some people think their opinions , should be considered 'fact' and should be held by the rest of us . (A bigot) I am , and always will be , pro choice. Oh well , that's my morning dump completed, ta ta Dusty
![There's always some fool - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8mobileLQ.jpg)
![There's always some fool - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8desktopLQ.jpg)
