Posted on 12/07/2005 8:25:34 PM PST by ncountylee
NEBRASKA CITY, Neb. (AP) -- Speeding is not necessarily reckless, even at 128 mph, a judge ruled in the case of a motorcyclist who tried to flee from state troopers.
With some reluctance, County Judge John Steinheider ruled last week that Jacob H. Carman, 20, was not guilty of reckless driving on Sept. 5, when he was spotted by a trooper who then chased him at the top speed of his cruiser's odometer - 128 mph.
"As much as it pains me to do it, speed and speed alone is not sufficient to establish reckless driving," the judge told Carman on Friday. "If you had had a passenger, there would be no question of conviction. If there had been other cars on the roadway, if you would've went into the wrong lane or anything, I would have convicted you."
Otoe County prosecutor David Partsch acknowledged that Carman could have been charged with speeding but, "We felt that the manner in which he was operating the motorcycle was reckless."
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Ever been on a race track?
Ever been on a closed course?
Ever been on a deserted stretch of straight-away on any interstate in Nevada, Montana, or a Dakota?
Stupid is not illegal - yet.
On the autobahn.
I might add that a vehicle going that fast going around a curve might come across something that could not be avoided. But I am going beyond that, and positing the case that no one else could have been possibily endangered, and assuming that, still rejecting your policy point of view.
"Judge, the grammar police are here to arrest you!"
Hey, it's in Nebraska, after all! That is where they think the "N" on Memorial Stadium in Lincoln stands for (K)nowledge. Same stadium that has artificial turf to keep the cheerleaders from grazing. :)
It is generally understood on the Autobahn that 128 MPH is "normal." If I am driving in the US, I think it is fairly safe to say that I have every reason to think that 128 MPH is not normal. It is dangerous. At a speed like that, he could not possibly react safely. It's true that if a kid stepped out in front of him while he was doing 65 or 75 or whatever the highway (I am assuming, though the article did not say, that this guy was on a highway) speed limit is in Nebraska it would be likely that he would hit the kid. Doing 128 makes it almost twice as likely and gives him almost double the stopping distance. 128 MPH is not safe, and it is reckless.
There is a significant difference between the Autobahn and your average US highway: on the Autobahn, other drivers know that most drivers will be doing high rates of speed because there is no speed limit. Here, we assume here that other drivers will be doing within thirty MPH of the posted speed limit; I have done some interstate driving and the highest speed limit that I have seen is 70, though I think I have heard of a couple of states whose highway limit is 75.
One does not fire a gun in a residential neighborhood for the heck of it (though I am of course all for defending one's home and family by any means necessary). By that same token, one does not drive at 128 MPH unless-well, quite frankly, I cannot think of an event that would make driving at 128 MPH is acceptable. A car is as deadly a weapon as a gun, and should be treated like a gun should be treated: with proper training and proper respect for the damage it could do.
Exactly
Read the State statue on what constitutes reckless driving and then ask yourself if the judge followed the law, or his emotions?
This is why we conservatives want Judges who follow the law and not their emotions or public hysteria.
Nebraska law is that you can't be reckless if you are endangering only oneself? Odd if true. That is not the typical statute.
Not normal, true. But not being normal is not the same as dangerous. They can get him for speeding, not being reckless, especially if he was alone on the road.
At that speed he can certainly react safely, Germans and airline pilots do it all the time.
definitely not typical, most States consider reckless driving as somebody who doesn't care for life or limb
LOL! No!
One must take each issue, one at a time. There is no grand unified theory. I tend to dislike grand unified theories. The planet is complex. JMO.
Well I am not an expert in the art of motorcycle maintenance, as it were. But one going 125 miles per hour on a bike, seems to me to be one who is angling for a Darwin award.
Well that is a debate stopper. Liberty doesn't mean license in a society tied together with rights and responsibilities, and subsidies, and whatever. If it did, society would collapse. It hasn't been that way since the species first evolved, and won't ever be that way, until the species departs.
Given that the wheels of a motorcycle are gyroscopes and the tires and rims have significant mass and are spinning very fast, it could be argued that the vehicle is more stable at a higher rate of speed. Assuming that the risk factors of the moving mechanical system are low - good tires, tight hardware, little old driver so lively and quick - I bet an lawyer and expert witness could make a case that we are all actually safer at high speed. After all, no terrorist could plan any action against a society constantly in motion.
The libertarians are after me. :) I am just doing this for the memories. It makes me feel young again.
Your argument reminds me of those who claim the Constitution is a "living document". This judge appears to have followed the law adopted by the elected officials of his state and is not injecting his own personal opinion. I vote that he be added to the list of possible Supreme Court candidates, We need m ore judges like this one
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.