Re: Jailed for speeding?? C'mon...

the_dawggie <the_dawggie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>David Z wrote:

>> The sentence is ridiculous.  It's akin to giving someone a longer 
>> sentence for murdering someone with a machine gun as opposed to say, a 
>> handgun (based on the theory that the machine gun has the "potential"
to 
>> do much more damage).  Murder is murder, plain and simple.  Just
because 
>> he had the potential to do more damage at 255 km/h than say, 155 km/h, 
>> the offense is still exactly the same.

>not so recent research shows us that:

>KE == 1/2 * M * V ** 2

>I'd dare suggest that 255 != 155, Radically
>different. At both speeds everything would be
>cactus, however that is not the point.

Kinetic energy is quite irrelevant. Attempting to use physics in an
argument about road safety is irrelevant.

Road safety is first and foremost about attitude.

An idiot at 30 km/h is still as dangerous as at 250 km/h.

If you want to apply physics to road safety, then you can start with
the traffic environment; in which councils plant trees in the middle
of the road and governments place fla****ng propaganda signs on the
hard shoulder of freeways.
-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | Great minds discuss ideas;
 X   against HTML mail     | Average minds discuss events;
/ \  and postings          | Small minds discuss people. -- Eleanor
Roosevelt