Kind of agree with you.
He caused no harm what so ever... In some countries that speed is perfect legal. Would he be classed as stupid and or wreckless over there? Highly doubt it!
He would have been found guilt of driving without due care and attention... one handed driving + high speed is stupid in any country, even where there aren't arbitrary limits...
It just would have been a short ban and no jail time.
Why do you keep bringing rape into it?
The "he didn't hurt anyone" view is utterly absurd. Should police and courts take that approach with drink-driving too?
Because the sentence he has been given is 5 times worse than what your average rapist gets... so it's a viable metric to compare against, along with being locked up with rapists and murderers without actually hurting anyone.
Yes - I would apply it to drink driving also... not everyone is suddenly completely and utterly incompetent and dangerous behind the wheel when they've gone over the generalised drink limit.
I'm not condoning it, in fact I've stated I think he's a moron.
Just that the sentence is wholly and completely wrong.
I could maybe... maybe think 28 days behind bars would be an acceptable slap on the wrist for something like this. Even that would have a dramatic impact on the rest of his life.
2.5 years will only encourage his continued self-employment as a drug-dealer... let alone anything else
That is exactly the approach they do take though. If you're caught drink driving via a normal traffic stop, you'll lose your licence for a few years. If you're caught drink driving as a result of having an accident and hurting someone, you'll likely be going to prison.
Which makes more sense, unlike what has happened here... that's one of the reasons I find it quite so baffling.
I can't condone 192mph on the road but to me to go to jail for this, seems ludicrous, when we often see suspended sentences issued for offences resulting in injury, or for crimes against the vulnerable, where there is an actual person that can be defined as a victim!
I could support longer driving bans and heavier fines for people convicted of the most serious speeding offences, but jailing somebody for this sort of things when nobody was injured and/or no property was damaged seems somewhat harsh to me given how the judicial system treats those convicted of other offences.
Exactly... even if I support higher speed limits, I can't condone what he did due to the expectation of other road users wouldn't be present to see anyone doing much more than 100mph on the road, let alone near enough 200mph... it's the disparity of harm caused vs punishment that is absurd.
You're smoking crack if you honestly believe he "did no wrong, because no one was hurt".
The very same clown could have hit an oncoming car and killed himself and multiple others. Jail is no good to a corpse. The punishment is heavy to discourage a repeat offence.
*could have* *should have* blah...
********...
I could have killed someone today... I didn't... should I get locked up for that?
**** off...
