“But there’s a fairly decent amount of traffic. He was not weaving. He wasn’t doing anything like that. He was in a straight line in the left lane.”
I don’t care at all about a motorcycle riding at those speeds under those conditions.
ACAB because of cop favoritism, and fuck this scumbag in particular, though.
Somehow read this that he avoided arrest because of the “Super Speeder” law. Like if you speed fast enough, it’s so impressive, they let you out of the ticket. Didn’t realize this was NOTtheonion. Made for an interesting interpretation on my first read.
So once upon a time, a long long time ago (well past all applicable statutes of limitation) I noticed a pattern when people would get pulled over for speeding. If they were speeding a little, it was a speed trap and the cop was there to write tickets, it would take a whole lot of charm and luck to get let off in that situation.
If they were speeding a lot, like a whole lot, they’d get pulled over by officers who were more interested in where they were going in such a hurry rather than handing out tickets. Having established that the driver isn’t fleeing the scene of a crime or something like that, they’d generally be let off with a warning - often just a verbal warning, but even sometimes a written warning on the official forms.
Is that really why they ask where you’re going? Like coincidentally they think they are also going to solve some massive crime? Like “I’m in a rush to get to my drug deal! Oops.”
Isn’t this the same piece of shit that shoved his service weapon down someone’s throat during sex, used Flock to stalk his ex, casually used racial slurs in texts, and threw the Nazi salute in photos? Don’t worry, I already know it is, but it’s probably just your average Tuesday for most county deputies in Florida.
Oh, you mean the guy with the “unrelated administrative investigation”
I believe it is.
Isn’t this the same piece of shit that shoved his service weapon down someone’s throat during sex, used Flock to stalk his ex, casually used racial slurs in texts, and threw the Nazi salute in photos
You’re gonna have to be more specific /s
Besides speeding, records indicate Fultz did not have an endorsement on his driver license that is required to operate a motorcycle.
What’s the phrase? “Never commit two crimes at the same time”. I guess we need to add “…unless you’re a cop, and then its all cool, bro”.
I got a motorcycle permit 18 years ago, but never did the (1) driving test where you have a friend bring a car and a trooper rides with them and follows you around or (2) a motorcycle safety course. At some point they removed option 1.
It showed as an AM license (CDL also) with a restriction of licensed MC operator over 21 in sight. For the one year I actually rode a motorcycle, I hoped I could talk my way out of it. “Ah shoot where did Uncle Joe go? He didn’t see you stop me?”
My last license renewal, the worker and I were friendly, and she was impressed how fast I did the hazmat test without missing any. She asked about the permit and I told her I’ve just never gotten around to it, but for some reason have paid $6 extra per renewal to keep it on there.
Without saying anything, she must have removed the restriction. So I now have a motorcycle license.
It’s not a crime if you’re above the law /s
Then you commit multiple crimes all day long.
The Florida Highway Patrol caught Brevard County Deputy of the Year Michael Fultz riding his motorcycle 111 mph while off duty in February but did not arrest him under Florida’s ‘Super Speeder’ law, News 6 has learned.
Instead, the FHP trooper issued Fultz a civil traffic citation for exceeding the posted speed limit by 9 mph, records show.
“I’m not going to take you to jail, Fultz,” Trooper Joshua Provencher told the deputy, according to a video recording of the traffic stop obtained by News 6. “Obviously you and I are buddies. I’m not trying to show favoritism, either.”
Well, to be fair, as long as he said he’s not showing favoritism, that means he’s not showing favoritism. I see nothing wrong here and I’m glad these stand up guys don’t get in trouble.
Oh well if there’s no favoritism. So you or I could do that and he obviously would do the same thing. Or someone who was a different color or religion. No favoritism.
FHP also did not address how it might respond to public concerns that the deputy may have received special treatment.
mhm
That’s how they’re going to respond. By not addressing it.
Isnt this the guy that also stalked his ex with Flock, put his service gun in her mouth, etc etc?
He looks like a husky version of Dangle from Reno 911.
New boot goofin’
178.6 kph
So slightly above regular Autobahn cruising speed, definitely not super speed.
You are very smart, and need everyone to know it
It depends on the road.
3-lane Autobahn? No prob.
Single-lane stroad? You should lose your license.
P.S. Most of the Autobahn has a speed limit
Oh scheiße, ich muss gleich gähnen.
(And to everyone who doesn’t know: The Autobahn is built for high speed cruising and people keep mostly to the right - so there’s no high speed “weaving” through traffic. Mostly. Idiots also exist over here, but sometimes traffic is low enough to go fast in a very relaxed way. I’ve driven in the US and there 180kph would be wild)
So, you have never driven on the Autobahn, you say?
Not die deutsche Autobahn.
Hot take: every motorcyclist who is driving fast in a responsible way should be shown this leniency, not just pigs, as motorcycles are not cars and the risk is born by the rider instead of the public.
The biker can only kill himself once.
500 pounds of bike and rider impacting another vehicle at >100mph can easily kill everyone in that other vehicle.
“The Public” bears much greater risk than the motorcyclist.
500 pounds of bike and rider impacting another vehicle at >100mph can easily kill everyone in that other vehicle.
Maybe if the other vehicle is a tandem bicycle. Nobody is dying in a modern car or SUV due to being rear-ended by a motorcycle with a ~45mph speed differential.
You’re not going to be personally harmed under those conditions on a freeway. A side impact due to cross- or turning-traffic on a two-way road? Maybe. Even then, a modern car is going to fare phenomenally well and much of the impact energy is turned into catapulting the rider into the air.
Maybe if the other vehicle is a tandem bicycle.
Those are actually ridden by members of the public, you know.
Nobody is dying in a modern car or SUV due to being rear-ended by a motorcycle with a ~45mph speed differential.
Even if you were correct (you’re not), you’re ignoring that the modern car or SUV is still going to be a total loss. That property damage is another risk born by the public.
And you’re completely disregarding the head-on collision when that biker comes across the median and hits the car with a ~180mph speed differential. Or the T-bone when the car doesn’t see the >100mph biker and turns across his path.
I’ve damaged plenty of vehicles, including being rear ended by a semi at a similar speed differential. If the semi didn’t total my kia soul, a motor cycle doing it isn’t going to total an SUV. A trip to the body shop would definitely be required, though. Modern vehicles can take a staggering amount of impact force and survive.
I agree with everything else.
Those are actually ridden by members of the public, you know.
Are there a lot of tandem bicycles out on the freeway, where this event occurred?
Even if you were correct (you’re not), you’re ignoring that the modern car or SUV is still going to be a total loss.
I am entirely correct and, again, where was the collision in the event being discussed?
You want to make absurd hypothetical claims (that car drivers are terribly endangered by a motorcycle speeding in a single lane) and when that’s shown to be false you want to talk about a “total loss”. This is also pretty baseless. A motorcycle rear-ending a hypothetical car at a 45mph speed differential is unlikely to be a total loss of the car.
And you’re completely disregarding the head-on collision when that biker comes across the median and hits the car with a ~180mph speed differential.
Oh, neat, more absurd hypotheticals that are phenomenally unlikely. Meanwhile, motorcyclists are killed all the time by oncoming drivers turning left across their path or simply veering into the motorcyclist’s lane because dicking around on their phone is more important than controlling a multi-ton box.
Or the T-bone when the car doesn’t see the >100mph biker and turns across his path.
Do you make a lot of turns on freeways?
Meanwhile, motorcyclists are killed all the time by oncoming drivers turning left across their path
Yeah, I’ve been involved in one of those. Driver was traveling at more than twice the speed limit. Had he been traveling only 20 over, he would have been where the driver would have reasonably been able to see him. But he was traveling more than twice the limit. The driver couldn’t foresee that he would cross his path. Couldn’t even see him before it was too late to stop his turn, or for the motorcyclist to evade.
Car was totaled. Motorcyclist went to jail.
It actually sounds better than I expected, a jail is still not a cemetery
the risk is born by the rider instead of the public.
This is some bullshit. A motorcycle may be smaller than a car comparatively but one being hurled at you at highway speeds is still lethal. Both pedestrians and people in cars die to speeding motorcycles every day.
people in cars die to speeding motorcycles every day.
No, they fucking don’t. It’s phenomenally rare. It’s utterly unheard of in one-way, divided traffic.
which is why the personal injury law firm i consult with from time to time has absolutely no business. none.
Compared to a fucking truck or SUV at highway speeds? No shot.
How is the comparison even relevant?
Last time I checked SUVs are required to adhere to speed limits too.I wasn’t arguing about cars vs motorcycles, I was arguing that
the risk is born by the rider instead of the public.
is complete horseshit.
It’s relevant because the truck or SUV are far far more dangerous to the public when doing the same behavior as the bike, yet are treated the same.
So, normal cars should be also allowed to speed because those are safer to everyone than SUVs
The risk is bourne by the public in three ways:
- The public pays for the cost of their injuries, either directly through a state healthcare system or in the form of increased premiums. An insurance company has no way to differentiate reckless motorcyclists who are lucky from responsible motorcyclists.
- A crash on a road will close one or more lanes while emergency services attend the site of the crash, causing congestion. While the overall inconvenience per motorist is small, it happens to many hundreds to thousands of motorists and thus collectively wastes hundreds of hours of people’s time.
- Normalising reckless behaviour increases its social acceptability, and I think that as soon as it becomes widely known that you won’t go to jail for operating a motorcycle at double the speed limit, the first people to try this will be teenagers
The public pays for the cost of their injuries, either directly through a state healthcare system or in the form of increased premiums. An insurance company has no way to differentiate reckless motorcyclists who are lucky from responsible motorcyclists.
The cost of the injuries is far less than the same behavior in a car.
A crash on a road will close one or more lanes while emergency services attend the site of the crash, causing congestion
I have only seen this happen once, when a guy did suicide by bike by driving directly into the back of a dump truck doing like 100 on a bridge at 4 AM about a year ago. The bike was ripped in half and the body was so messed up nobody wanted to touch it.
Every other time, someone just walks/drags the bike and rider to the side of the road and helps them get recollected.
Normalising reckless behaviour increases its social acceptability, and I think that as soon as it becomes widely known that you won’t go to jail for operating a motorcycle at double the speed limit, the first people to try this will be teenagers
So by treating the far more dangerous car behavior the same way, are we encouraging people to behave dangerously in cars?
But my point isn’t that reckless behavior should be legalized, it’s that cases where it’s much more dangerous to society should be punished accordingly.
Driving a motorcycle at double the speed limit is far more dangerous than driving a car at normal speeds. That’s why driving a car at those speeds will also get you a driving ban.
I ride my motorcycle everyday and ride strictly to the letter of traffic law. The safest way to ride is to be predictable. With that said, I am not wholly in disagreement with you, in that obviously risk levels for others are less than a rider in any circumstance on the road, even ones where it is the motorcyclist travelling with excess speed. That does not mean that consequences for an accident due to the unpredictablity of someone speeding are not shared with society. The trauma of witnessing a lethal accident and traffic delays due to cleanup have different severities but each can have lasting impacts on people. Riding and travelling on roadways in general already are filled with hazards and risks. Anecdotally, it seems as technology in cars meant to keep people safer makes gains in the industry, what it actually accomplishes is that it allows people to be less involved in driving, or even just complacent to not pay as much attention. This is not the rider’s fault, but adding the element of excess speed is a recipe for disaster. Ride and drive predictably. I rarely see accidents that are ambiguous. An all too common thread between accidents is excess speed.
The trauma of witnessing a lethal accident and traffic delays due to cleanup have different severities but each can have lasting impacts on people.
You may not have noticed, but there was no collision in the article being discussed. He was speeding in traffic that was so light that he didn’t even need to change lanes. There was no collision. He had something like a 45mph speed differential versus other traffic.
How about you stop pontificating on hypotheticals and look at the actual situation being discussed?
Also, if you’re so concerned about the trauma of seeing motorcyclists injured, then you should be focusing on driver training and PSAs about scanning the road for more vulnerable road users. Motorcyclists are injured or killed by inattentive or reckless drivers at a rate vastly higher than the reverse.
You seem so hostile to a comment I made about riding predictably and safely. You also seem to misunderstand the thread of comments. I was replying to a person who had a hot take about leniency of the law toward motorcyclists who speed, not discussing the specific situation in the article. I am aware that inattentive and reckless drivers are a much larger problem, and provide a little commentary on that as well. I didn’t intend to inflame anyone, we’re having a discussion, and as a daily rider, I encourage everyone I ride with to be as safe as possible. I also tell every car driver I’m with to pay more attention and to be more aware.
What a stupid take. Have you tried to change lanes with someone zipping by 40 mph faster than you? Now lets let everybody on a motorcycle do that. Sounds so fun!
An all too common thread between accidents is excess speed.
The influence of road conditions and traffic on what is and isn’t a safe speed is way greater on a bike than a car, so even in optimal conditions, where the speed limit was determined for motorcycles, it would have to be understood as a guide of “This is what an average bike could ride with minimal traffic and sunny road conditions, if there’s traffic or poor conditions, you should go slower”.
consequences for an accident due to the unpredictablity of someone speeding are not shared with society.
True, there aren’t zero consequences born by society, but it is far, far less than if you were speeding in a 2 ton steel box designed to protect you at the expense of anyone else, and that should be reflected in the consequences. Same reason I think it’s insane that a bicycle DUI in Japan can get you the same consequences as a car DUI, though in practice, cops understand the law is insane and only apply it to foreigners.
