Jackass in a 997 GT3

[Frodo]

I kinda go along with the last posted sentiments, when conditions clearly allow. When I drive at what would be considered excessive speed (say 30+ over the posted speed limit), I am constantly thinking of two things:

(1) If something surprises me at speed, is there room to move out of the way? An extra lane to move into (with no other vehicles to contend with)? The ability to safely "move out of the way" dwindles quickly the faster I'm traveling. Obvious to all, no doubt, but it's still something I'm actively thinking about. The wild card here, of course, is animals, a deer, or a dog. Those can be really tough to handle at speed because they are also moving and, more importantly, they're notoriously unpredictable.

(2) If anything bad happens here, it will be assessed to be TOTALLY my fault, regardless of whether it actually was. Example: If there's a side road that intersects with the one I'm on, someone stops, then pulls out in front of me, and I smack into them, odds are extremely good I'm going to be the one "liable" in all senses of the term. This is true even if the third party who pulled out should reasonably have yielded to oncoming traffic. ("Failure to yield" probably ain't gonna help you if you were doing 90 in a 60.) Problem is, they are not even thinking about the fact that some approaching vehicle might be going that much faster than the posted limit. You have to assume that they will probably be thinking that you're traveling no faster than the posted speed. Soooo, the existence of ANY side roads is a red flag for me and I'm almost certainly gonna slow down when I see one. (This is where familiarity with the road you're on is helpful.)

[Overdrive]

Avoiding the to-be-reckless-or-not-to-be-reckless debate that could go on for another 50 thread pages, and getting back to some of the original content: it really is unfortunate what happened, both to see the destruction of an amazing machine and even more the loss of two lives. Let's not forget that what we read and see in the news on this matter is mostly speculation, and it was even noted in some of these speculations that autopsy results won't be available for over a month. We don't know what factors led to the accident, and there's no guarantee that the investigation(s) will be 100% right. Regardless, it's really a shame.

And I will say that while I'm not a huge fan of the franchise and some of its cast, I could not even jokingly say that anyone else from the show should have been in that car with him and suffered the same fate, and it was really a shame to see that comment made on here. Whether it's a celebrity of sorts or someone local who you may or may not have known, I really feel it's never a good thing to hear about the death of another. And I'm not trying to sway anyone or tell them they're wrong, I'm just giving my opinion.

Let's all be safe out there, and I don't mean drive like grandpa when I say that. I just mean be safe. Have your fun and enjoy your life, because you could be 74, or a week past 34 like Ryan Dunn, there's no set age or scenario for the end of your life.

Now where's that Porsche key...?

[jotoole]

Driver's Ed 101

[achsengewicht]

The latest news point to that the jackass had about double the legal alcohol content in his blood. I say good riddance.

[husker boxster]

.195 blood alcohol + 130mph = lethal combination

It's fortunate that no one else was taken out by this fool. As far as the passenger, he entrusted his life to Dunn when he got in the passenger seat and let an obviously drunk person drive. Unfortunate, but he had a choice.

Madmods, could you explain what you mean in your stmt about blaming Porsche? I don't know if you're kidding or serious. I hope you were saying that tongue-in-cheek.

[schnellman]

I believe it was in the early 80's when Porsche stopped exporting Turbo 911's to the U.S. They said Americans (Californians in particular) were law suit crazy and they figured it was only a matter of time before some jury of loonies granted a loser, or his family, a billion dollar settlement against a manufacturer.

[mikstew]

Someone said driving is a privilege. It is not so. It is a right. And in many cases it is a requirement for work or otherwise.

Societies of the past chose to situate themselves sufficiently far from each other such that a means of rapid transportation is required in order to satisfy the demands of exchanging goods or services. From then one we have built our communities and cities, and countries to accommodate vehicular transport. We have built everything FOR cars, not the other way around.

We don't make new cars to "fit" new roads (with the exception of ecnonobox city cars, but they aren't really cars in my books), we build highways to accommodate faster travel and more volume.

It is not impossible to imagine a world in which cars did not form the basis for the layout of our communities, with something like trains or bikes in their place. Look at Hong Kong and all their bikes/motorcycles, for example.

So since driving is a requirement for most people, it is not logical, nor reasonable to argue that we need to drive gingerly at all times, utterly devoid of any spirit or amusement, when in fact we are the ones being forced to buy cars (on our coin, of course) to be able to work and contribute to our society by generating tax revenue and GDP.

If society wants me to work, to buy a car produced by society, to work for society, I think I reserve the right to use that vehicle how I see fit. And in the case of owning a luxury sports car, I deem fit use to mean speeding where appropriate.

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by mikstew

Someone said driving is a privilege. It is not so. It is a right.

Don't think you're gonna find a lot of support on this one.

Cheers!