Street racing.

[Ranb]

How often does illegal street racing take place in European countries? I have seen a few impromptu races myself, but only as a driver who was accidentally nearby. I think that movies like "The Fast and the Furious are silly, and movies like The Cannonball Run or The Gumball Rally are silly but somewhat entertaining.

Here is the tragic end result of a street race in Maryland USA. http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/16/drag.race.deaths.ap/index.html

Ranb

[Redtail]

I used to be part of the street racing scene when I was a kid. (This was before The Fast and the Furious, all that movie really did was bring the imports and Nos to the forefront.) It was mainly a way to make money. Some of the races I was involved in were for as much as $3k. Some of the races I saw were for $50k. Ahhhh the stupidity of youth.

[Autolite]

How often does illegal street racing take place in European countries? Ranb

Ahh, Ranb. Are you going where I think you might be going with this thread??? :D

[zooloo]

ooopppss
wrong thread

soz

[Ranb]

Ahh, Ranb. Are you going where I think you might be going with this thread??? :D

If you are thinking cars and guns, then that is a big no. :) The cars and guns analogy is being talked to death and has not seemed to have brought anyone down from the fence or convinced anyone to change their views. I hope no one derails this thread with gun control. If they do, then I promise to ignore it.

Ranb

[Ranb]

.....It was mainly a way to make money. Some of the races I was involved in were for as much as $3k. Some of the races I saw were for $50k. Ahhhh the stupidity of youth.

That is a lot of money. I grew up in a rural part of northern Minnesota. The only races I saw were two cars just taking off from a stop light or other intersection. One guy managed to get the police on his tail. He eluded them, ditched the car, got a ride to a party, reported the car stolen and got away with it. One of my classmates (back in 1981)tried the same thing after getting popped for speeding, but was convicted of submitting a false police report. Yes, the folly of youth.

Ranb

[gumboot]

I know that illegal street racing occurs here, although we are not in Europe. I don't know much about it though, so I don't know if it is done for prizes or just for kicks. I would imagine films like The Fast And The Furious present a culture far more sophisticated and developed than the reality. Most street racing here tends to be a bunch of young people getting together and racing because they think it's "fun" and "badass".

[Bikewer]

We have had either semi-organized or truly organized street racing scenes at a couple of periods here.
Back in the 70s, during the heyday of the "muscle car", the drag racing became so pervasive that the police actually organized weekend events in an industrial area of North St. Louis.

The idea it was better to have the activity there under some sort of supervision rather than on the public streets.

Another location for unsanctioned-but-daily racing was the section of roadway outside of the big McDonnell-Douglass plant. (Now Boing.)

The route that I take to work on a daily basis likewise. This is a several-miles long section that runs along the River Des Peres. (The "river" is just an enormous storm drain) There is relatively little late-night traffic, and few intersecting streets. Used to be popular for out-and-back racing.

It's always been a sore point with me; racing should be done at proper racing venues. Any public street, regardless of how little used, endangers non-participating citizens.

We have a local group of motorcyclists who style themselves "Street Fighterz" or somesuch. They take to the public highways, doing all sorts of vastly illegal and dangerous stunts, videotaping themselves all the while. They actually sell these videos in kiosks in a local mall.
Really burns me....

[The Fool]

Illegal street racing is being discouraged by a new and novel approach in Australia. The police confiscate the cars of repeat offenders and invite the offenders to watch it being crushed into a cube....If you don't believe me...look it up :)

[gtc]

There are also a few race tracks in Australia which allow people to race their own, street-legal, cars.

[Bikewer]

Just a slight digression into traffic law in general...

As an atheist, I seldom invoke "morals". However, I think that violation of traffic laws in general is, well, ethically reprehensible. Referring here to "moving" violations, of course.

Driving like a jerk by speeding, lane weaving, blowing stop signs, tailgating, and the whole panoply of other violations is to willfully endanger other people. There's no excuse for it, IMHO.
One can go into the psychology of all this, but the fact remains; all of these prohibited actions unduly raise the risk of endangering other people.

The law generally recognizes the increasing-risk factor; thus rolling through a stop sign will net you considerably less trouble than Driving While Intoxicated.

I suppose I could go off on a rant about how our glorification of the automobile has contributed to all manner of ills from millions of deaths worldwide to the degredation of the environment....Likely hopeless, however.

[baron]

How often does illegal street racing take place in European countries? I have seen a few impromptu races myself, but only as a driver who was accidentally nearby. I think that movies like "The Fast and the Furious are silly, and movies like The Cannonball Run or The Gumball Rally are silly but somewhat entertaining.

The Gumball Rally is real. The organisers say it's not a race but a lot of racing does go on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gumball_3000

There's some street racing in the UK although it's rarely organised or particularly long-lasting. I reckon it was at its peak about 10 years ago. The police have cracked down on it now.

[Ranb]

I have read about the Gumball Rally and the Cannonball Run; interesting stories. Too bad Hollywood had to ruin the movie by making it a Reynolds/Deluise comedy. Brock Yates has a good book on the Cannonball race.

Ranb

[bigred]

Just an .02 that while I was in Germany - where in most (but not all) places the Autobahn is the "go as fast as you want" highway - I saw one wreckless driver (who turned out to be some American Army punk, big surprise) and actually not as much of people driving as fast as possible as you might think. Not sure if that correlates to less street racing or not, again just an .02.

[qayak]

Back in the 70s, during the heyday of the "muscle car",

:confused:

1970's was the heyday of the musclecar? Okay, I will give you 1970 but not 1971 and up. The 60's were the heyday of the musclecar . . . of course, they can't hold a candle to the cars of today.

[qayak]

Just a slight digression into traffic law in general...

As an atheist, I seldom invoke "morals". However, I think that violation of traffic laws in general is, well, ethically reprehensible. Referring here to "moving" violations, of course.

Driving like a jerk by speeding, lane weaving, blowing stop signs, tailgating, and the whole panoply of other violations is to willfully endanger other people. There's no excuse for it, IMHO.
One can go into the psychology of all this, but the fact remains; all of these prohibited actions unduly raise the risk of endangering other people.

The law generally recognizes the increasing-risk factor; thus rolling through a stop sign will net you considerably less trouble than Driving While Intoxicated.

I suppose I could go off on a rant about how our glorification of the automobile has contributed to all manner of ills from millions of deaths worldwide to the degredation of the environment....Likely hopeless, however.

I disagree that the law recognises an increase risk factor. The law recognises who is easier to catch, not who is driving the most dangerously. I give as an exampole the fact that running a stoplight will get you a fine of $86 while speeding is $115 and 20 km/h over the limit will get you a fine of $173. Intersections are the most dangerous locations on the road but they do not garner the highest fines. Of course, they are a little harder to patrol.

You will also notice that the police sit on long straight stretches in sunny dry weather waiting for those "dangerous" speeders and fill their quotas in a few hours. It actually makes people think they are concerned about safety.

It is like the roadchecks for drinking drivers. They are notorious for NOT catching anyone. In British Columbia a few years ago they spent almost $7,000,000.00 over the 2 week Christmas season on roadblocks. They caught 1 DUI. During that same time, regular patrols caught 79.

The RCMP asked that the $7,000,000.00 be spent on more effective measures but it was refused because the government felt that the "IMAGE" of a roadblock was more important than actually catching drinking drivers. The RCMP refused to participate int he roadcheck program after that.

Studies show that cellphone use while driving is more likely to cause accidents than drinking and driving, yet the push to stop it is thwarted at every turn.

It isn't about safety.

[baron]

...20 km/h over the limit will get you a fine of $173

That's rather harsh. The police in the UK wouldn't even stop and warn you for that (I'm assuming a motorway, they'd very likely ticket you in a 30mph)

[Damien Evans]

That's rather harsh. The police in the UK wouldn't even stop and warn you for that (I'm assuming a motorway, they'd very likely ticket you in a 30mph)

20 ks over the limit here will lose you your licence

[Bikewer]

Gayak: I will readily agree that traffic law enforcement is driven by financial and political motives. I am well familiar with this, having been in a department where "quotas" were the norm. This leads exactly to the type of enforcement you mention.

It's the sad situation that many small towns and communities across the country derive a major share of their revenues from traffic enforcement. This leads to abuses like the local community who's officers were filmed "manipulating" a school-crossing signal to snare drivers....
But I'm talking about the intent of the law, not it's application.

The fact that law enforcement sometimes (or even frequently!) misuses enforcement does not make it less reprehensible to drive like a jerk.

[Francesca R]

As an atheist, I seldom invoke "morals". I'm puzzled as to why. Are morals no good to atheists?

I disagree that the law recognises an increase risk factor. The law recognises who is easier to catch, not who is driving the most dangerously. [ . . . ] Studies show that cellphone use while driving is more likely to cause accidents than drinking and driving, yet the push to stop it is thwarted at every turn.

It isn't about safety.

Gayak: I will readily agree that traffic law enforcement is driven by financial and political motives.I don't see law enforcement as being just about financial and political motives either, unless "political" includes "what society wants", in which case nearly every law has something to do with that.

The furore over hidden speed cameras in the UK (which can easily catch offenders and which reduce risk) was driven by nothing more than our motorised society's high aversion to being nicked fair and square without a chance to slow down, as in: "Oh sorry I had no idea I was 20mph over the limit".

[rats]

Up until at most 5 years ago there were regular road races in Birmingham (UK) city centre, though they appeared to be less frequent than 10 years ago. Don't know how things are now, and they did change location following part of the centre's re-build. However I know next to nothing about them except when taxi drivers went on necessary detours (but still charged the same), and seeing the 'racing' cars gathering in car parks.

[baron]

The furore over hidden speed cameras in the UK (which can easily catch offenders and which reduce risk) was driven by nothing more than our motorised society's high aversion to being nicked fair and square without a chance to slow down, as in: "Oh sorry I had no idea I was 20mph over the limit".

Mostly, that's true. However, it's often quite safe to drive at 20mph over the limit in a non-built-up area, you just shouldn't whine about it if you're caught.

[Francesca R]

Mostly, that's true. However, it's often quite safe to drive at 20mph over the limit in a non-built-up area, you just shouldn't whine about it if you're caught.That's the thing though. Collective whining about it did away with hidden cameras. Never mind whether they saved any lives and never mind if the motorist was flouting a law they signed up to when they started their car. The consensus tide against "profiteering" did for them.

(Not sure what's wrong with making money out of people who wilfully break the law anyway . . .)

To the OP: I have never seen a street race around my neighbourhood. But there is no stretch of road more than 100 metres long without a red light or a speed bump or a width restriction. Plus there are all those cameras enforcing the congestion zone.

[Almo]

. . . of course, they can't hold a candle to the cars of today.

Ever driven one? I used to drive 1970 Cutlass Supreme SX Holiday Coupe (http://home.c2i.net/terjekl/sxarticle.htm). Pretty rare car with a 455 (7.8 liter) engine in it. That was a kick to drive; it had this sound that I doubt you'd hear out of any high-tech wonder of today.

Not that modern speedsters suck or anything, but I contend that the phrase "they can't hold a candle" does not describe the situation.

[Bikewer]

The only reason to differentiate between "morals" and "ethics" would be the general apprehension of "morality" as linked to religion.
I admit it's a fine semantic point.

[Flo]

How often does illegal street racing take place in European countries? I have seen a few impromptu races myself, but only as a driver who was accidentally nearby. I think that movies like "The Fast and the Furious are silly, and movies like The Cannonball Run or The Gumball Rally are silly but somewhat entertaining.

Here is the tragic end result of a street race in Maryland USA. http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/16/drag.race.deaths.ap/index.html

Ranb


Over here, there's the extremely stupid (and badly acted) movies called "Taxi" (3 or 4 so far), that encourage already irresponsible drivers to show even more disregard for traffic laws than they would have naturally. The main irony is that the production of those movies has been heavily subsidized by the French government (protection of French cultural exception... :rolleyes:)

Illegal races are unfortunately common all over France and Switzerland, with the usual ghastly consequences ...

[gumboot]

I disagree that the law recognises an increase risk factor. The law recognises who is easier to catch, not who is driving the most dangerously. I give as an exampole the fact that running a stoplight will get you a fine of $86 while speeding is $115 and 20 km/h over the limit will get you a fine of $173. Intersections are the most dangerous locations on the road but they do not garner the highest fines. Of course, they are a little harder to patrol.

You will also notice that the police sit on long straight stretches in sunny dry weather waiting for those "dangerous" speeders and fill their quotas in a few hours. It actually makes people think they are concerned about safety.

It is like the roadchecks for drinking drivers. They are notorious for NOT catching anyone. In British Columbia a few years ago they spent almost $7,000,000.00 over the 2 week Christmas season on roadblocks. They caught 1 DUI. During that same time, regular patrols caught 79.

The RCMP asked that the $7,000,000.00 be spent on more effective measures but it was refused because the government felt that the "IMAGE" of a roadblock was more important than actually catching drinking drivers. The RCMP refused to participate int he roadcheck program after that.

Studies show that cellphone use while driving is more likely to cause accidents than drinking and driving, yet the push to stop it is thwarted at every turn.

It isn't about safety.


It appears it would depend entirely where you are. The above account, for example, would be entirely untrue in New Zealand. We are currently overhauling our penalties, and the emphasis is on demerit points which result in a loss of license, rather than fines. (You get a fine too, but the fines have been reduced and demerit points have been increased).

For a failure to comply with a red traffic light you get a $150 fine and 75 demerit points (100pts is a loss of license)
That's the equivalent of driving at more than 30km/h over the legal limit.
For failure to stop or give way at a stop sign you get a $100 fine and 50pts. That's the equivalent of driving at 21 to 30 km/h over the legal limit.

New Zealand police routinely employ checkpoints, but they also routinely catch large numbers of people that way. I think a lot of it is where you put it. Our police almost always put the checkpoints in places so that you can't get around them and usually you are right on top of it before you even realise it. They have cars waiting to chase down anyone who does a U-turn when they see the checkpoint.