Motorcyclist clocked at 170 MPH on NY Thruway

[froggie]

http://www.wtop.com/?sid=2851102&nid=681

Clocked him at 166 near Albany. Finally caught him near New Paltz.  Guess the guy was in a hurry.

BTW, one road-related error in the article.

[agentsteel53]

I'll bite.  what's the error.  is 87 not the Thruway in that one section of Albany?

[Alps]

Presumably they got him on I-87 and not I-90. I see no other opportunity for a road related error...

[cpzilliacus]

http://www.wtop.com/?sid=2851102&nid=681

Clocked him at 166 near Albany. Finally caught him near New Paltz.  Guess the guy was in a hurry.

BTW, one road-related error in the article.

Would that Maryland law enforcement would be able to get some of these crotch rocketers arrested and charged - they are a constant problem on Maryland's sections of I-95 and U.S.50.

[Kacie Jane]

I don't see any road-related error.  The chase all appears to have taken place on the southern section of the Thruway, correctly identified as I-87.

[froggie]

Okay...they fixed the article from when I first saw it.  It originally said 166 mph Wednesday afternoon in the southbound lanes of Interstate 90 just south of Albany in the 2nd sentence.

[bsmart]

http://www.wtop.com/?sid=2851102&nid=681

Clocked him at 166 near Albany. Finally caught him near New Paltz.  Guess the guy was in a hurry.

BTW, one road-related error in the article.

Would that Maryland law enforcement would be able to get some of these crotch rocketers arrested and charged - they are a constant problem on Maryland's sections of I-95 and U.S.50.

I have been told that Maryland Law Enforcement personnel have been told not to try to pursue or aprehend motorcyclists that are 'far in excess of the speedlimit'.  It is considered that pursuit represents a greater danger to the public and the officer.  One County Sherriffs deputy told me that the big fear is the damage a patrol car would do to an innocent civilian is so much greater than what a bike would do that was the deciding factor.  Crotch rockets are a huge problem on I-70, I-270 and US 340.  There have been several deaths along US 340 where they were attempting 'stunts'

[1995hoo]

Update on this: WTOP here in DC reports that his license has been suspended for 90 days and he also got 20 days in jail (apparently credited for time he already served).

[agentsteel53]

Update on this: WTOP here in DC reports that his license has been suspended for 90 days and he also got 20 days in jail (apparently credited for time he already served).

that's it?  I could get my license suspended for 90 days for five or six (I forget how many) 5-over speeding tickets. 

this just incentivizes me to speed in a psychotic fashion as opposed to going with the flow of traffic.

[cpzilliacus]

Update on this: WTOP here in DC reports that his license has been suspended for 90 days and he also got 20 days in jail (apparently credited for time he already served).

Seems like a light sentence (at least to me). 

I wish all states had "felony reckless driving" provisions in their statutes (many do not) - this individual might have been a good candidate for such a charge.

[cpzilliacus]

http://www.wtop.com/?sid=2851102&nid=681

Clocked him at 166 near Albany. Finally caught him near New Paltz.  Guess the guy was in a hurry.

BTW, one road-related error in the article.

Would that Maryland law enforcement would be able to get some of these crotch rocketers arrested and charged - they are a constant problem on Maryland's sections of I-95 and U.S.50.

I have been told that Maryland Law Enforcement personnel have been told not to try to pursue or aprehend motorcyclists that are 'far in excess of the speedlimit'.  It is considered that pursuit represents a greater danger to the public and the officer.

That strikes me as correct, especially on a busy freeway or other public road.

There was that horrific wreck on the I-95 part of the Capital Beltway in Prince George's County, Md. a few years ago, where a Prince George's County police officer ended up getting charged for attempting to chase a crotch rocket.

So I don't dispute that it presents a danger to other highway users, but I still feel that there are times when law enforcement should be chasing them down (perhaps using airborne pursuit).

One County Sherriffs deputy told me that the big fear is the damage a patrol car would do to an innocent civilian is so much greater than what a bike would do that was the deciding factor.  Crotch rockets are a huge problem on I-70, I-270 and US 340.  There have been several deaths along US 340 where they were attempting 'stunts'

If it's just the crotch rocketers getting killed, then the issue becomes one of cost and burden on law enforcement in cleaning-up, investigating and reporting a fatal crash.  But if those same crotch  rocketers suffer severe traumatic injury, then it becomes the taxpayers that fund their transport and treatment (since I think it reasonable to assume that most of them have little or nothing in the way of assets and insurance).

I do find it curious that I see many less crotch rockets doing gross violations of traffic law in nearby areas of Virginia, perhaps because a reckless driving charge there presents a legitimate threat of some time in jail and a criminal record.

[Takumi]

^ With regard to your last point, it may also be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

[cpzilliacus]

^ With regard to your last point, it may be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

Yup. 

And plenty of people (even residents of the Commonwealth (!)) are not aware of that provision in Virginia law (until and unless they get charged with driving 81 MPH or higher).

I have been asked why Virginia does not "advertise" this fact with signs on its highways, and the answer I give (which may or may not be correct) is that it would imply to people that 80 MPH is the de-facto speed limit in Virginia (not good), and it would also mean that VDOT would have to incur substantial expense in manufacturing and installing many of those signs.

Even though there are some parts of Virginia's highway network where 80 MPH would be an appropriate speed limit.  Two that come to my mind are I-295 between I-64 and its southern terminus at I-95; and all or very nearly all of I-85 (except perhaps for the northernmost segment in Petersburg).

[formulanone]

Update on this: WTOP here in DC reports that his license has been suspended for 90 days and he also got 20 days in jail (apparently credited for time he already served).

that's it?  I could get my license suspended for 90 days for five or six (I forget how many) 5-over speeding tickets. 

this just incentivizes me to speed in a psychotic fashion as opposed to going with the flow of traffic.

Hmmph, I don't see jail time as an incentive to do anything. Not having my license for 30 days would suck horribly; let alone, I'd probably lose my job.

[rawmustard]

I wish all states had "felony reckless driving" provisions in their statutes (many do not) - this individual might have been a good candidate for such a charge.

Michigan has had such provisions in its reckless driving law since 10/31/10, but as stated a felony only occurs should there be serious impairment of body function or death to another person. (Although the mere act of fleeing and eluding is also a felony.)

[cpzilliacus]

I wish all states had "felony reckless driving" provisions in their statutes (many do not) - this individual might have been a good candidate for such a charge.

Michigan has had such provisions in its reckless driving law since 10/31/10, but as stated a felony only occurs should there be serious impairment of body function or death to another person. (Although the mere act of fleeing and eluding is also a felony.)

Good call by Michigan.  In  my opinion, fleeing and eluding should be a felony - especially when  the fleeing takes place at well over 100 MPH, as the crotch rockets riders do.

[1995hoo]

^ With regard to your last point, it may also be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

Arguably it's fairer to say "81 mph is grounds for a ticket for reckless driving." I was at court one day and saw a case called involving a guy who got a speed ticket, but not a reckless ticket, for going 98 mph late one night on I-66 somewhere between Fair Oaks and the Prince William County line. The judge asked the cop why he didn't give the guy a reckless and the judge said he didn't believe the driver was endangering himself or anyone else because there was almost no traffic on the road, the weather was good, there was a full moon, and he was driving a brand-new Corvette. The judge said "OK." I remember the details so well simply because I was impressed that a cop considered the circumstances instead of writing the "bigger" ticket. I don't remember what the judge gave as a penalty, though. Normally in Fairfax County the judges give one day in jail for every mile an hour above 90 (thankfully, I know this NOT from personal experience but rather because opposing counsel in a case I had about 10 years ago did a lot of traffic court work).

....

And plenty of people (even residents of the Commonwealth (!)) are not aware of that provision in Virginia law (until and unless they get charged with driving 81 MPH or higher).

I have been asked why Virginia does not "advertise" this fact with signs on its highways, and the answer I give (which may or may not be correct) is that it would imply to people that 80 MPH is the de-facto speed limit in Virginia (not good), and it would also mean that VDOT would have to incur substantial expense in manufacturing and installing many of those signs.

Even though there are some parts of Virginia's highway network where 80 MPH would be an appropriate speed limit.  Two that come to my mind are I-295 between I-64 and its southern terminus at I-95; and all or very nearly all of I-85 (except perhaps for the northernmost segment in Petersburg).

It's always surprised me how many people just assume Virginia law says "20 over." The law used to say 20 over except that (a) in a 35-mph zone 60 was reckless and (b) and anything in excess of 80 was reckless regardless of the speed limit. The 35-mph zone portion was deleted sometime within the last ten years. The "anything over 80" provision is a bit of a "gotcha" law, I think. Imagine if those so-called "abusive driver penalties" were still in effect now that the speed limit is 70 mph in many places in Virginia. One can agree or disagree about what constitutes a reasonable speed limit on a given road, but I think most rational people (even the most vocal of the anti-car crowd) would agree that driving 11 mph over the speed limit is not a severe enough offense to warrant a $3000 levy by the Commonwealth!

[hbelkins]

^ With regard to your last point, it may also be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

Which, in my esteemed opinion, is total crap.

[mgk920]

I also recall a few years back when Chicago police radared a motorcyclist on a city street at about 15 faster than the guy in the OP.



They got him on the return and I forget offhand what the penalty served was.

Mike

[MrDisco99]

^ With regard to your last point, it may also be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

Arguably it's fairer to say "81 mph is grounds for a ticket for reckless driving." I was at court one day and saw a case called involving a guy who got a speed ticket, but not a reckless ticket, for going 98 mph late one night on I-66 somewhere between Fair Oaks and the Prince William County line. The judge asked the cop why he didn't give the guy a reckless and the judge said he didn't believe the driver was endangering himself or anyone else because there was almost no traffic on the road, the weather was good, there was a full moon, and he was driving a brand-new Corvette. The judge said "OK." I remember the details so well simply because I was impressed that a cop considered the circumstances instead of writing the "bigger" ticket. I don't remember what the judge gave as a penalty, though. Normally in Fairfax County the judges give one day in jail for every mile an hour above 90 (thankfully, I know this NOT from personal experience but rather because opposing counsel in a case I had about 10 years ago did a lot of traffic court work).

....

And plenty of people (even residents of the Commonwealth (!)) are not aware of that provision in Virginia law (until and unless they get charged with driving 81 MPH or higher).

I have been asked why Virginia does not "advertise" this fact with signs on its highways, and the answer I give (which may or may not be correct) is that it would imply to people that 80 MPH is the de-facto speed limit in Virginia (not good), and it would also mean that VDOT would have to incur substantial expense in manufacturing and installing many of those signs.

Even though there are some parts of Virginia's highway network where 80 MPH would be an appropriate speed limit.  Two that come to my mind are I-295 between I-64 and its southern terminus at I-95; and all or very nearly all of I-85 (except perhaps for the northernmost segment in Petersburg).

It's always surprised me how many people just assume Virginia law says "20 over." The law used to say 20 over except that (a) in a 35-mph zone 60 was reckless and (b) and anything in excess of 80 was reckless regardless of the speed limit. The 35-mph zone portion was deleted sometime within the last ten years. The "anything over 80" provision is a bit of a "gotcha" law, I think. Imagine if those so-called "abusive driver penalties" were still in effect now that the speed limit is 70 mph in many places in Virginia. One can agree or disagree about what constitutes a reasonable speed limit on a given road, but I think most rational people (even the most vocal of the anti-car crowd) would agree that driving 11 mph over the speed limit is not a severe enough offense to warrant a $3000 levy by the Commonwealth!

You speak of police and judges being reasonable in their assessments, but my experience tells a different story.  I typically set my cruise to 10 over the limit because that's just standard practice here in GA.  Well, on the 70mph portion of I-85 I got pulled over, clocked at "81" and written up for reckless driving.  I had to hire a lawyer to argue it down for me.

So while I agree that 11 over the limit is a bit silly for a misdemeanor, Dinwiddie county Virginia seems to think otherwise.  Apparently they've made quite a racket of it, too, judging by how routine the whole process of dealing with the lawyer seemed to me.

No matter where you go, speed laws are always more about revenue generation than actual safety.  Some jurisdictions just take it further than others.

[bugo]

^ With regard to your last point, it may also be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

Which, in my esteemed opinion, is total crap.

I have to agree.  But remember, it was a Republican president who signed the 55 MPH law.

[kphoger]

I've been pulled over three times for going more than 10 over the speed limit.  Once was in a town that's apparently famous for nabbing speeders (which I didn't know yet), and I was daydreaming and wasn't paying attention to my speed, and was approaching a school as the kids were letting out.  For that one, I got the full ticket, as I should have.  The other two times, I was only going about 11 or 12 over the limit.  In both cases, I was in a state (Kansas and Oklahoma) that only reports a violation to your insurance if you go more than 10 over.  In both cases, the officer rounded down to 10 over on my ticket.

[cpzilliacus]

^ With regard to your last point, it may also be that way because reckless driving is more clearly defined in Virginia law than some states: 81 MPH is automatically reckless driving.

Arguably it's fairer to say "81 mph is grounds for a ticket for reckless driving." I was at court one day and saw a case called involving a guy who got a speed ticket, but not a reckless ticket, for going 98 mph late one night on I-66 somewhere between Fair Oaks and the Prince William County line. The judge asked the cop why he didn't give the guy a reckless and the judge said he didn't believe the driver was endangering himself or anyone else because there was almost no traffic on the road, the weather was good, there was a full moon, and he was driving a brand-new Corvette. The judge said "OK." I remember the details so well simply because I was impressed that a cop considered the circumstances instead of writing the "bigger" ticket. I don't remember what the judge gave as a penalty, though. Normally in Fairfax County the judges give one day in jail for every mile an hour above 90 (thankfully, I know this NOT from personal experience but rather because opposing counsel in a case I had about 10 years ago did a lot of traffic court work).

Some cops are thoughtful and take the laws that they enforce seriously.  

In my opinion, I-66 between U.S. 50 at Fair Oaks and U.S. 29 and at Gainesville is probably safe at 150 MPH late at night.

....

And plenty of people (even residents of the Commonwealth (!)) are not aware of that provision in Virginia law (until and unless they get charged with driving 81 MPH or higher).

I have been asked why Virginia does not "advertise" this fact with signs on its highways, and the answer I give (which may or may not be correct) is that it would imply to people that 80 MPH is the de-facto speed limit in Virginia (not good), and it would also mean that VDOT would have to incur substantial expense in manufacturing and installing many of those signs.

Even though there are some parts of Virginia's highway network where 80 MPH would be an appropriate speed limit.  Two that come to my mind are I-295 between I-64 and its southern terminus at I-95; and all or very nearly all of I-85 (except perhaps for the northernmost segment in Petersburg).

It's always surprised me how many people just assume Virginia law says "20 over." The law used to say 20 over except that (a) in a 35-mph zone 60 was reckless and (b) and anything in excess of 80 was reckless regardless of the speed limit. The 35-mph zone portion was deleted sometime within the last ten years. The "anything over 80" provision is a bit of a "gotcha" law, I think.

I agree, even though not exceeding 80 MPH is a reasonable thing to do when driving in Virginia.

Imagine if those so-called "abusive driver penalties" were still in effect now that the speed limit is 70 mph in many places in Virginia. One can agree or disagree about what constitutes a reasonable speed limit on a given road, but I think most rational people (even the most vocal of the anti-car crowd) would agree that driving 11 mph over the speed limit is not a severe enough offense to warrant a $3000 levy by the Commonwealth!

Those "abusive" penalties were  part of an effort by the Virginia General Assembly to not, under any circumstances, increase the Commonwealth's per-gallon motor fuel tax rate.  

Driving 81 MPH on a road posted for 70 is not "abusive" (or even reckless) driving in most situations.

[hbelkins]

I have to agree.  But remember, it was a Republican president who signed the 55 MPH law.

I don't consider Nixon to have been much of a Republican, seeing as he supported wage and price controls. But that's a totally off-topic argument best saved for elsewhere.

But what does the 55 mph national speed limit have to do with anything over 80 automatically being considered reckless driving?

"Reckless driving" in Virginia = 1 over the speed limit in parts of Texas. Doesn't really make a lot of sense.

On the subject of motorcycles. I had one pass me on a double yellow line with oncoming traffic Friday afternoon as I was driving home from work. The guy passed me and several other vehicles and made the same right turn that I do (from KY 30 west onto KY 52 west) and I met him heading back in the opposite direction about four miles down KY 52. He had to be doing at least 90 when he passed me, and he forced the oncoming pickup truck onto the shoulder. I understand that this same guy got killed in a single-vehicle motorcycle wreck later that night, when he hit a utility pole and guy wire. Rumor has it he'd been drinking.

I was also passed by a motorcycle doing at least 100 mph on KY 90 between Monticello and Burnside yesterday afternoon.

I don't understand the mentality behind someone driving that fast with so much of their body exposed and not protected like you are in a car.

[froggie]

"Reckless driving" in Virginia = 1 over the speed limit in parts of Texas. Doesn't really make a lot of sense.

When you factor in the topography and traffic volume differences between the two, yes it does make sense.