Canadian idiot gets busted for 186 mph in a 50

[Zanatos]

What a moron.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/25/justice/canada-motorcyclist-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[TransNone13]

...for uploading it.

[Ghosty]

I wanna criticize, but then I laugh at what I possibly might've attempted if I had a rocket in my early 20's.

[cbrjohnny]

muuummmm... i need a saanich!

[mdub]

those bitches be hating...

wow...i would prolly done some thing in my 20's. there where definitely some tight ass spots..now in my wise age i'm luckee if i brk 130 on my 1k.. fastest i've gone ever was 144 on a 600rr. i would 've kept on but it was really windy on 470 that day...get spook everytime i hit triple digits...

[CaptGoodvibes]

muuummmm... i need a saanich!

Ha!

A sannich does sound doog right now!

00:13 "what an idiot." Lol, nice news casting!

[Nooch]

Just watched the video. Even in my early 20s, I was never THAT oblivious about my mortality. Watching him cut between cars like that made me cringe. :wtf:

[Wrider]

Don't wanna be a Canadian Idiot! (http://youtu.be/BjLQ6uCw2g8)

[UHATEIT]

Total idiot for uploading it is correct. DOH!

[Ghost]

...for uploading it.

Exactly.

And, fwiw, I think the "up to 5yrs in jail" is also bullshit since no one was actually injured/killed/maimed etc.

[Sean]

Aren't speeding tickets pretty severe/expensive in Canada?

[Ghost]

Aren't speeding tickets pretty severe/expensive in Canada?

If he gets 5yrs then I'd say so...

[mdub]

i dont think he is caught...this is just one of many videos all over the world where people are sharing their exploits of a fast bikes.

[Ghost]

i dont think he is caught...


Um....



Police in British Columbia say a man wanted for allegedly recording himself reaching speeds of at least 186 mph on his motorcycle and posting the video on YouTube has been arrested.

[mdub]

well sucks for him.

[real5280]

it appears that he turned himself in.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/canadian-motorcyclist-surrenders-police-186-mph-thrill-ride-viral-article-1.1122037

[Nooch]

Ok so he turned himself in and I assume he basically admitted guilt. But had that NOT happened, would the police really have had a leg to stand on? How could the guy not have been able to just say "that wasn't me". He never appears on camera. Where's the proof? Is there something about Canada laws that I'm missing?

[mdub]

whoa....sucks to have the big license plate in canada...

[Zviffer]

Pussy ... he was only doing 152 while lane splitting. :lol:



... Is there something about Canada laws that I'm missing?

Identity would definitely be an issue - even in Canuckistan - in the absence of him making any incriminatory statements to the Police or to any other person who can be compelled to testify. He turned himself in because there was a warrant issued for his arrest. There would have to be some evidence to support that warrant. It's not like he just showed up out of remorse and laid himself on the law's doormat. My suspicion is that he likely bragged to one person too many about the ride, and that person passed on the information to the police.



As a somewhat related aside, here is an amusing (but lengthy) video explaining why one should never talk to the police (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWjNNbmd68U).

[Drano]

iirc, the police had tracked down the rider's house from the I.P. address he used when he uploaded the video. Then they seized the bike and used the video to for visual verification. It turned out that the bike was titled to the guy's mother, who admitted that her son is the only person who rides it. Since they couldn't find him they built a case against the mother, which is probably why he turned himself in.

Whether they could have actually prosecuted based solely on the video of the bike seems like an easy grounds for dismissal. Not that it matters much now.

[CaptGoodvibes]

iirc, the police had tracked down the rider's house from the I.P. address he used when he uploaded the video. Then they seized the bike and used the video to for visual verification. It turned out that the bike was titled to the guy's mother, who admitted that her son is the only person who rides it. Since they couldn't find him they built a case against the mother, which is probably why he turned himself in.

Whether they could have actually prosecuted based solely on the video of the bike seems like an easy grounds for dismissal. Not that it matters much now.

Ohhhhh...... this is that one..... :canuck:

[maktastik_jr.]

Aren't speeding tickets pretty severe/expensive in Canada?

yes, fun is illegal in canada. or cunuckistan, whichever you prefer

[kalibra]

yes, fun is illegal in canada. or cunuckistan, whichever you prefer
I know that if someone close to me got killed by a maniac like that ...I would not find it funny! Would you?

[Ghost]

I know that if someone close to me got killed by a maniac like that ...I would not find it funny! Would you?


Nope. But your argument lacks any real bite since in this case no one did get injured or killed. If someone had, then there are manslaughter charges, etc.


The entire notion of punishing people for possible or potential harm or injury is a slippery slope with no clear beginning or end and is usually used when there's no other justification for the existence of malum prohibitum bullshit.

5 years in prison for a potential injury or death is a stiffer penalty than the minimum sentence for actually killing someone:


Involuntary manslaughter at both the federal and state level is treated as a felony and usually carries a jail or prison sentence of at least 12 months, plus fines and probation. The base sentence for involuntary manslaughter under federal sentencing guidelines is a 10 to 16 month prison sentence, which increases if it was committed through an act of reckless conduct. The minimum sentence for involuntary manslaughter committed with an automobile is higher still, although judges may use a certain amount discretion.

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/involuntary-manslaughter-penalties-and-sentencing.html

[Zanatos]

So, in Canada laws are meaningless and you can speed as fast as you want on public roads as long as nobody gets hurt? Wow, I had no idea Canada has an Autobahn.

Seriously though - I hope the guy just gets a fine and traffic school where he has to watch "Blood on the Highway" fifteen times.

[kalibra]

Nope. But your argument lacks any real bite since in this case no one did get injured or killed. If someone had, then there are manslaughter charges, etc.


The entire notion of punishing people for possible or potential harm or injury is a slippery slope with no clear beginning or end and is usually used when there's no other justification for the existence of malum prohibitum bullshit.

5 years in prison for a potential injury or death is a stiffer penalty than the minimum sentence for actually killing someone:
I believe you are missing the whole point.The fact that he broke the law (speeding,reckless driving) has no bearing on possible/potential harm or injury.It is just that : traveling at a higher rate of speed than posted !Period.Had he injured someone in the process,additional charges for additional laws being broken would apply....no?

[Ghost]

I believe you are missing the whole point.

Nope. Point is--5 years in prison is asinine in the extreme, no one was hurt, period.

[CaptGoodvibes]

I can't believe some of you think the punishment fits the crime.