Speed kills, but not if you know the road?

Wednesday, 26 February 2020

Kingston Webb was driving his Suzuki Swift, 68kmh over the limit.

OPINION: Good news for everyone who likes to exceed the speed limit - apparently it is no longer dangerous if you 'know the road'.

At least that is the main message you could take from the recent verdict handed down to an 18 year old charged with dangerous driving after being clocked at 148kmh in an 80kmh zone.

Napier student Kingston Webb admit in court that, at 68kmh over the speed limit he was driving way too fast, but was adamant it wasn't 'dangerous' because he drove on the road 3-4 times a week and he was very familiar with the road works on it.

Speed kills. But not when the road is wide and no-one else is around?

Yeah, that's right - road works. State Highway 2, alongside the Hawke's Bay Airport, where Webb was caught speeding also has road work being done, with the 80kmh zone leading into a 50kmh zone where the work is currently being carried out, although his lawyer said that the road works were some distance from the point at which the 148kmh speed was detected.

**READ MORE:

Kingston Webb was driving his Suzuki Swift, 68kmh over the limit

* He might have been driving at 148kmh in an 80kmh area but it wasn't dangerous

* Two speed cameras, two days, 302 speeding vehicles

The stretch of road near Napier where Webb was clocked at 148kph.

* 92-year-old grandad gets seven speeding tickets in five months

* British YouTube star caught going 141kmh in New Zealand**

Depending on the model, a Suzuki Swift like Webb's has a maximum top speed of around 185kmh.

Webb was automatically suspended from driving for 28 days and charged with dangerous driving, which is the part he disputed.

It helps to understand what the actual charge is here, because it does make a difference and does explain why Webb would be alarmed by it - a simple speeding infringement results in a fine, while a more serious Category 1 driving offence occurs when the speed is more than 50kmh over the speed limit - which Webb clearly was - and carries a maximum fine of $1,000 and the possibility of disqualification.

Category 2 driving offences, however, are where the stakes get much higher and are punishable by either community work, supervision or community detention, a prison term of up to three months or a maximum fine of $4,500. You must also be disqualified from driving for at least six months.

These offences include dangerous or reckless driving, so the difference for Webb was between a Category 1 charge and a figurative slap on the wrist, with a maximum fine of $1,000 and maybe a short disqualification or a Category 2 charge where he would face a larger fine, possible imprisonment and the loss of his licence for at least six months.

And, while I would agree that prison would be excessive, quite frankly, an 18 year old losing his licence for six months and either getting a big fine and/or some community work seems like a pretty sensible punishment for driving 68kmh over the speed limit in a Suzuki Swift when approaching road works, regardless of how well that 18 year old thinks he knows the road.

But judge David Harvey didn't think so, and agreed with Webb that driving 68kmh over the speed limit wasn't dangerous in itself, noting the presence of the median barrier. He dismissed the dangerous driving charge and fined Webb $400, with no disqualification from driving.

His reasoning was the road was relatively straight, it was two lanes narrowing down to one, the seal was good, the road conditions were good, the car was a relatively late model and in good condition, there were no driveways or other roads opening onto the highway, no parked cars and there were no other vehicles in the immediate vicinity, the lighting was relatively good, and Webb was not driving erratically

So… speed kills, but not if the road is good, there is a median barrier and no one else is around? Good to know.

Four hundred bucks seems a reasonable price for a good speed-related adrenaline rush, right? After all, that's what AJ Hackett charges for a bungy jump and catapault combo, and I know which thrill I would prefer.

Look, I love cars and I love speed. I like driving cars fast, but in a safe place. You know, like a race track. And a track day with any of the numerous operators that offer them is actually even cheaper than $400.

This decision by the judge sends all kinds of wrong messages to young 18 year old males everywhere. I know this because I used to be one.

Sure, the judge was only defining what constituted 'dangerous' driving, and that speed itself isn't inherently dangerous - which I actually completely agree with - but as well as flying directly in the face of decades of the 'speed kills' message we have been fed, it is also assuming that 'knowing the road' means that you can predict all the random events that can happen, even on a relatively straight road, with good seal in a good condition, relatively late model car.

Knowing the road doesn't mean a thing when a dog runs out in front of you. Or when your tyre lets go at 148kmh. Or any number of things that can happen behind the wheel of even the most incredibly well maintained car.

And so much depends on the driver as well - reaction times vary vastly depending on how you are feeling and, of course, stopping times are massively affected by the speed you are going. Webb's car was in good condition, but was he?

He was clocked at 7.40pm, so he could well have had a very long day at that point, which would likely mean his reaction time to any unexpected event and resultant stopping time at 148kmh would have been disastrously inadequate.

Now, don't get me wrong - I'm not saying we should live in fear of the unpredictable - far from it, we would never drive otherwise. I am just saying that we should be sensible. And effectively sending the message that 'knowing the road' makes it no longer dangerous to speed to 18 year old males who generally already think they are invulnerable (and, hell, just people in general) just doesn't seem particularly sensible to me.