Darryl Anderson was drunk behind the wheel of his Audi SUV, had his accelerator pressed to the floor and was barreling toward a car ahead of him when he snapped a photo of his speedometer. The picture showed a car in the foreground, a collision warning light on his dashboard and a speed of 141 mph (227 kph).

An instant later, he slammed into the car in the photo. The driver, Shalorna Warner, was not seriously injured but her 8-month-old son and her sister were killed instantly, authorities said. Evidence showed Anderson never braked.

Anderson, 38, was sentenced Tuesday to 17 years in prison for the May 31 crash in northern England that killed little Zackary Blades and Karlene Warner. Anderson pleaded guilty last week in Durham Crown Court to two counts of causing death by dangerous driving.

  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    At a certain point we need to prioritize people’s safety over “vroom vroom”. 200+ km/h is nearly double highway speeds. Children dying from speeding crashes should be much more important than somebodys ego and desire to speed.

    • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      If children dying from mass shootings isn’t enough to move these obstructionist-types, then nothing is.

      • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        When Sandy Hook happened and we didn’t even get universal background checks, I saw conservatives plainly that day.

      • UllallullooA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        36
        ·
        4 months ago

        Guns have useful legal purposes and specific constitutional protections though. Cars don’t. The number of people going track racing in their SUVs has to be essentially zero.

        • demonsword@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Guns have useful legal purposes

          Weapons are tools with only one utility, kill people.

          • UllallullooA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Killing people isn’t always illegal, and you forgot hunting, euthanasia, and target shooting.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              euthanasia

              Who exactly is euthanizing people with a gun? And why aren’t they using a less painful method?

              • UllallullooA
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                If a horse or cow breaks its leg, what’s a less painful method? A properly-aimed bullet is instant and 100% painless. You gonna call a vet, wait half a day if you’re lucky, and then hope they give chemicals quickly and correctly while the animal languishs in pain?

    • Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      As a driving enthusiast even I agree with this.

      However, people will just work around any limiters that get set like we already do.

      Many cars and motorcycles already have speed limiters—often 130-150mph.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          As far as I know that’s already the case.

          But nobody is going to know about it except you and (optionally) whoever you hired to do it if not yourself, so you’re only getting fined/arrested for it after you’re caught going 180mph.

        • Mac@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          yeah, be hard on crime! (sarcasm)

          I’m just meming—i don’t have a solution. other than maybe if people like me had a good outlet to enjoy what we love.

      • Spraynard Kruger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        There’s one around the White Mountains in NH that I have driven on that was 75 mph, but that is the absolute fastest I have ever seen. The same highway (I think) stayed 75 mph through the Green Mountains in VT too. Both areas are rural without a ton of drivers outside of peak tourism season, and about a 0% chance of hitting a pedestrian.

        Definitely a chance of hitting a moose and totally fucking up it’s legs, ending your own life in the process. Motherfuckers have been known to walk away from many car accidents without much more than a limp. They’re tall enough where they roll over most cars and even many pickup trucks when full grown.

        EDIT: Nevermind. It was I-93, which has a speed of 70 mph in the section that I drove on and I couldn’t find a 70 mph speed limit sign on that highway in VT, because it ends quickly after entering VT. Couldn’t be bothered to find where the VT highway was though.

        70 MPH on I-93 in NH

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        There are some 110 km/h hwys near me. The average speed seems to be 130 km/hr and cops don’t seem to mind until you go faster than that. 20 over seems “acceptable” near me, even in school zones marked 40 km/hr.