acc wrote:Regardless, driving at over 200kmh, on public roads, whether in Singapore or Malaysia, is irresponsible and places the lives of other innocent road users in unneccesary risk.
Completely agree.
Additionally, I think it is a fallacy to say that one can be driving way over the speed limit and still be safe, and that slow drivers can be poor drivers, and so the speed limit is just a guide, as has been suggested in these forums.
If one follows that kind of argument, then the following too would apply:
(a) A person could say, to justify himself, that he can drive safely even though he is intoxicated with alcohol way over the limit. So the alcohol limit is only a guide, hack it and the law. After all, some "dry" drivers drive more poorly than drunk drivers, so what is wrong with driving whilst drunk? ("I have driven whilst drunk many times before and can handle the vehicle well again tonight. See what I mean? More whisky please....", says the person).
(b) A person could say that he can handle a lorry or other large vehicle competently and does not need anything more than a Class III drivers' licence. So the classification system is just a guide. Hack it and the law, he is fully justitified in driving such vechicles without the necessary class of licence. Just don't get caught la. Better still, "I don't need a driver's licence. I have been driving since 16 with my dad's car in the carpark, no accidents what."
But why stop with traffic rules?
(c) An airline could say that its planes do not need the servicing required under Civil Aviation rules, e.g. full overhaul every xxx thousand kilometres or hours. After all, the plane would probably still fly safely. So the airlines skips the maintenance, does not change the gaskets in the engines, the brake pads in the wheels, etc. ("They look fine") Worse, forges the maintenance documents. Hack the law, we know better.
(d) A building contractor thinks the civil engineer is kiasu. In fact, building regulations are kiasu or kiasi too. Why does the building need concrete of a certain strength (e.g. rated at pressure of 5000 pounds per square inch)? After all the building can still stand with concrete of only 3000 square inches of pressure strength. I mean, my employees deserve a nice bonus this year. So lets cut corners and dilute the concrete mix a bit. No harm.
(e) A private clinic thinks the law is an ass. Why bother to dispose of needles after only one use as required by law? Isn't the environment just as important? Nope, if the patient looks healthy, just wash with tap water and re-use the needle. Risks are low, not mine anyway.
Anyone agrees with arguments (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) above?
Would you want to fly on that airline which "knows better"? Would you want to live or work in that building? Would you want to go to that clinic?
Sooo.... back to speed limits. "I can drive safely at 160km/h... and I think the speed limit of 100km/h on this road is just a guide. It can be flagrantly flouted at will. Just don't get caught, I am a good driver."
