This video is a big "up yours!" to the people who always say "but where are you going to use that kind of power?" - on the highway, that's where!

To be honest mate your an idiot.

This guy driving should be thrown straight into jail. No respect for the law.

Just because you can go 219 mph doesn't mean you should go 219 mph. You wanna go fast? Do it on the Autobahn or on your own private track.

Excessive speed at night is more dangerous than in the day since other drivers cannot precisely judge your speed or distance.

I own a Honda VTX 1300 and borrow my friend's Honda CBR 1000, so I'm all in to speed. Just not at the expense of others.

All I can say is if some person killed my wife and kids doing a stunt like this, they better hope they didnt live thru the crash.

While it is dangerous, I would wager this was done in the dead of night with several people in cars ahead scouting for traffic walkie talkies.

I wonder how accurate that 219mph reading is. I think most mags testing on a hot track mid day hit 205-209mph. A mostly straight stretch in a cold desert (Arizona) night might produce more power...oh and it supposedly was the LP640 edition.

"This guy driving should be thrown straight into jail. No respect for the law."

What did he do wrong? He wasn't swerving around, cutting people off, tailgating or anything dangerous. Despite that popular myth, no one has died from going too fast. They've died because they too fast for road conditions, the capability of the car, or their abilities (or any combination of the three).

Contrary to popular belief, speed limits are NOT about safety. They're about money. Governments know that people value their time and will always go faster than the absurdly low speed limits they put in place. As such, they can then use this as an excuse to take even more money from their citizens.

All you ninnies crying about the speed and no respect for the law, blah, blah, blah! need to get over yourselves.

I love peoples perceptions, what wife and kid did you see on the road in this video, none, no one around, not to be able precisely judge your speed or distance! DUH!

Most of the US posted speed limits are not based on capability but by political pressure from folks just as your selfs.

It's a money making machine nothing more nothing less.

For a comprehensive study go here: http://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm

"This guy driving should be thrown straight into jail. No respect for the law."

are you trying to tell us that you never, ever, ever speed? it doesn't matter if you're doing 60 in a 55 zone, or 219 in a 55 zone, you're still not respecting the law.

".........no one has died from going too fast"

Actually that is true, it's the rapid deceleration that kills you when you hit a wall or another car.

Honestly, I find it hard to believe that there are people alive who really believe it matter not how fast you are traveling. It's almost as though because they love to speed so much that they have given away all common sense in order to justify it.
I used to live in Dusseldorf Germany for several years, and I can tell you that it really is great fun to go so fast. Although most of the time, there is actually a much much slower speed limit on their highway system.
You can argue there are less collisions there which would be true, however this has nothing to do with speed AT ALL. Keep to mind that when you do crash at speed, and is often the case there, you are not walking away. The 100% of death is much higher vs the number of crashes. Much higher.
The reason there is less crashes is because of a properly managed road system. Timed traffic lights. Only two lanes on the highways...sometimes three but rarely. Also, adaptive speed limits. Plus...here is the big one, people MUST take a long and expensive driving test and can not drive until 18.
I am sure you will take this a trolling or flaming or what ever, just think about things logically and you can see how silly it is to think that speed does not impact safety.

Teah, and thx for the request. Though, I don't know when it was happened. I think it was midnight, because there were no cars in the middle of the night.

Remy,

I agree entirely with the idea of speeding tickets being revenue generators, but saying they weren't doing anything wrong is quite frankly rediculous. If a car had been in his lane he would not have had time to change lanes to avoid an accident. Current speed limits are too low, but not having a limit at all is dangerous. Not everyone knows the limit of their cars.

@Remy:
What did he do wrong? He wasn't swerving around, cutting people off, tailgating or anything dangerous. Despite that popular myth, no one has died from going too fast. They've died because they too fast for road conditions, the capability of the car, or their abilities (or any combination of the three).

Contrary to popular belief, speed limits are NOT about safety. They're about money. Governments know that people value their time and will always go faster than the absurdly low speed limits they put in place. As such, they can then use this as an excuse to take even more money from their citizens.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What he did wrong was excessive speed. Depending on the jurisdiction, He would have instantly lost his license and jailed. Not to mention the criminal liability he would have faced if he caused an accident. I am all for high speed driving in closed environments (race track, drag strip). However, whether he employed spotters or not, these are public roads regulated by local speed ordinances. And yes I was in law enforcement and I have my own views/misgivings on arbitrary speed limits, but the danger this driver placed on the public is unfathomable. Also, just because you have a vehicle that can do 219mph, it does not mean you have the capabilities to handle that speed. A classic case of someone who has more dollars than sense.

yeah, this guy is a douche. Its a public road there he doesn't have the right to do what ever he wants. then again I want the guillotine to come back.

That's what 350 km/h? Even if it is 340 that's impressive.

I agree that it was dangerous. If he crashed into somebody slower it would be ugly. But as a motorcycle rider, I've see worse at much lower speeds. I cannot bring my self to put my daughters to ride with me anymore, people simply can't judge the acceleration of a motorcyle, specially coming at traffic lights. Even when you don't want to go past 40, you quickly reach 40, and the stupid 16year old on a civic leaving a driveway more than once put my life in danger, and should deserve in my mind as much jail time as this guy.

Also, he should learn how to pronounce Murcielago. If you buy an inport, you should learn how to pronounce it. The "c" is more like "ch" as in chance, and the accent is on the "e", not on "la". Bah. Maybe they pronounce pizza as piza.

"What he did wrong was excessive speed."

How is that wrong? Who was hurt? What near accident did he cause? If he caused an accident, then by all means rape him to death with fines and jail time. However, if no one is hurt in any way, shape, or form, what crime was committed other than defying the Thought Police?

"I am sure you will take this a trolling or flaming or what ever, just think about things logically and you can see how silly it is to think that speed does not impact safety."

If you read what I wrote instead of intentionally ignoring it, I specify the times when speed does impact saftey. However, on a straight line on a dry road with a car that has good maneuverability and brakes, there was very minimal danger with what he did (especially since there were very few cars around).

Also Patty, one huge reason that Germany has fewer crashes is that they put more effort into the main cause of accidents -- tailgaters. If the police in the US put as much effort into nailing tailgaters as they do speeders, you'd see the number of accidents drop by a huge percent.

Apparently I'm the only person here who got the message of 1984 - the rest of you seem to all be scribbling 2+2=5 and chanting "War is Peace", "Freedom is Slavery", and "Ignorance is Strength".

@Remy:

Still respectfully disagree, it ts the same argument that cronic alcoholics tell. "I driven home hundreds of times without a single problem." Does that make it right? However, the danger occurs with the variance of speed. At those speeds, stopping a vehicle at that velocity requires exponentially more distance, furthermore reaction times to avoid an accident are significantly reduced ( something BTW that most race car drivers practice constantly), couple that with countless other variables (condition of road ((coefficient of friction)), possible other traffic, debris on roadway and you have a recipe for disaster. If the dude can afford a Lambo, then he can afford to cover his sorry a$$ in a lawsuit. It is his life/license on the line not me.

Now have I ever done the same silly stuff in the past? Of course I have, but that was twenty years ago and I was fortunate to not have tickets, accidents, lawsuits to contend with. So I am lucky and also realize how unprepared I really was at that speed until I took EVOC and high speed driving courses. I am older and have too much to lose for stupidity now. When I want to race, I have three dragstrips ranging from 15 min to 1 hour from my house. If you want to follow the "Street Racing is not a Crime" group, it is your perogative. I'd suggest upping your Umbrella Insurance policy.

It might be fast, but the guy in the Veyron would be flashing his lights to go around him....

Agree Remy...

If that guy crashed into me it is likely that I wouldn't live but if I did I would sure as hell sue him for every cent.

"If you want to follow the "Street Racing is not a Crime" group, it is your perogative. "

Never said that. However, if you do it without causing an accident, show where the harm is. Just like if I play russian roulette - as long as the bullet doesn't go off, where's the harm? Is it a dumb idea (in either case)? Sure, but if no one gets hurt there's no wrong being done.

Now, as to "At those speeds, stopping a vehicle at that velocity requires exponentially more distance" -- depends on the car (and usually cars that go fast can stop even faster than they accelerate). For instance, Top Gear took a Mercedes SLR McLaren to 120 mph and then stopped in a shorter distance then the government regulations for a 60-0 stop. More than twice the speed and it stopped in a shorter distance than the required 60-0 stopping distance (figured I'd repeat it to make sure it sinks in). Is some guy with a turbo Civic with nitrous going to have brakes like that? Probably not. Is a Lambo going to? Typically, yes.

@Remy:
However, if you do it without causing an accident, show where the harm is. Just like if I play russian roulette - as long as the bullet doesn't go off, where's the harm? Is it a dumb idea (in either case)? Sure, but if no one gets hurt there's no wrong being done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed that no harm was done, however like your russian roulette analogy , it sets a precident. He could do this 10 -15 times, maybe more, but the law of averages comes into play. Again, I will go back to the DWI/DUI analogy, one may be able to drive home without incident several times, but does that make it any less dangerous. The problem is the POTENTIAL is there for harm. ( and like the russian roulette, the law of averages workes against you the more you participate in the activity) And yes, a supercar like this will have superior brakes & handling but that doesn't account for the driver's skill/alertness/experience. The Stig is/was an accomplished professional racer with experience to wring out the true performance of a vehicle (again in a Lotus designed closed training ground). Furthermore, a drivers license is not a privilege not a right.

First, the Stig wasn't driving - Jeremy was. Secondly - "The problem is the POTENTIAL is there for harm". Wow. Do you realize how psychotically totalitarianist that is to want to punish people for having the POTENTIAL to commit a crime? Newsflash - by walking into a store you have the POTENTIAL to shoplift. You have the POTENTIAL to assault the clerk and steal the money from the register. You can't possibly be trying to claim that people can (or should) be charged with having the POTENTIAL to commit a crime.

"Furthermore, a drivers license is not a privilege not a right."

First, I"m assuming that the first not is a typo. Second, what right does the government have to tell you what you can do with your possession (in this case a car)? Why not have licensing for being able to watch a tv or use a grill. I mean, you could really, REALLY get hurt using a grill (especially if it's propane...you could blow your house up). There are people who don't have a license who can drive MUCH better than some people WITH a license.

What this amounts to is you want to fine / imprison people because you're afraid of what MIGHT happen. What you're forgetting is that you MIGHT die from any one of a billion every day things at any given time. That aspirin you take next time you have a headache MIGHT kill you (my sister is a pharmacist and will definitely tell you that every kind of medicine, no matter how safe, can kill you). I hardly think you're going to say that aspirin should be outlawed and that people who sell it or take it should be fined / imprisoned. Why should the speed at which you drive be any different?

I have to say the government does have a right to tell you what you can and can not do with your possessions because that is a "public" road. You and I pay taxes so it can exist and also you and I allow the government to dictate what is allowed and not allowed. If that was a private driveway then I would agree, government can piss off.

I think it is really hard to compare cooking hamburgers and taking an aspirin to driving 217 mpg on a public road.

You talk of potential to commit a crime. That isn't why there are speed limits or recommended dosages of aspirin. They are there for your safety and the safety of others (speed limits that is)

You wonder why Germans only crash once. I wish there
was such a thing as an autobahn here in the states but to be honest I think the average American has the complete wrong attitude about driving for it to work. Most Americans on the road think that they are entitled to the space around them (ie. driving slow in the left lane) Most don't understand nor would want to adhere to a process that would allow a 100+ mph speed limit. So we cater to the least common denominator in this great country of ours. We eat and talk and do what ever while driving. In Germany they drive and thats it. As for this guy, I think he is a douche bag. Go to a track or private lane or go to Germany. As a tax paying citizen I want him off the road.

"They are there for your safety and the safety of others (speed limits that is)"

No, they're not. Speed limits are about money, plain and simple. Are you aware that the federal government holds a threat over states that if they raise their speed limits above a certain point (I believe it's 65, but I'm not positive) that they lose federal funding?

The rest of your argument consists of "I'm scared as hell that something bad MIGHT happen, so someone should be punished to make me feel better". Again, show me where this guy hurt anyone and I'll gladly say he should be fined / imprisoned.

You have the right to do whatever you damn well please as long as you are not harming anyone against their will. (The "against their will" part is necessary because someone may pay / ask someone else to harm them for whatever reason, such as to end their suffering)

Its not about being scared. Under your logic everyone should be allowed to do whatever we want because we aren't harming anyone (until we actually do get hurt, of coarse). I wonder how many accidents there are involving a death where the cop says, if only he was driving a little slower. Wake up dude, speed kills. Yes there is an increased potential of getting hurt. I don't know if you ride a motorcycle or not but next time you get on a bike strip down to your underwear, don't wear a helmet or eye protection and go haul ass down the highway with your eyes wide open. Shouldn't matter to you because you don't believe in raising the "potential" of getting hurt. In life there are risks and then there are stupid risks. You, unfortunately, don't have the ability to discern between the two.

"You, unfortunately, don't have the ability to discern between the two."

No, I clearly said above that the guy is dumb for doing this. I merely said he wasn't doing anything WRONG. You fail to distinguish between taking a risk and harming someone.

People like you are why there's 50 billion lawsuits a year over completely ridiculous crap. You think just because someone does something crazy that they've committed a crime. They haven't. All they've done is made you realize that you're terrified of that fact that you MIGHT get hurt at some point in time.

@Remy:

I actually like alot of your posts but will vehemently disagree here your argument does not hold water. Yes, I am aware that I could be stuck by a bus tonight ( that is a random possibility. ( yes the potential is there...sorry I had to get the word POTENTIAL in somewhere....) A will conceed that speed limits are at the stranglehold of the Federal government and its control over state funding...you are correct about that.

Vehicular law, in this case "reckless driving" is for the general safety of the public. It does not matter if an accident was caused, it matters that the reckless driving is creating an unsafe environment for the public. Yes these are public roads and the public expects, check that demands a level of safety when using them. The laws are there to deter reckless behaviour. This driving and the danger it causes is preventable and enforced by legal means. I sorry if that pisses you off but that is the rules you and I abide by when we are issued a drivers license. It is inferred that our license is revokable by violating vehicular laws. The license is not a given.

You said,"what right does the government have to tell you what you can do with your possession (in this case a car)? " It has the right to revoke your license if it deems that your reckless driving has created an unsafe environment, Don't believe me, look at any street racers who have had there licenses suspended and cars impounded for there actions.

BTW privilege spelled correctly...good night

As far as "having the potential to rob a store when you go in it..." that's true but when you intentionally go into a store with a gun to potentially rob it, THEN you are having the potential to rob the store... this fella was on the highway with other vehicles running at insane speeds causing potentially damaging situations... if I walk into a store with a gun, I have the potential to rob.. if I go in without anything, I have the potential to rob but not the intent .. this fella had the intent to hurt someone by exhibiting his power behind the wheel.. same as if I exhibited my power from behind the trigger in a store. What's the difference.. someone could get killed from the situation that YOU have just created.

you guys must be stpuid or what, because there are cameras like in almost every section of Arizonian Highway. I'll not be surprise if they take away your license and lock your up for couple weeks for doing 219 on freeway.

"Vehicular law, in this case "reckless driving" is for the general safety of the public. It does not matter if an accident was caused, it matters that the reckless driving is creating an unsafe environment for the public."

But he WASN'T driving recklessly. He wasn't swerving around. He wasn't cutting people off. He wasn't tailgating. He was going in a straight line on a pretty much deserted chunk of road. Driving fast is not the same as driving recklessly. If he had been swerving around or anything like that, I'd admit he was doing something dangerous.

"It has the right to revoke your license if it deems that your reckless driving has created an unsafe environment, Don't believe me, look at any street racers who have had there licenses suspended and cars impounded for there actions."

No, you're talking about LAWS. I'm talking about what they have the RIGHT to do. If you've never noticed in life, the law and justice are rarely the same thing.

"this fella had the intent to hurt someone by exhibiting his power behind the wheel"

No, he didn't. He had the intent to go fast in a straight line without hitting anything. If you didn't notice, he did it 3 or 4 times in a row successfully. Again, you're just being one of those "OMG I'M SCARED!" people. You probably also think that lead is some evil thing that will conspire to kill you. Lead is only dangerous if you EAT it and in large doses over an extended period of time.

People didn't used to be terrified of everything. It wasn't until a few decades ago that they started peeing their pants and screaming for people to be arrested over every little thing.

ahh Im thinking that most people missed that the highway sign said CLOSED on it. You know, probably so they could legally break a world record. Maybe not

Lets assume under a controlled situation a McLaren at 120 can stop faster than a normal car at 60-0.

However, 219 is almost twice as fast as 120, thus requiring much more distance than120mph.

Factor in extremely reduced reaction times for unforeseen events (even something as silly as a pothole in the highway) and you get the real potential for problems.

I don't see the arguement that this guy was not reckless. He's travelling almost two to three times faster than almost anything he could encounter, assuming he wouldn't come up on a law abiding citizen driving 65.

On a public road there are simply too many uncontrollable variables with serious repercussions to self and others.

Right or wrong, it's plain stupid.

To the idiot that says there's no crime if there's no pain, you're a complete retard and obviously don't know squat about laws. What are you, some college know-it-all hippie wacko who thinks 1984 is the best book written? What'd you do, read it last week and it "opened your mind" and that we're all "sheeple?" Why don't you read some of Orwell's other works. He's obviously not on the left-wing wacko side. I hate your lot.

An analogy would be if I were to fire a minigun at you while you ran across a field. If there's no harm, what's the crime according to your logic.

Justin, that "Closed" sign you mentioned was only for the upcoming exit, (Hawes Street exit on the 202 south of Mesa) not the highway.

Casey

@ Al Frick

LOL! At your analogy.

Even though analogies should be avoided in an argument since they do not "prove" your case right. Most of the analogies posted are fallacies. Still hilarious though!

"To the idiot that says there's no crime if there's no pain, you're a complete retard and obviously don't know squat about laws."

If you were able to read something more complex than Green Eggs and Ham, you'd realize that I specifically said I'm not talking about LAWS, I'm talking about justice.

"Why don't you read some of Orwell's other works. He's obviously not on the left-wing wacko side."

I'm aware of that. Orwell was against totalitarians like yourself who want to fine / imprison people just because they scared you.

When your own views come to bite you in the ass and you get sued / fined / locked up when you didn't do anything wrong, you'll realize how stupid this whole "lets punish someone who DIDN'T hurt anyone!" mentality is. Ironically, the same people pushing to punish people for not hurting anyone are almost always the same people who want to let someone go free when they DID hurt someone. Did you guys just do WAY too many drugs and are unable to realize that you don't punish someone for not harming someone and that you do punish someone when they do harm someone?

Don't worry, I know none of you in the Socialist States of America will ever turn off the football game and put down the beer long enough to realize that every year you have fewer and fewer rights because of politicians manipulating your paranoia.

Remy:

Socialist States of America...

Beer and football (AR AR WOOF WOOF mentality)

Since I'm also so defensive and we butt heads often, I thought I would take this moment to say that I agree with you 1000%.

Quite sick of it myself. Would love to kill any legislation passed since FDR if not further: get rid of welfare type programs which have been proven to make the economy worse not better, get rid of the 1934 NFA gun ban and everything since, disband DHS, ATF, etc. Allow Americans to defend themselves on planes instead of teaching children in schools and adults in the media that only the police are allowed to have weapons, etc. Lifting government infringement of our rights (ie: carrying on airlines) would go a long way further to making the country safer than arresting American citizens for smuggling sporks and shampoo in plastic baggies onto planes...

Some people just don't understand that freedom comes at a price. That price is the fact that some people will abuse that freedom and harm others from time to time. It can will and does happen because in the absence of Orwell inspired thought police rounding people up for what they could or might theoretically do before they do it. These are the same people that thing the AR15 in my armory is inherently evil and is going to walk out any day and shoot up a school.

And these same people want to give killers a second chance after second chance, and then blame the weapons used.

Then there is the whole lot of socialist liberals who would rather see us all equally poor than allow those who try to better themselves...

GRRR

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

"this fella had the intent to hurt someone by exhibiting his power behind the wheel"

No, he didn't. He had the intent to go fast in a straight line without hitting anything.

LOL

I think the people whining about this are just pissed off they don't have a Lamborghini and want to see someone bigger than them punished.

haha chris, agreed.
i sure as hell would do that if i had a Lamborghini.
Yes, everyone has a point with he COULD HAVE hurt someone, but there was noone out and no one was hurt.
so get over it.

haha chris, agreed.
i sure as hell would do that if i had a Lamborghini.
Yes, everyone has a point with he COULD HAVE hurt someone, but there was no one out and no one was hurt.
so get over it.

why are you guys so mad about this, its not like he couldent stop the car if hit the breaks on a lambo im willing to believe it will come to a safe stop, this isnt a buick people its not like a wheele would fall off... the people who are angry will never own a lambo, maby if lamoborghini make a SUV, otherwise they will be in there volvo XC90 doing 70 mph in the fast lane....

Remy Lebeau:
"What did he do wrong?"

ummm i think he was doing 4 times the limit... which is cool and all but it's a public highway...

you kill a person you go to jail. this is pretty much attempted homicide of 3rd degree... if he actually killed someone he'd get charged.

I hope cops have enough brains to fin those jackasses (i mean posting a video proving a crime AND giving out your names AND appearing on the video yourself?) they should go to jail just for that act of stupidity.

but than again if the can afford murcielago they can no doubt afford lawyers that would get them out of jail on a whom. isn't this country with equality and justice for ritch great? blah

ok I'm ranting now, peace....

@chris

("I think the people whining about this are just pissed off they don't have a Lamborghini and want to see someone bigger than them punished.")

That's the thing he's not bigger than me (both physically nor socially). something about the way this country was founded with equality and justice? congrats on the lambo, with that kind of money i'm sure he can purchase a few laps on a track or rent a strip on an airfield for a day and speed his little heart out....

besides screw sports cars (ok now i am whining because car makers seem to think that only people under 5'8" should fit like they're compensating for something :D)

Anybody that can afford a lamborghini can afford renting a track for a day. Those people deserve to have their license permenantly removed and be sentanced to riding in public transportation for the rest of their lives.

Atleast the people driving the public transportation will observe the laws, regardless of whether or not they believe in them.

i've never seen so much whining over a video posted on a thread like this... has no one watched the news with all of the deadly traffic accidents, shootings, etc? why are we focused on this video... nothing went wrong.

i do agree with a comment above that at velocities that this car was at, it takes exponentially more time to stop the vehicle. however, this car is capable of stopping much more quickly.

i whole-heartedly agree with the comment about tail-gaters causing more accidents than speed. has no one noticed [especially in arizona] that no one uses turn signals, drives in the left lane with no one in the right lane, and tailgates way more than anyone should be comfortable with? why does anyone think arizona insurance is so high?