On 2007-05-09 09:00:53 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On 2007-05-08 23:30:48 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

The only non-arguable definition of "too fast" is whether or not the
vehicle was exceeding the speed limit. That can be precisely measured.
Everything else is subjective.

You can precisely measure the distance that the driver could see and the
stopping distance of the car.

Rubbish. The stopping distance is an average across a range of cars under
certain conditions.

One cannot say that this applies to a given car under all conditions so
it's a notional value.


If the stopping distance exceeds the visibility distance he was driving
too
fast whatever the speed limit.

Irrelevant. This then enters the realms of opinion.

No it is a fact that he was travelling too fast.

No it isn't.

The only *absolute* definition of "traveling too fast" is if the speed
limit is exceeded.



The question about speed is purely physics and nothing to do with opinion at
all.

No it isn't. Published stopping distances are based on averages under
particular conditions.

To determine the complete story would require details of the precise
vehicle conditions, the road surface and conditions and just as
importantly the reaction time of the driver.

There is a substantial variation between reaction time among individuals.


The only opinions are about him being competent and if it was a reasonable
thing to do.


Incorrect. The only *definition* of "too fast" is exceeding the speed limit




Its just an excuse to avoid hard thinking to say the speed is opinion.

Repeat in English.


You are attempting to make a circular argument based on if the driver
had an accident, he must have been traveling too fast.

There's a basic fallacy in that.