Were they (or anyone except the naughty lads) ACTUALLY endangered . I have seen nothing reported to suggest such a conclusion.Oh boy! How obtuse was I?! Ok. When I said 'my' it was a 'royal my' on behalf of all the other road users who have been on the same piece of road as those guys.
There is , in my mind, a clear distinction between riding *dangerously* and riding at an illegal *speed*.
It may be that the two in question did endanger other road users. In that case they deserve condemnation. But , I have not seen anything reported to draws me to such a conclusion.
A hypothetical surmise that if you, or Her Majesty, or the Easter Bunny, had been on the same piece of road , they would somehow have automatically been endangered (beyond the inevitable fact that any other vehicle is always a danger) is totally speculative and calls upon emotion rather than logic.
This all too easily leads to the "I don't do that so that proves it must be dangerous , immoral and perverted" view of life. Many people do things which I do not do - for many reasons. many people do things that you do not do. Neither statement proves that the unspecified "things" are dangerous, or otherwise to be deprecated. Merely that some people do that which I (and you) do not.
It is as if we were to condemn all Honda riders for endangering the rest of us on the basis that somehow they would cause us to be infected with AIDS.
Bookmarks