• Got the Contributing Memberships stuff finally worked out and made up a thread as a sort of "How-To" to help people figure out how to participate. So if you need help figuring it out, here's the thread you need to take a look at -> http://www.corvetteflorida.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3581 Thank you, everyone! Rich Z.

Woman killed during Corvette test drive

Curacao

Island in the Caribbean.
ky00s4-ky00nn07fatal.0217.ks.jpg

Sheriff's investigators look over a 2003 grey Chevrolet Corvette that crashed into a tree, killing its driver and injuring the passenger on Mill Creek Drive just south of Lake Forest Drive in Lake Forest, Wednesday morning, Feb 17.

LAGUNA HILLS – A 29-year-old woman from Laguna Hills was killed this morning when a Corvette she was driving crashed into a tree on Mill Creek Drive.

A 28-year-old man who was riding in the car was taken to Mission Hospital in Mission Viejo to be treated for cuts and chest pain. His injuries were not life-threatening, a sheriff's lieutenant said.
Neither person was identified by officials.

Amy Thomas was taking a prospective buyer out for a test-drive, authorities said.

Around 8:15 a.m., the driver of a gray 2003 Corvette lost control near 23016 Mill Creek Dr. in Laguna Hills.

Thomas was headed eastbound on Lake Forest Drive, then "turned right on Mill Creek and just floored it," said Sheriff's Lt. Steve Doan.

The car skidded sideways, its driver's side door slamming into a tree. The car then apparently spun around before banging into another tree 20 feet onward, Doan said.

Mill Creek Drive is a two-lane street surrounded by office parks. If the car hadn't hit the tree, it would have probably crashed into a nearby office building, Doan said.

Afterward, the driver's side door of the Corvette was dangling from a hinge, the windshield was shattered, the roof bulged upward, and the front end showed damage.

The Orange County Sheriff's Department and Orange County Fire Authority went to the scene of the accident, just south of where the 405 and 5 merge.

Source: ocregister.com
 
Wow, test failed I guess.:nonod: The article says "neither person was identified by officials", and the next sentence gives the drivers name.:shrug01:
 
"turned right on Mill Creek and just floored it,"...that says it all

I use to live there years ago. They went from a three lane highway with a speed limit of +/- 45mph to a side street, two lanes with limit of +/- 25mph.
I am truly sorry......I HATE AMATURES!!! :mad:

:shrug01: Jim :shrug01:

P.S.: Look at the hood....could we also have a MagnaCharger?? :confused:
 
I use to live there years ago. They went from a three lane highway with a speed limit of +/- 45mph to a side street, two lanes with limit of +/- 25mph.
I am truly sorry......I HATE AMATURES!!! :mad:

:shrug01: Jim :shrug01:

P.S.: Look at the hood....could we also have a MagnaCharger?? :confused:

I was thinking the same thing Jim. Maggie...maggie...maggie...wonder if it's still good?:rofl1:
Rookies! When will people learn?

Wow, test failed I guess.:nonod: The article says "neither person was identified by officials", and the next sentence gives the drivers name.:shrug01:

Saw that too...guess they weren't "official" enough... it took an "authority" to do it:
Amy Thomas was taking a prospective buyer out for a test-drive, authorities said.
:D


"turned right on Mill Creek and just floored it,"...that says it all

Yepper!:thumbsdown:
 
Crazy thing, it sounded like it was HER car...she should have known how to drive it. And yeah, I bet it was a boosted motor. So sad. Looked like a nice car the dude was going to get.
 
Where are we going with these high perfomance cars? Mines 350HP and I can get into all kinds of trouble with it. Now they're coming out with 600+. Why? How fast do you need to be on a street or highway?

I just don't get it and I think the insurance companies will be drawing the line.
 
Not to mention that they made it ILLEGAL to drive our cars without purchasing their "products". There is just something fundamentally wrong with that picture, in my opinion... I seriously doubt that the US Constitution authorizes our government to FORCE "the people" to buy a product or service from a commercial concern.
 
Not to mention that they made it ILLEGAL to drive our cars without purchasing their "products". There is just something fundamentally wrong with that picture, in my opinion... I seriously doubt that the US Constitution authorizes our government to FORCE "the people" to buy a product or service from a commercial concern.

The same with residential home insurance. If you can't afford the sky roketing premiums and don't pay then guess who takes your home? Even if you are up to date and not a day late on your motgage payments.....
 
Not to mention that they made it ILLEGAL to drive our cars without purchasing their "products". There is just something fundamentally wrong with that picture, in my opinion... I seriously doubt that the US Constitution authorizes our government to FORCE "the people" to buy a product or service from a commercial concern.

The same with residential home insurance. If you can't afford the sky roketing premiums and don't pay then guess who takes your home? Even if you are up to date and not a day late on your motgage payments.....

Florida does not "require" insurance on automobiles. The lienholder may if the car's not paid off; however, if it's free and clear, there's no requirement to carry a commercially purchased insurance policy...here's the catch...

You MUST show proof of financial responsibility;)

The statute for no "insurance" actually reads failure to provide proof of financial responsibility...

and this opens up a whole different can o' worms....

As for homeowners insurance, again, if the house is paid for, there's no requirement to be insured. You will take it in the shorts though if something happens to your house or some knucklehead gets hurt on your property...
 
Florida does not "require" insurance on automobiles. The lienholder may if the car's not paid off; however, if it's free and clear, there's no requirement to carry a commercially purchased insurance policy...here's the catch...

You MUST show proof of financial responsibility;)

The statute for no "insurance" actually reads failure to provide proof of financial responsibility...

and this opens up a whole different can o' worms....

As for homeowners insurance, again, if the house is paid for, there's no requirement to be insured. You will take it in the shorts though if something happens to your house or some knucklehead gets hurt on your property...

I have better luck climbing Mount Kilimanjaro than meeting either of these conditions.... So off to work I go to pay my crazy high insurance....
 
Florida does not "require" insurance on automobiles. The lienholder may if the car's not paid off; however, if it's free and clear, there's no requirement to carry a commercially purchased insurance policy...here's the catch...

You MUST show proof of financial responsibility;)

The statute for no "insurance" actually reads failure to provide proof of financial responsibility...

and this opens up a whole different can o' worms....

I thought they recently closed that loop hole? Like within the past few years. :banghead:
 
I have better luck climbing Mount Kilimanjaro than meeting either of these conditions.... So off to work I go to pay my crazy high insurance....

You and me both brother!
Hell, even those that can afford it, use the insurance companies money:lmao:It's just that, well, they can afford it!

I thought they recently closed that loop hole? Like within the past few years. :banghead:

Not that I'm aware of but I could be mistaken.

I'll check it out tonight.

Thanks

Gordon
 
Back
Top