Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

driver100

imidazol97 said:

driver100 said:

That is about where I got my ticket going 95 in a 70 mph area..my first in 16 years, and none after for 6 years

Where were all those people slowing everything down in the middle and left lanes when you needed them!!!

It's their fault they didn't slow you down and you got the ticket.

Good point....I have been saved from tickets a few times by a slow guy in front of me....have to look at the glass half full.
Unfortunately, in this case I was the first car behind the two trucks. I think they plan it that way.....radio the cop ahead they got one ready to fly.

Mr_Shiftright

Yes that's the best way. You monitor the prostate and if the testing shows an aggressive strain, then maybe you need to do something about it. But if it's the typical slow growing kind, seems to me you could just keep an eye on it, very diligently. I know people who are quite alive and healthy 10 years after diagnosis, with no surgery.

oldfarmer50

qbrozen said:

oldfarmer50 said:

Bad news, I won't be getting that red convertible. Finally talked to the owner and there were more red flags than the May Day parade. Oh well, there'll always be another one. I'll keep looking.

I think it is good news when someone avoids buying a Sebring. ;b

LOL, this from a guy who owns 2 Chrysler products. Pray tell, what convertible would you reccommend for $3k?

oldfarmer50

Mr_Shiftright said:

Yes that's the best way. You monitor the prostate and if the testing shows an aggressive strain, then maybe you need to do something about it. But if it's the typical slow growing kind, seems to me you could just keep an eye on it, very diligently. I know people who are quite alive and healthy 10 years after diagnosis, with no surgery.

Every guy who lives long enough gets it but most die happily of something else first. As I understand it the earlier it is discovered the more aggressive it is. I think of Bill Bixby (the Hulk) as someone who got it quite young and died soon afterward.

sda

I enjoyed my '92 LeBaron GTC turbo 5sp convertible. It had a fair amount of body flex, but didn't rattle and squeak, or leak water when it rained.

stickguy

now that, is a really sharp looking car. Classic.

graphicguy

Gas prices jumping way up. We predicted it. Doesn’t make it easier to swallow.

http://flip.it/ufiTY9

bwia

oldfarmer50 said:

Yes that's the best way. You monitor the prostate and if the testing shows an aggressive strain, then maybe you need to do something about it. But if it's the typical slow growing kind, seems to me you could just keep an eye on it, very diligently. I know people who are quite alive and healthy 10 years after diagnosis, with no surgery.

Every guy who lives long enough gets it but most die happily of something else first. As I understand it the earlier it is discovered the more aggressive it is. I think of Bill Bixby (the Hulk) as someone who got it quite young and died soon afterward.

Because of incontinence associated with prostate  surgery many thought that was an undesirable outcome. As a result other forms of treatments were pursued with different levels of success. 

So my question is, has the surgery been perfected to the point that incontinence is rare?

qbrozen

oldfarmer50 said:

oldfarmer50 said:

Bad news, I won't be getting that red convertible. Finally talked to the owner and there were more red flags than the May Day parade. Oh well, there'll always be another one. I'll keep looking.

I think it is good news when someone avoids buying a Sebring. ;b

LOL, this from a guy who owns 2 Chrysler products. Pray tell, what convertible would you reccommend for $3k?

Everybody has bad models. I don't write off a whole manufacturer for one. If I did, I'd have no car.

alternate vert? Saab, miata, 3-series, Z3. There really is no shortage. And, yes, I would take a $3k 150k-mile 3-series over a 75k-mile Sebring any day.

oldfarmer50

sda said:

I enjoyed my '92 LeBaron GTC turbo 5sp convertible. It had a fair amount of body flex, but didn't rattle and squeak, or leak water when it rained.

I'd prefer that over a Sebring but they're getting pretty rare in good shape with low miles.

oldfarmer50

qbrozen said:

oldfarmer50 said:

qbrozen said:

oldfarmer50 said:

Bad news, I won't be getting that red convertible. Finally talked to the owner and there were more red flags than the May Day parade. Oh well, there'll always be another one. I'll keep looking.

I think it is good news when someone avoids buying a Sebring. ;b

LOL, this from a guy who owns 2 Chrysler products. Pray tell, what convertible would you reccommend for $3k?

Everybody has bad models. I don't write off a whole manufacturer for one. If I did, I'd have no car.

alternate vert? Saab, miata, 3-series, Z3. There really is no shortage. And, yes, I would take a $3k 150k-mile 3-series over a 75k-mile Sebring any day.

I would too but I don't have the knowledge to assess the quality of one of those. Not sure I would buy any car with 150k miles though.

berri

Snake - Nashville is often a parking lot too. Have you ever skipped 65 and got onto I-24 and then connect to I-57 up Illinois into the Chicago area? Avoids a lot of urban driving and is usually similar in time. If you don't mind another hour or so, you can also go I-10, then cut up at an angle on 4 lane through Montgomery. AL to Birmingham(I-65). Skips Georgia and Atlanta, but not Nashville, then continue either the I-24 to I-57 or your I-65 north route.

tbirdmarco

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8eOdY875yWM

snakeweasel

Well the check engine light came on in the Sebring. I had a feeling that it was the gas cap as it felt loose putting it back on and I couldn't get that clicking noise. But just to make sure I got the code scanned and it looks like I was right. $10 fix.  

xwesx

snakeweasel said:

Well the check engine light came on in the Sebring. I had a feeling that it was the gas cap as it felt loose putting it back on and I couldn't get that clicking noise. But just to make sure I got the code scanned and it looks like I was right. $10 fix.  

Lesson learned: Don't talk about the Sebring!

driver100

sda said:

I enjoyed my '92 LeBaron GTC turbo 5sp convertible. It had a fair amount of body flex, but didn't rattle and squeak, or leak water when it rained.

Great car.....I always liked those LeBarons. If they used that design today it would still be a sharp looking car.

driver100

graphicguy said:

Gas prices jumping way up. We predicted it. Doesn’t make it easier to swallow.

http://flip.it/ufiTY9

You're not supposed to drink the stuff!

andres3

The first motion was a change of venue based on CA vehicle code where it was requested at the time of the citation, but was not granted by the officer. In contention (perhaps, as the Officer nor DA showed up to oppose me), was that I most definitely worked closer to the County Seat than the assigned Court. The VC does say you have to live or work closer to "demand" the County Seat. I used a business card and my sworn under oath and penalty of perjury testimony that indeed my place of work was closer to the County Seat (geographically wasn't even close, so a map was not needed in my opinion), so it should clearly be granted if we are to follow the law. She said something riduclous to the effect of "I hadn't established to the court's satisfaction I worked closer to the County Seat." I was flabbergasted, as I was UNOPPOSED! the People were not represented, other than by this judge that seemed to take on the role of prosecutor instead of judge! This is the SAME EXACT motion granted to my lawyer a few months ago. Only difference there was that the Officer did grant the County Seat, and a Court adminisitrative error placed it in the wrong Court. Their is PUBLISHED case law for the County Seat VC to be adhered to, so my case was highly appealable since I was later found guilty and my rightful motion was improperly and incorrectly denied. That would be solid grounds to overthrow the case. The People's only argument to oppose that would be to argue that the "error" didn't prejudice my case substantially (which I know it did, but the Court might not accept or like the reasons why). I should have appealed the decision based on the faulty motion denial, but I didn't. Would have cost some serious time and money. Lawyers don't like to waste thier political capital on stuff like this. They'd probably upset the judge who's ruling got appealed, and they make more money on the sheer numbers of cases they take in traffic court.

The second motion was for "compelling discovery" since my informal and properly issued Discovery Request for documents was ignored by the City, the DA, and the law enforcement agency involved (Sheriffs).

Two pretty basic motions that had nothing to do with one another. I had a similar motion to the second one previously granted at the County Seat for another case. These motions come straight out of the NOLO PRESS David Brown books. They are nothing extraordinary.

The judge in Ventura didn't like all the points of my defense, which included mentioning I had a radar detector that indicated to my vehicle wasn't the one that was "radared." He also probably didn't like that I made the officer show twice, since on the first trial date they had not responded to my discovery request, in in response to my motion to compel discovery, they suddenly produced the requested items right then and there that day at trial. This is why I now insist on a motion hearing BEFORE trial date.

Anyway, I was given a choice to review the documents right then and there and have my trial a half hour or 2 later (as needed), or a continuance. Since the Officer had showed up, I went with continuance. I think my motion plus a thorough defense and cross examination (since he showed up again!) bothered the judged enough that he let it show. There's no real good defense for 97 MPH, but I brought up every plausible reasonable doubt from tire inflation to radar errors. The detector worked fine for other CHP radar, I have never been given to this date any reason to think it malfunctioned the one time it mattered. I may have been speeding, but I believe his 97 radar reading was spurious error or made-up. He also stated he estimated my speed before activating the radar, which must of been for quite a spectacular range of distance given we were headed in opposite directions. I got him to admit he couldn't tell what brand/model of car I was driving at that distance, but somehow the court believes his speed estimate is accurate anyway? I wasn't any good at the timeline defense back then, but if this happened again, I'd try to get the officer to testify to a timeline of events, and then use speed math to show that the positions of our vehicles throughout the timeline may not line up with his story.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

henryn said:

andres3 said:

I do think "bad apple" judges such as you'll find in the Traffic Courts ought to think about self-preservation a bit more when they dole out their arbitrary sentences for traffic crimes unfairly. They might encounter a psychotic defendant one day.

You should be more careful with your words, that (above) could almost be taken as a threat.

And with your publicly stated attitude about driving (basically, everyone else should just stay home to avoid getting in your way), I wouldn’t see any tickets or fines that you might get as “arbitrary” or “unfair”. Rather the opposite.

To that I say "GOOD!" Some judges seem much too comfortable exerting the vast amount of power they have in their courtroom, with little regard to being overturned on appeal.

Anything to make them feel a bit less comfortable is a good thing in my opinion. Don't really want them to feel like a Tenured Professor. While they should not be scared into not doling out justice, they should be scared about doling out arbitrary and unfair rulings. My impression has been the "fear" of being overturned and overruled was not "large" enough in Traffic Court.

As you can see, even Federals Appeals Courts (high level) are routinely corrected by the SCOTUS. Sometimes even SCOTUS makes unanimous 9-0 decisions, which makes you wonder why it had to be taken that high in the first place!

And it might surprise you to learn that most of my citations over the years have been for "gotcha" violations. Not speeding. Not tailgating. Not unsafe lane changes. In fact, nothing unsafe of any kind. Technical violations at times, yes, sometimes, they just plain got it wrong.

It does surprise me as I cannot remember you posting anything about those citations, just getting busted for speeding. Maybe you could link one of your previous posts talking about one of those "gotcha" citations.

Let's see. The last ticket I was convicted for was a "Stop Sign" violation. Yes, the intersection near my home where I believe in 1,000 visits to this stop sign, I've never encountered a crossing car that needed to be yieilded to first. Talk about high traffic and high hazard! I probably rolled through at less than 3 MPH, and sight lines are amazing. He wasn't on the "travel" portion of roadway, but hidden in a parking spot along the residential street; behind a parked car.

I recall my story of my only "not guilty" verdict. Was a trial by declaration too. VC cited for was "Passing on the Right Shoulder." I successfully argued either 1) the lane wasn't a shoulder but the right-most lane of travel, and/or 2) even if it was a shoulder, I didn't pass anyone.

He didn't explain if he bought both arguments, but I only needed to convince him of one of those elements, and a not guilty verdict results.

I received my only tailgating ticket ever when I was still in college. That one was funny, as I remember it being possibly the worst "cut-off" in my entire life. Unsafe lane change was the correct violation to issue, for the guy in front of me!

I have at least 3 incidences of being ticketed for "running a red light" when really what happened was an argument over whether I came to a complete stop for a right turn on red. My first ticket ever at 16 or 17 was for running a red light that was still yellow (I legally had entered that intersection! AT least that one was a left turn).

I was wrongly accused of using the exit lanes as a passing lane on the freeway. In fact, I had just gotten onto the freeway, and was merging for the first time. I can only imagine that my Accord was mistaken identity. Don't remember what VC that was.

Front license plate missing fix-it tickets.

"Sign Violation" VC cited for a U-turn I made where there happened to be a No-U-Turn Sign in one spot I didn't see. No one had to slow down or brake for my maneuver, but the generic VC for a "sign violation" cares not.

Bald tires "fix it" ticket - that one is part of the U-turn just above, where the officer got mad I noted on the ticket he refused the county seat, so he added this 2nd violation after I had already signed the ticket. I was found guilty on the sign violation at trial, not guilty on the bald tires, so I guess that makes 2 not guilty verdicts. Funny, since it was 1 count guilty 1 count not guilty I view that as a loss and didn't remember the win. Come to think of it, if you read my post above, that's the main reason I probably didn't appeal the decision, it was only half a loss.

andres3

I think what my ticket stories above show is that law enforcement is pretty incompetent and inept when they try to enforce anything other than speed laws. They are very experienced and therefore, more competent with the speeding tickets. On my "maximum" speed violations, they for the most part have the upper hand, and were correct that I was speeding per the letter of the law. Basic speed law is different, and gives me a fighting chance.

28firefighter

And yet here you are, fighting the tickets. Sounds like they are pretty competent to me, you’re just unhappy. 

andres3

28firefighter said:

And yet here you are, fighting the tickets. Sounds like they are pretty competent to me, you’re just unhappy. 

You call a 55% conviction rate "pretty competent" ?

andres3

Example for speed trial cross-examination:

How far away was I when you estimated my speed? 2,000 feet?
How long does it take you to estimate a car's speed at that range? few seconds at least I'd imagine
How far away was I when you activated your radar?
How far away was I when you got/locked-in your radar reading?

What procedures do you go through to take a radar reading (push button, turn dial, whatever)

HOw long do those procedures take?

Did you use your radio?

Activate your lights and sirens?

How long does that take?

With questions like this you might just be able to show that his estimates are hogwash. Or the Officer might testify he instantaneously did 10 things all within a second, which seems overly confident to me. You may be able to show that at the speeds he testifies you were going, the ranges he testifies to are not accurate at all for the timeline given.

28firefighter

I’m letting this go. No sense engaging. 

andres3

isellhondas said:

andres3 said:

I just want to say for the record my attitude is not that you all should stay home and keep out of my way out on the roadway.

Enjoy the road. Use it as you wish. You pay taxes too. But follow the rules of the road, and don't make victims of other people.

That means:
1) don't impede traffic
2) don't be the cause of traffic
3) don't wreck damage other's personal property because see #1 and #2 above, in addition to victimizing them to your insurance company and a body shop.
4) If I see you force passes on the right I'll be just as mad at you for doing it to someone else as I am for doing it to me, if you do it to me.

andres3, I don't think I would enjoy being a passenger in your car.

I would however enjoy being a Traffic Court Judge with you in front of me.

Remember, most honest people's only exposure to the Justice System is through Traffic Court. Handing down arbitrary and unfair rulings creates nothing but disrespect and contempt for those that make and enforce those laws, while simultaneously ignoring all the laws that don't fit their financial mission.

suydam

I don’t know, our only court appearance was a ticket for going 70 in a 55. Guilty as charged. Pay the ticket. That was 20 years ago.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

I think what my ticket stories above show is that law enforcement is pretty incompetent and inept when they try to enforce anything other than speed laws. They are very experienced and therefore, more competent with the speeding tickets. On my "maximum" speed violations, they for the most part have the upper hand, and were correct that I was speeding per the letter of the law. Basic speed law is different, and gives me a fighting chance.

I didnt read the stories above. Why you may ask, because this isn't my first rodeo. I said I would like to see the motion before commenting. I have enough experience in these things to know that what people tell me and what actually happened don't always agree 100%. As for the tickets I asked for links to where you talked about them. Again not my first rodeo, I have seen way to many times people getting caught like this then try to cover their tracks. Links to past stories or it doesn't count.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

I just want to say for the record my attitude is not that you all should stay home and keep out of my way out on the roadway. Enjoy the road. Use it as you wish. You pay taxes too. But follow the rules of the road, and don't make victims of other people. That means: 1) don't impede traffic 2) don't be the cause of traffic 3) don't wreck damage other's personal property because see #1 and #2 above, in addition to victimizing them to your insurance company and a body shop. 4) If I see you force passes on the right I'll be just as mad at you for doing it to someone else as I am for doing it to me, if you do it to me.

andres3, I don't think I would enjoy being a passenger in your car. I would however enjoy being a Traffic Court Judge with you in front of me.

Remember, most honest people's only exposure to the Justice System is through Traffic Court. Handing down arbitrary and unfair rulings creates nothing but disrespect and contempt for those that make and enforce those laws, while simultaneously ignoring all the laws that don't fit their financial mission.

My experience is that the traffic courts tend to be somewhat fair and impartial. But then again I take responsibility for my actions. As for financial missions, most jurisdictions don't make money on traffic enforcement.

abacomike

Most of us do not have any direct contact with traffic law inforcement activities because we obey or are in compliance with all traffic laws.  We don’t travel more than 3-5 mph over the speed limit; we stop at red lights and stop signs; we yield the right of way; we come to a complete stop at right-turn-on-red intersections; we travel at 15 mph in school zones; we don’t drive recklessly; we use our directional signals when changing lanes or making turns; and we abide by all traffic laws and signs.

One or two posters here try to defend bending or violating some traffic ordinances or laws as they drive and condemn law enforcement for strictly enforcing laws and regulations.  Why?  Because they find the traffic laws too restricting for their driving preferences.  Tough, isn’t it!

If everyone obeyed the traffic laws, we would all be safer on the roads when we drive.  It’s because of those who violate traffic laws that accidents are on the rise.

abacomike

andres3 said:

I think what my ticket stories above show is that law enforcement is pretty incompetent and inept when they try to enforce anything other than speed laws. They are very experienced and therefore, more competent with the speeding tickets. On my "maximum" speed violations, they for the most part have the upper hand, and were correct that I was speeding per the letter of the law. Basic speed law is different, and gives me a fighting chance.

Maybe there would be less stress in your life if you just slowed down a little so you wouldn’t have all these stories about beating tickets.  It would also relieve us of some stress by not having to read about your frequent interactions with law enforcement while driving your car! 

snakeweasel

abacomike said:

andres3 said:

I think what my ticket stories above show is that law enforcement is pretty incompetent and inept when they try to enforce anything other than speed laws. They are very experienced and therefore, more competent with the speeding tickets. On my "maximum" speed violations, they for the most part have the upper hand, and were correct that I was speeding per the letter of the law. Basic speed law is different, and gives me a fighting chance.

Maybe there would be less stress in your life if you just slowed down a little so you wouldn’t have all these stories about beating tickets.  It would also relieve us of some stress by not having to read about your frequent interactions with law enforcement while driving your car! 

And that's exactly what I mean when I say slow down you'll live longer. Less stress overall doing so.

fintail

If only the enforcement sector would go after or be told to go after more than simple speeders. The amount of "drivers" I see with phones in their hand, not signaling, violating green signaled crosswalks, turning into the wrong lane, etc is stupefying. Actually cracking down on more than speed might alleviate some stress from those who have to dodge idiots, especially on foot.

On the other hand, this morning I saw a brave hardworking bootstrapper in a Tesla going maybe 60-70 in a 40, probably less likely to be nabbed for that than a 19 year old from a less affluent suburb speeding in a 20 year old Civic. But I guess that's how it goes, justice is not blind, they deserve the endless tax breaks, with more upcoming, as the entitled lucky ones like to lecture "life isn't fair", dopey libertarians will cry "class warfare!" if anyone questions this dumb status quo

Given the perks and blind deference accumulated and held by the crime and punishment industry, no doubt even doubling the amount of citations would fail to fund that system. This isn't real world accountability.

If speed demon's posts irk some, just skip them. It's not rocket surgery.

abacomike said:

Most of us do not have any direct contact with traffic law inforcement activities because we obey or are in compliance with all traffic laws.  We don’t travel more than 3-5 mph over the speed limit; we stop at red lights and stop si.  Why?  Because they find the traffic laws too restricting for their driving preferences.  Tough, isn’t it!

If everyone obeyed the traffic laws, we would all be safer on the roads when we drive.  It’s because of those who violate traffic laws that accidents are on the rise.

snakeweasel

fintail said:

If only the enforcement sector would go after or be told to go after more than simple speeders. The amount of "drivers" I see with phones in their hand, not signaling, violating green signaled crosswalks, turning into the wrong lane, etc is stupefying. Actually cracking down on more than speed might alleviate some stress from those who have to dodge idiots, especially on foot. On the other hand, this morning I saw a brave hardworking bootstrapper in a Tesla going maybe 60-70 in a 40, probably less likely to be nabbed for that than a 19 year old from a less affluent suburb speeding in a 20 year old Civic. But I guess that's how it goes, justice is not blind, they deserve the endless tax breaks, with more upcoming, as the entitled lucky ones like to lecture "life isn't fair", dopey libertarians will cry "class warfare!" if anyone questions this dumb status quo Given the perks and blind deference accumulated and held by the crime and punishment industry, no doubt even doubling the amount of citations would fail to fund that system. This isn't real world accountability. If speed demon's posts irk some, just skip them. It's not rocket surgery.

Most of us do not have any direct contact with traffic law inforcement activities because we obey or are in compliance with all traffic laws.  We don’t travel more than 3-5 mph over the speed limit; we stop at red lights and stop si.  Why?  Because they find the traffic laws too restricting for their driving preferences.  Tough, isn’t it!

If everyone obeyed the traffic laws, we would all be safer on the roads when we drive.  It’s because of those who violate traffic laws that accidents are on the rise.

Do we know what percentage of people are pulled over for each offense? We see someone pulled over so we automatically presume it's for speeding? How do we know it's not for cell phone use or not using turn signals or cutting someone off?

fintail

I've seen no data suggesting that there's any real enforcement of anything other than speeding. I'd want a third party review to show it actually happens, I wouldn't just take word for it. Trust, but verify, or something like that.

I know plenty of people who have been nabbed for speeding and freely admit it, never heard anyone mention being nabbed for anything else - and I see tons of it every time I am on the road, likely far exceeding the amount of speeding at the ticket threshold.

snakeweasel said:

Do we know what percentage of people are pulled over for each offense? We see someone pulled over so we automatically presume it's for speeding? How do we know it's not for cell phone use or not using turn signals or cutting someone off?

bwia

Well, its finally happened. Apple has become a trillion dollar company--the first company to reach such a rarified valuation. Yes folks, $1 trillion, that is $1,000,000,000,000. Enough already.

snakeweasel

fintail said:

I've seen no data suggesting that there's any real enforcement of anything other than speeding. I'd want a third party review to show it actually happens, I wouldn't just take word for it. Trust, but verify, or something like that. I know plenty of people who have been nabbed for speeding and freely admit it, never heard anyone mention being nabbed for anything else - and I see tons of it every time I am on the road, likely far exceeding the amount of speeding at the ticket threshold.

Do we know what percentage of people are pulled over for each offense? We see someone pulled over so we automatically presume it's for speeding? How do we know it's not for cell phone use or not using turn signals or cutting someone off?

I see no evidence for it either way. I am just wondering if we are letting our perceptions create a reality. I have been ticketed for non speed infractions and know of others it has happened to. traveling on rural roads does give less opportunity for non speed offenses to happen so that alone may skew figures but for actual figures I really don't think we know.

abacomike

fintail said:

I've seen no data suggesting that there's any real enforcement of anything other than speeding. I'd want a third party review to show it actually happens, I wouldn't just take word for it. Trust, but verify, or something like that. I know plenty of people who have been nabbed for speeding and freely admit it, never heard anyone mention being nabbed for anything else - and I see tons of it every time I am on the road, likely far exceeding the amount of speeding at the ticket threshold.

Do we know what percentage of people are pulled over for each offense? We see someone pulled over so we automatically presume it's for speeding? How do we know it's not for cell phone use or not using turn signals or cutting someone off?

They get ticketed for wreckless driving, failure to yield, etc., “after the fact” when causing an accident or property damage.  If a cop in a squad car is present and you pass a red light or fail to stop at a stop sign, you’ll get ticketed.

jmonroe

28firefighter said:

I’m letting this go. No sense engaging. 

I'm surprised it took you this long. Plain and simple, the guy is just unlucky that he seems to find the most inappropriate times and places to speed. You can't have a logical discussion with an unlucky person. I stopped doing that months ago.

jmonroe

28firefighter

jmonroe said:

28firefighter said:

I’m letting this go. No sense engaging. 

I'm surprised it took you this long. Plain and simple, the guy is just unlucky that he seems to find the most inappropriate times and places to speed. You can't have a logical discussion with an unlucky person. I stopped doing that months ago.

jmonroe

Next time I'm in Pittsburgh, @jmonroe, I'll treat you and @pensfan83 to some O fries.

thebean

I see the EPA is freezing the current mileage and emissions standards. What a stupid and shortsighted decision! When your children's children are enduring 120 degree days in a December with smog heavy enough to blot out your sun, maybe people will understand what a disasterous harmful decision this was.

jmonroe

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

isellhondas said:

andres3 said:

I just want to say for the record my attitude is not that you all should stay home and keep out of my way out on the roadway.

Enjoy the road. Use it as you wish. You pay taxes too. But follow the rules of the road, and don't make victims of other people.

That means:
1) don't impede traffic
2) don't be the cause of traffic
3) don't wreck damage other's personal property because see #1 and #2 above, in addition to victimizing them to your insurance company and a body shop.
4) If I see you force passes on the right I'll be just as mad at you for doing it to someone else as I am for doing it to me, if you do it to me.

andres3, I don't think I would enjoy being a passenger in your car.

I would however enjoy being a Traffic Court Judge with you in front of me.

Remember, most honest people's only exposure to the Justice System is through Traffic Court. Handing down arbitrary and unfair rulings creates nothing but disrespect and contempt for those that make and enforce those laws, while simultaneously ignoring all the laws that don't fit their financial mission.

My experience is that the traffic courts tend to be somewhat fair and impartial. But then again I take responsibility for my actions. As for financial missions, most jurisdictions don't make money on traffic enforcement.

I have only one experience in traffic court.

This was when we moved to SC in March of 1992. Immediately after moving there I found a builder and he warned me about driving on Martinstown Rd in North Augusta SC (across the river from Augusta GA) . He had gotten several tickets on this well known to locals speed trap road. I just got off of I20 (55 MPH limit) on my way to see a place about something for the house when I was pulled over for speeding. The cop didn't want to hear my plea that I wasn't speeding so I shut up and decided to fight it in traffic court. That was an experience almost worth getting a ticket for. The magistrate allowed everyone ahead of us to plead their case (had to be at least 8 or 9 people) but in the end his gavel came down and he announced, "the state of SC finds you guilty of speeding as charged (going xxx miles over the posted speed limit, pay $xxx fine and the number of points to be assessed) to the clerk on your way out". He said this to EVERYONE, without exception, ahead of us. After hearing this 5 or 6 times I knew I was doomed and at one point Mrs. j leaned over and whispered, "you know you are going to have the ticket upheld so why bother"? I told her since I was already there I might as well get my swing in.

Finally, it's my turn and I rose and told the magistrate the cop had to have captured the speed of a car that was passing me and I went on to tell him I had my car for about 10 years and had a very good feel for how fast my car was going at just about any speed and it was impossible that I was going 57 MPH in a 40 MPH zone. The magistrate politely listened like he did for all that came ahead of me, then he asked Mrs. j to stand and give her account of what happened. She confirmed what I said about a car passing me. He then asked the cop in the back of the room if he saw a car passing me. The cop said he didn't. The magistrate said, "you know, I have a car that is about 7 years old and I know what you mean about having a feel for how fast you are going when you've had a car that long". He scratches his head and asked, "do you think you could have been going 5 MPH over the speed limit"? I said, "5 was possible but not..." that's when he cut me off and slammed his gavel down saying, "the state of SC finds you guilty of going 45 MPH in a 40 MPH zone. Pay the clerk $45 on your way out and no points will be assessed". I was stunned, to say the least. I still can't understand how that happened.

When I told my builder what happened he couldn't figure it out either other than to say, "maybe she (pointing to Mrs. j) should go with me the next time I get a ticket on that road".

jmonroe

jmonroe

28firefighter said:

jmonroe said:

28firefighter said:

I’m letting this go. No sense engaging. 

I'm surprised it took you this long. Plain and simple, the guy is just unlucky that he seems to find the most inappropriate times and places to speed. You can't have a logical discussion with an unlucky person. I stopped doing that months ago.

jmonroe

Next time I'm in Pittsburgh, @jmonroe, I'll treat you and @pensfan83 to some O fries.

Write that down @pensfan83, I'm not going to pass up that offer.

jmonroe

ab348

fintail said:

Given the perks and blind deference accumulated and held by the crime and punishment industry, no doubt even doubling the amount of citations would fail to fund that system. This isn't real world accountability.

Other potentially arguable comments aside, I found the above interesting because yesterday our municipal govt released its "sunshine list" - an increasingly common practice up here requiring govts and public institutions to list the names and compensation of all employees making over $100K annually.

In this town about 25% of all municipal employees are on the list. By far the biggest number are police constables and firemen (not captains or the like, just regular ones). It does not seem like it is just long-serving ones either as a few have already been identified as relatively new. Apparently overtime is easy to collect and quite lucrative. So much for the days when being a cop or a firefighter was an honorable but not excessively rewarding occupation.

xwesx

andres3 said:

Remember, most honest people's only exposure to the Justice System is through Traffic Court. Handing down arbitrary and unfair rulings creates nothing but disrespect and contempt for those that make and enforce those laws, while simultaneously ignoring all the laws that don't fit their financial mission.

So very true! As most people only ever have contact with law enforcement through traffic stops, credibility here is critical to maintaining the public's trust.

thebean

@ab348, I for one do not begrudge policemen or firemen that type of salary. Theirs is a thankless job and certainly not one I would do for that salary. Yes, there are a few bad apples in the police ranks, but the vast majority are good brave folk. Even those that give @andres3 tickets (maybe especially those ones). I'll gladly pay the taxes necessary to keep top level people in those jobs.

thebean

Brookstone filed for bankruptcy and will close all its mall stores. Has anyone here even gone into a Brookstone in the past few years? Will any of you miss them? I can't recall ever buying anything from them. All I ever saw in there were freeloaders lounging in the massage chairs.

xwesx

ab348 said:

fintail said:

Given the perks and blind deference accumulated and held by the crime and punishment industry, no doubt even doubling the amount of citations would fail to fund that system. This isn't real world accountability.

Other potentially arguable comments aside, I found the above interesting because yesterday our municipal govt released its "sunshine list" - an increasingly common practice up here requiring govts and public institutions to list the names and compensation of all employees making over $100K annually.

In this town about 25% of all municipal employees are on the list. By far the biggest number are police constables and firemen (not captains or the like, just regular ones). It does not seem like it is just long-serving ones either as a few have already been identified as relatively new. Apparently overtime is easy to collect and quite lucrative. So much for the days when being a cop or a firefighter was an honorable but not excessively rewarding occupation.

Hah! Yes, that is the truth! The firefighters (again, the rank and file, not the top brass) at my organization are among the highest paid staff. Their "base salary" is quite modest, but the actual amount of salary they receive per year is close to double that. Our police are not even in the same wheelhouse. They receive solid compensation, but nothing like the firefighters.

28firefighter

thebean said:

Brookstone filed for bankruptcy and will close all its mall stores. Has anyone here even gone into a Brookstone in the past few years? Will any of you miss them? I can't recall ever buying anything from them. All I ever saw in there were freeloaders lounging in the massage chairs.

Nope. Today I learned two things: (1) that people still go to the mall (/sarcasm), and (2) Brookstone still had stores in the mall!

ab348

thebean said:

@ab348, I for one do not begrudge policemen or firemen that type of salary. Theirs is a thankless job and certainly not one I would do for that salary. Yes, there are a few bad apples in the police ranks, but the vast majority are good brave folk. Even those that give @andres3 tickets (maybe especially those ones). I'll gladly pay the taxes necessary to keep top level people in those jobs.

They seem to me to be badly overpaid, and I do acknowledge the risky and sometimes unpleasant nature of the job. But here, our cost of living is pretty low by comparison to larger places, the crime rate is low and mostly non-violent stuff, and by far the biggest chore for the fire service is a protocol that makes them, not police, the first responder to every traffic accident no matter how small. In short most days are filled with mundane tasks. When a fire or police captain (not eligible for OT) makes $120K and a regular firefighter or constable makes $115K, something is broken.

driver100

thebean said:

Brookstone filed for bankruptcy and will close all its mall stores. Has anyone here even gone into a Brookstone in the past few years? Will any of you miss them? I can't recall ever buying anything from them. All I ever saw in there were freeloaders lounging in the massage chairs.

I liked going into Brookstones and looking at all the cool gadgets. Never actually bought anything though.