I'm not saying that the lender should do a citizenship check or anything like that.
Since most folks don't lend their vehicle to just anyone, they usually know them and pretty much have, at least in general, a fair idea if the person borrowing the car is impaired.
Unless you're a lot more liberal on your lending standards than I am, you probably wouldn't lend your car to a suspected drunk, or otherwise impaired person.
Now, if Leroy heads straight to the ABC store after driving off, that's not your responsibility... Unless he tells you he intends on drinking and joyriding.
“The only thing that is dangerous is if as the driver you steer into another object at speed and try to occupy the same space at the same time. As long as you don't do that, speed is not dangerous.” Wrong collisions at higher speed result in greater damages/deaths than collisions at lower seed. If you really believe what you said, then drive into a wall at 0.5 miles per hour and then again at 50mph and post the results :P
“Holding the car owner liable is a silly idea for others' driving!” Why? We hold homeowner responsible for things that happens on their property, even if they personally didn’t do anything wrong. You’re right in that with respect to homeowners, it should only apply to those voluntarily allowed on the property (invited friends, guests, etc) not those there without invitation, like robbers. The same with the car. If you voluntarily give your keys to someone, you should be partially liable for actions that occur with your car, but not if someone steals your car. Same with a gun. If you hand over your gun to someone, then you should be partially liable for their actions. I consider this being responsible when you give something dangerous to someone else, like a car or gun. And if you think about it, how often does it really happen that a person getting a ticket is not the owner of a car? And I'm sure after the owner received the first fine for another driver, I'll bet they'll never loan their car to that guy again!
With respect to rental car companies and liability for tickets, already in the fine print is a clause that makes liable the driver for any parking tickets, so the same would hold true to any auto-generated speeding tickets, so no changes there.
And I agree there has been corruption in government. If in the 1950s, McCarthy or Hoover had today’s technology, we’d really be in trouble. But I think the checks and balances are in place now to help prevent such a thing. The key isn’t being afraid of the latest technology because that will come whether we like it or not, but as the HOST pointed out, the key is to maintain the appropriate level of checks and balances, rules & regulations, etc
The McCarthys and Hoovers haven't gone away, and while you need checks and balances and the Fourth Estate eyeballing stuff, you really need to put the onus on those wanting to track your movements to justify every incursion instead of watching everyone's every movement, not put the onus on the individual to protect their privacy rights.
Yes, I did have an idiot minivan cut me off. I was in the right lane of a 3 lane interstate, with a bunch of cars merging. I move to the center lane to help them out, when a minivan jumps from the merging lane, across all the lanes to get into the far left lane. If I didn't slow dow he would have clipped my front end. So much for being nice!
If you really believe what you said, then drive into a wall at 0.5 miles per hour and then again at 50mph and post the results
You missed the point. I'm not going to steer into that wall at .5 MPH, nor am I going to steer into it at 50 MPH. Without a collision speed is irrelevant. The problem isn't speed itself, but the actual getting into a preventable collision. Going faster doesn't suddenly make me crash. Usually, faster is reserved for roads where everybody should already be going fast and in the same direction.
The only unpreventable collision is that with a non-human controlled moving object, and that is extremely rare. A tire blow out should be handled safely in most vehicles (though you should visually inspect your tires from time to time). I think most blowouts are probably due to neglect and lack of maintenance (proper tire pressures). I've never had one.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
This morning around 0545, saw a Civic with a driver I won't stereotype (but parcel shelf had 4 or 5 stuffed animals...) going maybe 25 in a 35. Death grip on the wheel, head straight ahead...it's scary to drive! Yesterday I also saw an middle aged guy clenching the wheel at like 11 and 1...that can't be optimal.
Why? We hold homeowner responsible for things that happens on their property, even if they personally didn’t do anything wrong.
Well, for one, the homeowner is responsible for the conditions at their home and they can control that. If you leave booby traps everywhere, that is your choice and under your control as the homeowner.
The car owner can't control traffic conditions, nor can he make the red light change to green so that a ticket isn't incurred. He can't yell at the inattentive driver that the light is red (why don't we start ticketing back seat drivers for letting the driver commit a violation?) Surely, the front seat passenger should have been responsible and pulled the E-Brake on a driver that is going faster than the speed limit (god forbid!). :sick:
Anytime you make a rule, and then have to make a lot of exceptions to the rule immediately, you know you don't have a good or logical rule. You should be able to apply the standard across the board fairly with all. If you can't, your rule probably doesn't stand on a good foundation.
Examples:
1) Radar Detectors, Legal in 49 States. For professional Big Rig Truckers, I think they are illegal in many of those 49 States they are legal for car drivers. I find that hilarious because in a big rig truck, you'd have at least 1 to 2 minutes upon stopping to remove the offending "equipment" upon being pulled over, and the officer would never know. It would be almost impossible to get caught. Radar detectors should never be illegal anyway, all they do is provide the driver with additional information as to their surroundings.
2) Outlawing Abortion - Even out of the most anti-abortion group of people, the majority of those people have issues saying abortion is wrong in cases of rape and incest. A lot say abortion is OK if you catch the pregnancy early... not so OK if you are 5 months pregnant...... Hmmmmm. Who's setting these "standards?"
3) You can drive 65 MPH but not 65.1 MPH! Suddenly 65.1 is dangerous because your speeding, and the accident would be SO much more fatal than if you were going 65.0! :P It's speeding afterall!
4) You can own semi-Automatic weapons, 100 bullet cartridges, but you can't buy a fully automatic weapon, nor do I trust you to bare arms under the 2nd Amendment for nuclear, chemical, or other "extra" deadly arms. Who defines "extra" deadly?
5) Thou shall not kill, but our gov't reserves the right to use the death penalty and kill you. Oh yeah, they also reserve the right to label you an "enemy combatant," so they can skip the formalities of the trial and appeals due process, and simply send a drone to your house to blow you up.
6) Your 21st birthday is tomorrow, SON! Your under arrest for drinking that beverage and making that blackjack bet! Your twin brother, born at 11:55 P.M. the previous day from you, gets away Scott Free!
7) Some drugs are OK, some are not; even with a prescription!
And if you think about it, how often does it really happen that a person getting a ticket is not the owner of a car?
It happens a lot and it happens all the time. You know how it's normal for BF and GF to move in and live together prior to getting married these days? Often one person might be on the title, but really it's the other person's car. No one wants to pay the gov't (DMV) extra money to change the title if they can trust the person they are with. You are obviously rich and dont' realize a lot of people must SHARE vehicles.
What about teenage kids, they aren't the owner. You mean I can write-off all my tickets as a teen on my parents! Fantastic!
And I'm sure after the owner received the first fine for another driver, I'll bet they'll never loan their car to that guy again!
With respect to rental car companies and liability for tickets, already in the fine print is a clause that makes liable the driver for any parking tickets, so the same would hold true to any auto-generated speeding tickets, so no changes there.
I'll be sure to get that boilerplate clause, change the letterhead to Andres Loan-a-Car to Bobw3 before ever loaning you a car then! No one would ever loan a car without a signed document in your scenario of Utopia! With that document, I could then hold you liable for any infractions incurred while you were driving my vehicle, and I wouldn't have to sue you? I could simply direct the camera enforcements mail as "return to sender/wrong address?" Would I be forced to divulge and give up my document that shows the source of the infraction? What if I wanted to charge the gov't $100 to reproduce a copy? Afterall, why shouldn't I get a cut in the revenue if I help out and assist their investigation (and snitch).
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The McCarthys and Hoovers haven't gone away, and while you need checks and balances and the Fourth Estate eyeballing stuff, you really need to put the onus on those wanting to track your movements to justify every incursion instead of watching everyone's every movement, not put the onus on the individual to protect their privacy rights.
Excellent observation.
Yes, there are bad guys out there, and we need to deal with them.
If my neighbor is indeed hoarding and collecting WMDs in his house, I certainly understand the desire of law enforcement to be able to kick in the door and catch him by surprise, before he can "lock and load".
However, I want to make sure that there really IS a credible threat and the likelyhood of him having said weaponry is high, and not just some low-level cop's "guesstimate". That's why I want a court order prior to the raid, and one not signed by some low-level magistrate that got his/her job due to a political payoff, or some hack judge like the one from Texas last week claiming we will have a revolution if Obama wins a second term...
And, I also want that ability highly defined in the law, so that 10 years from now, someone can't include having a "stack of Hustler magazines" as some form of WMD.
Anyway, I'll be glad for the day when there will be GPS chips in every car linked to the road's speed limit, and if a person drives 10mph over the speed the owner of the vehicle will get a ticket in the mail automatically
This means that big brother government then could track your every movement. Think there is a State toying with the idea of GPS to track the mileage incurred in your vehicle to collect road-use taxes. Of course, with that, they can track your movements and time of day. Might be Oregon that is interested in this.
GPS tracking in vehicles might not be that far fetched given the direction of our nanny state government if we get 4 more years of the current guy in DC.
LaHood dropped that idea back in '09. Says the road fund is even solvent. (Reuters)
Depending on what source you read, only 6 or 7 % of potential voters are undecided. No use trying to score any political points around here since everyone has their mind made up and we don't need the extra noise.
Yes, I know if the opponents get into DC, there will be no chance of camera related shenanigans. If there is one thing the previous regime taught us, it is how they embrace personal liberties and freedom. Well, maybe those with a worth of 7 figures or more will be able to buy their way out of punishment.
Yesterday I also saw an middle aged guy clenching the wheel at like 11 and 1...that can't be optimal.
Maybe not. But inconsiderate? In any way dangerous? What's your next report going to be, someone didn't have their tie tied just right on the way to work?
If a driver with both hands on the wheel (at 11 and 1) is the worst thing I see on the road, it is a very good day indeed.
Didn't the governor of Illinois get into trouble selling CDL's a few years back?
I believe his name was Ryan... And he served prison time...
Being the above is off topic, and in the interest of fairness, there have been three Democrat Governors from Illinois that went to prison in the last 40 years. The last being Blago, for trying to sell a Senate seat.
Well, there are some elements that are close. Here in Illinois, we have I-Pass. If you have an account and transponder, you can go online and see your complete record of toll stations that you passed and PAID along with the date and time. It would not be rocket science to put in software that would compute your average speed between toll stations and then determine if you were speeding. So far, that has not been done. And, if you were exceeding the limit, by whatever increment - 1,5,10, 15, etc - it would not be that hard for Illinois Tollway to impose an appropriate fine and deduct from your I-Pass account. No doubt, they have discussed this. Maybe snakeweasel knows something here.
I understand they already do that on some roads in Germany (or perhaps it was another EU country).
So people bomb down a certain stretch of freeway speeding all the way, until they get within a mile of the exit toll station. Then they pull over, drag out the picnic basket, have a nice glass of wine and kill 30 minutes until the time catches up with a legal toll stamp speed.
I am sure it does not aid in any kind of abrupt emergency maneuvers, no. Might as well have no hands on the wheel. A driving position like that says to me that the driver is very tense and doesn't feel like he can handle the road.
Does devils advocate ever become tiresome for you? I must be like a drug, addictive
Does knowing you are the only Perfect Driver on the planet get tiresome for you? Also maybe lugging that giant Nit Pick in the car with you everywhere you go, that must get a little old too. Or maybe not.
I'll say this, though: someone with your mind-reading abilities should be in another line of work. Lots you can do with that skill, other than reading the minds of other drivers.
So people bomb down a certain stretch of freeway speeding all the way, until they get within a mile of the exit toll station. Then they pull over, drag out the picnic basket, have a nice glass of wine and kill 30 minutes until the time catches up with a legal toll stamp speed.
On Illinois Tollway, distances are relatively short between I-Pass drive-through toll stations and the next I-Pass or an exit with a toll drive-through toll station. On a couple of my frequent trips, one distance is about 14 miles the other is 7 miles. I can view online the exact time of day that I passed the first toll station and then the next.
There are situations, depending how far you go on the Tollway that you would only encounter one toll on your distance traveled on the road AND no toll station at an exit ramp. For these situations, one could drive over the speed limit the entire distance and there will be only one time-of-day recorded on your I-Pass account.
LOL more strawman strategy, you're a master. Pray tell, where did I say I was perfect? Really man, just skip my posts if they get under your skin so deeply.
I've been able to avoid accidents better than most, so maybe I am good at mind reading...
So people bomb down a certain stretch of freeway speeding all the way, until they get within a mile of the exit toll station.
That's exactly what I would do. I'd drive safer by going faster for 95% of the trip (leaving all the incompetents behind me to wreck), then take a break until the toll booth caught up to reality if that was the situation in the USA; with toll booth speeding timer tickets. Perhaps I'd LLC the last 5 minutes at 20 under the posted limit while shaving, eating, talking and texting on the Iphone, and other distractions that help me use the time driving slowly more wisely.
You all have a low bar for evidence that can be admitted and accepted in a courtroom! Just because an electronic device says so, doesn't mean it's true. There needs to be checks and balances, a verifiability of the evidence, if you will.
Courts accept radar evidence without much question (which is wrong in my opinion), but if the officer forgets to say "I saw suspect's vehicle and estimated their speed to be XXXX, and then took a radar reading to verify that speed, it read XXXX (usually +/- 3 MPH from what they said they estimated), the testimony will be insufficient and the prosecution inadequate, and you'll be found "not guilty" by a competent judge for lack of prosecution.
The officer's boilerplate testimony HAS TO include that they took a visual estimation of your speed prior to taking the radar reading (which is probably more often than not a lie and perjury), otherwise, the radar evidence is not accepted as meeting the verified court's standards.
How AZ gets away with using photo radar for "speeding" tickets is beyond me.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I've been able to avoid accidents better than most, so maybe I am good at mind reading...
I'm of the opinion bad drivers stick out like sore thumbs, no mind reading required, just keen attention and observance of drivers/vehicles around you when your driving.
I'm amazed how often as a passenger in a vehicle there are situation I see coming from literally a mile away, but I'll notice some other drivers will have to brake hard at the last second for the situation to be averted, whereas I'd of had time to smoothly brake or long since accelerated my way out of the "close call" encounter. If the situation merits, I'll warn the driver, but often it's just a simple "cut off" or something like that; doesn't pose a hazardous threat as long as the driver is at least half awake.
There are drivers out there that are so bad and obvious, when I go to pass them I already have a hand on the horn ready to blast them in a moment's notice. Sometimes I have to use it, sometimes not.
A lot of safe driving and accident avoidance comes from anticipating what others are capable of doing, and having a plan B ready to avoid it.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I can only speak for SC, but here, those standards are whatever the judge says they are. I'll not address the legitimacy of that practice, but it is what it is.
And, I doubt that SC is alone in that regard.
In SC... If the cop says you were speeding, regardless his reasoning...and the judge likes the cop, unless you have tons of evidence to debunk the claim, you were speeding.
End of story. Unless you lean towards hiring an F. Lee Bailey type and heading for the Supreme Court, you can pay your fine on the way out the door...
I think if a person drives regularly and hits 10-20 or so years without a crash, they are doing something right. Some things such as being rear-ended or being hit when they have a light are excusable, but a lot isn't. When I say "crash", I also mean being able to not scrape up against parking garage pillars and similar.
Speaking of braking hard, simply seeing people rush up to red lights and then slam on the brakes irks me. My dad taught me proper braking for anticipated stops involves not making the car dive forward.
The horn honk is useful for passing line straddlers...when you are either stuck behind them waiting to get hit by shrapnel, or have to roll the dice and go around.
I think if a person drives regularly and hits 10-20 or so years without a crash, they are doing something right.
Or they're just lucky. I know some bad drivers who have had no accidents for many years.
Another metric to consider is, how many crashes have they caused? They themselves might get off unscathed (lucky lucky), but maybe other vehicles weren't so lucky, e.g. in reacting to a lame-brained maneuver by Mr./Ms. No Accidents for 20 Years, they get in an accident.
I bet a lot of those slowpokes you see so much (and revile so much) in your area have no crashes on their record. (I know this because I've read their minds and discovered their driving records over the past 20 years. :P )
Around here, simps love to do that...random straight stretch, nobody in front of them, random brake tap. Curves on wide open properly built interstates make the dopes brake, too.
I'm thinking more of the people who can see traffic a mile ahead and still run up the back of the semi, instead of planning their move over and avoiding getting boxed in.
Yes, there can be luck. But for the most part, they are also doing something right. Nobody does everything right, but some do more than others. And the crash causers tend to be the types who scrape poles and curb wheels, and I already named off those sins :shades:
Assuming fire when there is smoke is a high crime! Almost as bad as going 70 in a revenue-based 60.
It sure is, fin! I think that was the most inconsiderate article I have ever read. I'm surprised at how slathered with prejudice it was. Whomever wrote that needs to take up a new career as a sports writer.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
Assuming fire when there is smoke is a high crime!
Agreed! A good example of that is, assuming there's some kind of significant issue because someone has his hands at 11 and 1 on the wheel for some period of time.
..."I'm of the opinion bad drivers stick out like sore thumbs, no mind reading required, just keen attention and observance of drivers/vehicles around you when your driving. "...
While I think it goes WAY beyond opinion, not to split hairs, I would almost totally agree. In the case where one is NOT sure, just assume EVERYBODY is stupid (including ones' self) and when they surprise one by being "good" count it as a blessing or if you are a dour type: just understand that not everyone follows the (all STUPID) rules.
I grew up in a small town in south-central GA, population 12K...small enough for people to recognize others simply by seeing their car.
By the time I was in my teens (late 1960's), there was a retired schoolteacher, Mrs. Bivins, that had to be around when Christ was alive. She could neither see nor hear well (maybe not al all), but she had a driver's license, and she drove... Only locally, thankfully.
She had a mid-60's model blue Chevy Nova, and EVERYBODY in town knew who drove that car.
When others spotted it out on the road, they literally changed directions, streets, etc, just to avoid her. It wasn't wise to be anywhere near being in her path.
For her, red lights were only suggestions.
As far as I can remember, she was never personally involved in a single accident, yet she forced hundreds of other drivers off the road, over curbs, etc.
I've been behind people who hit the limit and then tap the brakes. The brakers in corners are my favorites, corners any maintained car could take at 100mph and be just fine.
Must always assume the best in everyone, and that everyone is exceedingly competent. Oh, sorry, not gonna happen, and if someone doesn't like it, well, tough cookies. :P
Drivers with hands in weird positions are obviously skilled and with-it.... in ways known only to them.
I've been behind people who hit the limit and then tap the brakes.
Yes. In the U.S. there are people driving who consider an automobile no more than an appliance, like a refrigerator. That they have the "right" to be on roads and highways with little or no skills beyond stepping on the gas, brake and holding the steering wheel with one hand while handling a cell phone or a cup of coffee, or both.
Or they're just lucky. I know some bad drivers who have had no accidents for many years.
I'll argue many years is not 10 or 20 years. Maybe you can get lucky 2 or 3 years, maybe even 5 or 8, but not 10 to 20 years. No way, no how!
If you are driving a significant number of miles in significant traffic, and you don't cause accidents for 10 to 20 years, you are doing many things right.
The bottom line never lies.
Tickets lie though, or I'd have dozens of at-fault accidents by now.
Speaking of accidents you can't avoid; how about this one from the 90's. I was in my car parked with the engine off in a parking lot (waiting for a friend to come back from buying something at the store). Young guy in an SUV decides to back up from the space next to mine, and immediately turns the wheel without backing up first. His front end scrapes along the side of my vehicle from the midway point to the rear.
Car not moving, car was not even on; couldn't move out of the way. I did however, honk, but it was too late, he didn't react quickly.
I'm sure "speeding" was a factor in this one!!!! NOT!!!! :surprise: :surprise:
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Comments
I'm not saying that the lender should do a citizenship check or anything like that.
Since most folks don't lend their vehicle to just anyone, they usually know them and pretty much have, at least in general, a fair idea if the person borrowing the car is impaired.
Unless you're a lot more liberal on your lending standards than I am, you probably wouldn't lend your car to a suspected drunk, or otherwise impaired person.
Now, if Leroy heads straight to the ABC store after driving off, that's not your responsibility... Unless he tells you he intends on drinking and joyriding.
“The only thing that is dangerous is if as the driver you steer into another object at speed and try to occupy the same space at the same time. As long as you don't do that, speed is not dangerous.”
Wrong collisions at higher speed result in greater damages/deaths than collisions at lower seed. If you really believe what you said, then drive into a wall at 0.5 miles per hour and then again at 50mph and post the results :P
“Holding the car owner liable is a silly idea for others' driving!”
Why? We hold homeowner responsible for things that happens on their property, even if they personally didn’t do anything wrong. You’re right in that with respect to homeowners, it should only apply to those voluntarily allowed on the property (invited friends, guests, etc) not those there without invitation, like robbers. The same with the car. If you voluntarily give your keys to someone, you should be partially liable for actions that occur with your car, but not if someone steals your car. Same with a gun. If you hand over your gun to someone, then you should be partially liable for their actions. I consider this being responsible when you give something dangerous to someone else, like a car or gun. And if you think about it, how often does it really happen that a person getting a ticket is not the owner of a car? And I'm sure after the owner received the first fine for another driver, I'll bet they'll never loan their car to that guy again!
With respect to rental car companies and liability for tickets, already in the fine print is a clause that makes liable the driver for any parking tickets, so the same would hold true to any auto-generated speeding tickets, so no changes there.
And I agree there has been corruption in government. If in the 1950s, McCarthy or Hoover had today’s technology, we’d really be in trouble. But I think the checks and balances are in place now to help prevent such a thing. The key isn’t being afraid of the latest technology because that will come whether we like it or not, but as the HOST pointed out, the key is to maintain the appropriate level of checks and balances, rules & regulations, etc
Any idiot drivers out this morning?
3 lane Interstate in the morning...dang. I have trouble stumbling down my stairs half asleep to wake up my computer so I can get to work.
You missed the point. I'm not going to steer into that wall at .5 MPH, nor am I going to steer into it at 50 MPH. Without a collision speed is irrelevant. The problem isn't speed itself, but the actual getting into a preventable collision. Going faster doesn't suddenly make me crash. Usually, faster is reserved for roads where everybody should already be going fast and in the same direction.
The only unpreventable collision is that with a non-human controlled moving object, and that is extremely rare. A tire blow out should be handled safely in most vehicles (though you should visually inspect your tires from time to time). I think most blowouts are probably due to neglect and lack of maintenance (proper tire pressures). I've never had one.
That makes two things I never see.
Well, for one, the homeowner is responsible for the conditions at their home and they can control that. If you leave booby traps everywhere, that is your choice and under your control as the homeowner.
The car owner can't control traffic conditions, nor can he make the red light change to green so that a ticket isn't incurred. He can't yell at the inattentive driver that the light is red (why don't we start ticketing back seat drivers for letting the driver commit a violation?) Surely, the front seat passenger should have been responsible and pulled the E-Brake on a driver that is going faster than the speed limit (god forbid!). :sick:
Anytime you make a rule, and then have to make a lot of exceptions to the rule immediately, you know you don't have a good or logical rule. You should be able to apply the standard across the board fairly with all. If you can't, your rule probably doesn't stand on a good foundation.
Examples:
1) Radar Detectors, Legal in 49 States. For professional Big Rig Truckers, I think they are illegal in many of those 49 States they are legal for car drivers. I find that hilarious because in a big rig truck, you'd have at least 1 to 2 minutes upon stopping to remove the offending "equipment" upon being pulled over, and the officer would never know. It would be almost impossible to get caught. Radar detectors should never be illegal anyway, all they do is provide the driver with additional information as to their surroundings.
2) Outlawing Abortion - Even out of the most anti-abortion group of people, the majority of those people have issues saying abortion is wrong in cases of rape and incest. A lot say abortion is OK if you catch the pregnancy early... not so OK if you are 5 months pregnant...... Hmmmmm. Who's setting these "standards?"
3) You can drive 65 MPH but not 65.1 MPH! Suddenly 65.1 is dangerous because your speeding, and the accident would be SO much more fatal than if you were going 65.0! :P It's speeding afterall!
4) You can own semi-Automatic weapons, 100 bullet cartridges, but you can't buy a fully automatic weapon, nor do I trust you to bare arms under the 2nd Amendment for nuclear, chemical, or other "extra" deadly arms. Who defines "extra" deadly?
5) Thou shall not kill, but our gov't reserves the right to use the death penalty and kill you. Oh yeah, they also reserve the right to label you an "enemy combatant," so they can skip the formalities of the trial and appeals due process, and simply send a drone to your house to blow you up.
6) Your 21st birthday is tomorrow, SON! Your under arrest for drinking that beverage and making that blackjack bet! Your twin brother, born at 11:55 P.M. the previous day from you, gets away Scott Free!
7) Some drugs are OK, some are not; even with a prescription!
And if you think about it, how often does it really happen that a person getting a ticket is not the owner of a car?
It happens a lot and it happens all the time. You know how it's normal for BF and GF to move in and live together prior to getting married these days? Often one person might be on the title, but really it's the other person's car.
No one wants to pay the gov't (DMV) extra money to change the title if they can trust the person they are with. You are obviously rich and dont' realize a lot of people must SHARE vehicles.
What about teenage kids, they aren't the owner. You mean I can write-off all my tickets as a teen on my parents! Fantastic!
And I'm sure after the owner received the first fine for another driver, I'll bet they'll never loan their car to that guy again!
With respect to rental car companies and liability for tickets, already in the fine print is a clause that makes liable the driver for any parking tickets, so the same would hold true to any auto-generated speeding tickets, so no changes there.
I'll be sure to get that boilerplate clause, change the letterhead to Andres Loan-a-Car to Bobw3 before ever loaning you a car then! No one would ever loan a car without a signed document in your scenario of Utopia! With that document, I could then hold you liable for any infractions incurred while you were driving my vehicle, and I wouldn't have to sue you? I could simply direct the camera enforcements mail as "return to sender/wrong address?" Would I be forced to divulge and give up my document that shows the source of the infraction? What if I wanted to charge the gov't $100 to reproduce a copy? Afterall, why shouldn't I get a cut in the revenue if I help out and assist their investigation (and snitch).
Seriously, you are embarrassing yourself.
Excellent observation.
Yes, there are bad guys out there, and we need to deal with them.
If my neighbor is indeed hoarding and collecting WMDs in his house, I certainly understand the desire of law enforcement to be able to kick in the door and catch him by surprise, before he can "lock and load".
However, I want to make sure that there really IS a credible threat and the likelyhood of him having said weaponry is high, and not just some low-level cop's "guesstimate". That's why I want a court order prior to the raid, and one not signed by some low-level magistrate that got his/her job due to a political payoff, or some hack judge like the one from Texas last week claiming we will have a revolution if Obama wins a second term...
And, I also want that ability highly defined in the law, so that 10 years from now, someone can't include having a "stack of Hustler magazines" as some form of WMD.
Seriously, you are embarrassing yourself.
How so, because I left Honda for Audi?
:P
Except for a 911 situation where a driver cannot pull over to the side and safely stop to make the call.
People driving and talking on the cell phone are selfish, irresponsible and unable to organize their time and lives.
This means that big brother government then could track your every movement. Think there is a State toying with the idea of GPS to track the mileage incurred in your vehicle to collect road-use taxes. Of course, with that, they can track your movements and time of day. Might be Oregon that is interested in this.
GPS tracking in vehicles might not be that far fetched given the direction of our nanny state government if we get 4 more years of the current guy in DC.
Depending on what source you read, only 6 or 7 % of potential voters are undecided. No use trying to score any political points around here since everyone has their mind made up and we don't need the extra noise.
Thanks.
If GM and Chrysler can manage without it, so can we. :shades:
GM, Chrysler Ban Presidential Campaigning Stops at Plants (Inside Line)
Thank you. Gross generalizations have gotten many people in deep doo-doo.
Maybe not. But inconsiderate? In any way dangerous? What's your next report going to be, someone didn't have their tie tied just right on the way to work?
If a driver with both hands on the wheel (at 11 and 1) is the worst thing I see on the road, it is a very good day indeed.
Thank You!!!
I believe his name was Ryan... And he served prison time...
Being the above is off topic, and in the interest of fairness, there have been three Democrat Governors from Illinois that went to prison in the last 40 years. The last being Blago, for trying to sell a Senate seat.
Well, there are some elements that are close. Here in Illinois, we have I-Pass. If you have an account and transponder, you can go online and see your complete record of toll stations that you passed and PAID along with the date and time. It would not be rocket science to put in software that would compute your average speed between toll stations and then determine if you were speeding. So far, that has not been done. And, if you were exceeding the limit, by whatever increment - 1,5,10, 15, etc - it would not be that hard for Illinois Tollway to impose an appropriate fine and deduct from your I-Pass account. No doubt, they have discussed this. Maybe snakeweasel knows something here.
So people bomb down a certain stretch of freeway speeding all the way, until they get within a mile of the exit toll station. Then they pull over, drag out the picnic basket, have a nice glass of wine and kill 30 minutes until the time catches up with a legal toll stamp speed.
Unintended consequences. Cheers, porst & skoal.
Does devils advocate ever become tiresome for you? I must be like a drug, addictive
Americans, on the other hand, like to eat and drink in their cars.
I'll say this, though: someone with your mind-reading abilities should be in another line of work. Lots you can do with that skill, other than reading the minds of other drivers.
On Illinois Tollway, distances are relatively short between I-Pass drive-through toll stations and the next I-Pass or an exit with a toll drive-through toll station. On a couple of my frequent trips, one distance is about 14 miles the other is 7 miles. I can view online the exact time of day that I passed the first toll station and then the next.
There are situations, depending how far you go on the Tollway that you would only encounter one toll on your distance traveled on the road AND no toll station at an exit ramp. For these situations, one could drive over the speed limit the entire distance and there will be only one time-of-day recorded on your I-Pass account.
I've been able to avoid accidents better than most, so maybe I am good at mind reading...
That's exactly what I would do. I'd drive safer by going faster for 95% of the trip (leaving all the incompetents behind me to wreck), then take a break until the toll booth caught up to reality if that was the situation in the USA; with toll booth speeding timer tickets. Perhaps I'd LLC the last 5 minutes at 20 under the posted limit while shaving, eating, talking and texting on the Iphone, and other distractions that help me use the time driving slowly more wisely.
You all have a low bar for evidence that can be admitted and accepted in a courtroom! Just because an electronic device says so, doesn't mean it's true. There needs to be checks and balances, a verifiability of the evidence, if you will.
Courts accept radar evidence without much question (which is wrong in my opinion), but if the officer forgets to say "I saw suspect's vehicle and estimated their speed to be XXXX, and then took a radar reading to verify that speed, it read XXXX (usually +/- 3 MPH from what they said they estimated), the testimony will be insufficient and the prosecution inadequate, and you'll be found "not guilty" by a competent judge for lack of prosecution.
The officer's boilerplate testimony HAS TO include that they took a visual estimation of your speed prior to taking the radar reading (which is probably more often than not a lie and perjury), otherwise, the radar evidence is not accepted as meeting the verified court's standards.
How AZ gets away with using photo radar for "speeding" tickets is beyond me.
I'm of the opinion bad drivers stick out like sore thumbs, no mind reading required, just keen attention and observance of drivers/vehicles around you when your driving.
I'm amazed how often as a passenger in a vehicle there are situation I see coming from literally a mile away, but I'll notice some other drivers will have to brake hard at the last second for the situation to be averted, whereas I'd of had time to smoothly brake or long since accelerated my way out of the "close call" encounter. If the situation merits, I'll warn the driver, but often it's just a simple "cut off" or something like that; doesn't pose a hazardous threat as long as the driver is at least half awake.
There are drivers out there that are so bad and obvious, when I go to pass them I already have a hand on the horn ready to blast them in a moment's notice. Sometimes I have to use it, sometimes not.
A lot of safe driving and accident avoidance comes from anticipating what others are capable of doing, and having a plan B ready to avoid it.
I can only speak for SC, but here, those standards are whatever the judge says they are. I'll not address the legitimacy of that practice, but it is what it is.
And, I doubt that SC is alone in that regard.
In SC... If the cop says you were speeding, regardless his reasoning...and the judge likes the cop, unless you have tons of evidence to debunk the claim, you were speeding.
End of story. Unless you lean towards hiring an F. Lee Bailey type and heading for the Supreme Court, you can pay your fine on the way out the door...
Speaking of braking hard, simply seeing people rush up to red lights and then slam on the brakes irks me. My dad taught me proper braking for anticipated stops involves not making the car dive forward.
The horn honk is useful for passing line straddlers...when you are either stuck behind them waiting to get hit by shrapnel, or have to roll the dice and go around.
Or they're just lucky. I know some bad drivers who have had no accidents for many years.
Another metric to consider is, how many crashes have they caused? They themselves might get off unscathed (lucky lucky), but maybe other vehicles weren't so lucky, e.g. in reacting to a lame-brained maneuver by Mr./Ms. No Accidents for 20 Years, they get in an accident.
I bet a lot of those slowpokes you see so much (and revile so much) in your area have no crashes on their record. (I know this because I've read their minds and discovered their driving records over the past 20 years. :P )
Assuming fire when there is smoke is a high crime! Almost as bad as going 70 in a revenue-based 60.
Agreed! A good example of that is, assuming there's some kind of significant issue because someone has his hands at 11 and 1 on the wheel for some period of time.
While I think it goes WAY beyond opinion, not to split hairs, I would almost totally agree. In the case where one is NOT sure, just assume EVERYBODY is stupid (including ones' self) and when they surprise one by being "good" count it as a blessing or if you are a dour type: just understand that not everyone follows the (all STUPID) rules.
By the time I was in my teens (late 1960's), there was a retired schoolteacher, Mrs. Bivins, that had to be around when Christ was alive. She could neither see nor hear well (maybe not al all), but she had a driver's license, and she drove... Only locally, thankfully.
She had a mid-60's model blue Chevy Nova, and EVERYBODY in town knew who drove that car.
When others spotted it out on the road, they literally changed directions, streets, etc, just to avoid her. It wasn't wise to be anywhere near being in her path.
For her, red lights were only suggestions.
As far as I can remember, she was never personally involved in a single accident, yet she forced hundreds of other drivers off the road, over curbs, etc.
Drivers with hands in weird positions are obviously skilled and with-it.... in ways known only to them.
How about... not assuming at all?
Yes. In the U.S. there are people driving who consider an automobile no more than an appliance, like a refrigerator. That they have the "right" to be on roads and highways with little or no skills beyond stepping on the gas, brake and holding the steering wheel with one hand while handling a cell phone or a cup of coffee, or both.
I'll argue many years is not 10 or 20 years. Maybe you can get lucky 2 or 3 years, maybe even 5 or 8, but not 10 to 20 years. No way, no how!
If you are driving a significant number of miles in significant traffic, and you don't cause accidents for 10 to 20 years, you are doing many things right.
The bottom line never lies.
Tickets lie though, or I'd have dozens of at-fault accidents by now.
Speaking of accidents you can't avoid; how about this one from the 90's. I was in my car parked with the engine off in a parking lot (waiting for a friend to come back from buying something at the store). Young guy in an SUV decides to back up from the space next to mine, and immediately turns the wheel without backing up first. His front end scrapes along the side of my vehicle from the midway point to the rear.
Car not moving, car was not even on; couldn't move out of the way. I did however, honk, but it was too late, he didn't react quickly.
I'm sure "speeding" was a factor in this one!!!! NOT!!!! :surprise: :surprise: