Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
I welcome anyone to try that with me in the E55 on an open unpatrolled road. The car can get up to 120 in no time...not that I have any experience with that :shades:
Took a little road trip yesterday...a few LLCs but nothing too bad. Most annoying was a young woman in a Cobalt with some stupid flowery junk hanging from the mirror who would vary her speed - we passed each other about 4 times in 30 miles. I had my cruise control on, 65 in a 60. I looked at her and she looked back at me like I was the crazy one. Oh yeah, and to top it off, it was an "SS" badged car, but with hubcaps, no side trim, and an exhaust the diameter of a nickel
maybe she thought you were trying to "hit" on her and flirt! Taking a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th glance with each pass and passing mesmerized by her beauty! :P
So he camped out in the left lane at 50 and then ran up to 120 trying to race you? Do you think that was his intent all along? Now, that was insane.
And to think I came here today to gripe about the young lady in the black Honda that was so intent on her cell conversation that she didn't know she was 2 feet from my bumper at 65.
I have to agree with euphonium that racing that clown was unwise but I would probably have done the same thing. :sick:
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I can't help but wonder if the person behind was tailgating and being aggressive and evoked the racing response. I recall in the past I have had people tailgate and be generally obnoxious when the traffic pattern on the two-lane interstate through a certain state didn't lend itself to moving in and out of the right lane just so one entitled person could speed on through. I generally would just keep the speed of the others in the lane and would maintain a safe, sure distance per most state laws so that I wasn't tailgating them. Some of the obnoxious folk would just go crazy because there was 140 feet between me and the car in front of me. Many of them were Canadians traveling to and from Florida in long years far gone. That stretch of interstate is now mostly 3 lanes instead of 2.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
How is it even possible to not notice someone coming through your back window?
I swear there's a term for this. I think it must be hardwired into the brain cells of deer too. If they aren't getting run over around here, they are running into the sides of cars.
And since any activity on the side of the road is unusual, they will unconsciously steer towards it.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
I just got back from podunk, and driving there irks me more than the city. People don't signal until they start to turn - if at all, then they go around the corner at 2mph. So many will use a parking lane as a turn lane :confuse: . Speeds are very low, when you have nowhere to go and all day to get there. Lane discipline is some kind of evil socialist commie [non-permissible content removed] pinko liberal plot. The sun being out bakes their little old brains, too.
I've yet to be ticketed for something like this, but I am sure my day is coming as I tempt fate more and more. What would be the chances of me arguing safety, vs revenue generation? I know I'd still get wacked with a fine and probably more because I must have been doing something unsafe to warrant being ticketed since LEO's NEVER ticket just to generate revenue.
I don't think ticketing for revenue purposes is just nor fair, but I suppose municipalities have to make money somehow. I just don't think that one should be penalized with a mark on their driving record especially if what they were doing wasn't particularly unsafe. If they are going to ticket for revenue purposes, I think it should be done so that it could be stated as such and not blacken your record, thus increasing your insurance rates. Indeed I know that Arizona has or had a law like this called a "waste of resources" fine. If you were pulled over in a 55 zone going less than 65 MPH you could be ticketed with this. A no points violation that the officer could issue for wasting his time in having to pull you over to remind you to "slow down".
I still think it would be silly though because if you're not doing anything "unsafe" why should you be ticketed anyway? Why can't you just be left alone to continue on your way to where ever you're going doing it however you see fit, so long as it's in a safe manner that doesn't impede others or put you and other drivers in danger?
If I'm sitting at a traffic light that is ill managed and can't figure out that I have been sitting there for 30 seconds or more and still doesn't change and so I decide to just go after verifying no oncoming traffic, why should I be ticketed? Or if I'm on a open road with no other or very light traffic, why should I be restricted to a speed that is set so low that a double decker bus would have no trouble negotiating it? Or a 4-way stop where I am clearly the only one there? Should I have to come to a complete and full stop and sit there looking in all directions for 2 seconds each way before determining that it is indeed safe to proceed?
I have been pulled over for all of these infractions. "Speeding" on a open road, running a red light light in the middle of the night and rolling through a stop sign with no other visible traffic. No tickets in each case, but the fact that I can be punished for driving sensible is a bit insane.
Luckly you don't live in NY state. They would have held you upside down and shook you until the loose change fell out of your pockets.
That's the shame of it these days, police officers have been turned into "revenue enhancement" officers. It has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with politicians who just can't stop spending.
I'm afraid that in the end the public will lose respect for the police to such an extent that when they call on the public for help in solving real crime no one will answer.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Speeding today may be fine, but maybe the cop is trying to educate you that the road is posted 55 because it has a higher rate of fatalities than other roads in the area.
I saw one today where on a 4 lane freeway (each way), a very late model silver 5 series BMW was going 90+ mph (I was not really paying attention) in the #1 or passing lane. Evidently it was one too many multi task's to handle for the driver to see the marked highway patrol car parked right smack dab in the center meridian (left of the number # 1 lane). As I came closer to the parked highway patrol car, it was almost comical to watch the LEO scramble to get into his car, light up the light bar and slam on the accelerator. (it would seem a break area, as there was a white plastic chair right in the vicinity of the parking spot. He almost rear ended some other LLC'ers (in the #1 lane) who got in his way. Then, 2 mile to four miles down the road, I think the 5 series driver knew he was had and headed toward the #3 lane. The cop cut in front of the car, the 5 series had cut in front of and while I was watching all this from the#4 lane the LEO cut in front (less than one second interval @ 60 mph) of me on his way to the far right emergency lane: prize in his sights.
To get police out of that mode, demand that your taxes be raised. This is what a large group of people did last year. They went to Illinois State Capitol, Springfield, and demonstrated (with union made signs) saying: "Raise my taxes". The Illinois Governor obliged and raised tax rate on individuals by 60 percent. From 3 percent to 5 percent. Of course, the State then needs to send back some of that added revenue to individual communities.
Or it will become the modern trend of a "needed" tax hike of $200, and then a "gift" of a $30 tax cut.
I think a lot of speed enforcement comes down to a few things, and they aren't safety. We have quotas and pressure put on LEOs by overpaid underworked irresponsible public sector types, LEO ego and arrogance itself, and what I believe has to exist, some kind of collusion with the insurance industry.
The one's they also pull over are often times dangerous.
If I thought for a minute that raising my taxes would stop the storm trooper tactics I'd be down there holding a sign. You know though that they would spend all the extra money and the cops would be right back out there.
Where I live the police run roadblocks looking for expired inspections on blind turns and have nearly caused accidents when unsuspecting drivers come upon the police and slam on their brakes in a panic.
Another tactic is to sit (illegally) in the middle of the highway and use a new registration reader to scan every car that goes by hoping to nail some poor sap.
In NYS the push for revenue has become so manic that I once saw a county sheriff do an illegal u-turn in front of a school bus full of kids, forcing the driver to lock up the brakes. Who was he after? A car towing a small utility tailer with a tail light out. :sick:
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
To demonstrate for something like that, what they are really saying is that they want *OTHERS* to pay more in taxes, too.
Kinda like a LLC, who by definition, demands all on the road to drive at his speed or less.
But if you want more police protection, you can upgrade to a higher-cost service for $XXX dollars a month/year. Or even multiple levels of service.
And the police could then use that revenue to support all the rest of their operations, ending the need for earning 'revenue' via ticketing.
---
Oh, and there really ought never to be a case were the police get to keep/auction-for-cash anything they seize. That provides incentive for police to seize as much as they possibly can, for they'll make more money if they do.
That has already happened. Since most law abiding people's experience with the American justice system is usually limited to just traffic court, it is important that traffic courts and judges remain unbiased, fair, just, lawful, and retain some integrity.
It has been said that unfair laws prosecuted unfairly by untruthful officer's and judges generates nothing but contempt by those who enforce such unfair laws, penalties, and fines. There is a large segment of the population who view the American justice system as an arbitrary unfair system, simply because their only exposure to it is in the insane and ridiculous traffic court system, which is a joke.
The constitution is routinely thrown out the window, ignored, disobeyed, and a fair trial where you are innnocent until proven guilty is impossible to obtain.
Agreed! You tug on a lot of heart strings with your well written piece!
I however, have suffered many tickets for such infractions as you describe. I can't think of one ticket I've received in my lifetime that was about a safety hazard being presented, but all were simply all about revenue generation. I've received tickets for a CA stop at a right turn on red, for supposedly tailgating someone (when truly they dangerously cut me off and deserved the ticket themselves) speeding where it was safe to do so, and a left turn on a red light onto a one way (which is legal in most states, but not in CA unless you are on a one way yourself; learned that too late). Again, no cars were affected by my manuever, no danger posed.
In fact, I'd argue I've received not one legitimate ticket in my lifetime. The only one's remotely reasonable were the speeding one's if you accept the way the Vehicle code is written which means in CA if your going over 65.000000 MPH (even 65.00001) then you are guilty of speeding, period, end of story. Unlike the basic speed law, the maximum speed law doesn't take into account safety as a factor or proveable element of the crime.
Some offenses are defendable in court as safety is an element of the crime/infraction. Some such as California's "failure to obey a traffic sign" require no safety hazard or violation be proven. If a sign existed (even if buried where no one can see it reasonably) and you made a manuever contrary to that sign, you are guilty (doesn't matter if no cars were within a mile of you)!
ticketing for revenue generation is not only unfair, it is wrong, it is immoral, and it is unacceptable. We'd be better off if we elminated law enforcement all together, because without any salaries to pay, there would be no need to GENERATE revenue.
Talk about an expensive driving performance!
Don't forget Law & Order, in all its variations. :shades:
Can you say "diminished value"? People who can afford multi-hundred-$K vehicles surely don't want damaged goods...
Paintwork on my Bentley? How déclassé!
Yesterday at 2 different times got behind scaredy-cats who wouldn't come within several car lengths of the car in front of them, must have had recent rear end crashes. Throws a monkey wrench into congested traffic already being made worse by asinine light sequencing and closed traffic lanes with no work being done.
No collusion, just communication and rightly so. Here is how it works. When your policy is 60 days away from renewal, the insurance company gets an abstract of your driving record and issues the renewal priced according to the driving record of all drivers in the household. It is logical that a Black record will cost a lot more in premium than a clean record and that is good. Also used in measuring the risk is the person's Credit record because if you are irresponsible with your wallet, you are also with your wheel.
But otherwise, I know how it works, insurance isn't a charity, it's as dirty a business as any other.
I'm with fintail on this one. Insurance companies are known to subsidize police purchases of radar guns and lobby for low speed limits. A higher violation rate will help them keep rates higher on more drivers.
My initial thought was the BMW driver, but I'm not sure it wasn't BOTH of them!