Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

snakeweasel · August 2018

oldfarmer50 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 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.
We normally cruise at 70-71 in 65 zones but today the police (to steal a phrase from the song Convoy) "were as thick as bugs on a bumper". I was doing my normal cruise speed on I-87 when I passed a trooper in the u-turn. He immediately pulled out and came up on me. I switched to the right to give him passage but he pulled over two cars back. "This is it" I thought, first ticket since Reagan was president. He flipped his lights on and.......... ....pulled over the Jeep right behind me.

Around here doing 10 over on the interstate won't get you a second look from the state police unless you are being reckless. However there are areas where local police will also watch the interstate and sometimes they are not as forgiving.

snakeweasel · August 2018

explorerx4 said:

@oldfarmer50. They could have been pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt. I saw something like that coming home on vacation. 3 vehicles speeding, but had to stop at a traffic light. The 2nd one got to have a face to face with the trooper.

On my commute there is a police station that sits right on an intersection with a light. Sometimes there will be an officer outside at the intersection checking seatbelts usage.

fintail · August 2018

I have seen several of these on the road already. The faux floating C pillar and adjacent chrome trim triggers me, and not in a good way.

graphicguy said:
I know some of you are enamored with the new Acura RDX. Here’s a mostly positive review, with some actual “gushing” about its goodness.

http://www.thedrive.com/new-cars/22545/2019-acura-rdx-advance-sh-awd-review-a-tech-laden-compact-crossover-thats-already-winning-americans-over

roadburner · August 2018

oldfarmer50 said:

roadburner said:

explorerx4 said:
An M2 Comp STARTS at 59k.
Which is still cheaper than a GT350; and I suspect putting a limited slip, a mild tune, and Sport Cup 2 tires on my quasi-///M 2 Series would let me stay close to a GT PP2. Ditto for a "Base" M2 with a tune and more aggressive rubber.
Price really doesn't matter though, does it? You're a BMW fan and as such you can use comparisons with other cars to cement your preferences. You want what you want and that's ok.

I got to drive an Audi A6 yesterday and I can see why those German brands have devoted fans.

Yes, I lean towards BMWs, but I think it's ludicrous to offer two levels of "Performance" Packages when at the end of the day neither one allows the Mustang to be tracked for more than a few laps. That's not the case with SRT vehicles or the Camaro SS 1LE(which by the way, costs about the same as a GT PP2)
I like the Mustang, and in fact almost bought a CPO 2015 GT Premium, but I balk at paying $6,500 for a so-called "Level 2" performance upgrade only to be told I need to spend another few thousand dollars before it is track capable.
None of the other cars I considered before buying my 2er had a similar handicap to the GT- WRX STi, Golf R, SS 1LE, Challenger SRT, Cayman- all were track capable out of the box.

houdini1 · August 2018

snakeweasel said:

thebean said:

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.

Actually they are just rolling back Obama's mandates, the 2020 mandates are still in effect. Seriously auto emissions are so clean compared to the past that Obama's mandates wouldnt do much. Plus every increase in mileage and or emissions comes at an even greater cost than the previous. There is only so much power in a gallon of gas and only so clean it will burn. Obama's mandates would have been hard to achieve and would have increased car prices.

As for global warming this will have little if any affect. Climate change is a natural occurrence and in the past it has been hotter than it is now and in the future it will be cooler than it is now. And yes there is plenty of evidence that that natural climate change ca occurs rapidly. As for how much is man made is open for debate. However cars account for a small percentage of greenhouse gases being emitted, This rollback will have very little effect.

Also when its 120 in December it's going to be a few billion years from now when the sun is about to explode.

snakeweasel said:

thebean said:

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.

Actually they are just rolling back Obama's mandates, the 2020 mandates are still in effect. Seriously auto emissions are so clean compared to the past that Obama's mandates wouldnt do much. Plus every increase in mileage and or emissions comes at an even greater cost than the previous. There is only so much power in a gallon of gas and only so clean it will burn. Obama's mandates would have been hard to achieve and would have increased car prices.

As for global warming this will have little if any affect. Climate change is a natural occurrence and in the past it has been hotter than it is now and in the future it will be cooler than it is now. And yes there is plenty of evidence that that natural climate change ca occurs rapidly. As for how much is man made is open for debate. However cars account for a small percentage of greenhouse gases being emitted, This rollback will have very little effect.

Also when its 120 in December it's going to be a few billion years from now when the sun is about to explode.

You hit the nail on the head snake !

roadburner · August 2018

snakeweasel said:

thebean said:

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.

Actually they are just rolling back Obama's mandates, the 2020 mandates are still in effect. Seriously auto emissions are so clean compared to the past that Obama's mandates wouldnt do much. Plus every increase in mileage and or emissions comes at an even greater cost than the previous. There is only so much power in a gallon of gas and only so clean it will burn. Obama's mandates would have been hard to achieve and would have increased car prices.

As for global warming this will have little if any affect. Climate change is a natural occurrence and in the past it has been hotter than it is now and in the future it will be cooler than it is now. And yes there is plenty of evidence that that natural climate change ca occurs rapidly. As for how much is man made is open for debate. However cars account for a small percentage of greenhouse gases being emitted, This rollback will have very little effect.

Also when its 120 in December it's going to be a few billion years from now when the sun is about to explode.

Agree 100%.

imidazol97 · August 2018

graphicguy said:
I know some of you are enamored with the new Acura RDX. Here’s a mostly positive review, with some actual “gushing” about its goodness.

http://www.thedrive.com/new-cars/22545/2019-acura-rdx-advance-sh-awd-review-a-tech-laden-compact-crossover-thats-already-winning-americans-over

Auto media? Gushing over a Honda or Toyota? Say it's not true.

thebean · August 2018

Oh come on @roadburner, @snakeweasel, and @houdini1 - you're just trolling us. You guys are too smart to believe that climate change caused by humans is just a hoax. Maybe you are denying it for some reason, but you absolutely know that it's a real thing. You're just funnin' us, aren't you?

roadburner · August 2018

Nope.

28firefighter · August 2018

Guys, we're veering off into that territory again...

berri · August 2018

I think a lot of the latest global warming stuff is the development of Asia. Those air and ocean currents come into the PNW and Canada and then work their way down into the States.

qbrozen · August 2018

Climate change is caused by fairy farts and unicorn burps. Kill all of them off and we're fine until the elves take over.

houdini1 · August 2018

28firefighter said:
Guys, we're veering off into that territory again...

I agree, and ironically it is the people that were complaining about political posts who started it !!

graphicguy · August 2018

qbrozen said:
Climate change is caused by fairy farts and unicorn burps. Kill all of them off and we're fine until the elves take over.

Yep....add in the “see no evil...speak no evil....hear no evil” monkeys.

Ice caps are melting, the oceans are rising. This is a disaster, if not for the current generation, it will certainly be a catastrophe for future generations.

Bad move on the CAFE ROLLBACKS!

Auto manufacturers balked at CAFE standards at their inception. But, they caused a huge leap in innovations.

fintail · August 2018

Looking at what automakers have fought in the past, the makers not wanting a specific rule or regulation might not exactly mean the rule/regulation is bad. I won't say that personal transport is a significant factor in climate change, but if US standards dumb down products, it will likely make those products less competitive in other markets (of course, there are still people out there who think consumers in Sapporo or Stuttgart want products designed for the USDM and that the only things holding them back are small tariffs) - and isn't industry supposed to be a new focus? We'll see. Seems like more trolling of greenies/CA people to distract from other more serious malfeasance.

graphicguy said:

Yep....add in the “see no evil...speak no evil....hear no evil” monkeys.

Ice caps are melting, the oceans are rising. This is a disaster, if not for the current generation, it will certainly be a catastrophe for future generations.

Bad move on the CAFE ROLLBACKS!

Auto manufacturers balked at CAFE standards at their inception. But, they caused a huge leap in innovations.

oldfarmer50 · August 2018

houdini1 said:

28firefighter said:
Guys, we're veering off into that territory again...
I agree, and ironically it is the people that were complaining about political posts who started it !!

Not me and I have very strong opinions on the subject. But this is not the place to discuss the politics related to it.

Mr_Shiftright · August 2018

thebean said:

Michaell said:

driver100 said:

oldfarmer50 said:

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.
Never heard of them. What did they sell?
Brookstone had unusual items...often gift things. Like it might be a clock that also makes your toast in the morning....or say a scale with music when you stand on it, or maybe a bird feeder that will throw squirrels off into the bushes, or something you put on a chair and it will message your back. Some things are pretty cool, but, how much of that stuff does anyone need. Easier to buy online these days.
Kind of a poor mans Sharper Image.
Exactly. Crap nobody needs, but things someone that doesn't know you might buy you for a gift.

Don't be too sure you may not need a Venus de Milo statuette with a clock in her stomach. And that wi-fi toilet seat?

imidazol97 · August 2018

Samsung mistake. I bought a Samsung TV for bedroom replacement of Sony that's about 10 years old--darned Sony's don't last. It cuts off for 10 seconds or so with black screen.

Samsung was one I saw a couple months back that was new. 1080. 32inch. Smart. 5300 model. Price just dropped and my wife says the Sony is cutting out more frequently.

The Samsung does NOT have auto timer ON ability. The 40-inch Samsung in the family room has 3 preset times. The Sony had a single time on setting that was easily reset as an alarm clock when needed.

Now I've got to shop models again. Many are 720. Samsung supposedly has a straight forward Smart ability that's easy to use. I intended to switch to internet TV using Spectrum internet possibly... My DSL is probably too slow.

I never would have thunk to look for alarm clock capabilities when in the showroom. I would think Samsung would include that if it's in other software chips.

dino001 · August 2018

thebean said:
Oh come on @roadburner, @snakeweasel, and @houdini1 - you're just trolling us. You guys are too smart to believe that climate change caused by humans is just a hoax. Maybe you are denying it for some reason, but you absolutely know that it's a real thing. You're just funnin' us, aren't you?

I think the "denial" reaction comes from highly suspicious and political way it was all introduced. The first documents were full of materially incorrect statements that seem to all be going "one way". Then data that could introduce any doubt was systematically scrubbed from subsequent documents (e.g. Medieval warming period). I'm in the skeptic camp myself, but not a complete denier. This is my position:

1. I don't doubt the climate is changing faster than before. It's always been changing, but now it may be changing faster than before.
2. It is likely that human contribution is a significant factor, but I'm not completely convinced human contribution is decisive factor.
3. The "Earth is dying" thesis, or similar catastrophic visions are complete BS, IMHO. Things will change, for many to worse, but we are not going to go extinct, or some garbage like that.
4. For humans, it's more of economic factor, not existential. We should debate how to adapt, not how to stop it. We should look at opportunities (northern climate agriculture, northern passage for shipping) as much as threats (sea water rise displacing large number of people). We should develop technologies coping with some effects (e.g. make desalination cheaper and more practical).
5. Attempts to stop the process are unrealistic, futile and frankly stupid. They are politically motivated by busy body types who will latch to any opportunity to take control over other peoples' lives,cause it's what they live for. Corporations, initially resisting the legislation, joined it on the premise of extra business for themselves. Infamous now are those CFL bulbs with highly toxic filaments, that didn't fix anything, but were shoved down peoples' throats, just to be supplanted by LED bulbs (the issue is much more complex). Another such glaring example is dieselgate by VW - classic attempt to "save the planet" by giving everybody cancer through nitrogen oxides. The electric/hybrid vehicles are not "saints" either - we will yet to see devastation caused by lithium extraction or storage of highly toxic spent batteries in the future.
6. All of that sums up to conclusion we know something, we don't know whole lot more and political decisions based on this information have potential to do more harm than good. People who are in charge and try to peddle some of "solutions" are not trustworthy, their motivation is less than pure.

Mr_Shiftright · August 2018

EPA rollbacks are going to hurt the EV industry and give China a very competitive edge on us.

Not a good idea.

imidazol97 · August 2018

dino001 said:

5. Attempts to stop the process are unrealistic, futile and frankly stupid. They are politically motivated by busy body types who will latch to any opportunity to take control over other peoples' lives,cause it's what they live for. Corporations, initially resisting the legislation, joined it on the premise of extra business for themselves. Infamous now are those CFL bulbs with highly toxic filaments, that didn't fix anything, but were shoved down peoples' throats, just to be supplanted by LED bulbs (the issue is much more complex). Another such glaring example is dieselgate by VW - classic attempt to "save the planet" by giving everybody cancer through nitrogen oxides. The electric/hybrid vehicles are not "saints" either - we will yet to see devastation caused by lithium extraction or storage of highly toxic spent batteries in the future.
6. All of that sums up to conclusion we know something, we don't know whole lot more and political decisions based on this information have potential to do more harm than good. People who are in charge and try to peddle some of "solutions" are not trustworthy, their motivation is less than pure..

I dealt with serious data for a time as part of the work to which I was assigned. We did not have to fudge data, ignore data parts, to make any conclusions from that data. We didn't handpick or modify data records, nor did we select certain periods of time, as was/is done with the global warming hopeful.

The idea of global warming as a cause for certain folks to tax or sell is transparently a political purpose. Certain people have made millions maybe even billions already. We seldom have seen so many experts in the media with degrees in nothing, especially not in sciences which study and track the earth, as have been held up by the media. People with broadcasting school certificates as meteorologists are experts in the whom earth's behavior.

I parallel it (trigger alert) to the way many people stereotype GM products automatically (based on some deserved reputations in some models in the past).

I am surprised someone wanted to bring up this touchy topic. But the media makes it work with the populist method of putting out information for the people to believe that is being used these days. I believe more important is the 11-year sunspot cycle and a volcano erupting to warming and cooling.

Some data says the earth has been slowly cooling for a few years overall. There will be hot spots setting records every day. There will be cold spots setting records every day. There will be Lynchburgs with flooding potential due to heavy rainfall setting records every day. There is always an extreme being set somewhere, somehow. Macht nichts.

stickguy · August 2018

I get a laugh out of people thinking humans have that much control over the earth.

Also, IMO the EPA stuff (car emissions, coal burning, etc) issue got hijacked into global warming. That really generated from a much more basic problem of pollution at the ground level. Which really is a lot more relevant to people right now. Look at China, India, etc. That is a people issue (burning lots of crap polluting the environment and fouling air/water). Even if it does not materially change the climate long term, cleaning that stuff up will save lives (and parts of the planet).

Dino, you touch on a common theme. People like things the way they are, and don't want change. Ignoring that before them, things were different. So they don't care if 200 years ago a coastline was 1 mile further out to sea. They just don't want it to move inland 1 inch in their lifetime. When in reality, land has always been evolving, so if low lying coastal areas are going to flood, move elsewhere instead of trying to stop the ocean from doing what oceans do!

Throughout history, politicians and fear mongers talk and predict calamity. And in the end, people just adapt. Grow oranges in Canada if that is what needs to happen.

ab348 · August 2018

With the heat wave that has affected the Northeast for the last 10 days or so there are the usual dire proclamations on social media and citing of weather records. My favorite was one that was along the lines of "Still denying climate change? The hottest week according to weather statistics since 1984!!!" The obvious question was, of course, what happened back in 1984 then, before anyone knew about climate change?

I am with Dino, imid, Stick and their sensible posts on the topic.

houdini1 · August 2018

ab348 said:
With the heat wave that has affected the Northeast for the last 10 days or so there are the usual dire proclamations on social media and citing of weather records. My favorite was one that was along the lines of "Still denying climate change? The hottest week according to weather statistics since 1984!!!" The obvious question was, of course, what happened back in 1984 then, before anyone knew about climate change?

I am with Dino, imid, Stick and their sensible posts on the topic.

I agree, and I am pleasantly surprised that quite a few people posting here have resisted the daily attempts at brainwashing and continue to think clearly and rationally.

tbirdmarco · August 2018

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lV3BdtFdgiE

snakeweasel · August 2018

thebean said:

Oh come on @roadburner, @snakeweasel, and @houdini1 - you're just trolling us. You guys are too smart to believe that climate change caused by humans is just a hoax. Maybe you are denying it for some reason, but you absolutely know that it's a real thing. You're just funnin' us, aren't you?

Nope not trolling you. Just trying to look at this without all the hype and fear mongering that goes along with it. The fact of the matter is is that ever since the earth formed the climate has been in a constant state of flux. Sometimes changing faster sometimes slower but always changing. There are various reasons for the changes but it is a consistent change. To look at climate change as if the climate is static and any change is of human origin is disingenuous. We need to understand that climate change is a natural occurrence and how much is due to human activity and how and if we should act on it.

berri · August 2018

The auto industry has invested quite a bit of money to meet these new standards. But if you believe in learning curves. a lot of that effort may already be in today's cars. Of course another theory goes more like that last 20% gain takes over half the total investment to attain.

driver100 · August 2018

berri said:
I think a lot of the latest global warming stuff is the development of Asia. Those air and ocean currents come into the PNW and Canada and then work their way down into the States.

Stop blaming Canada. We didn't do nothing to nobody.

oldfarmer50 · August 2018

Just saw an Audi commercial where a woman quits her job and goes out and buys an Audi SUV. Now maybe I'm out of touch with the younger generation but buying a $75,000 SUV when you have no job seems a bit reckless.

driver100 · August 2018

What about climate change when the earth got really cold and all the dinosaurs died.....that was before people started to affect the planet. Or at the same time according to some.

berri · August 2018

Well driver, I mentioned the Pacific Northwest first and the dinosaur extinction was believed to be caused by a meteor or some such colliding with earth or a giant volcanic eruption. Either way blacked out the skies for a long period of time. Personally, I like the Canadians I've met.

qbrozen · August 2018

driver100 said:

What about climate change when the earth got really cold and all the dinosaurs died.....that was before people started to affect the planet. Or at the same time according to some.

Dinosaur farts. Did themselves in. They should have listened to the protestors who insisted they eat less gassy food.
That's why I'm saying we need to kill off the fairies and unicorns NOW before it is too late! Won't anyone please think of the children?!

jmonroe · August 2018

berri said:
Well driver, I mentioned the Pacific Northwest first and the dinosaur extinction was believed to be caused by a meteor or some such colliding with earth or a giant volcanic eruption. Either way blacked out the skies for a long period of time. Personally, I like the Canadians I've met.

I bet you can't even name two of em.

jmonroe

houdini1 · August 2018

oldfarmer50 said:
Just saw an Audi commercial where a woman quits her job and goes out and buys an Audi SUV. Now maybe I'm out of touch with the younger generation but buying a $75,000 SUV when you have no job seems a bit reckless.

Obviously, she had been embezzling for several years and finally got all she needed, took the money and run.

28firefighter · August 2018

See Office Space: e.g. Milton

Mr_Shiftright · August 2018

Global Warming is too hot a topic. Let's avoid it please. You can go to Quora and battle it out?

snakeweasel · August 2018

Name that car.

snakeweasel · August 2018

berri said:

Well driver, I mentioned the Pacific Northwest first and the dinosaur extinction was believed to be caused by a meteor or some such colliding with earth or a giant volcanic eruption. Either way blacked out the skies for a long period of time. Personally, I like the Canadians I've met.

stickguy · August 2018

well, her note said get "dream job". Maybe she got that first!

fintail · August 2018

Guess what's in the box?

Mystery car is a Jeepster, 1949-50 or so I guess.

houdini1 said:

Obviously, she had been embezzling for several years and finally got all she needed, took the money and run.

stickguy · August 2018

that a red 65 plymouth on the other side of the road?

snakeweasel · August 2018

fintail said:

Guess what's in the box? Mystery car is a Jeepster, 1949-50 or so I guess.
Obviously, she had been embezzling for several years and finally got all she needed, took the money and run.

Yep it's a 1950 Jeepster.

Next mystery car is:

henryn · August 2018

I'm going to say 1958 Buick. It's been a lot of years now, but my older brother owned one of these in 1966 or thereabout.

snakeweasel · August 2018

henryn said:

I'm going to say 1958 Buick. It's been a lot of years now, but my older brother towned one of these in 1966 or thereabout.

We have another winner, it's a 58 Buick Limited.

OK one more;

andres3 · August 2018

snakeweasel said:

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.

I think you guys missed the point of my long post. All those examples were things that didn't involve speed! Unless you consider a right turn at 1 MPH speed on a red light.

andres3 · August 2018

snakeweasel said:

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.
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.

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?

It's a pretty soild assumption when you see it happen in front/alongside/behind you. You are observing traffic, and you don't see any violations yourself, other than speeding, which everyone is doing, so when someone gets pulled over, pretty safe process of elmination. Also, if the fastest guy that just passed you gets pulled over, another prettty strong indicator.

andres3 · August 2018

snakeweasel said:

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.
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.

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?

It's a pretty soild assumption when you see it happen in front/alongside/behind you. You are observing traffic, and you don't see any violations yourself, other than speeding, which everyone is doing, so when someone gets pulled over, pretty safe process of elmination. Also, if the fastest guy that just passed you gets pulled over, another prettty strong indicator.

andres3 · August 2018

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.

The problem is you don't have any experience with traffic courts.

Furthermore, another problem is you don't have any experience with California Traffic Courts.

When you say "taking responsibility for your actions" what you really mean to say is paying a fine regardless of whether you are guilty or not.

As to not making money on traffic enforcement, that's another lauaghable lie, for if it were true, all the Traffic Courts in America wouldn't object to putting all traffic fine revenue for the current fiscal year into an account in my name. They should be able to run just fine off of tax payer dollars; they don't need the fine money; give it to me then.

andres3 · August 2018

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 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.

Then why do we have laws on the books where safety and hazard isn't an element of the crime?

What's the point of enforcing laws that don't lead to or cause any accidents? Why not concentrate on the laws that do lead to hazards and safety violations that cause accidents?

andres3 · August 2018

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 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.

I see you live in a very lucky and naive world where false accusations and allegations don't get thrust upon you.

Remember, if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit!

Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles