Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Jocassee on September 18, 2013, 11:16:21 AM
-
Is this what is adding to the rise of what I call "predatory" law enforcement?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zGeZiWOeGIc
Link is to a Reason TV program about a cop who was fired for refusing to meet quotas in Auburn AL
comes with a Radley Balko alert
Keep the cop bashing on the DL (mods...do as you see fit)
I am not posting this just because of what happened to me. I understand the thin blue line. But revenue generation and predatory law enforcement pisses me off.
Is a possible solution this maybe taking questionable tickets to jury trial (and hopefully a sympathetic jury)?
-
Is a possible solution this maybe taking questionable tickets to jury trial (and hopefully a sympathetic jury)?
I'm not channeling CSD here or anything, but I think the best solution is to drive the speed limit. But that revolves around my whole notion of starving Leviathan.
It'd be VERY interesting (in a chinese sense) to see what law changes come down the way, if traffic enforcement revenues dropped because people drove more conservatively. Because they (of "they-them-those" fame) would do anything to preserve that revenue, even if they start giving 10 year olds tickets for riding the playground slide backwards.
-
Is a possible solution this maybe taking questionable tickets to jury trial (and hopefully a sympathetic jury)?
Can you take a traffic citation to a jury trial? It was my understanding that you can't do that most places for a civil infraction.
-
Can you take a traffic citation to a jury trial? It was my understanding that you can't do that most places for a civil infraction.
You can in SC. I don't know if it counts as a civil or criminal infraction.
-
I'm not channeling CSD here or anything, but I think the best solution is to drive the speed limit. But that revolves around my whole notion of starving Leviathan.
You are no fun at all sir
-
If enough people don't break the law the change the law so you do.
But really, most traffic laws are written so broadly that cops can pull anyone over for anything at any time wioth no more than the ususal amount of perjury.
-
Is this what is adding to the rise of what I call "predatory" law enforcement?
A cop from my village was fired about a decade ago for not meeting quotas showing up late for work twice.
He publicly stated that "his purpose as a police officer is to patrol neighborhoods, not to hand out tickets on the freeway at the edge of town."
On the other end of the spectrum, there was another cop in my village who got special training from the DOT for inspecting semi trucks. He pulled over every semi truck that came through our village, spent 1/2 hour inspecting the rigs for violations (there is going to be some sort of violation on just about every truck out there, whether its brake linings 0.010" too thin or low wiper washer fluid, a loose dirt clod on a lowboy carrying an excavator, etc), writing hundreds-sometimes thousands of dollars in fines for each operator, and disrupting commerce in general (except of course the commerce that involved towing/repairing rigs). The people of our village got sick of it pretty quick when contractors or delivery trucks would add a large 'police' surcharge to all deliveries to or work being done in our village.
-
Can you take a traffic citation to a jury trial? It was my understanding that you can't do that most places for a civil infraction.
In TX, I've served as a juror a couple of times in traffic court - each time, it was made clear that these traffic offenses were considered criminal infractions, and the persons had a constitutional right to a trial by jury.
-
In TX, I've served as a juror a couple of times in traffic court - each time, it was made clear that these traffic offenses were considered criminal infractions, and the persons had a constitutional right to a trial by jury.
I think its the same here...
The last time my wife got a speeding ticket, she went to her court date instead of just paying the fine.
They gave her three options:
1. Pay the fine as-is, and get a few points on her license.
2. Plea bargain to a broken speedometer, pay a fine that was $50 or so higher but no points on her license.
3. Trial at a later date.
They make the fines cheap enough that no sane person unless independently wealthy, retired with a lot of free time, or is trying to make a point is going to go to trial.
It works almost the same way for parking tickets- at least in Milwaukee- a private contractor with incentives to write as many tickets as possible, writes tickets even when a person is parked legally. The person can pay it or appeal it, but appealing it is pointless, they are never overturned. Its simply a shakedown of people who park their cars on the streets.
-
I am taking an issue to court whenever i get a date. Speeding. I'll let you know how it turns out.
-
I am taking an issue to court whenever i get a date. Speeding. I'll let you know how it turns out.
Same one I know about, or another one?
-
Same one I know about, or another one?
Same one. Still waiting on a court date
-
If enough people don't break the law the change the law so you do.
But really, most traffic laws are written so broadly that cops can pull anyone over for anything at any time wioth no more than the ususal amount of perjury.
Both of these.
Traffic tickets are nothing more than an irregularly levied roadway use tax.
-
Traffic tickets are nothing more than an irregularly levied roadway use tax.
Another one of my pet peeves--using a high-usage yet perfectly safe roadway as a revenue generation device.
If the city wants to make money off their road--fine. But don't send gun thugs out to do it.
-
Another one of my pet peeves--using a high-usage yet perfectly safe roadway as a revenue generation device.
If the city wants to make money off their road--fine. But don't send gun thugs out to do it.
Drive the speed limit and obey all traffic laws, no reason to get a ticket then. Argue otherwise, you are a law breaking criminal. :rofl:
-
Drive the speed limit and obey all traffic laws, no reason to get a ticket then. Argue otherwise, you are a law breaking criminal. :rofl:
It's virtually impossible to obey all traffic laws, if someone is looking for a reason to pull you over.
-
It's virtually impossible to obey all traffic laws, if someone is looking for a reason to pull you over.
Did you give them a reason?
-
Did you give them a reason?
Both Jocassee and I gave him a reason (in his mind at least).
I mailed my extortion to the courthouse, once I finally returned back to AZ.
-
Both Jocassee and I gave him a reason (in his mind at least).
I mailed my extortion to the courthouse, once I finally returned back to AZ.
Were both of you exceeding the posted speed limit when you were pulled over?
-
Did you give them a reason?
In a lot of small towns that fund through tickets/asset forfeiture, "He ain't from 'round here" is all the reason that's needed. In Medina (super rich neighborhood in Bellevue where Bill Gates lives) driving while poor is a valid reason. In a lot of affluent white communities driving while black is a reason. Etc etc
-
Drive the speed limit and obey all traffic laws, no reason to get a ticket then. Argue otherwise, you are a law breaking criminal. :rofl:
Your point is not wrong, but in the best of libertarian traditions I'm going to stand on the point that cops should emphasize policing crimes and areas that have, you know, actual victims.
As a purely practical matter, my city has a large and growing gang, drug trafficking, and violent crime problem. We do not have a crushing Lunch Rush Traffic problem. Or an underage drinking problem (another set of laws they waste taxpayer money setting up stings to "fight.")
So when I see cops stacking up on the most-traveled section of freeway in the city which is normally quite safe, if running 10 over, I know that they are not doing the work they should be doing.
-
Were both of you exceeding the posted speed limit when you were pulled over?
I dunno. I wasn't looking at the speedometer, I was trying to keep up with my tour guide. ;)
-
Did you give them a reason?
All I have is the cop's word. I was watching the road and being a safe driver.
-
All I have is the cop's word. I was watching the road and being a safe driver.
True, dat. No radar. Just a spitballed guess on the cop's part.
-
It's virtually impossible to obey all traffic laws, if someone is looking for a reason to pull you over.
And yet i've driven just over 400 k miles without a ticket.
Am i that lucky?
damn phone
-
When a town drops the speed limit from 55 to 30 for a road that is 50 yards wide with no schools or buisness close on the road, you know they are just trolling to revenue. There is little or no reason to even low the speed limit in that town. I have responded by bypassing the town altogether when I drive that way.
-
And yet i've driven just over 400 k miles without a ticket.
Am i that lucky?
damn phone
You're probably slow. And inconspicuous. I am honest enough to admit I am not that slow and neither of my vehicles is inconspicuous.
-
And yet i've driven just over 400 k miles without a ticket.
Am i that lucky?
damn phone
Your experience is, once again, not a universal reflection of how things are for everyone everywhere. It's been many years since I got a ticket too, what's your point? All I said was that if a cop wanted to pull you over (because he needed to make quota, because he thought you looked like a promising asset forfeiture candidate, because you're young and you're black and you're hats pulled low, whatever) then he could find a way that you're violating traffic laws.
Kinda like how the average American committs three felonies a day, even though most folks on here can probably point at many years of living and no felony charges.
-
So what will your argument be, in your jury trial?
-
When a town drops the speed limit from 55 to 30 for a road that is 50 yards wide with no schools or buisness close on the road, you know they are just trolling to revenue. There is little or no reason to even low the speed limit in that town. I have responded by bypassing the town altogether when I drive that way.
I've taken to being a pedant in these situations, braking swiftly before the sign, slowly coasting through exactly on the speed limit, then zooming back up at the next speed limit sign.
People behind me are often annoyed about it, but all I'm doing is following the law. I've saved a few from getting a ticket themselves.
-
So what will your argument be, in your jury trial?
Still working on it but primarily it depends on charming the sweet southern church ladies who I envision will be on the jury.
Seriously though I don't have any good ideas. I plan on asking for the calibration records of the radar, if he was using radar. I don't know if SCHP uses Lidar and if they do if there are any loopholes.
-
He didn't use radar, according to what he said road-side with us.
He passed us while we were taking pics of that meadow and mountain range about 2 miles earlier, and probably was in the act of turning around on a side road to establish a speed trap and saw us go by.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkcconnor.endoftheinternet.org%3A8001%2Fphoto%2Fconvert.php%3Fdir%3D426c6f6720496d61676573%26amp%3Bname%3D323031332d30352d32352d3130305f303830382e4a5047%26amp%3Btype%3D1%26amp%3Bv%3D0&hash=aa826039618b9a3e871728810e17ee48f80c63ec)
Then he passed me at triple digits with his siren off but lights on (when I was just about to pass a little pickup truck between you and me, scaring the bejeezus out of me in the process), put his siren on for you, pulled you over and then instructed me to join you guys.
I was more than a bit irked by the way he passed me.
-
He didn't use radar, according to what he said road-side with us.
He passed us while we were taking pics of that meadow and mountain range about 2 miles earlier, and probably was in the act of turning around on a side road to establish a speed trap and saw us go by.
Then he passed me at triple digits with his siren off but lights on (when I was just about to pass a little pickup truck between you and me, scaring the bejeezus out of me in the process), put his siren on for you, pulled you over and then instructed me to join you guys.
I was more than a bit irked by the way he passed me.
I'll call you later.
-
Slow? Have you been following me?
I learned my lesson when they took my license for 17 years. The first 10 of which i continued to drive.
Not recommended particularly in va
damn phone
-
So how about the stretch of highway running through Jocasseetown that you will quite likely cause an accident by following the artificially slow speed limit, and if you get a ticket your just hte unlucky SOB they decided to ping that day?
-
Interstates were designed for safe travel at what, 70-75? And that was at a time when the best sports cars in the world had such poor handling they get spanked by a modern mini-van. Speed limits are set so ridiculously, artificially low solely because they know most folks will ignore them, and any time they want some extra revenue all they have to do is mosy on out and collect some unofficial taxes.
-
Interstates were designed for safe travel at what, 70-75? And that was at a time when the best sports cars in the world had such poor handling they get spanked by a modern mini-van. Speed limits are set so ridiculously, artificially low solely because they know most folks will ignore them, and any time they want some extra revenue all they have to do is mosy on out and collect some unofficial taxes.
I didn't know your were an actuary or an expert in traffic analysis.
-
So how about the stretch of highway running through Jocasseetown that you will quite likely cause an accident by following the artificially slow speed limit, and if you get a ticket your just hte unlucky SOB they decided to ping that day?
Because there are selfish people who feel that speed limits do not apply to them.
-
I didn't know your were an actuary or an expert in traffic analysis.
;/
Oddly enough you aren't either, and yet your opinion on the exact same subject is somehow more valid than mine. Strange that.
Whatever, I'm sure the .gov has nothing but our good in mind, so I'm terribly, terribly sorry for daring to question their benevolent wisdom. Please forgive me for impugning the heroes in our local revenue generation thin blue line of self less and impartial protecting people from themselves.
-
Because there are selfish people who feel that speed limits do not apply to them.
Remember kids, doubting that Big Brother only wants the best for you (and knows the best way to live your life) is selfish selfish hate thought.
-
Because there are selfish people who feel that speed limits do not apply to them.
Right.
Of course.
How silly of me
-
Right.
Of course.
How silly of me
So you are fine with exceeding the speed limit and putting other people at risk? What about the person pulling out of their driveway, who is used to people doing the speed limit, sees you from a safe distance and starts to pull out but you are doing 20 miles over the speed limit and you T-bone them?
The libertarian thought isn't me, myself and I, yes it is about personal responsibility, but it also about not becoming going against the societal norms.
No different then the folks who feel the need to park in the fire lane because they are too lazy/selfish to park elsewhere and walk an extra 20 feet to run in and run out a place.
-
;/
Oddly enough you aren't either, and yet your opinion on the exact same subject is somehow more valid than mine. Strange that.
Whatever, I'm sure the .gov has nothing but our good in mind, so I'm terribly, terribly sorry for daring to question their benevolent wisdom. Please forgive me for impugning the heroes in our local revenue generation thin blue line of self less and impartial protecting people from themselves.
I'm not either but why do vehicle accidents go up when speed limits are increased? You can look at stats all over the various governmental agencies websites that show that.
-
I'm not either but why do vehicle accidents go up when speed limits are increased? You can look at stats all over the various governmental agencies websites that show that.
1. Are those the same stats that show total causes of death at around %300?
2. Well shoot, let's just make all speed limits 10 mph enforced with mandatory governors. Problem solved!
So you are fine with exceeding the speed limit and putting other people at risk? What about the person pulling out of their driveway, who is used to people doing the speed limit, sees you from a safe distance and starts to pull out but you are doing 20 miles over the speed limit and you T-bone them?
The libertarian thought isn't me, myself and I, yes it is about personal responsibility, but it also about not becoming going against the societal norms. No different then the folks who feel the need to park in the fire lane because they are too lazy/selfish to park elsewhere and walk an extra 20 feet to run in and run out a place.
Lot of silly BS in this post, but regarding the bolded part: if gay marriage is against societal norms we should outlaw it and anyone who tries it is just selfish, right?
-
So you are fine with exceeding the speed limit and putting other people at risk? What about the person pulling out of their driveway, who is used to people doing the speed limit, sees you from a safe distance and starts to pull out but you are doing 20 miles over the speed limit and you T-bone them?
The libertarian thought isn't me, myself and I, yes it is about personal responsibility, but it also about not becoming going against the societal norms.
No different then the folks who feel the need to park in the fire lane because they are too lazy/selfish to park elsewhere and walk an extra 20 feet to run in and run out a place.
How many people have driveways coming out into a highway with a speed limit 10-15 mpf lower than the common flow of traffic?
-
How many people have driveways coming out into a highway with a speed limit 10-15 mpf lower than the common flow of traffic?
Huh?
-
1. Are those the same stats that show total causes of death at around %300?
2. Well shoot, let's just make all speed limits 10 mph enforced with mandatory governors. Problem solved!
Lot of silly BS in this post, but regarding the bolded part: if gay marriage is against societal norms we should outlaw it and anyone who tries it is just selfish, right?
Actually most of the polls now show that a slight majority (means over 50%) are fine with gay marriage. source: http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
How about this, you decide to dump vehicle antifreeze into the storm drain because you didn't want to pay for the disposal at a resource recovery center? Is that libertarian?
-
How many people have driveways coming out into a highway with a speed limit 10-15 mpf lower than the common flow of traffic?
come for a drive with me in va. i can show you hundreds
-
Huh?
Never mind, I got what you were saying.
All over the place where I live, most highways (not interstates) in the really rural areas have at least 2 driveways per mile (at least one house on each side of the road per section of land), as it goes into more populated area, you may have a driveway every 100' or less. These are highways at 55mph, not divided interstate highways.
-
Ick... I'm going to agree with CSD.
There are hundreds of thousands of homes in America with direct driveway access to a major rural artery or even state or US highway, between 45 and 65 mph speed zones posted.
That being said, Charby's silly groupthink post about societal norms is a pretty empty argument.
Most of those homes have such large driveways that they are practically roads unto themselves, and the homeowner or visitor to that home can enter nose-first into the driveway, as well as leave nose-first. This gives best visibility and best acceleration to merge to responsible traveling speed.
-
I'm not either but why do vehicle accidents go up when speed limits are increased? You can look at stats all over the various governmental agencies websites that show that.
That claim, "more speed = more accidents" is not universally accepted.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/06/texas_85_mile_per_hour_speed_limit_do_higher_speed_limits_cause_more_accidents_.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/06/texas_85_mile_per_hour_speed_limit_do_higher_speed_limits_cause_more_accidents_.html)
http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/szn/determining_the_85th_percentile_speed.htm (http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/szn/determining_the_85th_percentile_speed.htm)
There is evidence that setting the speed limit below the 85th percentile can also cause accidents.
We can infer that speed limits are set for revenue and not speed, because we can see what was done with red light cameras which has similar incentive structures. Some cities intentionally shortened yellow lights to make more red light camera revenue, even though there is strong evidence that short yellow times increase accident incidence. Even now, many yellow lights are shorter than the recommended minimums (formula based on road type and 85th percentile speeds).
One of the things that confuses the data, is that roads and cars have been getting steadily better; so that lowering the speed limit in the 70s saw dropping accidents, and raising the speed limit in the 90s and 00s saw dropping accidents.
here's an entertaining one...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BKdbxX1pDw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BKdbxX1pDw)
-
Most of those homes have such large driveways that they are practically roads unto themselves, and the homeowner or visitor to that home can enter nose-first into the driveway, as well as leave nose-first. This gives best visibility and best acceleration to merge to responsible traveling speed.
Not always, think of part of northern MN, WI or the UP where people built their house close to the hwy because the lake lots are so small between the lake and road. Or mountainous areas where there isn't much land between the highway and the rock faces.
-
Not always, think of part of northern MN, WI or the UP where people built their house close to the hwy because the lake lots are so small between the lake and road. Or mountainous areas where there isn't much land between the highway and the rock faces.
i can show you hundreds near here
-
We can infer that speed limits are set for revenue and not speed, because we can see what was done with red light cameras which has similar incentive structures. Some cities intentionally shortened yellow lights to make more red light camera revenue, even though there is strong evidence that short yellow times increase accident incidence. Even now, many yellow lights are shorter than the recommended minimums (formula based on road type and 85th percentile speeds).
I don't disagree about speed/red light cameras.
-
We can infer that speed limits are set for revenue and not speed, because we can see what was done with red light cameras which has similar incentive structures. Some cities intentionally shortened yellow lights to make more red light camera revenue, even though there is strong evidence that short yellow times increase accident incidence. Even now, many yellow lights are shorter than the recommended minimums (formula based on road type and 85th percentile speeds).
I'm thinking of starting a ballot referendum here in AZ that mandates that all red light cameras must be retrofitted with those LED digital timers for the cross-walk signal, otherwise the camera must be removed.
That gives you a visual queue when the green is about to turn yellow, and you can adjust your speed up or down a block BEFORE you get to the damn light.
There's no way redflex will like that, and no way that lawmakers at any level will like that. So it's obviously brilliant and perfect.
-
Drive the speed limit and obey all traffic laws, no reason to get a ticket then. Argue otherwise, you are a law breaking criminal. :rofl:
Even that doesn't always work.
The last ticket I got was over an inspection sticker. I had recenty returned to OK from VA after geting out of the Navy. I was still sportinga VA inspection sticker. Which was perfectly legal as OK and VA had reciprocity on vehicle inspections at the time. Something I had learned several years earlier.
Small town cop gave me a NO INSPECTION ticket. It was only a $55 fine, no points.
I had to make two traffic courts to get it thrown out.
First time I presented a copy of the relevant parts of the OK regs on inspections with a list of states OK had reciprocity with. Judge looked at the list and said he didn't see OK on the list. :facepalm:
Also told me, and I quote. "you're in Oklahoma now boy, you need to obey Oklahoma law".
Entered a not guily plea and left.
I had made numerous phone calls to the city prosecutors office tring to get it resolved prior to the court dates since it was night court and at the time I was working a night shift and making the court was a PITA. Never got an answer or call back.
When I finally got in back front of the judge I again stated my case and presented a full official copy of the OK inspection regs. Judge still wasn't buying it.
All night I had watched the show and the judge had a scripted routine, he'd pronounce guilty and levy fine and court costs, or a seperate script and dismiss fines and levy court costs.
After I had stated my case the judge started with his guilty routine and the city prosecutor cut him off cold, judge didn't like it.
Prosecutor made the case that the VA inspection was acceptable but that the officer had been confused by the way the dates on the sticker were presented. I said it sure seemed easy to read to me and that the sticker was still on the van if they wanted to see it. The judge then started on his dismiss the fine and just pay court cost script and the prosecutor cut him off again. Judge still didn't like that. The prosecutorsaid the city would waive court costs and somethn about the officer wasn't familiar with the inspection laws.
That's when I almost got in real trouble.
-
Having driveways intersect state highways here is the rule, rather than the exception.
Having driveways intersect state highways here on hill crests or blind curves is also the rule.
Then there are the tractors with manure spreaders, and Amish buggies all sharing the highway with you...
-
Having driveways intersect state highways here is the rule, rather than the exception.
Having driveways intersect state highways here on hill crests or blind curves is also the rule.
Then there are the tractors with manure spreaders, and Amish buggies all sharing the highway with you...
statist! >:D =D =D
-
Same one. Still waiting on a court date
Reminds me of when I was attending school in Philadelphia many years ago.
My brother had a car he was trying to sell. Had a potential buyer from New Jersey who was interested but wanted to see the car. We worked out a plan whereby I took the car down to Philly, and the next weekend I headed across the Walt Whitman Bridge and across New Jersey to show the car, then back to home to return the car to my brother.
It was raining heavily in NJ. The route was a 2-lane state highway. I was behind a truck that was going well under the speed limit, and throwing up huge rooster tails of water. Finally got a clear straight stretch where I could pass, and did so. I noticed a car parked on the opposite shoulder as I passed, but I didn't pay any attention.
MANY miles farther down the road, I spotted an emergency vehicle of some kind coming up behind me, so I pulled over to let it go by. I was mildly astonished when it pulled up behind me. It was a county mountie, and he claimed I must have been "flying" because it took him so long to catch up to me. In fact, I was driving the speed limit and it took him so long because he had to turn around, and then pass numerous vars and trucks in a heavy rain with near zero visibility. But ... don't argue it on the side of the road.
He gave me a ticket, with a court date and a fine, and an address where I could just send in the payment. I wasn't about the get railroaded by a NJ cop, so I resolved to go to court. There was a note on the bottom of the ticket advising that, if you elected to contest the ticket, call [this number]. So I called.
A woman answered. I told her I had a ticket, that I planned to appear in court, and that I was calling because the note on the ticket said to call [this number]. There was a long silence, followed by, "Why are you calling?" I repeated that I was calling because a note on the ticket instructed me to call if I planned to appear and plead not guilty.
She: "You're going to plead not guilty?"
Me: "Yes. I'm not guilty, so I'm going to plead not guilty."
She: "You're going to plead ... NOT guilty?"
Me: "Yes. That's why I called."
She finally got it, and then stammered out, "Oh. Well then, you can't come on the day on your ticket. That's only for non-contested cases. If you're really going to plead NOT guilty [she made it sound like I was the only person who had ever pled not guilty in the entire history of NJ traffic citations] you have to go to a different courthouse on a different day." So I got the information and wrote it on my calendar.
On the appointed day, I schlepped across New Jersey to the courthouse and sat through several hours of people paying fines for speeding tickets. The judge finally called my case. I stood up and announced that I was present.
The judge then asked if the complaining officer was present in court. The prosecutor looked around, cleared his throat several times, ran his finger around the inside of his shirt collar, and finally responded, 'No, your Honor, he is not in court today."
"Case dismissed," said the judge.
The whole mess was clearly a scam. The cop chased me because I had out-of-state tags and I'm certain he was sure I wouldn't bother to come back to contest the ticket.
Screw him.
-
Speaking of scams, I mailed in a guilty plea to a seat belt ticket in NY, Before I do I check the state website for the cost 50$.
Ok no big deal, after all I bs'ed the cop out of a speeding ticket. So the fine comes in the mail 25$ and 85$ in court fees, talk about extortion.
About the driveway on roads.
Here in NJ it is illegal to back out of a driveway on any road. I highly doubt anybody has been ticketed for it though.
You must back in if you don't have a place to turn around on the property.
Another NJ ism. We have a law about multi lane roads, It states keep right except to pass. They recently wanted to up the fine. It came out that less then 100 tickets were given out for it in a year. So its one of those things that if the cops won't pull people over for it why raise the fine. It always is a controversy when it is discussed, people cry that I'm doing the speed limit yada yada yada. There is no exception in the law about what speed you are doing.
-
Actually most of the polls now show that a slight majority (means over 50%) are fine with gay marriage. source: http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
It's pretty well established that folks either don't respond or respond falsely to those polls. Given that any disagreement with redefining marriage is automatically defined as only a result of being an evil awful hateful person who wants to discriminate against a protected group, and that there have been a number of attempts to harrass folks for signing onto defense of marriage laws petitions that's not surprising.
Regardless, you're the one who wants .gov to use force to make folks comply with "social norms" and says it oh so selfish not to, so...
How about this, you decide to dump vehicle antifreeze into the storm drain because you didn't want to pay for the disposal at a resource recovery center? Is that libertarian?
1. I'm not a doctrinaire libertarian so I don't care if it's " libertarian" or not. You seem to be using that as some sort of insult and implying that if I ascribe to that philosophy I must have some sort of group think hive mind that compels me to agree with you if you can prove your view is the "libertarian" one. It's bizarre and insulting, feel free to stop.
2. That example has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about. I'm saying "I should be able to own a machine gun" and you're saying "Oh so you want to be able to fire your machine gun indiscriminately into the air huh?" As drewtam noted, having speed limits set too low (and almost all interstate and major freeway limits are) can actually cause more accidents. Your presumption that going over the posted limit is reckless endangerment solely because the .gov says so and they're real smart and only have out best interests at heart so anyone not doing as they're told is just selfish and awful is silly. Not as silly as "we need men with guns to enforce social norms (as long as I agree with them)" but still pretty silly.
-
That claim, "more speed = more accidents" is not universally accepted.
Indeed. There is a lot of variance on road type/location. 15-20mph more speed on an interstate is not bad while 15-20mph over the normal limit is probably a not a good idea in a crowded town or suburb area. An interstate or other limited access highway where all traffic is flowing the same way, no intersections, entrances/exits near the speed of traffic, etc is actually IMHO the safer type of road vs. a standard road with intersections, people coming to a complete stop to turn, pedestrians/children/bicyclists/drunks on mopeds causing traffic hazards, and so forth.
Yes, if you are exceeding the limit by 1mph you are breaking the law. I fully acknowledge that and accept the consequences if I am ticketed for doing so (and yes I speed like a mofo). Is it a terrible crime against humanity or going against "social norms" to go 5-10mph over the limit on most roads and 10-20mph over on the interstate? No and no. Most everybody does it. That doesn't really cause a problem. Now if you were going 40-50mph over the limit, that'd be different story...
The "increased deaths from more speed" is simply that if you wreck at a higher speed your body is subjected to higher forces during the crash. Duh, it's more likely to kill unless you are wearing an extreme amount of safety gear and are in a caged race car like a NASCAR driver. Will raising the limits somewhat on roads that can handle it cause an appreciable increase in wrecks and subsequent deaths from the increased speed alone? I strongly doubt it, especially when you are talking going from 70-75 to 85 or so.
Much of your speeding tickets are revenue generating. Sometimes it's about sticking it to someone who's being a menace to society with their driving, but much of the time revenue generating, and a sure tell of that is when they start hitting people going 1mph or so over. And, like I said, I'll take the rap if I get caught while doing it, even if I am unhappy about it.
At least down here it's not nearly as bad as it was in the past. Back then EVERY damn town was a real speedtrap.
Jocassee/AZR, is that Hwy 11 ya'll got stopped on?
-
In a lot of small towns that fund through tickets/asset forfeiture, "He ain't from 'round here" is all the reason that's needed. In Medina (super rich neighborhood in Bellevue where Bill Gates lives) driving while poor is a valid reason. In a lot of affluent white communities driving while black is a reason. Etc etc
Bingo! That is the model my local police department works off of.
A relative of mine who is a cop told me that cops have a saying- "trash drive trash" or something like that. If you drive a car that is rusty or dented, the police are already under the assumption that you are a nogoodnik.
-
Then there are the tractors with manure spreaders, and Amish buggies all sharing the highway with you...
Like this mfer who nearly caused a pileup. He was cruising along at 15mph on a limited access freeway (which has a 45mph minimum speed limit) people in the right lane going 70 came over the crest of the hill and had to slam on the brakes, swerve onto the shoulder, etc. Oh to make it worse, there is a county road 1/4 mile away that runs parallel with the freeway for 10 miles in both directions. ;/
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv635%2Fbrimic%2FCAM00097_zpsf5adeb71.jpg&hash=4c024e25dd898dad16839ede6c27bf0de2b7c9ee)
-
On a lot of interstates if you drive the speed limit you will be passed by 90 percent of the cars on the road. Doesn't that imply that the limit is too low when the "societal norm" is to break the law?
-
Jocassee/AZR, is that Hwy 11 ya'll got stopped on?
It was, just east of 178 in Pickens.
-
On a lot of interstates if you drive the speed limit you will be passed by 90 percent of the cars on the road. Doesn't that imply that the limit is too low when the "societal norm" is to break the law?
I think there is a lot of 'slot machine' psychology going on.
On a particularly busy freeway section, Milwaukee county lowered the speed limit from 65 to 55. In the outer burbs people typically drive 65-80 mph with little impediment except in the rare ramp where the police set up a police trap.
In the 55 mph zone in Milwaukee county, people continue to drive 65-80 mph, with a sheriff's deputy out there every day pulling over one car at a time at will- raking in the cash.
As long as drivers get a 'win' by driving unimpeded, they will continue to do so, if they get a 'loss' by being ticketed, they will get on the same road the next day and drive 15-25 mph over because the odds of another 'loss' are small.
I have a friend how got ticketed on his motorcycle for 15 over in that section. He pleaded that if he didn't travel with traffic, it would only be a matter of time before he would be killed regardless of the law. As an experiment, I've tried to ride my motorcycle through that area at or near the spped limit, I had no fewer than 3 cars ride up withing a foot or so of my rear wheel, or pass me and cut me off really close- and that was in one trip.
-
Bingo! That is the model my local police department works off of.
A relative of mine who is a cop told me that cops have a saying- "trash drive trash" or something like that. If you drive a car that is rusty or dented, the police are already under the assumption that you are a nogoodnik.
My wife drove up my FIL/BIL's old beater pickup for several hours yesterday. Got pulled over twice. The day before it had gotten an inspection sticker and my wife was not going to drive that sucker over the posted limit. When my wife asked the LEO why he had pulled her over, she got a lot of, "Mwah mwah mwah mwah mwah" and no straight answer. No ticket or warning either time, just bullshoi.
-
1. I'm not a doctrinaire libertarian so I don't care if it's " libertarian" or not. You seem to be using that as some sort of insult and implying that if I ascribe to that philosophy I must have some sort of group think hive mind that compels me to agree with you if you can prove your view is the "libertarian" one. It's bizarre and insulting, feel free to stop.
2. That example has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about. I'm saying "I should be able to own a machine gun" and you're saying "Oh so you want to be able to fire your machine gun indiscriminately into the air huh?" As drewtam noted, having speed limits set too low (and almost all interstate and major freeway limits are) can actually cause more accidents. Your presumption that going over the posted limit is reckless endangerment solely because the .gov says so and they're real smart and only have out best interests at heart so anyone not doing as they're told is just selfish and awful is silly. Not as silly as "we need men with guns to enforce social norms (as long as I agree with them)" but still pretty silly.
And gay marriage has a correlation with speeding?
I'm arguing with you because I disagree with you, not trying to insult you. I see the world differently than you and others, I actually want to be part of a community, sort of how mind think was pre civil war where much of the populace acted together as a community to grow and sometimes the needs of the community outweighed the needs of the individual. This is not socialism or communism. Remember other people share the road with you and I.
-
...and to the folks wanting higher speeds limits, do you really want heavy trucks going 80-95mph? What about the person with the 30 year old car that drops parts on every bump? The 16 year old who just got their license. Little old lady who can barely see of the dash who drives the barely above the post min speed? Are you wanting to raise the min speed limits also if you increase the speed limits, 10-15-20 mph faster than the current ones? Are you going to want to mandate that all vehicles have higher speed rated tires? Mandate more safety for new vehicles?
-
Drive the speed limit and obey all traffic laws, no reason to get a ticket then. Argue otherwise, you are a law breaking criminal. :rofl:
I kindly call BS. My first and only speeding ticket was a trap. Signs were 55, then immediately went to 35 with no advanced notice because it was at the bottom of a slight hill. I was safely decreasing my speed when I got pulled over within 50 feet of the sign. Short of slamming on the breaks in a dangerous manner, there was no safe way to drop my speed by 20mph in the distance between being able to see the sign and the sign itself. I went to the court to protest. Which was a new building, very nice. Which also had the police station. The locals laughed when I said I was going to protest the ticket, and it was understandable once I saw the arrangement.
Why would a judge NOT want visitors to contribute to the shiney nice new civic building. That speed trap was potentially dangerous if someone DID slam on the brakes.
Red light cameras have rigging that is even MORE dangerous. There needs to be minimum time for yellow for the intersection to clear, and a minimum pause between one light turning red before the other light turns green. Shaving seconds off either is flat out dangerous. It'll be fixed when someone sues for enough money, and likely not before then.
-
...and to the folks wanting higher speeds limits, do you really want heavy trucks going 80-95mph? What about the person with the 30 year old car that drops parts on every bump? The 16 year old who just got their license. Little old lady who can barely see of the dash who drives the barely above the post min speed? Are you wanting to raise the min speed limits also if you increase the speed limits, 10-15-20 mph faster than the current ones? Are you going to want to mandate that all vehicles have higher speed rated tires? Mandate more safety for new vehicles?
Yes, I do want all traffic on the open interstate to be in a tight 75-80mph range. I find speed differentials and left lane squatters among the traffic population to be a lot more dangerous and disruptive, than straight up speed.
Tires are already rated to ~110/130. That is why most passenger vehicles have speed governors at around 105~110. Most sportscars & sport bikes do not have these governors, since they typically have tires rated for around 30-40mph faster than what the engine power can achieve against the wind.
-
...and to the folks wanting higher speeds limits, do you really want heavy trucks going 80-95mph? What about the person with the 30 year old car that drops parts on every bump? The 16 year old who just got their license. Little old lady who can barely see of the dash who drives the barely above the post min speed? Are you wanting to raise the min speed limits also if you increase the speed limits, 10-15-20 mph faster than the current ones? Are you going to want to mandate that all vehicles have higher speed rated tires? Mandate more safety for new vehicles?
Freeways are already set up for much higher speeds, most of the problems that cause accidents are software, not hardware. If the police really were intent on maing roads safer, they would pull over people driving like aholes instead of going 10 over in the left lane, though I don't think they will meet their quotas by pulling over people and warning them to stop being aholes, though ticketing for inattentive or wreckless driving may be a start.
On rural highways and city streets, I'm in complete agreement with you about speed limits for all of the reasons that have already been mentioned.
-
Like this mfer who nearly caused a pileup. He was cruising along at 15mph on a limited access freeway (which has a 45mph minimum speed limit) people in the right lane going 70 came over the crest of the hill and had to slam on the brakes, swerve onto the shoulder, etc. Oh to make it worse, there is a county road 1/4 mile away that runs parallel with the freeway for 10 miles in both directions. ;/
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv635%2Fbrimic%2FCAM00097_zpsf5adeb71.jpg&hash=4c024e25dd898dad16839ede6c27bf0de2b7c9ee)
I agree unless the embargo* on min speed was lifted for summer haying equipment, that person should have taken an alternate route.
*Many agricultural states will lift weigh embargos during peak harvest season on roads, bridge weight limits are still enforced though.
-
I kindly call BS. My first and only speeding ticket was a trap. Signs were 55, then immediately went to 35 with no advanced notice because it was at the bottom of a slight hill. I was safely decreasing my speed when I got pulled over within 50 feet of the sign. Short of slamming on the breaks in a dangerous manner, there was no safe way to drop my speed by 20mph in the distance between being able to see the sign and the sign itself. I went to the court to protest. Which was a new building, very nice. Which also had the police station. The locals laughed when I said I was going to protest the ticket, and it was understandable once I saw the arrangement.
This is illegal in AZ.
No more than 10mph change is allowed from one speed limit zone to another, unless a warning sign (reduced speed zone ahead) is in place at least x distance (I forget the exact distance, but it's something like a quarter mile) prior to the speed limit change. The law states it is a valid defense to a ticket if the warning sign is not present and the change in speed limits is greater than 10mph.
-
On a lot of interstates if you drive the speed limit you will be passed by 90 percent of the cars on the road. Doesn't that imply that the limit is too low when the "societal norm" is to break the law?
On I-25 through Wyoming, I set the cruise on the posted 75. Not much traffic to begin with, but I pass more vehicles than pass me, by about 80%. Once you get past Cheyenne into Califorado, about 90 percent of the vehicles pass me, still doing the posted speed. If you try to do the speed limit on 25 through Denver, you will cause a huge fricking pile-up. Speed varies between nothing in the traffic jams, up to 80+++ mph when traffic is moving. Best thing is to stay in a middle lane and never look at your speed.
Having driveways intersect state highways here is the rule, rather than the exception.
Having driveways intersect state highways here on hill crests or blind curves is also the rule.
Then there are the tractors with manure spreaders, and Amish buggies all sharing the highway with you...
All of the 2-lane hiways in Montana are like that, but the speed limit is 70.
-
On I-25 through Wyoming, I set the cruise on the posted 75. Not much traffic to begin with, but I pass more vehicles than pass me, by about 80%. Once you get past Cheyenne into Califorado, about 90 percent of the vehicles pass me, still doing the posted speed. If you try to do the speed limit on 25 through Denver, you will cause a huge fricking pile-up. Speed varies between nothing in the traffic jams, up to 80+++ mph when traffic is moving. Best thing is to stay in a middle lane and never look at your speed.
All of the 2-lane hiways in Montana are like that, but the speed limit is 70.
A lot less people in Montana, I've driven miles on some of the state highways and never see a car.
I've noticed that about WY also when I hunt out there, I'll drive speed limit or maybe 5 over and I pass a lot of vehicles, same with Western Nebraska once I pass Lincoln.
SD on I-90, drive 5 over and you still get passed by over half the traffic.
-
I agree unless the embargo* on min speed was lifted for summer haying equipment, that person should have taken an alternate route.
*Many agricultural states will lift weigh embargos during peak harvest season on roads, bridge weight limits are still enforced though.
A bridge weight limit is about the only thing that makes sense in this case. The only way onto the freeway would have been with a ramp, as there is an unbroken fence that runs along the freeway on both sides.
-
A bridge weight limit is about the only thing that makes sense in this case. The only way onto the freeway would have been with a ramp, as there is an unbroken fence that runs along the freeway on both sides.
That tractor and big square bailer is light enough for most rural bridges, I'm calling lazy selfish tractor driver. :)
-
A bridge weight limit is about the only thing that makes sense in this case. The only way onto the freeway would have been with a ramp, as there is an unbroken fence that runs along the freeway on both sides.
Reminder to keep some snips in the truck's emergency box.
-
[tinfoil]
Reminder to keep some snips in the truck's emergency box.
Do they have freeway ramp gates down by you too?
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.jrn.com%2Fimages%2Fmjs-barricades--p2_-mjs_-mjd_-news.jpg&hash=a43b928dbc962801e93048d8c826194f0e762a5f)
-
That tractor and big square bailer is light enough for most rural bridges, I'm calling lazy selfish tractor driver. :)
do they cut and bail the roadside ditches? they do in minn
-
Only places I saw those was in Minnesota and the Dakotas, for controlling access to freeways during blizzards... and places like Chicago and Seattle where they have bi-directional express lanes that switch traffic flow directions based on rush hour needs.
We don't have those around here.
But I hate the trapped feeling when on an interstate and it turns into a parking lot, and all that keeps you there is a stoopid little fence separating you from a farm road or frontage road.
I'm not saying I'd use them routinely... that's why they'd be in the emergency box. For emergencies.
I remember sitting in traffic outside of Baton Rouge for about 2 hours. Took me 2 hours to go maybe 20-25 miles to New Orleans. It was damned hot, and damned muggy, and I was on my bike in full gear, and I had no air flow. There was a fence next to I-10 (this was just west of the Mississippi crossing there) and I was SOOO tempted to whip out my skeletool and cut the fence, and get on the frontage road next to the highway. If it were an emergency, I would have.
-
Only places I saw those was in Minnesota and the Dakotas, for controlling access to freeways during blizzards... and places like Chicago and Seattle where they have bi-directional express lanes that switch traffic flow directions based on rush hour needs.
We don't have those around here.
But I hate the trapped feeling when on an interstate and it turns into a parking lot, and all that keeps you there is a stoopid little fence separating you from a farm road or frontage road.
I'm not saying I'd use them routinely... that's why they'd be in the emergency box. For emergencies.
I remember sitting in traffic outside of Baton Rouge for about 2 hours. Took me 2 hours to go maybe 20-25 miles to New Orleans. It was damned hot, and damned muggy, and I was on my bike in full gear, and I had no air flow. There was a fence next to I-10 (this was just west of the Mississippi crossing there) and I was SOOO tempted to whip out my skeletool and cut the fence, and get on the frontage road next to the highway. If it were an emergency, I would have.
Just make sure there are isn't any livestock on the other side of the fence or you will be creating an emergency for someone else.
-
do they cut and bail the roadside ditches? they do in minn
They do the same in Iowa, but only in drought emergencies and not on Interstate highways.
-
And gay marriage has a correlation with speeding?
It was addressing your point re "social norms" only.
And I want to live in a community too, but one where norms are enforced socially, not by men with guns.
-
It was addressing your point re "social norms" only.
And I want to live in a community too, but one where norms are enforced socially, not by men with guns.
What about folks who don't want to follow the social norms, perhaps them not following norms causes harm to those who do?
-
What about folks who don't want to follow the social norms, perhaps them not following norms causes harm to those who do?
Depends on what you call harm.
A pair of gay guys living next door to a Southern Baptist... the SB is causing himself all the "emotional harm" of that. The gay guys aren't doing anything to him.
If the gay guys are lobbing boulders through his roof with a trebuchet, that would be actual harm.
-
...and to the folks wanting higher speeds limits, do you really want heavy trucks going 80-95mph? What about the person with the 30 year old car that drops parts on every bump? The 16 year old who just got their license. Little old lady who can barely see of the dash who drives the barely above the post min speed? Are you wanting to raise the min speed limits also if you increase the speed limits, 10-15-20 mph faster than the current ones? Are you going to want to mandate that all vehicles have higher speed rated tires? Mandate more safety for new vehicles?
So because some people are stupid and irresponsible, you want to punish everyone else? Hmmm, where have I heard that before...
-
We don't have those around here.
But I hate the trapped feeling when on an interstate and it turns into a parking lot, and all that keeps you there is a stoopid little fence separating you from a farm road or frontage road.
I only brought it up because of the weirdness involved with the gates.
They went up about 3 years ago, and I was about the only person to notice them, when I pointed them out to other people, they were like "WTF????"
The paper ran an article about how they were for high speed rail crossings, which makes almost no sense.
There were articles about them on sites like Dailypaul and prisonplanet.
They're real purpose is to shut down freeways in odd events like blizzards or Presidential visits.
-
What about folks who don't want to follow the social norms, perhaps them not following norms causes harm to those who do?
I've been known to run out to the curb, shaking my fist and screaming at motorists who choose not to 'conform' to the 'societal norm' of the speed limit on the street I live on. My 'statism' might be brought on by the fact that people are easily doing 45 in a 25 zone, near where a lot of kids play.
-
What about folks who don't want to follow the social norms, perhaps them not following norms causes harm to those who do?
Given actual traffic patterns I'd say the "social norm" is to go about 10-20mph over the interstate speed limit. I guess it's the cops who are breaking social norms and causing harm now, huh?
Also, if you interpret freedom as "the ability to do anything that your local social group finds normal and acceptable" then... I honestly don't even know what to say. I don't want to live in that world. In the group I grew up in a lot of things I've done (enlisting, marrying a Mexican, leaving my parent's religion etc) are "outside of the social norms" but I certainly don't want the .gov to use force to stop me from doing them.
Speaking of using .gov to enforce social norms, you are logically consistent in that right? So whatever the local social norms are, it's totally cool for the cops to use force to compel you to obey that right? Going to church every Sunday. Local social norm. Blacks use a different water fountain, eat at different restaraunts, attend different schools. Local social norm. Poor kids don't date the children of the wealthy, Local social norm.
-
...and to the folks wanting higher speeds limits, do you really want heavy trucks going 80-95mph? What about the person with the 30 year old car that drops parts on every bump? The 16 year old who just got their license. Little old lady who can barely see of the dash who drives the barely above the post min speed? Are you wanting to raise the min speed limits also if you increase the speed limits, 10-15-20 mph faster than the current ones? Are you going to want to mandate that all vehicles have higher speed rated tires? Mandate more safety for new vehicles?
Heavy trucks get better fuel efficiency at lower speed. Economy will dictate they find a happy medium between speed and fuel cost. They'll probably even out around 70mph.
There aren't a lot of bumps on the interstate. Only car parts I see are blown tires from 18 wheelers. Which gets back to point #1.
I dunno about you, but when I was 16 I was afraid of interstate speed for all of about a week. Same thing happened when I started riding a motorcycle at 34. I was afraid of the highway and the 60mph threshold for about a week.
Little old lady already causes drama doing 50mph on a 75mph interstate. Maybe she'll be too terrified of the highway and stay off altogether if everyone is doing 90 instead? That's a good thing, IMO. If you can't confidently handle the vehicle, then don't drive it.
-
It's pretty obvious that whatever mission statement might be sitting somewhere in a file drawer, the primary goal of the county sherrif is to write tickets on the busiest highway.
This means that they pretty much ignore everything else unless they can't avoid it. I guess the old adage "crime doesn't pay" applies to the cops, too. ;/
-
Given actual traffic patterns I'd say the "social norm" is to go about 10-20mph over the interstate speed limit. I guess it's the cops who are breaking social norms and causing harm now, huh?
Also, if you interpret freedom as "the ability to do anything that your local social group finds normal and acceptable" then... I honestly don't even know what to say. I don't want to live in that world. In the group I grew up in a lot of things I've done (enlisting, marrying a Mexican, leaving my parent's religion etc) are "outside of the social norms" but I certainly don't want the .gov to use force to stop me from doing them.
Speaking of using .gov to enforce social norms, you are logically consistent in that right? So whatever the local social norms are, it's totally cool for the cops to use force to compel you to obey that right? Going to church every Sunday. Local social norm. Blacks use a different water fountain, eat at different restaraunts, attend different schools. Local social norm. Poor kids don't date the children of the wealthy, Local social norm.
I think you are missing the point or you are strawmanning to avoid answering directly.
Also the 10-20 over the speed limit on interstates is not everywhere, see what Tallpine posted about WY and what I posted about NE.
-
...and to the folks wanting higher speeds limits, do you really want heavy trucks going 80-95mph? What about the person with the 30 year old car that drops parts on every bump? The 16 year old who just got their license. Little old lady who can barely see of the dash who drives the barely above the post min speed? Are you wanting to raise the min speed limits also if you increase the speed limits, 10-15-20 mph faster than the current ones? Are you going to want to mandate that all vehicles have higher speed rated tires? Mandate more safety for new vehicles?
Hell yes I want higher speed limits. And I want incompetent drivers to stay in the right lane where they belong, and where the law states they should stay. And I want those "Slower traffic keep right" signs to have "THIS MEANS YOU!!!" added to them. And I want driving competency tests to be administered every 10 years or so. Speed doesn't kill, bad driving does.
-
I think you are missing the point or you are strawmanning to avoid answering directly.
Also the 10-20 over the speed limit on interstates is not everywhere, see what Tallpine posted about WY and what I posted about NE.
You said you want the .gov to use force to make me obey local social norms. I'm pointing out how wrong that is. Your counter argument, as far as I can tell, is that you only want to do that for social norms you personally approve of. You try to cloak that in behind the rubric of "violating social norms causes harm" but as others have pointed out that is false.
So please, tell me what point I'm missing, because it certainly isn't one you've made in this thread.
-
You said you want the .gov to use force to make me obey local social norms. I'm pointing out how wrong that is. Your counter argument, as far as I can tell, is that you only want to do that for social norms you personally approve of. You try to cloak that in behind the rubric of "violating social norms causes harm" but as others have pointed out that is false.
So please, tell me what point I'm missing, because it certainly isn't one you've made in this thread.
You used examples that are protected from being made illegal due to various items found in the Bill of Rights. You are choosing to nitpick which social norms to strawman about.
-
I think you are missing the point or you are strawmanning to avoid answering directly.
Also the 10-20 over the speed limit on interstates is not everywhere, see what Tallpine posted about WY and what I posted about NE.
In the links I provided, there is the idea of the 85th percentile. Traffic engineers have recommended for a long time that speed limits should be set according at the point where 85% of the people obey it.
Setting the speed lower, doesn't change how people drive. They'll still drive what they feel is safe.
Setting the speed higher, doesn't change how people drive. They'll still drive what they feel is safe.
-
You used examples that are protected from being made illegal due to various items found in the Bill of Rights. You are choosing to nitpick which social norms to strawman about.
But they haven't always been illegal. Segregation was a social norm enforced by law for many years.
So please, spell out for me which "social norms" you're cool with compelling via force, and which are not.
-
It wouldn't bother me so much except insurance companies use those tickets to jack up your premiums -- even if you've *never* had an accident or filed a claim.
-
It wouldn't bother me so much except insurance companies use those tickets to jack up your premiums -- even if you've *never* had an accident or filed a claim.
This is the sole reason I am contesting my ticket. I have had some accidents, for which I justly received an insurance hike. None of them were speed-related.
-
But they haven't always been illegal. Segregation was a social norm enforced by law for many years.
So please, spell out for me which "social norms" you're cool with compelling via force, and which are not.
Traffic laws, criminal laws, civil laws, you know laws (most laws come about from social norms). Usually its police that enforce those, they have to enforce traffic along with criminal laws.
So if I understand how you are thinking, you prefer a police officer that enforces traffic laws to be unarmed?
-
Traffic laws, criminal laws, civil laws, you know laws (most laws come about from social norms). Usually its police that enforce those, they have to enforce traffic along with criminal laws.
So if I understand how you are thinking, you prefer a police officer that enforces traffic laws to be unarmed?
I'd prefer speed limits that aren't artificially low and other traffic laws that were designed to essentially fill budget gaps.
Sent via tapatalk
-
I'd prefer speed limits that aren't artificially low and other traffic laws that were designed to essentially fill budget gaps.
In the links I provided, there is the idea of the 85th percentile. Traffic engineers have recommended for a long time that speed limits should be set according at the point where 85% of the people obey it.
Setting the speed lower, doesn't change how people drive. They'll still drive what they feel is safe.
Setting the speed higher, doesn't change how people drive. They'll still drive what they feel is safe.
In Wyoming about 85% drive below the speed limit on the interstate. In Colorado, about 85% drive above the speed limit, despite the fact that there is much more traffic and many more on/off ramps. I'm not sure the speed limit has any damn effect on anything except perhaps ticket revenue ;/
-
I'd prefer speed limits that aren't artificially low and other traffic laws that were designed to essentially fill budget gaps.
Sent via tapatalk
So how do you punish the driver who refuses to obey traffic laws?
I agree I don't care for Officer Ticket-tron Ron, or red light cameras or unmanned speed traps.
Are the speed limits of 75 mph on rural western interstates fast enough? Do people need to be driving 75mph through a urban interstate?
-
In Wyoming about 85% drive below the speed limit on the interstate. In Colorado, about 85% drive above the speed limit, despite the fact that there is much more traffic and many more on/off ramps. I'm not sure the speed limit has any damn effect on anything except perhaps ticket revenue ;/
Like where I live, once you get out of the "urban" areas most drivers seem to drive the 70mph speed limit or 5 over. In the "urban" areas you get those packs of cars that feel the need to drive 80-85 mph on the 55mph interstate.
-
Like where I live, once you get out of the "urban" areas most drivers seem to drive the 70mph speed limit or 5 over. In the "urban" areas you get those packs of cars that feel the need to drive 80-85 mph on the 55mph interstate.
So it would make sense to just mail an automatic speeding ticket to everyone with a DL that lives within big city limits once or twice a year :lol:
I really have no trouble with speed limits. Especially in town: it is rude and inconsiderate to speed down residential streets, or even busy business streets with lots of traffic in and out.
I have more trouble with the ass-holes who think it is somehow a sin to pass in the left lane on the iState while driving only the speed limit ;/
-
Are the speed limits of 75 mph on rural western interstates fast enough?
I dunno, can you safely go faster?
Do people need to be driving 75mph through a urban interstate?
I dunno, is it safe to do that speed with the traffic conditions and road layout?
-
I dunno, can you safely go faster?
What the highest sustained speed that most vehicles on the road is?
Hypothetically, If no one is on the road and there are no hazards, I could drive as fast as the car would let me all day long.
-
What the highest sustained speed that most vehicles on the road is?
Hypothetically, If no one is on the road and there are no hazards, I could drive as fast as the car would let me all day long.
Works for me.
No one's saying anything about driving 80mph at 3 oclock in front of an elementary school. But when they take an interstate that people regularly travel 80mph on and lower the speed limit to 60 and then station half the available cops along it to hand out speeding tickets it's a might asinine.
-
Ninety miles per hour out north of Casper doesn't seem too unreasonable to me, if you don't mind the gas mileage penalty.
You would get to see a few more cars that way. Otherwise, there is sometimes no one in sight either direction.
-
Works for me.
No one's saying anything about driving 80mph at 3 oclock in front of an elementary school. But when they take an interstate that people regularly travel 80mph on and lower the speed limit to 60 and then station half the available cops along it to hand out speeding tickets it's a might asinine.
Where is this said interstate where the speed limit is 60 and it should be raised to 80.
I've drove a lot big city interstates and sometimes the 55 speed limit is a bit high due to the on ramps, off ramps, one interstate merging with another, truck traffic, unusual road design, road surface, etc.
-
Ninety miles per hour out north of Casper doesn't seem too unreasonable to me, if you don't mind the gas mileage penalty.
You would get to see a few more cars that way. Otherwise, there is sometimes no one in sight either direction.
Funny you say that, I drove in Montana during the brief period of time in the late 1990's when there was no speed limit, at 120 mph in a 1 ton van, you could watch the fuel gauge drop. I would have tried to go faster but the van would go no faster, wasn't governed, just all it could do.
-
Where is this said interstate where the speed limit is 60 and it should be raised to 80.
There's plenty of them
-
Funny you say that, I drove in Montana during the brief period of time in the late 1990's when there was no speed limit, at 120 mph in a 1 ton van, you could watch the fuel gauge drop. I would have tried to go faster but the van would go no faster, wasn't governed, just all it could do.
Some wannabe race car driver did that on one of those winding two lane roads with slow moving farm equipment not too far from here, and ruined it for everyone :(
MT SC said "reasonable and prudent" was too vague. :facepalm:
On a lonely stretch of interstate it wouldn't be too much problem. I never drove that fast back then but at least you could pass somebody safely without risking a ticket.
-
plan on raising minimums? or in libertarian utopia a 40 mph speed differential will be rendered safe
-
Funny you say that, I drove in Montana during the brief period of time in the late 1990's when there was no speed limit, at 120 mph in a 1 ton van, you could watch the fuel gauge drop. I would have tried to go faster but the van would go no faster, wasn't governed, just all it could do.
Violating social norms in a vehicle not built for extremely high speeds...hmm...what was the speed rating on them tires?
[popcorn]
-
There's plenty of them
I don't see it where I live, Des Moines is the biggest town and it slows from 70 to 65 about a mile out from the beginning of the urban area, the belt way stays 65 and the leg that goes through downtown reduces to 60 then 55 where there are exits about every .5 mile, then back up to 65 when you leave downtown. This is for I-80 and I-35
I live 30 miles north of Des Moines and I-35 slows from 70 to 65 for the two interchanges we have, they only slowed it down after a year of daily accidents at the US Hwy 30 and I-35 cloverleaf.
The biggest problems we have in Iowa with Interstates are people who feel that traffic needs to yield to them as they enter the Interstate and the habitual left lane driver.
-
The biggest problems we have in Iowa with Interstates are people who feel that traffic needs to yield to them
As Tamara says, the on ramp is a legal drag strip.
People need to get on the stick and merge properly instead of being dumbasses. That's all over America though. Almost got in a bad wreck the other day because of a stupid *expletive deleted*ck in a minivan in front of me decided to slam on brakes instead of accelerating onto the interstate on ramp properly. There was plenty of traffic room he just decided to change his mind for some unknown reason.
-
I don't see it where I live, Des Moines is the biggest town and it slows from 70 to 65 about a mile out from the beginning of the urban area, the belt way stays 65 and the leg that goes through downtown reduces to 60 then 55 where there are exits about every .5 mile, then back up to 65 when you leave downtown. This is for I-80 and I-35
I live 30 miles north of Des Moines and I-35 slows from 70 to 65 for the two interchanges we have, they only slowed it down after a year of daily accidents at the US Hwy 30 and I-35 cloverleaf.
The biggest problems we have in Iowa with Interstates are people who feel that traffic needs to yield to them as they enter the Interstate and the habitual left lane driver.
That's nice. If that's an appropriate speed limits for those roads then good on them.
There's still plenty of roads that as set far to low, regularly traveled faster than the posted limit but the majority of drivers on the road, and the only time it's generally a problem is when someone sees a cop and slams on their brakes.
-
Violating social norms in a vehicle not built for extremely high speeds...hmm...what was the speed rating on them tires?
[popcorn]
I was a lot younger and dumber back then.
Plus there was no speed limit at the time in Montana on rural highways and interstates.
-
plan on raising minimums? or in libertarian utopia a 40 mph speed differential will be rendered safe
On the two lane you can drive past the oncoming car at 140mph ;)
Out in Wyoming where I'm talking about, cars are often a mile or more apart. But I-25 north of Denver is scary. The right lane is only going about 40mph because of the constant on/off traffic and the left lane is going 80mph or more because people that live in Colorado are very important and have to get places in a hurry.
-
On the two lane you can drive past the oncoming car at 140mph ;)
Out in Wyoming where I'm talking about, cars are often a mile or more apart. But I-25 north of Denver is scary. The right lane is only going about 40mph because of the constant on/off traffic and the left lane is going 80mph or more because people that live in Colorado are very important and have to get places in a hurry.
It almost starts at Cheyenne.
-
It almost starts at Cheyenne.
Yeah, south of I-80 it is crazy :(
Between Cheyenne and Casper there is some mild traffic. North of Casper, it's like you're driving across some empty alien planet - though it is a bit busier than it was 15 years ago.
Last time we skipped Denver entirely. Took 85 down to just north of Greeley and then headed east to Hwy 71 that goes down through Last Chance to Limon. It is almost totally empty out there. But Hwy 24 to the Springs has way too much traffic for a 2 lane. I can't believe that it hasn't been upgraded to a divided 4 lane like much of Hwy 50. Texas has good roads. Most everything is 4 lane now.
-
Where is this said interstate where the speed limit is 60 and it should be raised to 80.
I've drove a lot big city interstates and sometimes the 55 speed limit is a bit high due to the on ramps, off ramps, one interstate merging with another, truck traffic, unusual road design, road surface, etc.
I84 through Oregon. REALLY should be 75 or 80 (it goes up to 75 once you cross into Idaho). I5 probably should be as well, save maybe in the urban areas. Currently it's 65.
Most of the highways on the east side of the state should really be bumped up to 65-70 as well. That's about what 90% of the traffic is doing anyway. Currently, they're 55, and driving through the east side of the state at that speed is mind numbing, monotonous, and completely unnecessary.
-
This story doesn't make me want to bash police; it makes me want to bash police chiefs. This cop is a truly remarkable man.
But I hate these videos. THey lead me down a trail of hours of watching abusive cops. There are just too many such videos.
It is pretty darn nice to see a good one every now and then. Are all good cops ex-cops?
-
This story doesn't make me want to bash police; it makes me want to bash police chiefs. This cop is a truly remarkable man.
But I hate these videos. THey lead me down a trail of hours of watching abusive cops. There are just too many such videos.
It is pretty darn nice to see a good one every now and then. Are all good cops ex-cops?
You know you only have to watch the video at the link and not click on anything else....just saying. =D
-
This story doesn't make me want to bash police; it makes me want to bash police chiefs. This cop is a truly remarkable man.
These are my thoughts exactly.
-
Traffic laws, criminal laws, civil laws, you know laws (most laws come about from social norms). Usually its police that enforce those, they have to enforce traffic along with criminal laws.
So if I understand how you are thinking, you prefer a police officer that enforces traffic laws to be unarmed?
I'd prefer traffic laws that penalize actual reckless and dangerous behaviour, instead of some arbitrary BS lowest common denominator limit designed solely to generate revenue. And really, you use "laws" and "social norms" interchangeably?!?!?!?!
-
I'd prefer traffic laws that penalize actual reckless and dangerous behaviour, instead of some arbitrary BS lowest common denominator limit designed solely to generate revenue. And really, you use "laws" and "social norms" interchangeably?!?!?!?!
Sounds like performance-based vs requirements-based evaluation.
-
I'd prefer traffic laws that penalize actual reckless and dangerous behaviour, instead of some arbitrary BS lowest common denominator limit designed solely to generate revenue. And really, you use "laws" and "social norms" interchangeably?!?!?!?!
This.
A cop patrolling a section of road and pulling over people driving like asshats (tailgating, cutting people off, weaving in and out of traffic, failing to stay to the right to allow faster traffic to pass, etc.) would do a HELL of a lot more to reduce wrecks and fatalities than sitting his ass in one spot and pulling over whoever he feel likes when they ding his radar gun.
-
This.
A cop patrolling a section of road and pulling over people driving like asshats (tailgating, cutting people off, weaving in and out of traffic, failing to stay to the right to allow faster traffic to pass, etc.) would do a HELL of a lot more to reduce wrecks and fatalities than sitting his ass in one spot and pulling over whoever he feel likes when they ding his radar gun.
That's pretty close but how about a cop patrolling a section of town looking for real bad guys or just making himself seen in order to prevent crime... and then, if he happens to see someone driving stupidly dangerous, pull them over and invite them to the ball. Mostly, traffic patrol should be an accident of just doing police work.
-
That's pretty close but how about a cop patrolling a section of town looking for real bad guys or just making himself seen in order to prevent crime... and then, if he happens to see someone driving stupidly dangerous, pull them over and invite them to the ball. Mostly, traffic patrol should be an accident of just doing police work.
I'm not sure I would go that far. Traffic fatalities are about twice the rate of homicide (~33.8k v ~14.7k). Of course, there is a big difference between accidental and intentional behavior, but in terms of outcomes the traffic safety issues shouldn't be ignored systematically.
-
I'm not sure I would go that far. Traffic fatalities are about twice the rate of homicide (~33.8k v ~14.7k). Of course, there is a big difference between accidental and intentional behavior, but in terms of outcomes the traffic safety issues shouldn't be ignored systematically.
I didn't say traffic violations should be ignored systematically. I said that police presence while doing other work would have a big impact on driver behavior. We live in a world where traffic patrol is undercover work in unmarked and obscure cars in hopes of writing a ticket rather than in a well marked black and white with a big bubble or light-bar that works to control driver behavior just by being seen.
Then, instead of concentrating on speeding violations, cops could, if they see dangerous behavior, write tickets for the things that really cause accidents.
I think you make my case - or a case I'd like to make. The war on drugs is a disaster; it's done nothing to stop drugs and probably increases the use. Gun control doesn't stop gun violence. Why would you think that writing the occasional ticket for speeding is going to stop traffic deaths?
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811753.pdf
NHTSA considers a crash to be speeding-related if the driver was charged with
a speeding-related offense or if an officer indicated that racing, driving too fast
for conditions, or exceeding the posted speed limit was a contributing factor in
the crash.
That document indicates that 31 to 32% of traffic fatalities are speed related but the number is wholey based on officer opinion - though the opinion is based on lots of experience, I know, but at least 70% of fatalities, then, are not speeding related at all most tickets written are for speeding. Statistics on what tickets are written for is strangely unavailable in the hour I spent searching on Google.
A couple of views that speeding is not the primary cause but, instead, distracted driving or following too close seem to be much more dangerous.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57583281/study-distracted-driving-deaths-underreported/
http://albany-lawyer.blogspot.com/2006/12/following-too-close-tailgating-traffic.html
Police sitting watching radar is not about accident prevention or public safety. As the article linked below states, some officers are likely very interested in safety but the department, the city, and the traffic program are interested in revenue.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2011/10/19/town-that-lived-off-speeding-tickets/
According to the page linked below, the average revenue generated by each and every police officer in the United States is $300,000. That's about $150 per working hour in revenue.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/driving-citation-statistics/ That's a pretty high revenue rate per person - and still the city wants taxes to pay for police.
-
you don't see a problem with this ?
most tickets written are for speeding. Statistics on what tickets are written for is strangely unavailable in the hour I spent searching on Google.
-
also willing to bet you that more parking tickets are given than speeding >:D
-
this ones not exactly a ticket
http://shar.es/KaTMClady gets life for 6th dui
-
you don't see a problem with this ?
most tickets written are for speeding. Statistics on what tickets are written for is strangely unavailable in the hour I spent searching on Google.
Not at all. Do you have any evidence that my statement is incorrect?
-
also willing to bet you that more parking tickets are given than speeding >:D
You got me there. Are you suggesting that is a cause of traffic fatalities?
-
this ones not exactly a ticket
http://shar.es/KaTMClady gets life for 6th dui
Link's broke.
Here's my opinion on drunk drivers: First offense: 30 days. Second offense: 1 year. Third offense: 5 years. Fourth offense: 20 years. Fifth offense: third-strike; life in prison. DUI should be a strict liability offense; you meet the numbers then you're guilty so it is a good candidate for mandatory punishment.
-
A jury in texas agrees and so do i
damn phone
-
Hell yes I want higher speed limits. And I want incompetent drivers to stay in the right lane where they belong, and where the law states they should stay. And I want those "Slower traffic keep right" signs to have "THIS MEANS YOU!!!" added to them. And I want driving competency tests to be administered every 10 years or so. Speed doesn't kill, bad driving does.
pretty much have to agree here.
WRT drunk drivers, part of me want's to kill them because my late GF was killed by one, but in my drinking days I was way way more careful when driving because I didn't want a DUI and taught myself to be really anal about stop signs/signalling/everything cops look for to pull you over.
I never really got tickets until I was sober and figured I could be a slacker like everyone else on the road.
I think if a person is over the low limit set - and they're staying in the lane, stopping at stop signs - you know- being a good driver then they should not be pulled over.
I hate check point charlies
-
I think if a person is over the low limit set - and they're staying in the lane, stopping at stop signs - you know- being a good driver then they should not be pulled over.
I hate check point charlies
Like all stupid government bans and programs, the limit used to be 1.0 to 1.2 in most states. Now it is dropping in many to .08 or below with the claim that lowering the limits will keep more drunks off the roads - when, in fact, it simply made more people on the road legally drunk. The way to keep drunk people off the road is to put them in jail for serious time. 3 months on the first conviction or pleading and a year the next. DUI #3 should be a felony and have 3 to 5 years. Conviction #4 10 to 15 years. Conviction #5 is a three-strikes felony and should get life.
Then, raise the limit back to reasonable levels and work to get true drunks off the street rather than simply calling more people drunk so you can raise the numbers of arrests but still leave the seriously drunk people on the road.
-
Also... take a look at BAC levels in major alcohol related accidents: it's never .08, .09, .10. Usually, it's "Why does this person have so much blood in their alcohol system?"
-
Also... take a look at BAC levels in major alcohol related accidents: it's never .08, .09, .10. Usually, it's "Why does this person have so much blood in their alcohol system?"
How drunk does it take to not see the biker and merge into him? Is it only "major" accidents that count? Whats your metric for major? That bad merge barely scratches a cars paint but it might seem major to someone lays down their bike. And how often does someone "just a lil buzzed" screw up and not get breathalyzed.
damn phone
-
Also... take a look at BAC levels in major alcohol related accidents: it's never .08, .09, .10. Usually, it's "Why does this person have so much blood in their alcohol system?"
and oh the irony of this source
http://norml.org/library/item/cannabis-and-driving-a-scientific-and-rational-review
A 2007 case-control study published in the Canadian Journal of Public Health reviewed 10-years of US auto-fatality data. Investigators found that US drivers with blood alcohol levels of 0.05% – a level well below the legal limit for intoxication – were three times as likely to have engaged in unsafe driving activities prior to a fatal crash as compared to individuals who tested positive for marijuana.[40] A 2005 review of auto accident fatality data from France reported similar results, finding that drivers who tested positive for any amount of alcohol had a four times greater risk of having a fatal accident than did drivers who tested positive for marijuana in their blood.[41] In the latter study, even drivers with low levels of alcohol present in their blood (below 0.05%) experienced a greater elevated risk as compared to drivers who tested positive for higher concentrations of cannabis (above 5ng/ml). Both studies noted that overall few traffic accidents appeared to be attributed to driver's operating a vehicle while impaired by cannabis.
-
a less accredited source... >:D
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722956/
-
How drunk does it take to not see the biker and merge into him? Is it only "major" accidents that count? Whats your metric for major? That bad merge barely scratches a cars paint but it might seem major to someone lays down their bike. And how often does someone "just a lil buzzed" screw up and not get breathalyzed.
damn phone
The biker that whizzed up into somebody's blind spot? ;/
-
and oh the irony of this source
http://norml.org/library/item/cannabis-and-driving-a-scientific-and-rational-review
A 2007 case-control study published in the Canadian Journal of Public Health reviewed 10-years of US auto-fatality data. Investigators found that US drivers with blood alcohol levels of 0.05% – a level well below the legal limit for intoxication – were three times as likely to have engaged in unsafe driving activities prior to a fatal crash as compared to individuals who tested positive for marijuana.[40] A 2005 review of auto accident fatality data from France reported similar results, finding that drivers who tested positive for any amount of alcohol had a four times greater risk of having a fatal accident than did drivers who tested positive for marijuana in their blood.[41] In the latter study, even drivers with low levels of alcohol present in their blood (below 0.05%) experienced a greater elevated risk as compared to drivers who tested positive for higher concentrations of cannabis (above 5ng/ml). Both studies noted that overall few traffic accidents appeared to be attributed to driver's operating a vehicle while impaired by cannabis.
I don't see the irony at all in the source. norml.org is a pro-marijuana organization. Maybe you are using "irony" wrong...
But the statistics as presented are mostly worthless. Considering the fact that a normally-sized person can drop their BAC by 0.01 - 0.03% *per hour*, and even faster for smaller people, you can pretty much guarantee that people who were tested for alcohol after an accident had a significantly higher BAC at the time of the accident.
Also consider the fact that you will test positive for marijuana for up to a month after using it.
You really can't compare the two in any meaningful manner, really.
-
This story doesn't make me want to bash police; it makes me want to bash police chiefs.
It isn't all due to police chiefs. Some of it may be due to training, but a lot of it is due to nothing more than the personality of the person behind the badge. They do stupid, arrogant stuff not because the chief told them to do it, but just because they can.
The worst part is that you can't even complain, because of the "thin blue line." For some reason, even otherwise "good" cops generally seem to be willing to line up in support of the bad cops, and other bad cops are often only too happy to join up in harassing anyone who has the temerity to report an incident of abusive "policing."
-
Drive the speed limit and obey all traffic laws, no reason to get a ticket then. Argue otherwise, you are a law breaking criminal. :rofl:
Explain the black and yellow state-mandated signs outside of a few small towns on US-19 in Florida. Hint: the state made the towns put them there to warn unwary motorists of the 45-25-45 speed limit changes that were a major source of revenue in the towns. But there were no quotas in effect. (Yeah, right.)
Russ