 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / August 2005Judge orders black boxes put in cars of criminal drivers
Sounds like more criminal coddling to me. Bad drivers are killers and maimers and i say lock them up forever. They can't be cured. http://www.freep.com/news/statewire/sw120395_20050826.htm August 26, 2005, 7:54 AM NOVI, Mich. (AP) -- A judge in Oakland County is using black box technology to keep an eye on drivers who repeatedly run afoul of the law. The boxes have been installed in the vehicles of 14 defendants since 52-1 District Court Judge Brian MacKenzie created the program last year. They track a vehicle's speed and other actions, such as acceleration rate and whether a driver slams the brakes or makes sharp turns. The black box requirement is part of a program called Driver Rehabilitation Incorporating Vehicular Education -- or DRIVE -- and applies only to drivers who have a license and are on probation. Others in the program are required to attend group therapy, take driver training or perform community service. "The idea is to come up with a sentence that makes the individuals coming into the program better drivers, safer drivers, improving the safety of everyone around," MacKenzie told The Detroit News for a Friday story. "And it seems to work." (snip) The program targets drivers cited for reckless driving, driving with a suspended license or leaving the scene of a property-damage accident, if they have two previous crashes or several driving infractions. The boxes emit a loud beep when a car speeds or accelerates too rapidly. They ultimately will be modified so driver actions can be tracked by satellite. Data is gathered monthly and sent to a driver's probation officer. "It's not like Big Brother; it's a sentence that's trying to do the right thing, the appropriate thing, to guarantee the community's safety," MacKenzie said. "It's not going to be in their car forever, but it's going to be there to demonstrate that they've learned to drive appropriately." "Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide" quoted AP: >"It's not like Big Brother; it's a sentence that's trying to do >the right thing, the appropriate thing, to guarantee the >community's safety," MacKenzie said. What bullshit. Wait till the first time some spouse filing for divorce has her lawyer subpoena the data from a spouse's car's black box. See who will claim it's not "Big Brother" then. The damn gadget can't even tell WHO was driving the car at the time. Was it the guy on probation - or his hot-rod teenage son? Was it the guy on probation - or his wife rushing home from the supermarket as she worried about frozen food thawing? Browse this gun show for FREE! Shop the http://stores.ebay.com/INTERNET-GUN-SHOW > "Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide" quoted AP: > >"It's not like Big Brother; it's a sentence that's trying to do >the right thing, the appropriate thing, to guarantee the >community's safety," MacKenzie said. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > guy on probation - or his wife rushing home from the supermarket as she > worried about frozen food thawing? Yup - better to lock them up. Then they can't kill or maim anyone except the other cons. Let's stop the criminal coddling. > Yup - better to lock them up. Then they can't kill or maim anyone > except the other cons. Let's stop the criminal coddling. Are you really suggesting we get tough on criminals, OR are you only seeking to make more criminals? There is a difference between getting tough on criminal behavior, and classifying more behavior as criminal. > > Yup - better to lock them up. Then they can't kill or maim anyone > > except the other cons. Let's stop the criminal coddling. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > There is a difference between getting tough on criminal behavior, and > classifying more behavior as criminal. Every DAY in america 110 americans are killed by speeders and drunk drivers and red light runners etc. That's over 3000 a month, a 9-11 every month. Criminal drivers are obviously the biggest crime problem we have, you moron. And the most readily corrected, if we would just start throwing these psychos in prison or at least take away their DL. Laura Bush wrote: > Proffsl wrote: > > Laura Bush wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Are you really suggesting we get tough on criminals, OR are > > you only seeking to make more criminals? It doesn't go unnoticed that you completely ignored my question. > > There is a difference between getting tough on criminal behavior, > > and classifying more behavior as criminal. Nor does it go unnoticed that you completely ignored my statement. > Every DAY in america 110 americans are killed by speeders and > drunk drivers and red light runners etc. Where "etc" includes simple accidents, not due to criminal intent or negligence? Where are you getting these stats? Regardless, let's put this into prospective. Given 150 Million Drivers each day, that's 1 in 1,363,636. Given each drives on the average 20 miles, that's 1 death for every 27,272,727 miles driven. > That's over 3000 a month, a 9-11 every month. You're being melodramatic. Regardless, kind of puts 9-11 into prospective, doesn't it? > Criminal drivers are obviously the biggest crime problem we have, Can you make the distinction between Criminal Intent and an Accident? > you moron. Go f.ck Yourself. > And the most readily corrected, if we would just start throwing these > psychos in prison or at least take away their DL. Clearly you can't make a distinction between Criminal Intent and an Accident. If you were to have an ACCIDENT, without any Criminal Intent, would you classify yourself as a PSYCHO? Although, I might classify you as a Psycho already. Hahahahaha. I take back what I said about you earlier in this same thread. > Every DAY in america 110 americans are killed by speeders and drunk > drivers and red light runners etc. That's over 3000 a month, a 9-11 > every month. Criminal drivers are obviously the biggest crime problem > we have, you moron. And the most readily corrected, if we would just > start throwing these psychos in prison or at least take away their DL. I would suggest that this is a good way of eliminating those who are too slow or stupid to avoid destruction. Darwin may be dead, but his spirit lives on.  SignatureCheers, Bev ************************************************* Never argue with a woman holding a torque wrench. >Every DAY in america 110 americans are killed by speeders and drunk >drivers and red light runners etc. That's over 3000 a month, a 9-11 >every month. Criminal drivers are obviously the biggest crime problem >we have, you moron. And the most readily corrected, if we would just >start throwing these psychos in prison or at least take away their DL. Teach them how to drive; accidents can EASILY be avoided. SignatureThe last song I started on my PC was: Fast Car-Tracy Chapman-Tracy Chapman This is track 14 of 55 in the current playlist. >Every DAY in america 110 americans are killed by speeders and drunk >drivers and red light runners etc. You could easily say that every day in america 109 people are killed by drunk drivers, red light runners, and people sleeping in bed and your statement would be just as valid. >That's over 3000 a month, a 9-11 >every month. Criminal drivers are obviously the biggest crime problem >we have, you moron. And the most readily corrected, if we would just >start throwing these psychos in prison or at least take away their DL. I see instead of teaching people how to driver properly, you want to punish them for driving poorly. I think who ever tried to teach you how to drive whacked you on the head with a stick a few too many times and caused some drain bamage. :) ----------- Alex On 27 Aug 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend , relaxed its anal sphincter and spewed the following crap all over several unrelated newsgroups including rec.autos.driving... > Criminal drivers are obviously the biggest crime problem > we have, you moron. And the most readily corrected, if we would just > start throwing these psychos in prison or at least take away their DL. You first. Put up or shut up. -- "> Have you ever driven a car faster than the legal speed limit? Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5 years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open stretch could be 25, i thought." Pride of America (c.k.a. "laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMOCIDE), 10/3/2002 Message-ID: <3c1753f7.0210030916.7b6f5dff@posting.google.com> http://tinyurl.com/5u4wg Connecting POA to LBMHB: See the following: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj MPG.1cfc480a3c46652d98976a@newsgroups.bellsouth.net > > "Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide" quoted AP: > > >"It's not like Big Brother; it's a sentence that's trying to do >the right thing, the appropriate thing, to guarantee the >community's safety," MacKenzie said. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Yup - better to lock them up. Then they can't kill or maim anyone > except the other cons. Let's stop the criminal coddling. We've have stopped the criminal coddling. Since the people who know black boxes actually work, have stopped working for idiots like Lawyers entirely, since the only place any of the idiot things work is in Starbucks. > Was it the....... wife rushing home from the supermarket as she > worried about frozen food thawing? Hey. Nice one. New defence for speeding - the frozen food might thaw ! Idiot cretin ! Graham >Bad drivers are killers and >maimers and i say lock them up forever. They can't be cured. I can't say I disagree with that. :) >http://www.freep.com/news/statewire/sw120395_20050826.htm > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >tracked by satellite. Data is gathered monthly and sent to a driver's >probation officer. As usual, the government ninnys are targeting the wrong behavior. What we REALLY need is a box that beeps when people drive too slowly, block the passing lane, fail to merge properly, and all the other asinine things that incompetent drivers do. > <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Bad drivers are killers and maimers and i say lock them up forever. > > They can't be cured. > > I can't say I disagree with that. :) Drivers who Endanger or Damage the Property and Lives of others definately should be Prosecuted, but I CAN NOT agree that they can't be 'cured', and should be locked up forever. That's simply absurd. > > They track a vehicle's speed and other actions, such as acceleration > > rate and whether a driver slams the brakes or makes sharp turns. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > What we REALLY need is a box that beeps when people drive too > slowly, Any sensible person would have to agree we have a Right to Travel on our Public Highways. But, if I told you we have a Right to Drive (safely), you'd likely say "Driving is a Privilege. Walk, Bicycle, or Ride a Horse.". Each of course being a much slower form of Travel than Driving. Then, I suppose you'd want to Prosecute people for going to slow??? We do Indeed have the Right to Drive, as Driving is the Transit Ordinarily used for Personal Travel on our Public Highways. We have the Right of Transit Ordinarily used for Personal Travel on our Public Highways. "Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any state is a right secured by the 14th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." - Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270 (1900) - http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol9&invol=270#274 Spicifically, note the phrase: "and the right, ordinarily, of free transit" > > <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > definately should be Prosecuted, but I CAN NOT agree that they can't be > 'cured', and should be locked up forever. That's simply absurd. Ignorance can be cured, but stupidity is forever. A case could be made for segregating the hopelessly stupid... > > > They track a vehicle's speed and other actions, such as acceleration > > > rate and whether a driver slams the brakes or makes sharp turns. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > (safely), you'd likely say "Driving is a Privilege. Walk, Bicycle, or > Ride a Horse.". All our lives we've been told that driving is a privilege, but that doesn't make it true. If it is, then a whole lot of other things that we believe to be rights are also privileges, and privileges can be taken away if we aren't good little boys and girls and mind Big Ninny. It ought to be considered a right that can be forfeited if it's abused, but I think my definition of abuse is very different from Officer Friendly's. SignatureCheers, Bev ================================================================== "Don't sweat it -- it's not real life. It's only ones and zeroes." -- spaf (1988?) > Proffsl wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > All our lives we've been told that driving is a privilege, but that doesn't > make it true. True. > If it is, I will assume by this that you mean "If it is" true that Driving is a Right. > then a whole lot of other things that we believe to be rights are > also privileges, This isn't necessarly true, and in fact is contrary to nature. When people are convinced that one Right is a privilege, it is more likely they will be convinced more of their Rights are privileges than vice-a-virsa. > It ought to be considered a right that can be forfeited if it's abused, All Rights, including our Right of Liberty can be forfeited by Criminal Behavior (Violating the Rights of others). >> > <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > abused, but I think my definition of abuse is very different from > Officer Friendly's. Well,it IS established that rights can be curtailed,but only by a court of law.Also that minors have limited rights until they reach their majority. (although age 18 USED to be considered a legal adult for all purposes,now the socialists have messed that up.) SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > Well,it IS established that rights can be curtailed,but only by > a court of law. This is called "Due Process of Law", where one is first Charged with a crime and summonsed to court where they are then given the opportunity to confront the witnesses against them and defend themself in a court of law. > Also that minors have limited rights until they reach their majority. True, as a child's Right to Liberty and to their Pursuit of Happiness are in the charge of their Parents. > (although age 18 USED to be considered a legal adult for all purposes, > now the socialists have messed that up.). While we have the Right to Property, minors do not, and many only have what their parents would allow them to have. >> (although age 18 USED to be considered a legal adult for all purposes, >> now the socialists have messed that up.). > > While we have the Right to Property, minors do not, and many only have > what their parents would allow them to have. People aged 18 USED to be considered adults in all respects,but now,not until actually age 25. Can't buy an handgun until 21,nor buy or consume alcohol,can't rent a car until 25.But they can be drafted for military service at 18,and can be tried as an adult for any crimes they commit. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > Proffsl wrote: > > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > they can be drafted for military service at 18,and can be tried > as an adult for any crimes they commit. Hypocracy like that has totally f.cked this country. It disgusts me to no end. I purchased my first rifle when I was 12 years old, then rode my bicycle to the country store to purchase ammunition. The store owner knew my father consented to me purchasing the ammo and had no problem selling it to me as such. A child's right to Liberty and to their Pursuit of Happiness are in the carge of their parents. > A child's right to Liberty and to their Pursuit of Happiness are in the > charge of their parents. 'Course, you have to have a license to go down to the lake and fish, but any two wastes of protoplasm who can figure out how to insert tab "A" into slot "B" are allowed to be "parents". > Proffsl wrote: > > A child's right to Liberty and to their Pursuit of Happiness are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > fish, but any two wastes of protoplasm who can figure out how > to insert tab "A" into slot "B" are allowed to be "parents". And, I imagine you'd like to be in charge of who gets to f.ck who? By what authority do you claim such a power? Do you claim such a power by consenting to accept responsibility for the consequences of the actions of others? Well, as far as I'm concerned, consenting persons can f.ck who ever they choose, and they are also Responsible for any consequences of their actions. I am not responsible for the consequences of their actions. Therefore, I have no authority over the behavior of consenting persons. If I consent to be responsible for the consequences of another climbing a tree, that does not give me the authority to choose if they can climb a tree. > > > A child's right to Liberty and to their Pursuit of Happiness are in > > > the charge of their parents. > > > > 'Course, you have to have a license to go down to the lake and fish, > > but any two wastes of protoplasm who can figure out how to insert tab > > "A" into slot "B" are allowed to be "parents". > And, I imagine you'd like to be in charge of who gets to f.ck who? Nope. > By what authority do you claim such a power? None. I don't claim any such power. > Do you claim such a power by consenting to accept responsibility for the > consequences of the actions of others? No matter how many times you respin the question, the answer is still that I don't claim any such power. > Well, as far as I'm concerned, consenting persons can f.ck who ever they > choose, and they are also Responsible for any consequences of their > actions. Ah, but that's just it: They're *NOT* being held responsible for the consequences of their actions. > Proffsl wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Ah, but that's just it: They're *NOT* being held responsible for > the consequences of their actions. I would disagree that men aren't being held responsible. Fact is, often, men are held souly responsible for the consequences of sex. On the other hand, women are not. Women should be held, at least, EQUALLY responsible for the consequences of sex. Women who wish to hold the man responsible for any consequences of sex should ask for marrage BEFORE having sex. If they do not, they can not rightfully hold the man responsible (excluding rape), and are then SOULY responsible for the consequences. Men who wish to have charge over any consequences of sex should ask for marriage BEFORE having sex. If they do not, they can not rightfully claim any charge (excluding rape), and then have NO charge for the consequences. In the case of rape, Men should be held ENTIRELY responsible for ALL consequences, including Assault, Pregnancy, and the Child. Plus, they should have NO charge for the Child. >> Proffsl wrote: >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the other hand, women are not. Women should be held, at least, EQUALLY > responsible for the consequences of sex. Nonsense,it's the WOMAN who makes the final decision to have unprotected consensual recreational sex with the possibility of getting PG,and SHE is the one who GETS PG. She also has the final decision of having an abortion or not,the last person to decide to bring that child into the world.She has ALL the power. Men should have NO responsibility,unless they consent to it once notified of a pregnancy;then it would be unrevokeable.(consensual sex only) > Women who wish to hold the man responsible for any consequences of sex > should ask for marrage BEFORE having sex. If they do not, they can not > rightfully hold the man responsible (excluding rape), and are then > SOULY responsible for the consequences. These days,donate sperm to a sperm bank,and you can be held "responsible". If a woman uses your sperm from a used condom to get PG,you still are "responsible". > Men who wish to have charge over any consequences of sex should ask for > marriage BEFORE having sex. If they do not, they can not rightfully [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > In the case of rape, Men should be held ENTIRELY responsible for ALL > consequences, including Assault, Pregnancy, and the Child. > Plus, they > should have NO charge for the Child. What do you mean by this??? SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > Proffsl wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > final decision of having an abortion or not,the last person to decide > to bring that child into the world.She has ALL the power. That's what I mean. The Woman is in CHARGE, and the Man is RESPONSIBLE for her choices. > Men should have NO responsibility,unless they consent to it once > notified of a pregnancy;then it would be unrevokeable.(consensual > sex only) As I said, if a Woman wants the Man to be Responsible for the Child, they will ask for Marrage BEFORE having Sex. If the Man wants to have Charge over the Child, they will ask for Marrage BEFORE having Sex. > > In the case of rape, Men should be held ENTIRELY responsible for > > ALL consequences, including Assault, Pregnancy, and the Child. > > Plus, they should have NO charge for the Child. > > What do you mean by this??? Rape is an Assult, which the Rapist should be held Responsible for. Pregnancy is a hardship which the Rapist should be held Responsible for. The Child is a Consequence which the Rapist should be held Responsible for. If the woman chooses abortion, then there is no Child to be Responsible for, but that would be the woman's choice in the case of Rape. >> Proffsl wrote: >> > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > As I said, if a Woman wants the Man to be Responsible for the Child, > they will ask for Marrage BEFORE having Sex. Oh,force people to get married? (yeah,that's a good idea[not]) Are you planning to outlaw any sex outside of marriage? As if that is practical.... > If the Man wants to have Charge over the Child, they will ask for > Marrage BEFORE having Sex. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > If the woman chooses abortion, then there is no Child to be Responsible > for, but that would be the woman's choice in the case of Rape. The rapist,if caught,will be in prison,unable to contribute to any child's support.(actually,he should be dead.) Also,you then condemn the woman to bear a child she never wanted,nor had any choice in conceiving. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > Proffsl wrote: > > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Oh,force people to get married? (yeah,that's a good idea[not]) >From who's a.shole did you pull this wild a.s presumption? Not mine! As I said, ***IF*** a Woman wants the Man to be responsible for any resultant Child, they will ask for Marrage BEFORE having Sex. OTHERWISE, they CAN NOT rightfully hold the Man responsible for any resultant Child. > > Are you planning to outlaw any sex outside of marriage? > > As if that is practical.... Actually, that sounds more along the idea of Daniel J Stern, when they posted: ""'Course, you have to have a license to go down to the lake and fish, but any two wastes of protoplasm who can figure out how to insert tab "A" into slot "B" are allowed to be "parents". "" You really should follow the thread more closely. > > If the woman chooses abortion, then there is no Child to be > > Responsible for, but that would be the woman's choice in the > > case of Rape. > > The rapist,if caught,will be in prison,unable to contribute to any > child's support. While the rapist should go to prison for a period of time, this does not remove their financial responsibility for any resultant child. > (actually,he should be dead.) Who's mama taught you this? I do not agree. While rape is a violent crime, and the rapist should be prosecuted, I simply do not find rape to be violent enough a crime to merit a death penality. And, I really don't care if you disagree or not. > Also, you then condemn the woman to bear a child she never > wanted, nor had any choice in conceiving. Well, if you can't even pay attention to the post your posting to, how can I expect you to follow the thread? I said: "If the woman chooses abortion, then there is no Child to be Responsible for, but that would be the woman's choice in the case of Rape." Don't bother me with more of your posts if you can't respond to what I actually say instead of what you imagine I said. > Actually, that sounds more along the idea of Daniel J Stern, when they > posted: ""'Course, you have to have a license to go down to the lake and > fish, but any two wastes of protoplasm who can figure out how to insert > tab "A" into slot "B" are allowed to be "parents". "" ...sounds like the idea of Daniel J. Stern, when *they* posted it? Both of me? All 42 of me? > You really should follow the thread more closely. And evidently you should spend some quality time with Warriner's. tab "A" into slot "B" are allowed to be "parents". "" > ...sounds like the idea of Daniel J. Stern, when *they* posted it? > > Both of me? > > All 42 of me? Wow! You are legion! > often, men are held souly responsible for the consequences of sex. On > the other hand, women are not. Women should be held, at least, EQUALLY > responsible for the consequences of sex. I agree with that, as long as we include professional babymakers on welfare. > Women who wish to hold the man responsible for any consequences of sex > should ask for marrage BEFORE having sex. If they do not, they can not > rightfully hold the man responsible (excluding rape), and are then SOULY > responsible for the consequences. You're right, they can't *rightfully* hold the man responsible. But wrong though it be, they can *successfully* hold the man responsible. That should change. > Men who wish to have charge over any consequences of sex should ask for > marriage BEFORE having sex. If they do not, they can not rightfully > claim any charge (excluding rape), and then have NO charge for the > consequences. Agree. > In the case of rape, Men should be held ENTIRELY responsible for ALL > consequences, including Assault, Pregnancy, and the Child. Plus, they > should have NO charge for the Child. Agree. Now: What-all does the term "rape" encompass? Serious question. Obviously, forcible nonconsensual sex equals rape. But what about those pesky instances in which the woman, the day or week after, regretting having said "yes", convinces herself she actually said "no"? Then what? >> Proffsl wrote: >> > A child's right to Liberty and to their Pursuit of Happiness are [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > a tree, that does not give me the authority to choose if they can climb > a tree. Except that OUR tax dollars end up supporting such people,and paying for the resultant crime committed by delinquents not properly raised. I'd say prospective parents at least had to have a steady job,and a high school education,and not be on welfare. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > Proffsl wrote: > > > Proffsl wrote: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Except that OUR tax dollars end up supporting such people,and paying > for the resultant crime committed by delinquents not properly raised. Theoretically, Taxes are adopted by OUR consent. I will not have our Rights placed on the auction block to Social Benefits Bidders. If tax payers consent to be responsible for the consequences of others, that does not give them the authority to deny them the acts which might bring such consequences about. If tax payers consent to be responsible for the consequences of me climbing a tree, that does not give tax payers the authority to choose if I may climb a tree. > I'd say prospective parents at least had to have a steady job,and a high > school education,and not be on welfare. I'd say if you don't want to be responsible for the actions of others, don't consent to be responsible for them. >>> (although age 18 USED to be considered a legal adult for all purposes, >>> now the socialists have messed that up.). [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > alcohol,can't rent a car until 25.But they can be drafted for military > service at 18,and can be tried as an adult for any crimes they commit. It isn't any "socialist" denying anyone the right to rent a car under the age of 25. That would be insurance companies, and I can hardly think of a group less socialist in nature. Perhaps you meant to say it is the greedy corporations? Bernard >>>> (although age 18 USED to be considered a legal adult for all purposes, >>>> now the socialists have messed that up.). [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > a car under the age of 25. That would be insurance > companies, More accurately,the RENTAL companies. Denying equal protection uder the law;age discrimination. It's "socialist" because it's part of their socialist belief that young people are not responsible,and must be controlled.(also that laws are not 'fixed',that they can be interpreted depending on the circumstances,not by their -written- meaning.) Insurance companies could merely charge more for under 25 drivers,like they already do for one's own car.They do not deny insurance TOTALLY to under 25 drivers. > and I can hardly think of a group less socialist > in nature. Perhaps you meant to say it is the greedy corporations? > > Bernard SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > > It isn't any "socialist" denying anyone the right to rent a car under > > the age of 25. That would be insurance companies, > > More accurately,the RENTAL companies. Denying equal protection uder the > law;age discrimination. Er...no. There is no right to rental cars. > It's "socialist" because it's part of their socialist belief that young > people are not responsible Traffic crash and insurance claim stats back up this belief...very solidly. >> > It isn't any "socialist" denying anyone the right to rent a car under >> > the age of 25. That would be insurance companies, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Er...no. There is no right to rental cars. there are laws against age discrimination. >> It's "socialist" because it's part of their socialist belief that young >> people are not responsible > > Traffic crash and insurance claim stats back up this belief...very > solidly. Then why do the same ins.companies sell insurance to those same people for their own cars? The fact that they do shows it's unreasonable discrimination. After all,the insurance covers any loss to the vehicle,whether it's a rental or their own. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > >> > It isn't any "socialist" denying anyone the right to rent a car under > >> > the age of 25. That would be insurance companies, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > there are laws against age discrimination. Indeed, and so far, charging under-25ers more money to rent cars, or refusing to rent to them altogether, hasn't legally been found to be age discrimination, no matter how fervently Jim Yanik thinks that it is. > > Traffic crash and insurance claim stats back up this belief...very > > solidly. > Then why do the same ins.companies sell insurance to those same people > for their own cars? Because they can make money at it. Checked the rates for under-25 car insurance? It's higher, just like the cost to rent a car if you're under 25. >> >> > It isn't any "socialist" denying anyone the right to rent a car >> >> > under the age of 25. That would be insurance companies, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > age discrimination, no matter how fervently Jim Yanik thinks that it > is. I wonder if it's even been to court? >> > Traffic crash and insurance claim stats back up this belief...very >> > solidly. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > insurance? It's higher, just like the cost to rent a car if you're > under 25. Then why refuse the same to under-25 renters? The rental company still gets their protection,insurance companies still make their money,too. I never said they had to rent to <25'ers for the -same- price as older drivers,just that there should not be a total refusal to rent to <25 but >18 drivers. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > >> there are laws against age discrimination. > > Indeed, and so far, charging under-25ers more money to rent cars, or > > refusing to rent to them altogether, hasn't legally been found to be > > age discrimination, no matter how fervently Jim Yanik thinks that it > > is. > I wonder if it's even been to court? Either it has (and it's been deemed legal to charge under-25ers more money to rent cars, or to refuse to rent to them altogether) or it hasn't (and you're the only one who thinks it's an outrage). In either case, I'm afraid you'll just have to get over your hysterical self. > > Checked the rates for under-25 car insurance? It's higher, just like > > the cost to rent a car if you're under 25. > I never said they had to rent to <25'ers for the -same- price as older > drivers,just that there should not be a total refusal to rent to <25 but > 18 drivers. That's up to the rental companies. There exist companies that will rent cars to under-25ers. > As usual, the government ninnys are targeting the wrong behavior. What > we REALLY need is a box that beeps when people drive too slowly, > block the passing lane, fail to merge properly, and all the other > asinine things that incompetent drivers do. Actually there's a really easy way to do that. You need a *real* test of driving ability - not just a 'driving test'. It would cost more but keep the idiots off the road. Might even *teach* some ppl how to drive properly too ! Graham > > As usual, the government ninnys are targeting the wrong behavior. What > > we REALLY need is a box that beeps when people drive too slowly, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It would cost more but keep the idiots off the road. Might even *teach* > some ppl how to drive properly too ! I disagree completely. Everyone knows how to drive safely. They don't do it because the penalties for reckless driving are so light. If people knew that doing 80 mph in a 65 zone would cause them to lose their license for at least a year, they wouldn't do it. Stop the criminal coddling. > > > As usual, the government ninnys are targeting the wrong behavior. What > > > we REALLY need is a box that beeps when people drive too slowly, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I disagree completely. Everyone knows how to drive safely. That's utter rubbish. You aren't born with the skill to drive. It has to be learnt. I know someone for example who passed her test but is *afraid* to overtake any traffic - so is therefore likely to cause traffic queues behind slow moving vehicles. This is an example of a *real* danger to traffic - as opposed to driving a few mph over some arbitrary limit. Graham >I disagree completely. Everyone knows how to drive safely. They don't >do it because the penalties for reckless driving are so light. If >people knew that doing 80 mph in a 65 zone would cause them to lose >their license for at least a year, they wouldn't do it. Stop the >criminal coddling. Speed isn't the problem, retard; it's merely a component of it. Of course, no one out here has ever accused you of being able to see the entire picture, but that's no loss on our part. SignatureThe last song I started on my PC was: Fast Car-Tracy Chapman-Tracy Chapman This is track 14 of 55 in the current playlist. > As usual, the government ninnys are targeting the wrong behavior. What > we REALLY need is a box that beeps when people drive too slowly, > block the passing lane, fail to merge properly, and all the other > asinine things that incompetent drivers do. You can't drive too slowly. >You can't drive too slowly. Only mentally inferior individuals need an arbitrarily set speed limits to give them that false sense of security. No loss on our part, though. SignatureThe last song I started on my PC was: Fast Car-Tracy Chapman-Tracy Chapman This is track 14 of 55 in the current playlist. On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 03:04:04 GMT, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > Sounds like more criminal coddling to me. Bad drivers are killers and > maimers and i say lock them up forever. They can't be cured. > > http://www.freep.com/news/statewire/sw120395_20050826.htm Same for cheap a.sholes like yourself who don't maintain their vehicles. Get back under your bridge, troll! Signature"If you speed loons would just slow down we wouldn't have a problem. drive them until the holes get too big for that tire-in-a-can stuff to work.Then do what I do and go to pep boys and get a set of used retreads for $50 and repeat." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 11/20/04 ref: http://tinyurl.com/bg9n9 ========== AND ========== "Hey stupid - I've tried to fix it and i can't. The cable adjusting nuts are rusted solid." --Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide (a.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, Pride of America, aunt millie and Judy Dairya, among others. See: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj), 6 Apr 2005 11:05:54 -0700 Ref: or9851dpb7a4s8fduf7bf83gab02t9u5rn@4ax.com Ref: http://tinyurl.com/8exv3 Paul wrote: > laura bush wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Same for cheap a.sholes like yourself who don't maintain > their vehicles. Why do you call them cheap? Do you presume they're somehow obligated to enrich your life? Calling them an a.shole makes YOU the a.shole. > Get back under your bridge, troll! Trolls on the internet refer to act of Trolling for a bite, as in fishing. It is You who is fishing, Trolling for a bite. I judge You to be the Troll. I don't agree with everything the previous poster, going by "laura bush", says, but I find them to be a far more thoughtful person than yourself. On 27 Aug 2005 06:49:10 -0700, proffsl , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > Paul wrote: > > laura bush wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Why do you call them cheap? Do you presume they're somehow obligated > to enrich your life? They are not obligated to enrich my life, but they don't have to right to endanger same by driving an ill maintained vehicle on the roads like "laura bush murdered her boyfriend," has bragged about doing in the recent past. The remainder of your bullshit I won't dignify with a response. SignaturePaul "If you speed loons would just slow down we wouldn't have a problem. drive them until the holes get too big for that tire-in-a-can stuff to work.Then do what I do and go to pep boys and get a set of used retreads for $50 and repeat." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 11/20/04 ref: http://tinyurl.com/bg9n9 ========== AND ========== "Hey stupid - I've tried to fix it and i can't. The cable adjusting nuts are rusted solid." --Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide (a.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, Pride of America, aunt millie and Judy Dairya, among others. See: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj), 6 Apr 2005 11:05:54 -0700 Ref: or9851dpb7a4s8fduf7bf83gab02t9u5rn@4ax.com Ref: http://tinyurl.com/8exv3 >Paul wrote: >> laura bush wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Why do you call them cheap? Do you presume they're somehow obligated >to enrich your life? No, but they *are* obligated to maintain a vehicle in a safe, road worthy condition. LBMHBF has mentioned in the past numerous aspects regarding it's car, and it's treatment of that car, that indicate the vehicle is not maintained properly. The "bare minimum," if that. >Calling them an a.shole makes YOU the a.shole. I don't know about Paul, but sign me up for being an a.shole if expecting my fellow motorists to be driving a car in a safe manner. >> Get back under your bridge, troll! > >Trolls on the internet refer to act of Trolling for a bite, as in >fishing. It is You who is fishing, Trolling for a bite. I judge You >to be the Troll. Who cares what you judge? If you're siding with LBMHBF, you've already indicated you're delusional. >I don't agree with everything the previous poster, going by "laura >bush", says, but I find them to be a far more thoughtful person than >yourself. Why? Because such assinine rants appeal to your minuscule IQ? You and LBMHBF make a cute couple. David W. Poole, Jr.wrote: > Proffsl wrote: > > Paul wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > aspects regarding it's car, and it's treatment of that car, that indicate > the vehicle is not maintained properly. The "bare minimum," if that. Actually, in this society of Rights, the ONLY thing we're OBLIGATED to is to NOT Endanger or Harm the Rights of others. In terms of Travel by Automobiles, this means one is obligated to NOT operate their Automobile beyond it's safe limits. There is a subtile difference here, and not everyone will agree with me, but... For example, if one's brakes are weak, they are only obligated to not operate their vehicle in such a manner that their weak brakes would endanger or harm the Rights of others. > I don't know about Paul, but sign me up for being an a.shole if > expecting my fellow motorists to be driving a car in a safe manner. I wouldn't call you an a.shole for expecting your fellow motorists to not Endanger or Harm the Rights of you or others. > > Trolls on the internet refer to act of Trolling for a bite, as in > > fishing. It is You who is fishing, Trolling for a bite. I judge > > You to be the Troll. > > Who cares what you judge? My Representatives in Government. > If you're siding with LBMHBF, you've already indicated you're > delusional. I wouldn't call myself delusional, but I would say I was mistaken. Since posting that, I have re-adjusted my Judgment of LBMHBF. I now judge them to be just another Idiot Troll. >David W. Poole, Jr.wrote: >> Proffsl wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >vehicle in such a manner that their weak brakes would endanger or harm >the Rights of others. And yet LBMHBF admits to a non-functional emergency brake, as well as riding around on bald retreads filled with tire in a can. Does this sound like a safe automobile to operate to you? >> I don't know about Paul, but sign me up for being an a.shole if >> expecting my fellow motorists to be driving a car in a safe manner. > >I wouldn't call you an a.shole for expecting your fellow motorists to >not Endanger or Harm the Rights of you or others. Well, that's the point Paul was making, and I am seconding. LBMHBF believes that adherence to an arbitrarily set speed limit somehow makes you a safe driver; vehicle maintenance be damned. >> > Trolls on the internet refer to act of Trolling for a bite, as in >> > fishing. It is You who is fishing, Trolling for a bite. I judge [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >My Representatives in Government. And yet none of them, to the best of my knowledge, read this group. :-D >> If you're siding with LBMHBF, you've already indicated you're >> delusional. > >I wouldn't call myself delusional, but I would say I was mistaken. >Since posting that, I have re-adjusted my Judgment of LBMHBF. I now >judge them to be just another Idiot Troll. I was wondering. You wrote something to the effect of you saw LBMHBF's side. If you read this group or any others LBMHBF trolls, you'll find that the few people that side with LBMHBF are some real corn-flakes. While on the subject of LBMHBF's trolling: STFU YOU HATEFILLED TROLL. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.sport.golf/msg/4bafc59af1481a15?hl=en Hey lr5 dood. Get your own newsgroup. I'm the troll here. : http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.golf/msg/d6c3bc1eb365fc67?hl=en& Fork you, beyatch. I'm the greatest troll that ever lived!!!! I'm the world's champ at infuriating all these pschopathic car loonies. HAHAHA http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.misc/msg/8316b755126bd447 Being a troll is an honorable life. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/c795f38d501be2d8?hl=en& Some more "interesting" posts by LBMHBF the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie. I get RESPECT now. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en Colin powell was not black, you idiot. : http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/d353aca699d28854?hl=en& Just get in front of the trucker and lob a handful or marbles at his windshield. Perfectly legal since he started it. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/acf43f4e647f4416?hl=en& Even a safety nut like me doesn't carry things that far. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/c24964a9d26bba6d?hl=en& I wish everyone involved in this "accident" had died. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/5f4bfd6988914951?hl=en I don't care who i kill; it's just an accident. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/79da070478765cee Driving twenty year old beaters doesn't keep me up to date. Anyway it's a stupid idea. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/ff331395cfc7b81b?hl=en Screw driver training and courtesy. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/d4aaae4439d8c383 I know you're paid to come on here and spout these idiocies : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/9384db67599b 93f3?hl=en& Fork the dictionary. You've got your definitions and we've got ours. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/a74373e47d63 8020?hl=en Hey dood. I've been a US senator since 98! You mean you didn't know that??? : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/2f1dd067aa0af690 I never voted in my life, you lying whore. All elections are rigged. The globalists rigged this one by paying kerry not to attack bush. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/87a31e73cec1db38 It's all about money. Most organ transplants are unnecessary but doctors make a fortune off them so we have them. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/19e5ff027e51 bd5a?hl=en That "microphone" could have been filled with battery acid. Cruise should have pulled a knife and slit the guy's guts out. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/84af48b0cba14e15?hl=en Put AEOS on the list too. It came out with great earnings and guidance today and yet went down 7% on very heavy volume. When a stock sells off on good news, it's going much lower. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/misc.invest.stocks/msg/1a9e462f5ff431de?hl=en Of course he does. With a name like roger, you know he's a pervert. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/38c4ddd6a5640c4a?hl=en What is the P&G logo?. I just went to their WS and didn't see any. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.abortion/msg/9acb6a6cd49d23aa?hl=en Hey stupid. I told you the other day to stop using the phrase "conspiracy theorist". We're gover-media skeptics. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/402c7cb69523 57e9?hl=en There's not a shred of evidence that the jerries murdered anything close to 7 million jooz. Another monstrous lie just like the 9-11 official story. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/3650866dc7ecbadc All his amnesty talk puzzled me because most conservatives are hatefilled racists and don't want the greaseballs in this country. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/172c99cba6ba cc3c?hl=en You're crazy. There will be a draft. Bush is gonna stage another 9-11 type event and then say we have no choice but to go to war against every muslim nation. And democrats will say nothing. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/b4a8ea8427fdf968 You are an ignoramus. 9-11 was an inside job. That's for sure. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/msg/d4b6e83b246dae5 e?hl=en The issue is the psychopath doing 60 mph OVER THE LIMIT!!!!!!!!. This guy is a murderer and i want him locked up anyway they can do it. Three cheers for the cops. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=780ea958.0411162236.1a4d23a5%40posting.goog le.com Market economy???? HAHAHAHA. Prices are whatever the monopolists want to charge. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/msg/23c9a9e267ecc08 f?hl=en If you speed loons would just slow down we wouldn't have a problem. drive them until the holes get too big for that tire-in-a-can stuff to work. Then do what I do and go to pep boys and get a set of used retreads for $50 and repeat. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/dbe7ec33863c0fc4?hl=en The Federal Reserve is not a branch of the govt; it's a group of private banks and borrowing from them means the taxpayers have to pay the interest to the banks. This has been going on for nearly a hundred years and it's just stealing from the public and giving to the bankers. JUST PRINT THE DAMN MONEY. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/f15b1f7d7ea0dfe2 I'm not talking about increasing the money supply; just replacing borrowed money with printed money. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/760bbaea47e5f5f9 I know what you mean, dood. I did 5 years in the can myself for beating the crap out of a half-dozen faggot gun loonies i caught raping a collie and I couldn't handle the food either. Goddam beets with every meal. Ended up eating nothing but cans of tuna i bought at the commy. : http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0411242021.7b529c17%40posting.google.com I don't think knife bans will ever happen, since knives are so damn easy to make. I remember when i was in prison for beating up a dozen gun loonies and we used to melt down a thousand or so aspirin tablets into a thick goo and then let it harden into a knife shape which we sharpened against the concrete floor. Anybody can make a knife anywhere out of anything. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.rush-limbaugh/msg/018c5bbd64dd19ac GODDAMMIT - STOP SENDING MESSAGES TO MORE THAN FIVE GROUPS Google won't allow more than five. It's not my job to delete excessive group listings but i seem to spend half my life doing that. OBEY THE RULES, YOU BUTTHOLES!!!! : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/c3d2661d3c6734ed I am not paid to delete the excessive newsgroups you clowns are posting to. Obey the rules or GTF out of here!!!! : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/f5c7a53c81f28cdf Tires don't blow out anymore. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/9a619fee7f463fc2 LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH LAURABUSH : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/b9727d351b4be64a Bush is dictator and that means he has to take the blame for everything. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/msg/a2d35f67fd7b6003 Has he killed as many people as Laura Bush? : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.flame.niggers/msg/c2ff1fca08982a38 You don't know what you're talking about, dood. AIDS is an american bioweapon developed by americans so that blacks would be esp susceptible to it. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.sport.baseball/msg/cd9d112311697712 She knows it won't matter. Blake is white so the media will insist on a not guilty verdict. :http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/59c74805c56a5747 YOu stupid lying shithead. All bush has accomplished in AFG is to make it the world's leading heroin supplier. And BTW it wasn't a war. It was a massacre against a defenseless nation that never did anything to us. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.bush/msg/29a86842abe0d9d6 She's just damn lucky the press is owned by the GOP and doesn't crucify her for vehicular manslaughter like they've done to ted kennedy for 35 years. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.republicans/msg/cac630fd8aec9a63 I'm saying that bush obviously doesn't want to catch OBL. Not now that the election is over, anyway. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/46a00a246987524f You're crazy, dood. Google is a super rw org and they censor liberals. RW posters here get away with everything while libs have to be choir boys. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.prophecies.nostradamus/msg/ca35950242741f13 That's why so many legal scholars think republicans should be banned from juries. Anyone who'd vote for a man who lied us into war is too dumb to sit on a jury. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/4dc8560247663014 Wouldn't have mattered if hitty had one. He took his orders from the same organization that roosevelt did and bush does today. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/cd58ee450b438b19 You can't even lie any good. No where in the country are cops issued crown victorias. : http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0410112125.4b572994%40posting.google.com i'm sure jeffrey dahmer also objects to big daddy govt telling him he can't kill people anymore. : http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1665104637d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=o ff&edition=us&selm=780ea958.0410311919.5f4893f4%40posting.google.com At first i thought the tars had been slashed but no, the tars were fine : http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0410311926.d89b941%40posting.google.com I hate cell phone drivers but at least this gal had the sense to drive slowly while yakking. : http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=off&edition=us&selm=780e a958.0411231910.47c6ceb7%40posting.google.com Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5 years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open stretch could be 25, i thought. Turns out the cop was right. No complaints from me then. I should have known the law. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.autos/msg/b140009050c624a9 http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/hornsey/515/Xeton2001IsAMoron.html --- ( the following contains part of one of Judy's posts, which would not otherwise be available due to Judy's use of the X-No-Archive bit) >>>Of course, they're anti-safety devices!!! Why would anyone think >>>otherwise, loonball???. I wish you'd get off this board - you make us [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Got it? So many loons in school made fun of me!!! : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/36b69ad3f5e8013a?hl=en ( the following contains part of one of Judy's posts, which would not otherwise be available due to Judy's use of the X-No-Archive bit) > That's the way it should be. In fact even having a RD in your car >should result in mandatory and permanent loss of DL. Why do you need a >device whose only function is to help you commit a crime that murders >thousands of americans a year. URAPSYCHOPATH : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/56c432d3f6f9a6fe?dmode =source&hl=en Straw man???? If you saw some black guy on crack with a gun, you'd go ballistic. But alkies with guns is ok with you cause alcohol is YOUR drug. URA STUPID ILLOGICAL HYPOCRITE. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/talk.politics.guns/msg/c59a4f089df6ecfa?hl=en We don't need safer cars and roads. The incredible highway carnage is entirely due to reckless drivers like you. URAMURDERER. : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/misc.legal/msg/3352db7c732fd7f1?hl=en HUH??? The cops plant the gun on him and you still say he deserved 55 years. URAPSYCHO : http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.politics.usa.republican/msg/ac09b1777ac5 a5ce?hl=en > On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 03:04:04 GMT, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE , said > the following in rec.autos.driving... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Same for cheap a.sholes like yourself who don't maintain their vehicles. My car is in fine shape. And how would you know anyway? On 27 Aug 2005 08:17:28 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > > On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 03:04:04 GMT, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE , said > > the following in rec.autos.driving... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > My car is in fine shape. And how would you know anyway? ROTFLMAO!!!! How easily you forget your bragging about how shitty and ill maintained your POS beater is! See the links below, dumbfuck! BBBWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAAA HAAAHAAAHAAHAAAHAAAHAAAA!!!!!!!!!! SignaturePaul - "If you speed loons would just slow down we wouldn't have a problem. drive them until the holes get too big for that tire-in-a-can stuff to work.Then do what I do and go to pep boys and get a set of used retreads for $50 and repeat." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 11/20/04 ref: http://tinyurl.com/bg9n9 ========== AND ========== "Hey stupid - I've tried to fix it and i can't. The cable adjusting nuts are rusted solid." --Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide (a.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, Pride of America, aunt millie and Judy Dairya, among others. See: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj), 6 Apr 2005 11:05:54 -0700 Ref: or9851dpb7a4s8fduf7bf83gab02t9u5rn@4ax.com Ref: http://tinyurl.com/8exv3 They love Spam: boilingpitsofsewage@yahoo.com > On 27 Aug 2005 08:17:28 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend , said > the following in rec.autos.driving... [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > ROTFLMAO!!!! How easily you forget your bragging about how shitty and > ill maintained your POS beater is! See the links below, dumbfuck! I never said that. My car is in fine shape even though it is a beater. Doesn't matter anyway since i drive slow. > I never said that. My car is in fine shape even though it is a beater. > Doesn't matter anyway since i drive slow. LMAO. If you reckon poor vehicle maintenance is countered by driving slowly you're an even bigger idiot than I first though. Example. Your brakes fail. Doesn't matter how fast you were going - you're going to 'sail on' regardless... Most likely into the path of oncoming traffic where you will be responsible for *MURDERING* ppl ! I hope they send you to jail and throw away the keys. Graham On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:29:01 +0100, Pooh Bear , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > If you reckon poor vehicle maintenance is countered by driving slowly you're an > even bigger idiot than I first though. Well, he/she/it does call itself "laura bush murdered her boyfriend." That should say alot... > Example. Your brakes fail. Doesn't matter how fast you were going - you're going > to 'sail on' regardless... Most likely into the path of oncoming traffic where > you will be responsible for *MURDERING* ppl ! Its only a matter of time before that happens; I've speculated on one possible scenario given judy's posting habits. (see:http://tinyurl.com/98pwg) > I hope they send you to jail and throw away the keys. The sooner the better. SignaturePaul Self-appointed unofficial overseer of kooks and trolls in rec.autos.driving. They love Spam: boilingpitsofsewage@yahoo.com > My car is in fine shape even though it is a beater. After all those manslaughters while driving drunk? Signature/"\ || \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN || Oderint Dum Metuant X AGAINST HTML MAIL || VRWC Proud Life Member / \ AND POSTINGS || http://www.rightwingnation.com >I never said that. My car is in fine shape even though it is a beater. >Doesn't matter anyway since i drive slow. Do you *ever* post anything that isn't a lie? SignatureThe last song I started on my PC was: Fast Car-Tracy Chapman-Tracy Chapman This is track 14 of 55 in the current playlist. >My car is in fine shape. And how would you know anyway? Because you tell everyone, retard. Need me to dig up some MIDs for you? SignatureThe last song I started on my PC was: Fast Car-Tracy Chapman-Tracy Chapman This is track 14 of 55 in the current playlist. On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 19:03:15 -0400, David W. Poole, Jr. , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > >My car is in fine shape. And how would you know anyway? > > Because you tell everyone, retard. Need me to dig up some MIDs for > you? Or maybe that lits you keep of judy-isms... ;) SignaturePaul Self-appointed unofficial overseer of kooks and trolls in rec.autos.driving. They love Spam: boilingpitsofsewage@yahoo.com >> >My car is in fine shape. And how would you know anyway? >> >> Because you tell everyone, retard. Need me to dig up some MIDs for >> you? > >Or maybe that lits you keep of judy-isms... ;) Lits? What the hlel is a lits? <BEG> Just posted in another thread here in RAD: Message-ID: <mnr7h1lmnrhphme8fhvhtu4dvo62vbi3rp@4ax.com> Speaking of lits, did you notice that our favorite lits maker seemed to ignore the poster of Message-ID: <JpvLe.12157$XM3.6859@bignews5.bellsouth.net> et al? On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 01:44:54 -0400, David W. Poole, Jr. , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > >> >My car is in fine shape. And how would you know anyway? > >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > to ignore the poster of Message-ID: > <JpvLe.12157$XM3.6859@bignews5.bellsouth.net> et al? He ignored alot of them, which must mean that they are telling the truth.... SignaturePaul Self-appointed unofficial overseer of kooks and trolls in rec.autos.driving. They love Spam: boilingpitsofsewage@yahoo.com > Sounds like more criminal coddling to me. Bad drivers are killers and > maimers and i say lock them up forever. They can't be cured. Dude... seriously.. are you really this clueless... or do you smoke a lot of pot.. or what.. trolls are trolls.. but it just doesn't seem possible for someone to be this clueless.. > On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) <http://tinyurl.com/65nqz> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Dude... seriously.. are you really this clueless... or do you smoke a > lot of pot.. "Probably" for both. > or what.. That too. > trolls are trolls.. but it just doesn't seem possible for someone to be > this clueless.. Judy makes you wonder though, doesn't he? Signature~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. ******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant." (pgp@v6stang.com for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:36:05 -0600, Mister X , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > > Sounds like more criminal coddling to me. Bad drivers are killers and > > maimers and i say lock them up forever. They can't be cured. > > Dude... seriously.. are you really this clueless... or do you smoke a lot > of pot.. or what.. My guess would be a combination of crystal meth, gasoline and goat droppings. > trolls are trolls.. but it just doesn't seem possible for someone to be > this clueless.. You underestimate judy. SignaturePaul Self-appointed unofficial overseer of kooks and trolls in rec.autos.driving. They love Spam: boilingpitsofsewage@yahoo.com >"The idea is to come up with a sentence that makes the individuals >coming into the program better drivers, safer drivers, improving the >safety of everyone around," MacKenzie told The Detroit News for a >Friday story. "And it seems to work." What an idiot. If he wants better drivers, you have to give them some hands on education. The black box is not going to make them better drivers. >The boxes emit a loud beep when a car speeds or accelerates too >rapidly. They ultimately will be modified so driver actions can be >tracked by satellite. Data is gathered monthly and sent to a driver's >probation officer. I can already see some of these persons trying to see how many beeps they can get out of the box. >"It's not like Big Brother; it's a sentence that's trying to do the >right thing, the appropriate thing, to guarantee the community's >safety," MacKenzie said. "It's not going to be in their car forever, >but it's going to be there to demonstrate that they've learned to >drive appropriately." Without some driver education, they aren't going to get better just because the stupid beeping box is in the car. ------------- Alex |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.