 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / November 2006Interesting Seat Belt Violation in NYC
This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they picked me and motioned me to pull over. I pulled over, stopped my car, and proceeded to unbuckle my seat belt in order to get my wallet out (with my license and registration). Well, the officer got to my driver's side and immediately asked why I didn't have my seat belt on. I explained that I had it on since I left my house, but I had just taken it off in order to get my license and registration for him. He insisted on writing me up. I asked how he could possibly know that I wasn't wearing my seat belt before I stopped my vehicle. He told me that they had to assume I wasn't. Comments, advice? It's basically my word against his. Larry E. > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Larry E. The main error I see is that you failed to wait until the officer reached your car to ask for the documents. Thus you didn't give him a chance to confirm that you had indeed been wearing the belt. I'm not sure about NY state laws or NYC ordinances regarding seat belt convictions (in MO it's $10 and no points), but you might just have to suck it up. Not many judges or lawyers would dare question a police officer's judgment. It also depends on the police officer: if he were really serious about manufacturing a charge, he could, if you had your belt on, claim that you didn't put it on until you spotted him. In that case, word vs. word again. My advice is to examine the citation for what the fine is, and research the law regarding points. It may be minor enough that a court appearance could result in dismissal if the cop fails to appear. Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), MLOM said in rec.autos.driving: > It also depends on the police officer: if he were really serious about > manufacturing a charge, he could, if you had your belt on, claim that > you didn't put it on until you spotted him. In that case, word vs. > word again. For that matter, the cop at this papers check point could do just about anything he wants. Including making the mark blow into a breathalyzer and then writing anything he feels like writing on the form. Hence a driver such as Larry who blew a 0.00 on the meter gets cited as a DUI when the cop writes 0.147 (or whatever he feels like writing) on the arrest report.  Signature"Hell i once painted a whole car with a bunch of spray cans." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 3/29/06 Ref:http://tinyurl.com/qqaeq Message ID: 1143700563.098595.106970@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they > picked me and motioned me to pull over. I pulled over, stopped my car, > and proceeded to unbuckle my seat belt in order to get my wallet out Why does everyone come up with this lame excuse? I have no trouble getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would store the license and registration without having to remove my seat belt. Sorry ... it's no excuse. It's the truth. Larry E. >> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >> stop" being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would > store the license and registration without having to remove my seat belt. [TOP POSTING CORRECTED] >>> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >>> stop" being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, >>> cause they picked me and motioned me to pull over. I pulled over, >>> stopped my car, and proceeded to unbuckle my seat belt in order to >>> get my wallet out >> Why does everyone come up with this lame excuse? I have no trouble >> getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one >> would store the license and registration without having to remove my >> seat belt. > Sorry ... it's no excuse. It's the truth. Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, reaching into your any of your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require one to remove the seat belt. OK Genius ... try doing that over and over again. Eventually, you will find that in leaning forward, the seat belt mechanism will lock into place preventing you from doing anything until it unlocks. Geez. Larry E. > [TOP POSTING CORRECTED] > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require > one to remove the seat belt. Please stop top-posting. > OK Genius ... try doing that over and over again. I do every single time I get the radar detector out of the glove box, slide it onto the passenger side sun visor, and hook up the power cord to it. I have no trouble doing this with my seat belt on (in an Audi S4). > Please stop top-posting. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > slide it onto the passenger side sun visor, and hook up the power cord > to it. I have no trouble doing this with my seat belt on (in an Audi S4). Then as I said, your seat belt is not working properly. Larry E. >> I do every single time I get the radar detector out of the glove box, >> slide it onto the passenger side sun visor, and hook up the power cord >> to it. I have no trouble doing this with my seat belt on (in an Audi >> S4). > Then as I said, your seat belt is not working properly. It is. See my other post. Larry wrote: <brevity snip> > > I do every single time I get the radar detector out of the glove box, > > slide it onto the passenger side sun visor, and hook up the power cord > > to it. I have no trouble doing this with my seat belt on (in an Audi S4). > > Then as I said, your seat belt is not working properly. No. It sounds as if his seat-belt is working properly, and yours is not. Some tensioners require that you put the belt on, extract it to its limit, and then allow it to return in order for it to work as intended. Check your owner's manual. Yours is the classic seatbelt ticket as foisted off daily on truck drivers. Many of them do not sit on their wallets since they have to sit all day, day in and day out. Never, ever, ever, ever pull out your license or registration before the officer asks for it. As a matter of courtesy you should keep your hands visible and on the wheel until the officer asks you to move them. Even then your chances of being shot or beaten senseless while reaching for a "weapon" are not nil. It seems somewhat likely you did not have your seatbelt properly fastened when selected to pull over. I'll bet that will be the prosecution's contention should you choose to contest. Better have several witnesses or sworn affidavits of people who know you well and will attest that you are a faithful wearer of seatbelts. ----- - gpsman Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), gpsman said in rec.autos.driving: > Never, ever, ever, ever pull out your license or registration before > the officer asks for it. As a matter of courtesy you should keep your > hands visible and on the wheel until the officer asks you to move them. > Even then your chances of being shot or beaten senseless while > reaching for a "weapon" are not nil. Don't do that! It scares the hell out of me when you and I agree on something. SignatureSincerely, The New World Order. > OK Genius ... try doing that over and over again. Eventually, you will > find that in leaning forward, the seat belt mechanism will lock into > place preventing you from doing anything until it unlocks. Geez. Only with an inertia reel type belt. Not all of them are. Moron. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that) > Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, reaching into your any of > your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require > one to remove the seat belt. Inside a cars interior to move the way I need to get my wallet out of my back pocket I unbuckle it. Even a reach to the golve box with the belt on requires twisting my body in a way it doesn't like to be twisted. I can do it, but sometimes it hurts and then I curse myself for being lazy by not just unbuckling the belt. >> Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, reaching into your any of >> your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require >> one to remove the seat belt. > Inside a cars interior to move the way I need to get my wallet out of my > back pocket I unbuckle it. Even a reach to the golve box with the belt on > requires twisting my body in a way it doesn't like to be twisted. I can > do it, but sometimes it hurts and then I curse myself for being lazy by > not just unbuckling the belt. I suppose there could be a difference depending on how tall one is (I'm only 5' 7"). All I can say is that I've never really had a problem reaching for things I need with my seatbelt fastened (glove box, back pocket, etc.). But, there are limits. Even I have trouble getting things from the back seat or opening the passenger side door with my seatbelt fastened. >>> Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, reaching into your any of >>> your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > things from the back seat or opening the passenger side door with my > seatbelt fastened. Things are a bit different when your hair can brush against the headliner and legs just barely clear under the steering wheel ;) > Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, reaching into your any of > your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require > one to remove the seat belt. You don't know what you're talking about. It does in my Vette. Hell, it's hard enough to get your wallet out WITHOUT the seat belt on. >> Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, reaching into your any of >> your pockets, or getting something out of the glove box does not require >> one to remove the seat belt. > You don't know what you're talking about. It does in my Vette. Hell, > it's hard enough to get your wallet out WITHOUT the seat belt on. In all the vehicles I've driven over the last 15 years, I've never had a problem getting my wallet out of my back pocket with the seatbelt fastened. > > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would > store the license and registration without having to remove my seat belt. Really ? Where would you store them ? To get something out of a back pocket I'm sure you'd need to release the belt. I'm just puzzled that the OP didn't 'see this one coming'. Graham You're right, and next time I'll know. I just never expected him to write me up for a seat belt violation after I stopped. It's one thing if he saw me "operating" the car without a seat belt fastened. But I didn't expect him to make an assessment based on whether the belt was on once I stopped. Larry E. >>>This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" >>>being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Graham > You're right, and next time I'll know. I just never expected him to > write me up for a seat belt violation after I stopped. It's one thing if > he saw me "operating" the car without a seat belt fastened. But I didn't > expect him to make an assessment based on whether the belt was on once I > stopped. How long had you been stationary ? I'd plead my case to the court quite frankly. Graham Stationary maybe 10 secs. I am going to plead Not Guilty because ... I wasn't. If they manage to insist, I'll pay at that point. But I'm not going to go down easy on this one. >>You're right, and next time I'll know. I just never expected him to >>write me up for a seat belt violation after I stopped. It's one thing if [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Graham >>> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" >>> being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they >>> picked me and motioned me to pull over. I pulled over, stopped my car, >>> and proceeded to unbuckle my seat belt in order to get my wallet out >> Why does everyone come up with this lame excuse? I have no trouble >> getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would >> store the license and registration without having to remove my seat belt. > Really ? Where would you store them ? Some people store them in the glove box. Others store them in the sun visor. I store mine in the center console. > To get something out of a back pocket I'm sure you'd need to release > the belt. No you don't. IME, getting something out of my left or right pocket requires leaning to the right for my left pocket, and vice-versa. I can open my glove box, get the radar detector out, plug the adapter in the cigarette lighter, slide the detector onto the passenger side sun visor, and pull the cord from the trimming in the A-pillar and hook it into the detector without removing my seat belt. Seat belts do not significantly restrict one from leaning to the left or right. And, if you don't trigger the pre-tensioner locking mechanism, they don't stop you from leaning forward either. >>>> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >>>> stop" being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > and pull the cord from the trimming in the A-pillar and hook it into the > detector without removing my seat belt. Then your seat belt is not working properly. > Seat belts do not significantly restrict one from leaning to the left or > right. And, if you don't trigger the pre-tensioner locking mechanism, > they don't stop you from leaning forward either. LArry E. >>> To get something out of a back pocket I'm sure you'd need to release >>> the belt. >> No you don't. IME, getting something out of my left or right pocket >> requires leaning to the right for my left pocket, and vice-versa. I >> can open my glove box, get the radar detector out, plug the adapter in >> the cigarette lighter, slide the detector onto the passenger side sun >> visor, and pull the cord from the trimming in the A-pillar and hook it >> into the detector without removing my seat belt. > Then your seat belt is not working properly. It is working properly. If I lean forward fast enough, or yank on the seat belt through the B-pillar anchor, the pre-tensioner is triggered and locks the belt at the current length. Similarly, if I brake hard, the pre-tensioner is triggered. > >>> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > >>> being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Some people store them in the glove box. Others store them in the sun > visor. I store mine in the center console. Do you leave them there when you get out of the car even briefly ? > > To get something out of a back pocket I'm sure you'd need to release > > the belt. > > No you don't. IME, getting something out of my left or right pocket > requires leaning to the right for my left pocket, and vice-versa. You said *back* pocket though. > I can > open my glove box, get the radar detector out, plug the adapter in the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > right. And, if you don't trigger the pre-tensioner locking mechanism, > they don't stop you from leaning forward either. I can't properly reach inside the glove box with the belt fastened. It doesn't stretch far enough. Graham >> Some people store them in the glove box. Others store them in the sun >> visor. I store mine in the center console. > Do you leave them there when you get out of the car even briefly ? I leave the registration card in the car. My drivers license is in my wallet, which I do not leave in the car. >> No you don't. IME, getting something out of my left or right pocket >> requires leaning to the right for my left pocket, and vice-versa. > You said *back* pocket though. That's what I was referring to. >> Seat belts do not significantly restrict one from leaning to the left or >> right. And, if you don't trigger the pre-tensioner locking mechanism, >> they don't stop you from leaning forward either. > I can't properly reach inside the glove box with the belt fastened. You must have a shorter belt or you're not wearing the lap portion over your hips and, as a result, leaving less reserve length for the part that goes over your shoulder. >>> Why does everyone come up with this lame excuse? I have no trouble >>> getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Some people store them in the glove box. Others store them in the sun > visor. I store mine in the center console. Many people do not consider that advisable, especially in areas with high rates of vehicle thefts. >>>> Why does everyone come up with this lame excuse? I have no trouble >>>> getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would >>>> store the license and registration without having to remove my seat >>>> belt. >>> Really ? Where would you store them ? >> Some people store them in the glove box. Others store them in the sun >> visor. I store mine in the center console. > Many people do not consider that advisable, especially in areas with high > rates of vehicle thefts. I always leave the registration and insurance cards in the vehicle (I should have typed "... wherever one would store the registration and *proof of insurance* ..."). My drivers license is in my wallet which remains with me. If my car is stolen, then I have bigger things to worry about than the registration and insurance cards in the car. "Sancho Panza" <otterpower@xhotmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >>> Really ? Where would you store them ? >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Many people do not consider that advisable, especially in areas with high >rates of vehicle thefts. Like your center console is any less safe than your glovebox... SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! >> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >> stop" being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would > store the license and registration without having to remove my seat belt. I can't see how that would be possible without some contortions in my car; the seatbelt buckle is less than 2" from my wallet pocket. Unless you're left handed and therefore keep your wallet in your left pocket... It's perfectly reasonable that it would be *easier* to simply unbuckle the seat belt and retrieve the wallet rather than to try to get it out without unbuckling. But in any case, the lesson we can take from this is despite what you've been taught, don't try to make things easy for the cop by getting your info. out before he gets to the window. Wait for him to ask you for it so he can *SEE* you unbuckle your seatbelt, otherwise an unscrupulous cop will simply write you another ticket. I'm not sure I've always followed this advice in the past, and indeed I've never gotten a seatbelt ticket, but I've heard enough stories that if I'm ever pulled over in the future I will try to remember this. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel >>> This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >>> stop" being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, >>> cause they picked me and motioned me to pull over. I pulled over, >>> stopped my car, and proceeded to unbuckle my seat belt in order to >>> get my wallet out >> Why does everyone come up with this lame excuse? I have no trouble >> getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one >> would store the license and registration without having to remove my >> seat belt. > I can't see how that would be possible without some contortions in my > car; the seatbelt buckle is less than 2" from my wallet pocket. Unless > you're left handed and therefore keep your wallet in your left pocket... Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my right rear pocket and see how difficult (or easy) it is to remove while I'm still in the car with the belt buckled.. I'll post the result when I get back. > Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make > a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my > right rear pocket and see how difficult (or easy) it is to remove while > I'm still in the car with the belt buckled.. I'll post the result when > I get back. It was a little more difficult to get my wallet out from my right rear pocket, but all I needed to do was pivot my legs to the left and get my wallet out of my pocket. I did not have to remove the seat belt. > > Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make > > a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > pocket, but all I needed to do was pivot my legs to the left and get my > wallet out of my pocket. I did not have to remove the seat belt. I'm right handed and carry wallet in left rear. No problem getting it out. I also have a trip today. Will tryi from the the right pocket. I do know that I have a problem just getting my handkerchief out of there with belt on. Not impossible, just easier with it off. Harry K > > > Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make > > > a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Harry K That was my point; it may not be impossible, but certainly it is reasonable to assume that an average person may simply take the seatbelt off rather than think about getting a seatbelt ticket and contort themselves to get their wallet out without removing it. Certainly in my '55 Stude with manually cinched lap belts it would be virtually impossible, but I didn't bring that up because most people drive cars that have inertia-reel 3-pointers. nate >>>>Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make >>>>a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > seatbelt off rather than think about getting a seatbelt ticket and > contort themselves to get their wallet out without removing it. EXACTLY! But I'll know for the next time. > Certainly in my '55 Stude with manually cinched lap belts it would be > virtually impossible, but I didn't bring that up because most people > drive cars that have inertia-reel 3-pointers. > > nate Larry E. > > > > Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make > > > > a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > nate Well surprise, surprise. While not impossible it is such a problem getting something out of either pocket that I would unhook the belt. While the shoulder portion allows plenty of movement, it doesn't give any slack to the lap portion. I would have sworn that I could retrieve the wallet from the left rear but it is no easier there than in the right. Harry K Arif Khokar <akhokar1234@wvu.edu> said in rec.autos.driving: >Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make >a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my >right rear pocket and see how difficult (or easy) it is to remove while >I'm still in the car with the belt buckled.. I'll post the result when >I get back. Would you mind picking me up a Snickers bar while you're there? Thanks! :) SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! > Arif Khokar <akhokar1234@wvu.edu> said in rec.autos.driving: >> Actually, I do keep my wallet in my left rear pocket. I'm going to make >> a quick trip to the grocery store right now and put my wallet in my >> right rear pocket and see how difficult (or easy) it is to remove while >> I'm still in the car with the belt buckled.. I'll post the result when >> I get back. > Would you mind picking me up a Snickers bar while you're there? Missed the opportunity by a few hours :). I did get some of those Grandma brand oatmeal raisin cookies. I'd offer you one, but I already ate them ;) > > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > getting my wallet out of my back pocket, or reaching wherever one would > store the license and registration without having to remove my seat belt. Bully for you. I do have trouble getting my wallet out. Signature'It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix.' "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X) '[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' -- 'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM) 'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun) <snip> > Bully for you. I do have trouble getting my wallet out. Yeah, I also have that problem, especially when it is time to pay the tab. Can't someone else do it? <snip> >This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" >being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Larry E. That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be pissin' blood for 6 months. > >This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > >being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be > pissin' blood for 6 months. What kind of money back do you offer with that BS guarantee? Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Larry said in rec.autos.driving: <<snip story>> > > >Comments, advice? It's basically my word against his. > > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > What kind of money back do you offer with that BS guarantee? A welfare bum like Loco Laura has no concept of a thing like "money." SignatureLoco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend foams like a Bartlo (and spelling or gramatical errors are left as is): "Hey - necromancer is a criminal coddler. BTW the article says 4X and then it says the BAC was .187 which doesn't make much sense. Not that it matters. Drunk drivers who kill should get life wo parole." Ref: http://tinyurl.com/rqvtg Message ID:i2k082lf3gv2p6h1sosge2bqma6uvce2ft@4ax.com > That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be > pissin' blood for 6 months. Is that a guarantee? Like how you said that we'd be paying $3.00 for gasoline by "turkey day," (e.g. Thanksgiving) to use your own words???? Oh, BTW, a BP station I drove by this evening had gas at $2.16 yesterday and was at $2.09 when I drove past about 2 hours ago. TBIM >> That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be >> pissin' blood for 6 months. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >TBIM Hey stupid - i remember in 2000 when gas was $1.30 and then your god bush took over and you expect people to cheer cause gas is "only" $2.10 now???? Why can't you think? > >> That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be > >> pissin' blood for 6 months. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > bush took over and you expect people to cheer cause gas is "only" > $2.10 now???? Why can't you think? Why can't you address the issue, Aunt Judy? You said gas would be $3.00 on Turkey day. It's not. What's up with that, loser? >>>That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be >>>pissin' blood for 6 months. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > bush took over and you expect people to cheer cause gas is "only" > $2.10 now???? Why can't you think? $1.30 * 195.3 / 172.2 = $1.47, so the price has only gone up roughly 50 cents/gallon in today's dollars see here: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt One would think, as often as you rail against unnecessary consumption, that you'd be in favor of higher gas prices. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS said in rec.autos.driving: > I'm so stupid - i remember in 2000 when gas was $1.30 and then my god > bush took over and I expect people to cheer cause gas is "only" > $2.10 now???? Why can't I think? Here's your comment quoted in its entirity (all spelling and gramatical errors left as is): ==================== "At least they did where i live. It'll be $3 by turkey day and $4 by Xmas as exxon tries to make up for the money they lost lowering prices to help their bud Bush." Ref: http://tinyurl.com/y35dzw Msg ID:g1b6m2toqvke4g7jampip7d32kalsvvn74@4ax.com ==================== Where's my $3.00 gas, loser???? Oh, and I cleaned up your filthy post, dirt bag. SignatureLoco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend defends a known *DRUNK DRIVER*: "Teddy went off a single lane bridge with no guard rail at night. The real killer was the idiot who built the bridge. Next question." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE June 20th, 2006 Ref: http://tinyurl.com/zlnyz Message ID: qcch92lislem5sqq92qgf7hf9mlm847sgh@4ax.com >>This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" >>being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >>Comments, advice? It's basically my word against his. They saw you had it on when they told you to pull over? Assuming yes; file a complaint on the officer at his station - then seek out a lawyer. It's gonna cost you some time and money but don't back down. Those who backed down yesterday and took the easy way out are responsible for significant numbers of criminals wearing a badge. > >This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > >being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be > pissin' blood for 6 months. Suurrre you would. In your case it would be amusing to see you kicking anything while you were groveling like the coward you are. Harry K Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS <xeton2001@yahoo.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >That's bullshit. If a cop does that to me, i guarantee he's gonna be >pissin' blood for 6 months. <chrotle!> SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! Scott en Aztl?n wrote: > <chrotle!> ACK! Man, d'you need a *Heimlich* or somethin'? Sounds like you're choking! If you survive, I'll give you a little <chortle> ... -- C.R. Krieger Corrector of All Spelling (Aaron's cousin, BTW) "Motorhead Lawyer" <88.535is@gmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >> <chrotle!> > >ACK! Man, d'you need a *Heimlich* or somethin'? Sounds like you're >choking! Actually, I wouldn't mind a Heineken Maneuver or two right about now. :) SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! Larry <larry@nospam.net> said in rec.autos.driving: >Comments, advice? It's basically my word against his. You're absolutely right about that. You basically blew it, and will undoubtedly be convicted of the charge. For future reference, the correct procedure to follow when stopped by the police is to pull over immediately, shut off the engine, roll your windows down, and wait there with both hands on the steering wheel in plain sight until the cop approaches. He will instruct you on what he wants you to do after that. That is, of course, unless you're in Louisiana, where apparently you are expected to pull over, get out of your car, and walk back to the cop's vehicle. Now there's a regional difference in procedures that probably causes quite a bit of excitement whenever an out-of-state driver gets pulled over... ;) SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! > Larry <larry@nospam.net> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > plain sight until the cop approaches. He will instruct you on what he > wants you to do after that. You're absolutely right. And now I know that. But having never been pulled over before in 33 years of driving, I had no possible way of knowing that. Is this advice published anywhere? In the NYS Vehicle and Traffic Law? In the drivers manual for NYS? Why wouldn't someone unknowingly assume that the officer is going to want to see your license and registration poste haste and therefore get that out asap? Still having made this mistake doesn't mean I'm guilty, and that's exactly what I intend to tell the judge. A fine is one thing, but the violation being on my driving record is something I can't deal with ... especially when I'm not guilty. > That is, of course, unless you're in Louisiana, where apparently you > are expected to pull over, get out of your car, and walk back to the > cop's vehicle. Now there's a regional difference in procedures that > probably causes quite a bit of excitement whenever an out-of-state > driver gets pulled over... ;) Larry E. > > Larry <larry@nospam.net> said in rec.autos.driving: > > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > violation being on my driving record is something I can't deal with ... > especially when I'm not guilty. Before your trial, you can ask for the evidence that the Police has. If your cars ignition was off when he saw you without your seatbelt, then I think he needs to produce evidence that you were not wearing a seatbelt while you were operating the vehicle. Often, at these safety checkpoints, the police record the proceedings on video. You should find out if video was being recorded at the safety checkpoint where you were pulled over. If the stops were being recorded on video you should have the right to view the video before your trial. Check to see if the video shows that you were wearing your seatbelt before you were pulled over. If you don't want a conviction, I would strongly suggest that you hire a lawyer (or at the very least, consult with one before proceeding further). A qualified lawyer should be able to help you in getting the evidence you need to counter the police officer's testimony and avoid a conviction. If it's just your word versus the officer's word, you will probably get convicted. - Peter Interesting. Makes sense. But lots of others tell me that while I may not be dismissed, I should be able to get the charges reduced to a parking violation. The truth is ... there is no evidence that I was operating a motor vehicle without my seat belt on. To draw the conclusion that I was operating one without a seat belt on because I did not have one on after I pulled over ... is not evidence that I was. Larry E. >>>Larry <larry@nospam.net> said in rec.autos.driving: >>> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > - Peter > Interesting. Makes sense. But lots of others tell me that while I may > not be dismissed, I should be able to get the charges reduced to a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > operating one without a seat belt on because I did not have one on after > I pulled over ... is not evidence that I was. The officer that pulled you over could offer his own eyewitness testimony as evidence in court that he saw you not wearing your seat belt before he signaled you to pull over and stop. It would be hard for you to counter this evidence by your testimony alone. You would probably need some other type of collaborating evidence to counter the officer's claim. - Peter Does anyone know if the seat belt violation is considered a moving violation in New York State? That might influence whether I decide to fight this or not. Larry E. >>Interesting. Makes sense. But lots of others tell me that while I may >>not be dismissed, I should be able to get the charges reduced to a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > - Peter Larry wrote: <brevity snip> > Does anyone know if the seat belt violation is considered a moving > violation in New York State? That might influence whether I decide to > fight this or not. http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/broch/c-1.htm http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/license.htm#points http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/index.htm ----- - gpsman Thank you for these. I've seen them already, and none of them answer the question as to whether it is a moving violation or not. Larry E. > Larry wrote: <brevity snip> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > - gpsman > Thank you for these. I've seen them already, and none of them answer the > question as to whether it is a moving violation or not. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > > > - gpsman Check out the "points" link, right column of table: it's mentioned as a "safety" violation assessed 3 points. That is if my interperetation is correct; it mentions "passenger" which may or may not include "driver." >>Thank you for these. I've seen them already, and none of them answer the >>question as to whether it is a moving violation or not. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > "safety" violation assessed 3 points. That is if my interperetation is > correct; it mentions "passenger" which may or may not include "driver." Exactly, that is only if you have a passenger in the car who is under a cetain age who is not using a seat belt. Larry E. Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Larry said in rec.autos.driving: > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" OK, first off, let's quit waffling. These checkpoints are papers check points and an end run around our Constitutional Rights against unreasonable search and siezure. The only reason that they are called "safety," check points is so that the stupid sheeple in this once great nation will swallow the totalitarian conversion hook, line and sinker. > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they > picked me and motioned me to pull over. I pulled over, stopped my car, > and proceeded to unbuckle my seat belt in order to get my wallet out > (with my license and registration). A singularly bad thing to do in front of a cop who can then legally blow your head off for what ever reason he chooses and then say that you were "reaching for a weapon." > Well, the officer got to my driver's > side and immediately asked why I didn't have my seat belt on. I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > wearing my seat belt before I stopped my vehicle. He told me that they > had to assume I wasn't. > Comments, advice? It's basically my word against his. If you are going to fight this rape of your Rights, then get a lawyer. Don't go against a revenue generating juggernaut like this alone. Signature"Hell i once painted a whole car with a bunch of spray cans." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 3/29/06 Ref:http://tinyurl.com/qqaeq Message ID: 1143700563.098595.106970@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com > Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Larry said in > rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > your head off for what ever reason he chooses and then say that you were > "reaching for a weapon." Now I know. >>Well, the officer got to my driver's >>side and immediately asked why I didn't have my seat belt on. I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > If you are going to fight this rape of your Rights, then get a lawyer. > Don't go against a revenue generating juggernaut like this alone. Well ... what are the chances that the officer will actually show up for the court date? > Larry E. Larry wrote: <brevity snip> > Well ... what are the chances that the officer will actually show up for > the court date? In the case of a multi-stop "safety" checkpoint? I'd guess in the neighborhood of 1,000,000%, unless he's dead. ----- - gpsman Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Larry said in rec.autos.driving: > > If you are going to fight this rape of your Rights, then get a lawyer. > > Don't go against a revenue generating juggernaut like this alone. > > > Well ... what are the chances that the officer will actually show up for > the court date? Well, given that he probablly wrote up a lot of bogus invoices.... errr.... tickets that day, I'd say its virtually guaranteed that he will show up in court. Signature"If a pastor buys meth, does that make him a Methodist?" --Jay Leno I disagree. They never show up on the first court date. > Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Larry said in > rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > errr.... tickets that day, I'd say its virtually guaranteed that he will > show up in court. > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Larry E. "Officer? Would you kindly point out which NYC law states that a driver of a properly parked vehicle is required to be wearing a seat belt? Then sir, do you see that officer over there? The one who directed me to park here? Would you mind asking him to come over? Then you can ask him if I was wearing it at the time of the stop. Cite me for it, you'll be on the witness stand explaining to the judge and jury why it is you should be allowed even to wear a uniform." Actually, HIS word has more clout than yours. Then if it was the same officer, you could have the court order him to take a vision test and memory test. As he obviously failed to recognize that the seatbelt was in proper use at the time of the stop. > > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety stop" > > being manned by NYC police. I guess it was my lucky morning, cause they [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > explaining to the judge and jury why it is you should be allowed even to > wear a uniform." Since you're now talking about my jurisdiction, Richard, I'd LOVE for you to try this. I love the people like you who think they're the first ones to come up with a "brilliant" defense like this. As if the judges haven't heard it before. > Actually, HIS word has more clout than yours. > > Then if it was the same officer, you could have the court order him to take > a vision test and memory test. Really? What statutory basis is there for the court to order a witness to an offense to undergo medical exams? There are serious constitutional due process concerns here, Richard, so think before you answer. > As he obviously failed to recognize that the > seatbelt was in proper use at the time of the stop. You're an idiot. He was cited for not wearing the seatbelt while driving, not while stopped. Whether it is true or not, it is a reasonable assumption. >> > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >> > stop" [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > driving, not while stopped. Whether it is true or not, it is a > reasonable assumption. Just one queston mister prosecutor, would you kindly cite the actual law where it says a person must wear a seatbelt while the vehicle is properly parked? A ticket written like this one means only oe thing, revenue and the quota. The OP did not state why the police had put up the checkpoint. I don't believe they can do so merely for seatbelt use. As the officer already had seen the seatbelt in proper use, then what was the probable cause for making the stop? That sir, is an illegal stop. You run that scenario by one of your fine upstanding traffic judges and let them tell you what they would do with the citation. I'll bet you they would all drop it. Bogus ticket. >>> > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety >>> > stop" [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > properly parked? > A ticket written like this one means only oe thing, revenue and the quota. EXACTLY! > The OP did not state why the police had put up the checkpoint. I don't > believe they can do so merely for seatbelt use. As the officer already > had seen the seatbelt in proper use, then what was the probable cause > for making the stop? That sir, is an illegal stop. It was what he called a "safety stop". It's not all that uncommon. Cops set up at a checkpoint randomly checking cars to see if 1. the seatbelt is being used. 2. the license and registration are valid and up to date (including window sticker). 3. the hands-free cell phone law is being observed. Difference is ... whenever this has happened to me before, the cop slows me down to a stop while he's standing stationary in a position where he can see what's happening as soon as I pull the car up (i.e. he's at a position where he's standing right at the drivers side) ... so he can see right away that I have my seat belt on. In this case, that would have worked fine because I had it on when he motioned me over. But he was positioned on the other side of the street and then had to walk over to my car which took about 30 secs ... and gave me time to instinctively react by getting my license and registration out (and unbuckling my belt). > You run that scenario by one of your fine upstanding traffic judges and > let them tell you what they would do with the citation. I'll bet you > they would all drop it. Bogus ticket. Larry E. > >>> > This morning, I was driving in NYC, and came onto a "random safety > >>> > stop" [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > EXACTLY! Even if this is true, it doesn't mean the violation didn't happen. If it was all about quotas, to the extent that the police willingly fabricate charges against people, wouldn't they have come up with a more expensive violation to charge you with? > > The OP did not state why the police had put up the checkpoint. I don't > > believe they can do so merely for seatbelt use. As the officer already [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > window sticker). > 3. the hands-free cell phone law is being observed. And, of course, DWI or any other offenses they come across. > Difference is ... whenever this has happened to me before, the cop slows > me down to a stop while he's standing stationary in a position where he [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Larry E. > > You're an idiot. He was cited for not wearing the seatbelt while > > driving, not while stopped. Whether it is true or not, it is a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > where it says a person must wear a seatbelt while the vehicle is properly > parked? There is no law that says this. If the OP can raise a reasonable doubt that this is what actually happened, he'll be acquitted. And I don't know if he's telling the truth or not. All I am saying is that using an excuse the judge has probably heard a zillion times before isn't likely to be persuasive without corroborative proof. > A ticket written like this one means only oe thing, revenue and the quota. And protecting the public. > The OP did not state why the police had put up the checkpoint. Do you think the police put up signs and banners as to why they have checkpoints? > I don't > believe they can do so merely for seatbelt use. Not that what you believe has any weight, but they can. Even more, there doesn't need to be a reason for a checkpoint any more specific than "safety." > As the officer already had > seen the seatbelt in proper use, then what was the probable cause for making > the stop? That sir, is an illegal stop. Ha! There's so much wrong with that statement I barely know where to begin. First, there is no indication he saw the seatbelt in proper use. If he did, why would he have written the summons? Heck, if YOU know you don't have to wear a seatbelt in a parked car, I would imagine the officer knows that, too. Second, you do NOT need probable cause to stop cars at checkpoints. If a police officer stopped a car because he had probable cause to do it, it wouldn't be a checkpoint! A checkpoint is where every car (or every third car, or every fifth car, or whatever) is stopped, regardless of whether the car is committing any obvious infractions. > You run that scenario by one of your fine upstanding traffic judges and let > them tell you what they would do with the citation. I'll bet you they would > all drop it. Bogus ticket. I don't prosecute moving violations or appear in traffic court, but in cases involving criminal offenses where defendants have come up with excuses like this, I've never seen one succeed. Not once. Larry dear boy, the only people in this country who can legally set up a checkpoint and have no probable cause, is the frickin US Border Patrol. In every state, any normal police department MUST follow certain set guidelines when operating a check point, regardless of reason. The stops MUST be totally random. They can not stop every vehicle. If you're dumb enough to run by an officer and not have your seatbelt, then yeah, he can cite you for it checkpoint or not. If the stop was to check for license and registration, and you just happen to be the lucky randomly chosen victim, then the stop is valid. If the officer stopping you was not in a position where he could clearly see the seatbelt was in proper use, then that is in your favor in court. The officer was wrong for citing based on the fact that the vehicle is now no longer in motion and no state law I know of requires a seat belt to be in use at that time. It's still a bogus ticket. Challenge the ticket, request a jury trial and demand the officer take an eye exam. If no problems are detected, then it's obvious the ticket was written under false pretenses. I believe there are state laws to contend with on that issue. A friend of mine was an officer. He made one driver go to an optometrist before appearing in court. You can't do the same for an officer? Try it once. > Larry dear boy, the only people in this country who can legally set up a > checkpoint and have no probable cause, is the frickin US Border Patrol. Absolutely, 100% incorrect. You've never seen local or state police set up a checkpoint? > In every state, any normal police department MUST follow certain set > guidelines when operating a check point, regardless of reason. The stops > MUST be totally random. Actually, you're 100% wrong - AGAIN. The one thing that they can NOT do is make them completely random. If they're totally random, that leaves the department open to charges of racism or profiling. But if there is a set pattern, they can show they are stopping cars according to a plan, and not for an improper motive. I can't divulge some of the techniques actually used, but patterns like "every third car" or "all pickup trucks" are completely lawful, and commonly used. And they've withheld court challenges from real lawyers, Richard, not armchair attorneys like you. > They can not stop every vehicle. Once again, you're absolutely wrong and the truth is the exact opposite of what you assert. They sure can stop every vehicle. Sometimes they set up on exit or entrance ramps to highways and stop every car passing by. Again, absolutely lawful. > If you're dumb > enough to run by an officer and not have your seatbelt, then yeah, he can > cite you for it checkpoint or not. Obviously, but if there's a checkpoint, they can make you stop for any reason. If you're just driving down the road and the police want to stop your particular vehicle they need to have reasonable suspicion (not probable cause) to believe a violation occurred. > If the stop was to check for license and registration, and you just happen > to be the lucky randomly chosen victim, then the stop is valid. Nope, not if you're randomly-chosen. If you're unlucky enough to be the next in the pattern they're enforcing, then the stop is valid. You're now 0-for-4! > If the > officer stopping you was not in a position where he could clearly see the > seatbelt was in proper use, then that is in your favor in court. No its not. The entire point of having a checkpoint is that you can be stopped without particularized evidence of committing a violation! Zero for five so far! > The officer was wrong for citing based on the fact that the vehicle is now > no longer in motion and no state law I know of requires a seat belt to be in > use at that time. It's still a bogus ticket. Yawn. This is easier than shooting ducks in a barrel. By your logic, a cop cannot pull someone over for drunk driving, since at the time he sees the person is drunk, the car isn't moving! > Challenge the ticket, request a jury trial and demand the officer take an > eye exam. A defendant has no right to require a witness to undergo medical examinations prior to a trial. > If no problems are detected, then it's obvious the ticket was written under > false pretenses. So let me see if I have this right... If the cop fails the vision test, the defendant wins the case since he couldn't have seen it happen. If the cop passes the vision test, the defendant wins the case since the ticket is an obvious fraud! Once again, you've created a circular and illogical no-lose situation.... well done! > I believe there are state laws to contend with on that issue. There are. And they're all against you. > A friend of mine was an officer. He made one driver go to an optometrist > before appearing in court. You can't do the same for an officer? Try it > once. You can't. But there are provisions to mandate a defendant undergo certain tests prior to trial. The stop was valid, and it was random. However, instead of directing me to drive over to him, he directed me to actually drive away from him ... and to the other side of the street. It then took him 30 secs to reach me, at which point I had already stopped my car and taken off my seat belt. Larry E. > Larry dear boy, the only people in this country who can legally set up a > checkpoint and have no probable cause, is the frickin US Border Patrol. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > before appearing in court. You can't do the same for an officer? Try it > once. > The stop was valid, and it was random. I don't know if you'll win or not. But I hope by now you've realized that Richard is notorious for making statements of law which he has no basis to assert. Doesn't really matter. Point is this. I checked with DMV. Seat-belt violation is not a "points" type violation, but it IS a moving violation that stays on your record for 4 years. I may not win, but I can't see where it makes sense to just give up by pleading guilty (especially when I wasn't). If it were just a traffic violation with a fine ... then I would plead guilty and pay it. Make sense? Larry E. >>The stop was valid, and it was random. > > I don't know if you'll win or not. But I hope by now you've realized > that Richard is notorious for making statements of law which he has no > basis to assert. > Doesn't really matter. Point is this. I checked with DMV. Seat-belt > violation is not a "points" type violation, but it IS a moving violation [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Make sense? It sounds like it is "just a traffic violation with a fine." You've already determined it's no points. What else were you thinking it would be? Did you think it wouldn't be on your record for some amount of time? To tell you the truth, I really wasn't sure whether it was more like a traffic violation or a moving violation (with or without points). Now I know. Larry E. >>Doesn't really matter. Point is this. I checked with DMV. Seat-belt >>violation is not a "points" type violation, but it IS a moving violation [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > already determined it's no points. What else were you thinking it would > be? Did you think it wouldn't be on your record for some amount of time? >> Doesn't really matter. Point is this. I checked with DMV. Seat-belt >> violation is not a "points" type violation, but it IS a moving violation [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > already determined it's no points. What else were you thinking it would > be? Did you think it wouldn't be on your record for some amount of time? See? You as the prosecutor expect every good citizen to just pay the fine and go on. Bullshit. I don't care what the ticket is for, if it's bogus, fight it. I got stopped in Cincinati on Memorial Day for not having a rear bumper on my pickup truck. Well sir, Ohio law says I don't need one. Never has been required. Why was the ticket written? Every Labor and Memorial Day the Cincinnati cops see how many tickets they can write. They don't care if it's bogus or not. Just write the ticket. I was not guilty, plead not guilty and walked out of court without owing the city a dime. If I needed a bumper then? Why had I not been cited 8 years earlier when I purchased the truck from an Ohio dealer? Cops write tickets knowing they are false hoping you'll just pay the fine. Truck drivers are singled out by cops all the time because the cops know the truckers will just pay the fine because they can't take the time out to challenge it. Now tell us mister prosecutor, honestly, would you pay the same fine? Actually, you are right. While they were writing me up, they pulled two trucks over. Larry E. >>> Doesn't really matter. Point is this. I checked with DMV. Seat-belt >>> violation is not a "points" type violation, but it IS a moving violation [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Now tell us mister prosecutor, honestly, would you pay the same fine? > >> Doesn't really matter. Point is this. I checked with DMV. Seat-belt > >> violation is not a "points" type violation, but it IS a moving violation [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > See? You as the prosecutor expect every good citizen to just pay the fine > and go on. I'm not expecting that at all. But I wasn't sure what his expectations were. > Bullshit. I don't care what the ticket is for, if it's bogus, fight it. As you should. But it doesn't mean you'll win. And basic common sense says you should at least consider any plea bargain - in fact, any options at all - that are presented to you. There's alot to be said for limiting your exposure to a stiffer punishment. > I got stopped in Cincinati on Memorial Day for not having a rear bumper on > my pickup truck. > Well sir, Ohio law says I don't need one. Never has been required. So what? > Why was the ticket written? Every Labor and Memorial Day the Cincinnati cops > see how many tickets they can write. They don't care if it's bogus or not. > Just write the ticket. > I was not guilty, plead not guilty and walked out of court without owing the > city a dime. Good for you. You want a medal or something, Richard? > If I needed a bumper then? Why had I not been cited 8 years earlier when I > purchased the truck from an Ohio dealer? > > Cops write tickets knowing they are false hoping you'll just pay the fine. Knowingly writing a false ticket is a crime. It's certainly reasonable to think a bumper is needed on a vehicle. And whether its needed or not, it's pretty stupid to drive without one, for your protection as well as others. > Truck drivers are singled out by cops all the time because the cops know the > truckers will just pay the fine because they can't take the time out to > challenge it. What proof do you have for the claim that truck drivers are singled out? > Now tell us mister prosecutor, honestly, would you pay the same fine? It would depend what my options were. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message