Virginia "abusive driver" fees are history

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

kilton9@yahoo.com - 28 Mar 2008 00:50 GMT

http://tinyurl.com/24gjqs

What a disgrace this whole thing has been. Here's the shocker of the
week:

"After six months of implementation, it was clear that the fees did
not improve the safety of Virginia highways," Kaine said in a
statement his office issued announcing his signature.

Reply to this Message

Matthew T. Russotto - 28 Mar 2008 02:04 GMT

>http://tinyurl.com/24gjqs
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>not improve the safety of Virginia highways," Kaine said in a
>statement his office issued announcing his signature.

The headline is nicely ambiguous:
"Gov. Kaine Signs Bill Repealing Abusive Driver Fees"

Signature

There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Reply to this Message

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 28 Mar 2008 16:10 GMT

> In article
> <5d68894d-8137-4a1c-b762-df29fcc30cb6@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> The headline is nicely ambiguous:
> "Gov. Kaine Signs Bill Repealing Abusive Driver Fees"

Abusive Drivers??? They should have called them criminal drivers or deadly
drivers or kid-killing drivers.

Reply to this Message

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 28 Mar 2008 02:26 GMT

On Mar 27, 5:50 pm, kilt...@yahoo.com wrote:

> http://tinyurl.com/24gjqs
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> not improve the safety of Virginia highways," Kaine said in a
> statement his office issued announcing his signature.

Translation - the high fines worked TOO WELL in reducing crashes and
the auto industry didn't like that.

Reply to this Message

Nate Nagel - 28 Mar 2008 02:32 GMT

> On Mar 27, 5:50 pm, kilt...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Translation - the high fines worked TOO WELL in reducing crashes and
> the auto industry didn't like that.

cite, please?

nate

Signature

replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Reply to this Message

Ashton Crusher - 29 Mar 2008 19:24 GMT

>http://tinyurl.com/24gjqs
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>not improve the safety of Virginia highways," Kaine said in a
>statement his office issued announcing his signature.

But as the article suggests, the real reason had nothing to do with
it's impact on safety. It was repealed because the citizens were
PISSED OFF and because it FAILED to raise enough money. Is there ANY
doubt in ANYONE's mind that had it not pissed off the citizens AND if
it had raised a huge windfall of money EVEN if safety got WORSE, they
would still have that law.

Reply to this Message

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 30 Mar 2008 03:51 GMT

> But as the article suggests, the real reason had nothing to do with
> it's impact on safety. It was repealed because the citizens were
> PISSED OFF and because it FAILED to raise enough money. Is there ANY
> doubt in ANYONE's mind that had it not pissed off the citizens AND if
> it had raised a huge windfall of money EVEN if safety got WORSE, they
> would still have that law.

The citizens are NOT criminal coddlers like you and they liked the
law. It was repealed because the auto industry makes a fortune off
car crashes and they paid the legislators to repeal.

Reply to this Message

Nate Nagel - 30 Mar 2008 12:09 GMT

>>But as the article suggests, the real reason had nothing to do with
>>it's impact on safety. It was repealed because the citizens were
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> The citizens are NOT criminal coddlers

true

> like you

false

> and they liked the law.

false

> It was repealed because the auto industry makes a fortune off
> car crashes and they paid the legislators to repeal.

It was repealed because the public finally got to the breaking point
with traffic law being used to raise revenue instead of being used to
promote safety.

nate

Signature

replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Reply to this Message