 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / General Car Topics / April 2005Are American Roads a Jungle?
see results at... http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=122628 Are American Roads a Jungle? "I have managed to survive more than 12 months driving here, and I thought I would share some tips with you, in case you ever develop masochistic tendencies and evince a desire to drive here. These tips will help you blend in." Surviving in the jungle for 12 month ain't easy feat. It takes a lot of knowledge of the laws...of the jungle. Number one is, size matters, like the big fish eats the little fish... But don't take it from me... Choice of Vehicle -Choose the largest vehicle you can. Because petrol is so cheap here, no matter how large your vehicle is, it still won't cost much to run. A very large vehicle gives you several advantages. -A large vehicle will allow you to see the traffic. If everyone is driving normal size cars, everyone can see ahead to watch for stopping or danger, and everyone can see if it's safe to turn left or right. However, no-one drives normal size cars here. Everyone is driving large vehicles. If you drive a normal size car, the sort found in the rest of the world, you will be unable to see anything other than the tops of the wheels of the other vehicles. This is clearly dangerous. Your only recourse is to drive a huge vehicle yourself. The bigger the better, because then you can peer over the tops of the other vehicles and be alert for danger. -The larger the vehicle you are driving, the more you can intimidate the fools who choose to drive anything smaller. You will often need to force other vehicles out of your way, especially those fools who misunderstand the speed limits. And any fool who hesitates. If you have a vehicle the same size as the one you want to intimidate, you are going to make no impression on the other driver. Remember, they aren't usually watching the road, so they won't notice your vehicle unless you are really, really HUGE. If your vehicle is 6 times their size, then they will notice you and they will hear you. You can happily ignore them. They will stop or veer away from you because they know they will be crushed by your juggernaut if they don't. -When you choose your large vehicle, it will be unfinished. You will need to modify the vehicle to suit your personality and abilities. Generally speaking, you should enlarge your vehicle. Make it an extra 3 feet higher by adding massive shock absorbers and hydraulics. Make it bigger again by adding oversized tyres. Make it wider by adding wide tyres or huge side mirrors. You should aim to make the vehicle appear bigger and bulkier. The bigger you are, the better you can be seen. The bigger you are, the more vehicles you can intimidate. On The Road -Do not use your indicators to change lanes. It is a sign of weakness, a warning that you not confident or skilled enough to simply move into the next lane. Indicators are usually used by drivers who are not travelling with the pack and are unable to simply move into a gap. If you use your indicators, you will be seen as a dangerous driver and other drivers will PUNISH you. They will punish you by immediately moving up to block your passage. -Do not use your indicators when turning corners. It is unnecessary as no-one needs to know if you are turning or not. -Because of the nature of the roads, you will often enter a highway in the right-most lane, and need to turn left almost immediately afterwards. You will need to cross four or five lanes almost immediately. This is relatively easy and should be done without the use of indicators. If you use your indicators, other drivers will close up and prevent your passage. Most drivers will be travelling in packs and travelling at speed. You can trust them to maintain their formations. Simply swing across into the desired lane. They will trust you too and they will not slow down or swerve. They will simply ignore you. This is correct behaviour and traffic will flow smoothly. -When you first obtain a drivers license in your state of choice, you have to sit for a small examination to show that you know the rules of the road. You will be given a small booklet with the rules in it and expected to memorise it. Two things to remember. The book contains rules and numbers that you have to remember just long enough to pass the exam and get your license. It can then be forgotten. This is a small exercise in short-term memory abilities. And anyway, the rules are optional. They are for ideal conditions, like when a traffic policeman is watching you carefully. They are not meant to be used in the real world. For example, the book says you should not cross unbroken white lines. In reality, you should not cross unbroken white lines unless you want to. Sharing The Road -You might sometimes notice that there are things on the road that are smaller than smaller vehicles. I refer to motorcycles, bicycles, pedestrians and animals. These are small and can generally be ignored. more... http://www.hgriggs.com/driving.html http://committed.to/justiceforpeace Funny. Too bad that it is true. Where were you driving? > see results at... > http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=122628 [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] > > http://committed.to/justiceforpeace > Funny. Too bad that it is true. Where were you driving? If you've driven I-95 in Florida then you know the jungle. The problem is SUVs, kids racing among cars, supersonic motorcyclists and every other suicidal driver out there. And of course, this other issue... There's something particularly bad about American roads: LACK OF LANE DISCIPLINE. Nobody enforces that here. This makes our roads nothing short of CHAOTIC and DEADLY. And then if you choose to do the right thing and drive a small car, you will understand how you feel when those 5 ton vehicles whistle past you on all sides... 'All I am saying is that you can eliminate the majority of inconsiderate driving and "road rage" by instituting and enforcing keep right except to pass. In addition you will save a considerable number of lives. This will also take care of much of the problem driving having to do with talking on phones applying makeup etc. The reason being that the majority of times I see it as a problem the driver is in the LEFT lane weaving. If we institute keep right except to pass we can safely blow by these idiots when we think it is safe to do so rather than having them hang out next to us. As for those of you concerned about being stuck in the right lane going too slowly. I can assure you that if the faster drivers are allowed to get by, without being roadblocked in the passing lane, you will not have a buildup of cars that will take 5 minutes to go by in close proximity to each other. In addition whenever I have seen the situation described in the previous paragraph, the right lane is basically doing the speed limit. Your real complaint is that the speed limits are too low and you want to hang out in the left lane at a higher speed but don't want to be courteous and pullover to allow others to pass.' http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/di...w/.ef08fa1/4340 >>Funny. Too bad that it is true. Where were you driving? > > If you've driven I-95 in Florida then you know the jungle. I did, just yesterday, from Jacksonville to Daytona (then took 4 over to Orlando) > The problem > is SUVs, kids racing among cars, supersonic motorcyclists and every > other suicidal driver out there. And of course, this other issue... Didn't see any of this. Hell, I was on the only motorcycle I saw on the road in that 140 miles and I was following an SUV with 3 adults and 2 kids (my wife, her bother and his wife and their 2 kids). We moved along at a leisurely 80-85 MPH. > There's something particularly bad about American roads: LACK OF LANE > DISCIPLINE. Nobody enforces that here. This makes our roads nothing > short of CHAOTIC and DEADLY. And then if you choose to do the right > thing and drive a small car, you will understand how you feel when > those 5 ton vehicles whistle past you on all sides... Lack of lane discipline? Does this refer to stay in the right lane except to pass, or to people drifting between lanes? I didn't see either problem yesterday, everyone was moving at relatively close speeds, so the left lane was moving just a few MPH faster then the right, no one drifting between lanes. > 'All I am saying is that you can eliminate the majority of > inconsiderate driving and "road rage" by instituting and enforcing keep [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > have a buildup of cars that will take 5 minutes to go by in close > proximity to each other. Then you've never lived in an area where 90% of the traffic is at or over the speed limit while the other 10% is under the speed limit with this enforced. > In addition whenever I have seen the situation described in the > previous paragraph, the right lane is basically doing the speed limit. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/di...w/.ef08fa1/4340 I'm not slowing down from 80MPH to 50MPH to change to the right lane because some a.shole behind me wants to do 82MPH. He can suffer at the 80 MPH until there is no traffic at all in the right lane.  SignatureOdinn "The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." --Walter Bagehot Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org '03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide '97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org rot13 to reply > I'm not slowing down from 80MPH to 50MPH to change to the right lane > because some a.shole behind me wants to do 82MPH. He can suffer at the > 80 MPH until there is no traffic at all in the right lane. The actual problem is when the joker in the left lane is doing 52 mph and won't move over for the people wanting to do 80. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org Impotence...Nature's way of saying "No hard feelings. >> I'm not slowing down from 80MPH to 50MPH to change to the right lane >> because some a.shole behind me wants to do 82MPH. He can suffer at >> the 80 MPH until there is no traffic at all in the right lane. > > The actual problem is when the joker in the left lane is doing 52 mph > and won't move over for the people wanting to do 80. Ahh, I don't typically have that problem, I ride right on their bumper and turn on the bright lights, they usually move over pretty quick. SignatureOdinn "The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." --Walter Bagehot Reeky's unofficial homepage ... http://www.reeky.org '03 FLHTI ........... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/ElectraGlide '97 VN1500D ......... http://www.sloanclan.org/gallery/VulcanClassic Atlanta Biker Net ... http://www.atlantabiker.net Vulcan Riders Assoc . http://www.vulcanriders.org rot13 to reply > >> I'm not slowing down from 80MPH to 50MPH to change to the right lane > >> because some a.shole behind me wants to do 82MPH. He can suffer at [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Ahh, I don't typically have that problem, I ride right on their bumper > and turn on the bright lights, they usually move over pretty quick. So, you're that guy. The guy that scares the snot out of people when they're driving along minding their own business. >> Ahh, I don't typically have that problem, I ride right on their bumper >> and turn on the bright lights, they usually move over pretty quick. > >So, you're that guy. The guy that scares the snot out of people when >they're driving along minding their own business. If those people would mind their own business in the correct lane, then everyone else would be able to mind THEIR own business, as well. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ Scott en Aztlán wrote: > If those people would mind their own business in the correct lane, > then everyone else would be able to mind THEIR own business, > as well. Scott, you are mentally retarded if you believe what you wrote. It's none of YOUR business what lane other motorists drive in. Read your California Vehicle Code and you will discover a few interesting things. For instance, all lanes on the freeway have the SAME speed limit, unless otherwise marked. And, passing on the right or left is permitted, as long as you stay in the lanes of travel. And, you can search the California vehicle Code as long as you want, and you will NEVER find any proof that the lane closest to the center divider is the "fast lane". That's just an urban myth. Law abiding drivers have every right to mind their own business in the lane closest to the center divider while cruising at the speed limit. That's what the lane is FOR, it's NOT a passing lane, nor is it your personal race track where you're allowed to pass everybody on the road and expect them to get out of your way. Don't flash your lights at other motorists, expecting them to just get out of your way. Light flashing on the freeways is illegal and may lead to incidents of road rage. There is only ONE situation where you can legally flash your lights or toot your horn when you come up behind a slower moving vehicle in California. That's when you're on a two-lane road and you have a quarter of a mile clear space to pass a slow moving vehicle. That slower driver is supposed to move as far to the right as possible, but he doesn't have to drive on the shoulder for you. If you can't pass in that situation, don't even try it. Finally, the signs that say "Slower Traffic Keep Right" do not refer to motorists driving in the lane closest to the center divider if they are driving at the speed limit. The "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs mean that busses and trucks and underpowered vehicles that can't reach the speed limit have to move over to the right. Unfortunately, brain dead dipshits like Scott here may be trying to pass everybody who won't move out of the left lanes. This moron may be driving 100 mph in what he thinks is "the slow lane". If it's the "slow lane", why the f.ck is Scott driving 100 mph in it? It's because he's retarded... spectraltars...@aol.com wrote: > Scott en Aztlán wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > where you're allowed to pass everybody on the road and expect them to > get out of your way. And that seem to me like a recipe for disaster. We got some chaotic roads, full of road rage, with danger coming on all sides. And on top of that you are ticketed for speeding, which is a lesser threat to others by itself. I think kids can come up with a better system than that. But lawyers and bureaucrats can't. :( > spectraltars...@aol.com wrote: > > That's what the lane is FOR, it's NOT a passing lane, nor is it > > your personal race track where you're allowed to pass everybody > > on the road and expect them to get out of your way. > And that seem to me like a recipe for disaster. We got some chaotic > roads, full of road rage, with danger coming on all sides. And [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I think kids can come up with a better system than that. > But lawyers and bureaucrats can't. :( Yeah, I know. You want a "rational" use of America's highways, based upon the myth of the lane-disciplined German autobahn... We have a lot of children walking around in adult bodies here in California. Having had very little discipline in their upbringing, they believe in moral relativity: whatever they want to do must be OK, because they want to do it, and they see "everybody else" doing "it", so why *shouldn't* they do what "everybody else" is doing? Traffic court judges hear that defense all the time, and the judges convict the offenders routinely. But an offender can get away with his bad behavior for years, just by taking traffic school once every 18 months and his license to drive won't be suspended or revoked... California has its own peculiar set of laws regulating how drivers shall operate their motor vehicles upon California highways. Allowing drivers to pass on the right or the left on the freeways is one of the major differnces between California and New York or Missouri, for example, or Germany's famous autobahns, where everybody must keep right except while passing... New Yorkers used to flashing their lights at cars they are overtaking even do it in city traffic in Manhattan, if you can imagine some aggressive moron driving down a city street signed for 35 mph, but he's doing 60 mph because he sees a gap between him and the car a quarter of a mile ahead, so the idiot starts flashing his lights as if to say, "Get out of my way, I'm coming through!" So, when somebody comes up behind me on a California freeway and starts flashing his lights, I stay in the lane I'm in and check for New York license plates when he finally passes me---in a different lane, I'm NOT going to move over for him just because he's being an a.shole about his *imaginary* "rights"... And that autobahn rule works fairly well in Germany, as long as traffic is light. But most drivers in America have never seen the narrow lanes of the almost empty autobahn, or Italy's empty autostrada, or England or France's wide open highways between major cities... First time I ever saw the autobahn, I thought to myself, "That is a really *small* freeway, it's no wider than the old Pasadena freeway from Pasadena to Los Angeles that was built in the 1940's or 1950's... Many drivers will get onto a nearly empty freeway in the early morning hours just before dawn and drive ten or fifteen miles an hour over the speed limit and think, "Well, *that's* what the freeways were designed for, so I can drive 80 miles an hour and get where I'm going really quick!" On a recently completed stretch of freeway between Pasadena and San Bernardino, commuters *ass-umed* that it was somehow "OK" to drive 100 miles per hour because the new road was almost empty. The California Highway Patrol stopped hundreds of them and helped the traffic courts empty those morons' wallets... The fine for driving over 100 mph may be as high as $1000 or six months in county jail, last time I checked into it... The highway engineers in California predicted the present day extreme high traffic density on the freeways when they designed them to *move cars to their destinations*, not to feed the egos of speed demon drivers... So California has six-lane freeways headed from the suburbs to the skyscrapers downtown where many people work in offices and have to be at work by 8 AM or 9 AM Monday through Friday, and these office workers all want to drive by themselves in their own car, and they make a parking lot out of the freeway at the same time every day, going to work and coming home, and like little kids, they blame everybody else while they sit there motionless in traffic... No amount of autobahn-style "lane discipline" is going to make the commute any faster, only car pooling and use of public transportation is going to do that. (Or ride in the car pool lanes on a motorcycle, while being tailgated by morons in cars who think that the car pool lane is their own private race track, and that they should be able to drive 80 or 90 mph and that the cars ahead should pull over to the right when they flash their lights. Cheezus, what stupidity!) The price of fuel is so high in European countries, automobiles are so expensive that only the very rich can afford to drive, so they believe they should be able to drive as fast as they please, having paid a lot of money for their vehicle... And the railroad system still works, so if a citizen of a European country wants to go somewhere, he can take a train and relax and read a magazine. Most Europeans would be unwilling to get up at 4:00 AM and commute an hour each way to go to work, though. If they can't get a job in their own town, they won't work. But that rich German Porsche or Mercedes Benz driver heading for the office in the morning gets on the autobahn and he wants to drive as fast as he pleases, so he comes up behind somebody in a slower car and if the driver ahead is still in the process of passing and getting over to the right, the overtaking driver will turn his left turn signal on to let the driver ahead know he's there and wants to pass. And the Germans recently made flashing one's high beams at cars ahead illegal. At some point the traffic gets so heavy that there is always a line of cars trying to leap frog their way past a line of slower trucks and busses... And, somebody in a big fast car will be wanting to drive 90 or 100 mph, and they are also supposed to move over into the line of slow moving and merge with the slow traffic. So this means the driver has to make sudden movements of the steering wheel at high speeds, instead of just holding the steering wheel in one position and gruising at 90 mph in the left hand lane... I saw a video tape of a Mercedes Benz that crashed while the driver was just trying to obey the "pass left/drive right" rule. The car started fish tailing, crashed, turned over... Then there are the rich sportscar drivers in Italy, where there are different speed limits based upon the size of the engine in the car. Little Fiat Pandas were limited to 55 mph last time I was over there, but cars with bigger engines could go faster... An American tourist told me that he rented a Fiat in Italy and was driving in the left hand lane, obeying the speed limit, and a Ferrari came up behind him and started flashing his lights. When he didn't move over, the Ferrari driver started bumping his car with his front bumper! spectraltars...@aol.com wrote: > > spectraltars...@aol.com wrote: > > > That's what the lane is FOR, it's NOT a passing lane, nor is it > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > because they want to do it, and they see "everybody else" doing "it", > so why *shouldn't* they do what "everybody else" is doing? I see a big mass of vehicles zigzaging around each other, the big ones posing a greater threat on the little ones. In other words: It's a VERY SCARY PLACE TO BE IN. Whether the Autobahn is good or not, or Mercedes' drivers are a.sholes or not, American highways--and byways--remain a jungle. Lane discipline is the very simple step that can make our highways faster and safer. Enforcing speed limits while ignoring lane discipline is very stupid--but a profittable industry. ;) 'I watched the television show "Modern Marvels" on The History Channel last night, on the German Autobahn. They started out by showing a camera crew ride along in a 520 hp RUF Porsche Carerra Turbo that got up to 212 mph. The other vehicles, which were all going way faster than on an American Interstate, looked like they were standing still in comparison. Here are some facts I noted: The police strictly enforce rules designed to make people pay attention when they drive, the most important of which is lane discipline. No matter what speed you are going, you must keep right except to pass, no exceptions. Before and during your pass you are expected to watch for faster cars which may be approaching. You must pass with urgency, and at no time may you linger in the left lane, even for a second. There are absolutely no speed limits on more than half of the Autobahn (thousands of miles). Most traffic travels around 110 mph. Sometimes traffic flows at 130 or 140. Occasionally, faster cars come through. This is not dangerous because of the aforementioned lane discipline. The system works! The rate of fatalities on the German Autobahn is 0.74 per 100 million miles traveled, compared to 0.86 for the American Interstate system. Obviously, creating and enforcing speed limits is not the best answer to creating a safer and more efficient roadway system.' http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.ef08fa1/4252 > Obviously, creating and enforcing speed limits is not the best answer > to creating a safer and more efficient roadway system.' speed limits aren't about safety. they're about revenue. otherwise the sop procedure for ALL federal standards would be followed (survey the stretch of road and post the limit at the 85% of what the drivers are running at). instead they under post the limits to make ticketing easier. with radar and lidar guns, traffic court time is easier and doesn't require an intelligent case to be presented by the city's attorney or for the officer to present a moderately complex testimony. Sit in traffic court and listen to the city lawyer talk to the city cop and they repeat the same questions over each time. It's rote and doesn't require conscious thought after a while. Taking someone to trial for failure to yield, obstructing the flow of traffic, or careless (inattentive) driving (cell phone, kids, makeup, reading, etc while driving) take more effort. They let the safety issues slide because it takes longer in court for each of those cases. An extra 10 minutes per case for safety issues means 3 fewer speeding cased pumped through the system for the cash flow. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org WANTED: Meaningful overnight relationship. > > Obviously, creating and enforcing speed limits is not the best answer > > to creating a safer and more efficient roadway system.' > > speed limits aren't about safety. they're about revenue. otherwise the > sop procedure for ALL federal standards would be followed (survey the > stretch of road and post the limit at the 85% of what the drivers are > running at). instead they under post the limits to make ticketing > easier. with radar and lidar guns, traffic court time is easier and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org > WANTED: Meaningful overnight relationship. You have explained quite well how the MACHINE works. Of course, you provide the oil for it to run smoothly. The same principle can be applied to the prison industrial complex or war machine or health industry. They are self-perpetuating machines and turn out big bucks. ;) >>>Obviously, creating and enforcing speed limits is not the best > [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > industry. They are self-perpetuating machines and turn out big bucks. > ;) "You" in the general sense; not "me" specifically. I go to traffic court for entertainment purposes. The number of people who testify against themselves is amazing. Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for work! [admitting guilt with his statement] Judge: [Bangs gavel] $200 please! SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org So you don't know how fast you were going. I guess that means I can write anything I want on the ticket, huh? >Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for >work! [admitting guilt with his statement] >Judge: [Bangs gavel] $200 please! Sorry, it doesn't work that way. If you're charged with doing 80, you can't be found guilty of that charge by admitting to doing 70. You might be able to plea bargain before (or even, in some cases, during) the hearing, but you can't be conviced of a charge until you've been found guilty *of that charged offence*. Doing 70 is not the same as doing 80. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" >>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > you've been found guilty *of that charged offence*. > Doing 70 is not the same as doing 80. the issue before the judge was "were you speeding". 61 in a 60 is speeding. [bangs gavel] the only difference is how big the fine will be. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org Ever stop to think, and forget to start again? >the issue before the judge was "were you speeding". 61 in a 60 is >speeding. [bangs gavel] the only difference is how big the fine will be. Fiction >>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >the issue before the judge was "were you speeding". 61 in a 60 is >speeding. [bangs gavel] the only difference is how big the fine will be. That's not how I read, "Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead?" That does not translate into, "were you speeding". I would suggest that you gain a small understanding of how our legal system works. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" >>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >I would suggest that you gain a small understanding of how our legal >system works. The law he violated was "speeding." The amount doesn't matter, except as evidence of the officer's veracity, judgment, and the severity. The officer could just say, "at least 1 mph over" and nothing would change. SignatureTurby the Turbosurfer >>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >officer could just say, "at least 1 mph over" and nothing would >change. I was responding to a hypothetical situation, and I properly quoted it. Here is is again, since you didn't seem to have read it the first time: "Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead?" Now, read that. Then read what I wrote again. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" snip ... learn how to post or get off Usenet. >The law he violated was "speeding." The amount doesn't matter, except >as evidence of the officer's veracity, judgment, and the severity. The >officer could just say, "at least 1 mph over" and nothing would >change. Sorry but you are being an idiot again. Any idiot cop that would say this at my trial would be going home the loser you both are. "Your honor it is obvious the officer was not paying attention enough to come up with a valid estimate of my speed, and as such I move to have all charges dismissed, and the officer taken out back and beaten." >>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I would suggest that you gain a small understanding of how our legal > system works. tickets may be written up differently in different jurisdictions. many are shows with the violation "speeding" and a comment area for the officer to add detail. on those, the issue before the judge was "were you speeding". SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org "A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." --Bertrand de Jouvenel >>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >officer to add detail. on those, the issue before the judge was "were >you speeding". I've never seen a ticket hat helkd a complaint of "speeding". They always referrence the statute violated, and a count, which must describe how the statute was violated. Thus, "speeding" is not a valid complaint on a ticket. As well, you don't appear to have read what I responded to. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" >>>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > >As well, you don't appear to have read what I responded to. I dug out an old ticket I got a few years ago, and sure enough, it says "22349 V.C. Speeding". There are no other comments. In California, "speeding" is covered under the Basic Speed Law, section 22350, and several other sections as well: "22348. (a) Notwithstanding subdivision (b) of Section 22351, ( )1 a person shall not drive a vehicle upon a highway with a speed limit established pursuant to Section 22349 or 22356 at a speed greater than that speed limit. 22349. (a) Except as provided in Section 22356, no person may drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than 65 miles per hour. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person may drive a vehicle upon a two-lane, undivided highway at a speed greater than 55 miles per hour unless that highway, or portion thereof, has been posted for a higher speed by the Department of Transportation or appropriate local agency upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey. 22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. 22351. (a) The speed of any vehicle upon a highway not in excess of the limits specified in Section 22352 or established as authorized in this code is lawful unless clearly proved to be in violation of the basic speed law. (b) The speed of any vehicle upon a highway in excess of the prima facie speed limits in Section 22352 or established as authorized in this code is prima facie unlawful unless the defendant establishes by competent evidence that the speed in excess of said limits did not constitute a violation of the basic speed law at the time, place and under the conditions then existing. " It's an old wives tale that if the cop made minor errors on the citation, you could get it thrown out. Judges now look at the infraction and if they're convinced you did it, (hell, just if they believe the cop,) there can be tons of errors on the cite. I've seen it happen in court. SignatureTurby the Turbosurfer >>>>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >> >>As well, you don't appear to have read what I responded to. Here's what I responded to: "Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead?" R4ad it for yourself. >I dug out an old ticket I got a few years ago, and sure enough, it >says "22349 V.C. Speeding". There are no other comments. I've never seen such a citation. The relevant law may well be as quoted, but I've never seen such a citation. >In California, "speeding" is covered under the Basic Speed Law, >section 22350, and several other sections as well: [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >believe the cop,) there can be tons of errors on the cite. I've seen >it happen in court. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" >>>>>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > The relevant law may well be as quoted, but I've never seen such a > citation. What we've been trying to tell you is, just because YOU'VE not seen it doesn't make it untrue. Geeze. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org "Of the four wars in my lifetime none came about because the U.S. was too strong." - Ronald Reagan >> I've never seen such a citation. >> The relevant law may well be as quoted, but I've never seen such a >> citation. > >What we've been trying to tell you is, just because YOU'VE not seen it >doesn't make it untrue. Many years ago, when I lived in CA, I got two speeding tickets from the CHP while on my Wing. Both listed the speed, because the speed would determine the fine. They changed this? SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" >>> I've never seen such a citation. >>> The relevant law may well be as quoted, but I've never seen such a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Both listed the speed, because the speed would determine the fine. >They changed this? The estimated speed is listed as well as the location, direction, date, time, etc, but the offense was "speeding," not "doing 65 in a 55." SignatureTurby the Turbosurfer >>>I've never seen such a citation. >>>The relevant law may well be as quoted, but I've never seen such a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Both listed the speed, because the speed would determine the fine. > They changed this? Not in all places. Many times the case in court becomes an admission of guilt with just the amount of fine in question. (I wasn't going 80. I was going 78.) That was my point about the judge determining guilt (speeding) by admissions and confessions and adjusting the fine according to the shade of gray that day. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org CM Rule #1 = Violate IBA Rule #5 >>>>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > believe the cop,) there can be tons of errors on the cite. I've seen > it happen in court. don't confuse him with reality. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org CM Rule #1 = Violate IBA Rule #5 >>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I would suggest that you gain a small understanding of how our legal > system works. It doesn't really work the way you think it does in traffic court. Usual legal rules and procedures don't apply. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel >>>>> Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>> Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > nate Excellent and observable point. On more than one occasion I have pointed out that and still lost. I learned not to testify because it leaves me open for cross examination ("well, you're honor, it happened this way..."). Instead I question the cop and establish some background that may or may not be disputed. I have watched it happen repeatedly to others too. Traffic court isn't real court anyway. You typically have an appointed judge that used to be a prosecuting attorney, who is far from impartial. If the prosecution fails to make a case then the judge sits up and starts asking the questions for him/her as if the judge were the prosecution. One time I actually had the prosecution agree to drop the charges before the case came up. When we were all called forward, the prosecution announced that the city was choosing not to move forward and requested a dismissal for (xyz). The judge set up and spent 15 minutes quizzing me as if he was the prosecution instead of being the impartial ruling body that, not having a case before him any more (due to both pros and def being in agreement for dismissal), had no choice but to drop that gavel and dismiss. I have had invalid tickets (incorrect vehicle description, improper first name, location where ticket took place) that were still upheld for no other reason than the DL number was right and they wanted the cash; even after moving to dismiss on the grounds that none of the pertinent info was valid (which even the cop admitted to). So take your law degree and your corn holing LEO bedmates and shove 'em up your a.s. You're all so incestuous and corrupt that Jury Nullification is the only thing standing between your "system" and a revolution. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org WANTED: Meaningful overnight relationship. >>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >nate Actually, I'm right. If you'd actually attend traffic court, you'd see that. The citation lists a specific count of an infraction. The LEO must convince the hearing officer (usually a judge) that the count is accurate. Saying, "Seventy, eighty, it's close enough" won't get it. Certainly, "speeding" won't even begin to cut it. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" >>>>>>Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >>>>>>Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Saying, "Seventy, eighty, it's close enough" won't get it. > Certainly, "speeding" won't even begin to cut it. I have been to traffic court locally, twice. both times I got to sit through several hours of various traffic cases and about the only way anyone got off was if the officer didn't show - and even then you still had to come back for a second appearance. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel Where I live in Calfornia I estimate that a full THIRD of motorists on the road are illegal aliens who 1. never took a driving lesson in their lives; 2. don't speak or read English (apart from "I need welfare and food stamps for my kids" -- they're entitled to both for any children they may have, and they typically have four or more); 3. frequently drive under the influence of booze/drugs; 4. WILL flee if in an accident -- even one in which another person is injured or dies. This scenario, in fact, is now quite common all over the USA. So you decide if "American roads are a jungle" or not. "So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) [Can you say "Neoconservative"? - WakeUp] the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.... "Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government . . . Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests. [Can you say FOX News? - WakeUp] "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. " . . . nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest." -- President George Washington Farewell Address September 26, 1796 <WakeUp2005@adelphia.net> wrote in message Ah, another racist inbred, mouth breathing, belching felcher...go suck on mengele's a.s in hell scum bag. > Where I live in Calfornia I estimate that a full THIRD of motorists > on the road are illegal aliens who 1. never took a driving lesson in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > So you decide if "American roads are a jungle" or not. They are, and not only the roads. But you must be aware how much camouflage there's in it, and that the real problem may be the big fish... The Effect of Immigration The large scale employer looking at greater profitability or the way to cut costs has several options open, the easiest and laziest being to cut wages. If the workers are well-organised they can resist this so there are two options open to the major capitalist. Either take the factories to where the cheap labour is or take the cheap labour to where the factories are. The first option entails great pollution, as a rule -- not that they ever care about that -- and in some cases they have to go into areas of political instability. It is cheaper to move the cheap labour. Having thus encouraged immigration, wearing the financial hat as it were, the capitalist in the capacity of a right-wing politician, dons the political hat and denounces immigration. This has the advantage of setting worker against worker, fuelled by religious and/or racial antipathies which can persist for generations, and have the added bonus of inducing the worker to support the right wing electorally. It does the capitalist no harm to have a work force hated by those who surround them, or in fear of deportation if they step out of line. Nor does it harm the capitalist, in a political context, to have issues such as immigration replace the basic issue of the wage and monetary system. http://www.spunk.org/library/writers/meltzer/sp001500.html *** There's no excuse however for giving them an easy "license to kill" or to have lax enforcement of the law. Everything is part of this problem we call "the jungle"... snip of a whole bunch of ignorance... Let me see, you bitch about circumstances created by a democrat president who allowed the illegal immigrant population to balloon to more then 10 times what it was when he took office, and then proceed to misquote a president and suggest that he was talking about conservatives and Fox News. Exactly what drugs are you taking? >and then proceed >to misquote a president and suggest that he was talking about >conservatives and Fox News. Listen, schmuck, get your head out of your a.s, willya? Yup -- GW was referring in his timeless Farewell Address to precisely the kinds of traitors who own and run FOX "News". Are you such a clueless putz you think he meant his words only to be understood in reference to his own time?LOL "So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation) [Can you say "Neoconservative"? - WakeUp] the interests of their own country without odium, sometimes even with popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.... "Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government . . . Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests. [Can you say FOX News? - WakeUp] "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. " . . . nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest." -- President George Washington Farewell Address September 26, 1796 > >Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? > >Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for > >work! [admitting guilt with his statement] > >Judge: [Bangs gavel] $200 please! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > you've been found guilty *of that charged offence*. > Doing 70 is not the same as doing 80. My case is different but it goes to show how the GRINDING MACHINE works: The parking officer gave me a parking ticket (with no good reason other some stupid sign in fron of my house) and had lifted the car to tow it. I complained about being excessive punishment, etc, and she agreed to dismiss the ticket if I paid the truck 40 bucks on the spot. 20 days later I get a notifice with late fees added. I complain to the Parking Authority that I never saw the ticket but they tell me to go to court. I see the lady officer twice in the meantime and she assures me that she would acknowledge what happened in court. At court day she tells me in my face that she never offered to dismiss the ticket, and the judge tells me to pay everything with late fees and all. What a shock! I've been preyed upon. Then some good samaritan who saw me in rage told me to appeal. Wow, what a good idea! Wait, it's twice as much to appeal! Forget it. I go to the head of the Parking Authority and they dismiss the whole thing. Lucky me! >> >Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? >> >Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >works: The parking officer gave me a parking ticket (with no good >reason other some stupid sign in fron of my house) Did the stupid sign say "No Parking" or some variation thereof? >and had lifted the >car to tow it. I complained about being excessive punishment, etc, and [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >twice as much to appeal! Forget it. I go to the head of the Parking >Authority and they dismiss the whole thing. Lucky me! SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >> >Judge: You are charged with 85 in a 60, how do you plead? > >> >Clueless defendant: Not guilty! I was only doing 70 and was late for [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Did the stupid sign say "No Parking" or some variation thereof? > >and had lifted the It did. What I'm saying that it was UNNECESSARY (no real need for it), IT CARRIED UNUSUAL PENALTY (simultaneous ticketing and towing) and that THE LADY LIED. This is a building with limited parking whose fact they use to squeeze the people out of their last penny. 100 bucks for such a slight violation amounts to TERRORIZING THE PEOPLE FOR PROFIT. >> >> On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:44:24 GMT, Bownse <bownse@swbell.net> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >the people out of their last penny. 100 bucks for such a slight >violation amounts to TERRORIZING THE PEOPLE FOR PROFIT. OHMYGOD! Did you seek counseling for the terror? SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >This is a building with limited parking whose fact they use to squeeze > >the people out of their last penny. 100 bucks for such a slight > >violation amounts to TERRORIZING THE PEOPLE FOR PROFIT. > > OHMYGOD! > Did you seek counseling for the terror? No, I sought a loan. ;) I believe there's many kinds of terror on the people, some over politics, some over profit. When I wake up to the fact of my car being ticketed AND towed over an slight oversight, in front of my building, for no good reason other than profit, I feel an economic war is being waged on the poor. Certainly my neighbors and I feel terrorized by it. >> >This is a building with limited parking whose fact they use to >squeeze [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >for no good reason other than profit, I feel an economic war is being >waged on the poor. Certainly my neighbors and I feel terrorized by it. You volunteered. There was a sign, you ignored it, and got caught. You paid the price for your actions. This isn't terrorism, it's consequences for your actions. Of course, you're entitled to your opinions, but this one doesn't match reality. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >I believe there's many kinds of terror on the people, some over > >politics, some over profit. When I wake up to the fact of my car being [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Of course, you're entitled to your opinions, but this one doesn't > match reality. This ain't about fairness other placing than placing a sign to catch unsuspecting people. And the enforcing by the officer and tow truck man acting together no more than a raid. In my dictionary "anything that terrorizes is terrorism"... (so are the intimidating driving habits of some out there, particularly when using the overwhelming size of their vehicle). >> >I believe there's many kinds of terror on the people, some over >> >politics, some over profit. When I wake up to the fact of my car [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >unsuspecting people. And the enforcing by the officer and tow truck man >acting together no more than a raid. It's a SIGN! You can READ it. "Unsuspecting" people? What are you talking about? This was a NO PARKING sign. It's not a "parking trap", it's a marked no parking space. The cop and tow truck man acted as a "raid"? You mean by doing their jobs after someone *VOLUNTEERS* for it? >In my dictionary "anything that terrorizes is terrorism"... (so are the >intimidating driving habits of some out there, particularly when using >the overwhelming size of their vehicle). Which has what to do with a parking violation? "Your dictionary"? Is this one that we can buy at a book store, or is it just made-up defifntions to excuse your behaviour? SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >In my dictionary "anything that terrorizes is terrorism"... (so are the > >intimidating driving habits of some out there, particularly when using [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Your dictionary"? Is this one that we can buy at a book store, or is > it just made-up defifntions to excuse your behaviour? My dictionary is to be made from the little people's perspective, not the lion's. So the definitions are quite different. But I'm not quite alone in the use of the broad definition of terrorism. For example... "parking fine= terrorism" http://www.eltnews.com/community/?board=legal;action=display;num=1109925918 Well, I'm willing to bring it one notch down and declare them PREDATORS instead of TERRORISTS. >> >In my dictionary "anything that terrorizes is terrorism"... (so are >the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >My dictionary is to be made from the little people's perspective, not >the lion's. So the definitions are quite different. Once you admit that your words don't mean what they mean, you've admitted that what you write is meaningless. >But I'm not quite alone in the use of the broad definition of >terrorism. For example... > >"parking fine= terrorism" > >http://www.eltnews.com/community/?board=legal;action=display;num=1109925918 Another person who doesn't mean what he writes. So? >Well, I'm willing to bring it one notch down and declare them PREDATORS >instead of TERRORISTS. And yet, you volunteered for the predation. What does that make you? SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >My dictionary is to be made from the little people's perspective, not > >the lion's. So the definitions are quite different. > > Once you admit that your words don't mean what they mean, you've > admitted that what you write is meaningless. How so? There are many dictionaries in this world. For example, one man's "terrorist" may be another's "hero." That happens too with the word "freedom fighter," which is used to indicate the guy is on our side, no matter what he does. And all this confusion comes because WE ALL LIVE UNDER DOUBLE STANDARDS, hiding the fact we live under the Law of the Jungle. From the roads to international politics. When a poor man is fined over 100 bucks for no other reason that he was easy prey, we may assume he's been victim of that Law too. He could have been warned; he could have been given the ticket first and then be towed later. But when we witness the parking officer and tow truck man acting swiftly to get your car--even though I was screaming at them from the window--you witness the same predatory skills of the lion coming down fast on the gazelle. There's little room for the gazelles and other little animals of this world. "The world belongs to the mighty beasts," thought the dinosaurs before they disappeared... > >Well, I'm willing to bring it one notch down and declare them PREDATORS > >instead of TERRORISTS. > > And yet, you volunteered for the predation. What does that make you? Only as prey. I hardly call that predation. ;) > When a poor man is fined over 100 bucks for no other reason that he was ...too stupid to read the "no parking" sign and park elsewhere. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org Suffering from the occasional blinding flash of mediocrity. > > When a poor man is fined over 100 bucks for no other reason that he was > > ...too stupid to read the "no parking" sign and park elsewhere. Excessive punishment. The laws are made for the lion to eat the little animals. Only law is Law of the Jungle. HOW THE LAW WORKS... FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LION One day the King of the Jungle, tired of being called a "Tyrant," gathered the most cunning animals in the kingdom, chief among them the Foxes... He said to them: "It's mighty unjust that I am not recognized for what I am. You know full well that the best of my SCRAPS, after you, go to the Little Animals... Well, I want you to write LAWS, so from now on it'll be them, and not me, who would rule over this God chosen kingdom..." After a few months of hard deliberations (and a few "private parties" and "business trips") the Foxes (now turned politicians) returned with a long, long book of laws written in a language so hard to understand to the Little Animals that they thought it was old Greek. After translation, it started like this: "The animals with a mane will be treated like kings; the animals with paws and teeth will be above the Laws; and the animals who will represent the interests of the Little Animals, us, will be granted a raise in benefits and status... Of course, ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION will be considered ILLEGAL, and will result in the Lion eating the Little Animal..." >>>When a poor man is fined over 100 bucks for no other reason that he > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > HOW THE LAW WORKS... FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LION [snip of whine fest] Boo f.cking hoo. No one held a gun to their head and made them park there. They chose to do what they did. It was clearly marked. Ain't no place I've ever lived that didn't reserve the right to tow and stow a vehicle for violating clearly marked NO PARKING zones. Grow and and grow a pair of balls ya f.cking baby. SignatureMark Johnson, Ft. Worth, TX http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org "Every a.s is different. Some are evil, some are famous, some are pierced by ceramic unicorns." - Katherine Becker > > Excessive punishment. The laws are made for the lion to eat the little > > animals. Only law is Law of the Jungle. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > there. They chose to do what they did. It was clearly marked. Ain't no > place I've ever lived that didn't reserve the right to tow and stow a > vehicle for violating clearly marked NO PARKING zones. > > Grow and and grow a pair of balls ya f.cking baby. The lion eats you because he's HUNGRY not because he's FAIR. It happens every day on the road. People get away with the WORST OFFENCES (lack of lane dicipline, talking on the phone) but you get eaten for going 10mph over the limit. Case in point... " I'd Rather Get Mugged Than Get A Traffic Ticket". "Insurance companies love to see us get tickets because they can raise our rates." Personal Letter From: Mel Leiding Anaheim, CA Dear Friends and Fellow Victims, The reason I got started in my campaign against unfair traffic tickets is because I have always felt like a victim whenever I have received a ticket no matter how well deserved. This feeling usually comes right after I get the notice that the extra 8 MPH over the limit will cost me $350.00. At that point I begin to feel like I've been robbed at the point of a radar gun by a masked (sunglasses) bandit in a black and white car or motorcycle who was hiding behind a huge garbage dumpster. They always say they are writing these tickets in the interests of my safety. This may have been true at some point in the past before tickets became big business. Now I believe most are written to raise revenue, not for safety. If they were really interested in safety they would not hide behind walls and bushes but would be stationed out in the open where they can be seen and thus be a true deterrent to unsafe driving. The problem is that if they did this they would not make any money. Hiding behind buildings and bushes doesn't cause anyone to drive slower or safer. It only causes bad relationships between the driving public and the police. You'll have to excuse me for being a little negative and cynical right now. Normally I can appreciate an officer's job but I just got two tickets within two weeks of each other. The last one really ticked me off because the cop had such a rude and condescending attitude. It reminded me of the worst ticket I ever got for speeding ( 59 MPH in a 50 MPH zone) early one Sunday morning on my way to the mountains. It was a wide four lane road by an industrial park with no one around except the cop hiding in the bushes. That ticket eventually got dismissed. I once wrote an article titled " I'd Rather Get Mugged Than Get A Traffic Ticket". Basically I said that getting mugged was faster, cheaper and has no long term repercussions such as increased insurance premiums or loss of my license. If I get mugged, the guy is only going to get $20.00 or $30.00 sometimes less and its over in about 30 seconds. If I get a ticket, it will cost $150.00 to $500.00 or more. If I didn't have car insurance that ticket for no insurance will be about $1,350.00. The mugger would love a score like that. Unfortunately the traffic ticket fine is just the beginning. If you don't fight each ticket you get points against your license which could lead to the loss of your driving privileges which could eventually lead to the loss of your job and your ability to support yourself or your family. The next thing you might face if you don't fight each ticket is an insurance rate increase or something worse like cancellation by the company you've been paying faithfully year after year after year. Insurance companies love to see us get tickets because they can raise our rates. Naturally they want the speed limits lower so we will get more tickets which means higher rates and more money for them. Did you know that insurance companies spend 26 million dollars a year checking peoples driving records? Believe me they are not checking to see if you have no tickets so they can give you a good driver discount. They are checking to see if you have any traffic tickets so they can increase your rates accordingly. One last thing - in a mugging the mugger might get arrested but never the muggee. Sit in on any traffic court and you will hear the judge issuing arrest warrants for things like failure to appear, contempt or whatever else is on the agenda that day. I swear to you, I was in traffic court this morning and someone failed to appear in court. The judge threw the file to the clerk and said "issue an arrest warrant with $10,000.00 bail". If not taken care of properly, traffic tickets can escalate into something much more serious than a fine and traffic school. http://www.beattraffictickets.com/ Remember my strategy: DO _NOT_ FEED THE LION! ;) >> Boo f.cking hoo. No one held a gun to their head and made them park >> there. They chose to do what they did. It was clearly marked. Ain't [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >lane dicipline, talking on the phone) but you get eaten for going 10mph >over the limit. Case in point... You VOLUNTEERED for the victimization. Is this because you LIKE being a victim? Is that it? SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >The lion eats you because he's HUNGRY not because he's FAIR. It happens > >every day on the road. People get away with the WORST OFFENCES (lack of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You VOLUNTEERED for the victimization. > Is this because you LIKE being a victim? Is that it? Yeah, I L-O-V-E being a victim. Now two more parking tickets pending, one today. The first one in front of my house, two feet BEHIND the stop line. They say so many feet within the stop sign is not allowed. No sign, nothing. I'll go and discuss it again, since there's only a few spaces available for so many cars. I won't waste my time in court though. Today, parked in a minor two lane street where buses turn left. I parked since there was no sign, but see the logic of it. Still I argue with the officer, "WHY NOT PUT A SIGN?" I fear another ambush by the lion though... :( >Yeah, I L-O-V-E being a victim. Now two more parking tickets pending, >one today. > >The first one in front of my house, two feet BEHIND the stop line. They >say so many feet within the stop sign is not allowed. No sign, nothing. Like it's even possible to put up a sign for EVERY SINGLE LAW on the books. You as a driver are responsible for knowing the law. Lack of a sign is no excuse. If you doubt me, go park next to a fire hydrant, then try to tell the cop not to ticket you because there is no sign. SignatureSloth Kills! http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/ >> The first one in front of my house, two feet BEHIND the stop line. They >> say so many feet within the stop sign is not allowed. No sign, nothing. > Like it's even possible to put up a sign for EVERY SINGLE LAW on the > books. For laws that aren't the same throughout the state, they can and must. > You as a driver are responsible for knowing the law. Lack of a sign is > no excuse. The existence of the MUTCD is an admission by the government that that principle is morally bankrupt. > If you doubt me, go park next to a fire hydrant, then try > to tell the cop not to ticket you because there is no sign. That law is the same statewide and so needs no sign. (Though I have installed a sign by the hydrant in front of my house anyway, because it's an unusually shaped hydrant & not obvious to some people.) >> >The lion eats you because he's HUNGRY not because he's FAIR. It >happens [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >was no sign, but see the logic of it. Still I argue with the officer, >"WHY NOT PUT A SIGN?" I fear another ambush by the lion though... :( Do you not understand that, as a driver, *YOU* are supposed to learn the rules? If you want to play tye game, you must learn the rules, or you will continuously be a victim, just like now. You'd think you'd learn after a while that you just don't know the rules. SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > Do you not understand that, as a driver, *YOU* are supposed to learn > the rules? > If you want to play tye game, you must learn the rules, or you will > continuously be a victim, just like now. > You'd think you'd learn after a while that you just don't know the > rules. The combo ticket/towing incident happened at a "loading zone" where there was no loading whatsoever, and not even a building or house there, just green grass. I see that the rules, regulations and laws are meant for the lion to eat the little animal in a legal way. We got to keep him fat, right? 'Traffic ticket fines are the cash cow of the court system. No other class of "crime" is as profitable for state and local governments as is that of traffic tickets. Traffic courts cannot be fair and unbiased when their finanacial welfare depends on traffic fines.' But he's a master of deceit and camouflage... "Many speed limits are deliberately set well below the prevailing speed of safely-driven vehicles. Doing so does not slow traffic but it does make a greater number of motorists eligible for a speeding ticket they don't deserve." http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/secrets.html >> Do you not understand that, as a driver, *YOU* are supposed to learn >> the rules? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >there was no loading whatsoever, and not even a building or house >there, just green grass. It seems you forgot to mention the No Parking sign that you earlier said was there. >I see that the rules, regulations and laws are meant for the lion to >eat the little animal in a legal way. We got to keep him fat, right? No, they are meant to bring a little order to the world. It seems that *you* are one of those for whom the signs are mostly meant, since you can't make order even when it's spelled out for you. >'Traffic ticket fines are the cash cow of the court system. No other >class of "crime" is as profitable for state and local governments as is >that of traffic tickets. Traffic courts cannot be fair and unbiased >when their finanacial welfare depends on traffic fines.' That's a very nice quote. Now try to imagine how parking would go without parking rules. Remember, you can't park right *with* signs. >But he's a master of deceit and camouflage... > >"Many speed limits are deliberately set well below the prevailing speed >of safely-driven vehicles. Doing so does not slow traffic but it does >make a greater number of motorists eligible for a speeding ticket they >don't deserve." Yet, those who are ticketed are volunteering for the tickets. If you want to play the game, learn the rules. Simply saying the rules are wrong does not mean they won't bite you. This seems to be somethig you don't (or won't) learn. Let's say that you're right; the rules are there to seperate you from your money. Why do you volunteer to be seperated from your money? >http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/secrets.html SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" > >> Do you not understand that, as a driver, *YOU* are supposed to learn > >> the rules? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > It seems you forgot to mention the No Parking sign that you earlier > said was there. You've never seen a sign that says, "NO PARKING, LOADING ZONE"? > >I see that the rules, regulations and laws are meant for the lion to > >eat the little animal in a legal way. We got to keep him fat, right? > > No, they are meant to bring a little order to the world. It seems that > *you* are one of those for whom the signs are mostly meant, since you > can't make order even when it's spelled out for you. Order into the jungle...funny. You can do whatever you want out there: zigzag at supersonic speeds at will; talk on the phone, holding people back; drive recklessly a monster SUV, intimidating others... You know, everything goes, like in the jungle. > >'Traffic ticket fines are the cash cow of the court system. No other |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message