Click It or Ticket Insanity

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Doug, did you just make that? Otherwise, how timely.

What a waste of bandwidth.

Yes...waste of bandwidth and time. A couple of guys over on the Superformance owners forum started using Xtranormal to create some short movies...just more fodder for some friendly ribbing.

[RedEsprit]

Fighting Legislation In Arizona

Sam Crump, an Arizona assemblyman who is opposed to the speed cameras and has backed legislation to have them removed from the state's freeways in 2010, says the main backing for speed cameras within Arizona has come from "senior citizens groups," but there has been a surprising agreement between his core conservative followers and college students over privacy concerns.

"It's been the subject of some debate since we introduced it and some legislators have been surprised by the controversy," Crump said. "We expect it to come up for a vote in the next couple weeks. If it fails, we'll say more power to the people. But every time [a freeway speed-camera initiative] has been up for a vote in any place it has failed."

Arizona's former governor, Janet Napolitano, predicted Arizona's freeway camera system would generate $90 million in profit for the state in 2009, and $34 million for the private company that runs it. Crump, however says the system's total profit has been in the range of "$20 to $25 million a year," which leads him to suggest that speed camera detractors who say it's only a device to make money could be wrong.

"I caution people that it really is technology in the hands of Big Brother," Crump said. "We've got 70 or so [freeway speed cameras] right now, and they're looking at [a total of] 200."

As you will notice, Napolitano doesn't say anything about how many lives will be saved with speed cameras. Its all about $90 million in profit. Its all about the revenue. So if your in Arizona and on a back desert highway with no one in sight other than a Gila Monster or tarantula, keep the leash on your Cobra.

[Bill Bess]

OK...this whole thing is really about, the gov. going after folks for violations that can generate money. Government can't ever cut back spending like we must do when our in comes go down ..they just look for more opportunities.
I have an retired friend that use to be a cop in LA. He told me that they use to place those little orange Union 76 - antena balls, on cars parked at the bar parking lot at night.
At closing time they just stopped the cars that had the orange balls on the antenas, most of the time the drivers were drunk.
Good for safety, good for generating money, but bad for the people.
Well, here we are.
Bill

[RedEsprit]

Years ago I got a ticket for parking in a handicapped zone. I was coming back from the Keys in a torrential Florida down pour and pulled into a truck stop for gas just before getting onto Alligator Alley. The handicapped sign was completely hidden behind a row of fishing poles. You couldn't see the blue stripes on the pavement because of the deep water during the storm. The FHP was hiding behind a diptsty dumpster giving out $300 fines. The girl, working behind the counter in the store, told me that the FHP actually arranged the cane poles so the sign could not be seen and he had given out dozens of $300 tickets in just a few hours. Not sure how many lives were saved in that parking lot that day but the revenue was extraordinary!

[DAVID GAGNARD]

I might add that, if you are involved in an accident in a state that requires wearing a seatbelt and are injured, you will likely not recover any damages and possibly not be covered by insurance because you broke the law and contributed to your own injuries because of negligence.

This a totally false statement..............You can be dead drunk and be in an accident and you WILL BE COVERED by your insurance company, you can be speeding 125 mph in 25 mph zone and be in an accident and your still covered and can recoup money for injuries,happens every day....sure, your stupidity contributed to your injuries, but I've yet to see an insurance policy with a "stupidity clause" in it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In 99% of all accidents, one of the vehicles involved "broke the law", be it running a red light,speeding or whatever,an insurance company can not deny coverage because of this..........if this were allowed,what would be the use of having insurance in the first place???????

David

[ERA713]

Why dont school buses have seat belts?

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by ERA713

Why dont school buses have seat belts?

Many states now require that seat belts be installed on buses. In most cases, its based on the build date of the bus (i.e. in CA they need to be on all new buses after 1999).

[Silverback51]

Originally Posted by ERA713

Why dont school buses have seat belts?

The kids would use them to hit other kids.

[tmareina]

Granted, everyone should have a little compassion and give warnings (I totally agree)...BUT...the law is the law and if you don't break the rules you won't have to worry about the consequesces and you'll be a little safer and less prone to injury. Just my 2 cents.

Tom

[Dangerous Doug]

Trying to make a right turn in Los Gatos today. Left turners from oncoming traffic are parading around the corner. Their light turns red; mine green. Little old lady in a Buick comes swinging around through the red light.

Not a cop in sight.

Ingrained driving habit, I'm sure.

Could she afford the ticket? I don't care. Adjacent to me was someone getting ready to cross the street. If they weren't paying attention, they would have been hit. Had neither of us been paying attention, the pedestrian would have ended up between the Buick and my Jeep.

Humans do stupid things. Their behavior needs to be regulated---to some degree. Do we enact laws to regulate every behavior? No, that would be Talibanesque. Do we suspend all laws so that people can exercise perfect free will? No, innocent people would be hurt. In fact, sometimes we need to regulate behavior because humans also do stupid things to themselves (like, get addicted to drugs).

Anyhow, it's a balance. Like I said, we've all had our run-ins with overzealous peace officers. However, these examples are not the norm. Most peace officers are rational, reasonable people. If you detect an attitude, it's probably because he's still a little pissed from the last scumbag he's had to deal with.

DD

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by Dangerous Doug

Driving to work today over highway 17, a notoriously curvy road from Santa Cruz to Silicon Valley, I was mystified by the density of the traffic. Usually, this is due to a slow-moving truck making it's way up the hill. No truck in sight. Just some green, non-descript Japanese sedan going 40 in a 50 mph zone. Traffic was backing up for abou 1/8 of a mile behind this guy. Everyone shifting lanes to the left to get around this guy. As I drove around I glanced in expecting to see a great grandmother or something. Nope. A guy my age, in his forties, READING WHILE DRIVING.

What a DS!

Yeah, he'd get a ticket for that...

DD

Doug - In my 20+ years of driving over Hwy 17, I've seen it all. My favorite was a guy playing guitar while he was driving and steering with his knees.

[Great Asp]

Originally Posted by tmareina

Granted, everyone should have a little compassion and give warnings (I totally agree)...BUT...the law is the law and if you don't break the rules you won't have to worry about the consequesces and you'll be a little safer and less prone to injury. Just my 2 cents.

Tom

The consequesces I am worried about is when the city, county, or state you are traveling in is "trying" to extract tax dollars from us by ordering LEOs to write these tickets as a focus.

I have no problem with the law, just opportunistic government seeing it as a way to make money. Just like the photo enforcement, a way to collect taxes.

I'll say it again, LEOs have better things to do than patrol looking to write seatbelt tickets. That is the directive they have been ordered to do in many cases, and that's why we are having the thread.

Great thread, great discussion, thanks to all posters.

E

[ROUSHAC]

Neither side seems to be able to convince the other that the opposing view is in error.

Maybe a "compromise" would be in order in discussions like this current waste of bandwidth.



If the above doesn't work, please feel free to just carry on