More power to the police in high speed pursuit

So your point is that I should just shut the f*ck up? How about you use your kill file instead?

Gee wally everything I stated is also reality. You just choose to insult me because I brought it to your attention. Is the 'reality' you live in so fragile that you can't take a little information without calling people names?

New york drivers are more competent while being rude. That's why chicago is scarier.

Once again you've ingored what I've written in favor of your imgination.

Obviously you're just stupid then. Because that's not what I wrote.

Thank you captain obvious.

I haven't try learning how to read. Check with your local high school, they may have night classes to help with your reading comprehension.

Defining the vast majority of safe, reasonable drivers as violators of the law does not make things safer, if anything the opposite.

I didn't blame the traffic signal, only stated that it occured. Studies on RLCs show an increase in rear-end collisions. So what if they are at fault? It's still my car that's damaged, it's still me that may be hurt. I don't find any comfort in being able to blame the person who hit me, I still have all the hassles. And if you think not being at fault matters, it does matter to some insurance companies even if you are not fault. Now, if I should encounter an RLC intersection with a short yellow where I can stop safely but the SUV behind me can't with its shitty undersized brakes, how exactly has the RLC and the tweaking to bring in revenue been a benefit?

You made a number of implications in that direction along with others.

Good for you. I have to share the roads with bigger idiots than you have.

So you deny doing this, then do it again....

Here it is again... don't disturb your idea of 'reality' with facts you've been blissfully ignorant of. There is a thing called a kill file. You don't want to read what I have to say, USE IT. Solve your own problems.

The usual things an ordinary person does. Inform people, get letters published in newspapers, writes representives, that sort of thing. At least one rep is willing to listen to these issues and thusly IL now has a strong keep right to pass law for limited access highways. There have been some attempts to fix the speed limit issues in this state one step at a time, but with the current governor it's not going to happen.

If you don't like my posts, use your kill file. Why waste your time reading it if it disturbs you so.

I already called it a tax on driving. Do try to keep up with things.

What would my congressman have to do with it? Constant complaining already got the federal law repealed a decade ago. Try to keep up. Or is that your special reality where the NMSL law is still in place?

Constant? Let's see... someone posts about a tragic result from a chase that began for 'just speeding'. I post my response. Did I start a thread on this? No. But there is this small group who wants to keep this going... hell bent on attacking my character, my driving, my personal life, everything their imginations can come up with but not addressing the topic. Here's a big clue. You can solve your own complaint. Use your kill file or if you don't reply, then guess what, it ends. All in your hands.

But you won't ignore me. I've disturbed your fraigle little reality with facts, information. Beyond your ability to refute. So what do you do, go after me.

Good for you. Now try to deepen your understanding instead of lashing out at people who know more than you do.

Considering your demonstrated level of intelligence, the fact that's all you can present is not surprising.

Read it yourself and present your own then. Oh wait, that would actually require some brains... much easier to just fling insults instead.

I'm going to try one more time.

Reality.

1. the state or quality of being real.
2. resemblance to what is real.
3. a real thing or fact.
4. real things, facts, or events taken as a whole
5. Philosophy. a. something that exists independently of ideas concerning it. b. something that exists independently of all other things and from which all other things derive.
6. something that is real.
7. something that constitutes a real or actual thing, as distinguished from something that is merely apparent.

You can obsess as much as you want about how a thing SHOULD be, but that does not affect reality. Why are you having such a hard time with this?

Did I insult you? Did I call you names. Did I call you a "sheep", or, worse, an "apathetic sheep"? No, all I've said is that the REALITY is exactly that which you've been railing against for days. Years, by your own account.

New York drivers are competent? You've never driven in New York.

Hah! Look who's talking!

Obviously, you're just stupid then. Fine, let's play.

You are without question THE most self-centered, self-absorbed, self-inflating asshole I've ever conversed with, and I've conversed with plenty. You believe that anyone who does not share your obsession with your chosen subject matter is inferior, unthinking, crude, rude, or just a lout. And obsession it very obviously is! You are so far into this one stupid subject that you can't see everything that goes on around you.

The sign still says 55. Pull your head out of your ass and LOOK AT IT. That, you obsessive, drooling moron, is reality. You can pull over to the side of the road, get out of your car, walk right up to it and touch it. It's real. All of your mindless drivel and endless pursuit of this windmill has had NO effect on reality. You've wasted your time (years of it), my time, and the time of so many others around here who have tried, exhaustively, to make you see.

You obsess, endlessly obsess, about this ONE TOPIC, as if this were the barometer of a nation's soul. You're a one-trick pony, and you're riding this beast until it drops.

This world, this insane, troubled, dangerous world, is SO FULL of FAR GREATER concerns, that your problem with speed limits is pathetic. Arbitrary speed limits or the enforcement of same or the purpose behind these arbitrary speed limits is SO FAR DOWN THE LIST OF SERIOUS CONCERNS as to be laughable.

But you go ahead, keep railing against THE GOVERNMENT, keep preaching your oh-so-enlightened philosophy, and the rest of us will just keep laughing at you, poking you once in a while for entertainment.

Call you names? What's the point?

dwight

It's spelled "paradigm". Don't get snooty if you don't know where the letters go.

You've now hit the lowest level of trolling.

And yet... YET... the sign still says 55.

How is that possible?

dwight

The sign doesn't reflect the reality of the road. The actual speed data does.

This is why you should actually read the cites, they would do a great deal to clear up your questions.

here is a plain language summary of what the research has shown from the Maryland DOT:

-----------------------------------------

Will crashes increase if the speed limit is raised? Probably not. Research has shown that the posted speed limit has little effect on the speeds at which most motorists drive. Raising the speed limit does not significantly raise the speeds at which motorists drive, and lowering the limit generally does not appreciably decrease their speeds. However, the more motorists learn from their experiences that speed limits are set at speeds that they consider safe and reasonable the greater the chances that the motorists will heed them. Speed limits significantly lower than the 85th percentile speed are ignored by many drivers and difficult to enforced

In most instances, a speed limit based on the 85th percentile reflects the expectations of the largest proportion of drivers; is found by most to be

a safe and comfortable limit; facilitates speed enforcement; and offers the greatest chance of achieving some uniformity in speeds on a given road. When motorists drive at a relatively uniform speed, tailgating, lane changing, and overtaking are reduced. As a result, collisions are less likely to occur.

Those who drive much faster or slower than most of the drivers around them place themselves and others at considerable risk of a collision. When the posted limit is reasonable, enforcement can be targeted to the relatively small percentage that exceeds the speed limit.

-------------------------

BTW: Today's article on revenue based traffic ticketing:

----------------------------

Road-trippers face added risk of ticket

Published May 7, 2007

Drivers traveling out of state might want to pay extra-close attention to their speed to avoid getting a ticket in towns where voters recently rejected proposals to increase property taxes.

The farther a driver lives from the courthouse where the ticket could be challenged, the more likely it is that a ticket will be issued, the study found. Also, the fines will probably be higher.

And drivers have a 28 percent higher chance of being fined when stopped in municipalities where voters rejected property tax increases, the study found. The amount of the fine is also likely to be higher when voters defeated a tax referendum.

"The police are almost exclusively writing higher numbers of tickets to out-of-town drivers in the year a referendum proposal fails. It's an interesting way to export the tax to non-voters," said Michael Makowsky, a PhD candidate in economics at George Mason University who conducted the study with economics professor Thomas Stratmann.

"The data showed us that while it is the job of police officers to issue tickets to violators, police also respond to incentives that are put out there by their supervisors as well as by the elected officials responding to economic issues in their communities," Makowsky said.

Police are less likely to write tickets in cities that depend on tourism revenue, the study found. "In towns that want people to eat in their restaurants and stay in their hotels, the police departments issue fewer tickets," Makowsky said.

-----------------------------------

I expect none of it to be read and the usual spew to be issued in response.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in news:BNOdnYzWjr1Hh97bnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

OK, Brent, I'll play along. Exactly what is your point in 50 words or less?

Initially? That defining reasonable, normal, and safe behavior illegal has negative consquences. One of those negative consquences with regard to under posted speed limits is dangerous police chases that can result in death or injury.

I read all of it, and I repeat - yet again - that I am not arguing against change. The ONLY point that I've ever made was that what you and I call reality are wildly divergent.

I see the sign that says 55, I see the police pulling over seemingly random speeders, and I see that as the reality.

You pull out all kinds of links to show that all of this is merely revenue enhancement or links to show how the world SHOULD be, but that is not the reality that I see with my own two little beady eyes.

I see the sign that says 55. That is my reality.

dwight

The kid was doing 73 in a 55 zone. On a dark night.

Let's say, for argument, that the speed limit along that stretch was raised to 70. My money says that this kid would THEN be doing 83, that the police STILL would have attempted to pull him over, and the he STILL would have taken off.

Your argument is moot, if only the numbers are changed. I repeat, speed was not the mitigating factor here. Reckless driving, reckless endangerment of those around him, compounded by his idiotic choices once the police lights went on, all of these things made him a prime target for negative attention by the authorities. Not purely his speed.

dwight

Some people like being ruled, others resign themselves to it. Slavery isn't much different. Some slaves like being a slave, others resign themselves to it. Those of these two mentalities often have negative reactions to someone in the same situation but doesn't just accept his lot in life.

What it comes down to is you don't like someone being uppity and saying the emperor has no clothes.

It is this basic mentality goes way beyond speed limits. It goes into the nature of government and wether or not a people remain free. Once you start accepting rule outside the law, the rule of force, rule by color of law, by doomsmen, freedom's days are numbered.

Where else do you just accept this rule by color of law? I am sure it doesn't start or stop with driving related things.

Would you just shrug your shoulders and go off to fight and die in an illegal war too?

My point is not specific to this case, but general.

Obviously you didn't read the cited material. *shrug*

by assumption and declaration. That's nice.

Coming back requires that one first leave.

SNIP

As a member of the Armed Forces, it is/was not my decision to determine whether or not a war is "illegal". My duty, and honor, is to to serve my country. It is my personal ethics which compell me to hold true to the oath I took when I joined. If that means going off to fight, then that is my duty.

It is the President and the Congress who determine whether a war is legal or not.

And if I go off to war, as I have done, in service to my country, and die, I shall not have died in vain. I upheld my honor. What would make my death in vain is those who cut and run before the job is done. Then we shall all, all of us who served with honor, will have had our lives wasted.

I have no idea whether you have ever served your country or just used the internet to whine about your pet peaves, but, whether you agree or disagree with armed conflict, you do not have the right to malign those who serve simply because you believe a war is "illegal". Right or wrong, the government decided to send the troops. The time for the government to argue whether a war is legal or illegal is BEFORE the troops are sent. Once they are sent, the nation should give all the support they can in a drive for victory. To do any less is a total diservice to those sent to fight and die.

You crossed the line on this one.

Don't you sleep?

Oh, boy... Here we go...

You just skipped over everything I wrote.

Jet's right. You're paranoid and delusional.

At the very least, ADD.

Okay. I get it. You're off somewhere in your own little world, and there really is no point in continuing.

Thanks, and have a nice day.

dwight

Then you lack the basic understanding to even comprehend what has been said. Too bad. So sad.

You want to be ruled. I want liberty. That's what it comes down to in the end.

Since you won't listen to me, maybe you'll listen to a congressional medal of honor recipient, twice over. At the time of his death the most decorated Marine in US history, Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested."

-Smedley Darlington Butler

Actually, it's quite the opposite. Try expanding your knowledge some day. Things aren't as they seem, Alice.

At least you are learning to solve your own problems now.