Ditto down here in Florida....In Florida, it's illicit to stop a vehicle
for non-seat belt wearing; but "if" they stop you, and you're not wearing a
seat belt, then the fine applies.  Fortunately I have no issue with this
policy, and always wear a seat belt.

I have mutual problems with the cameras, and they are quite controversial
down here in Florida.  There have been some successful challenges to the
whole "Cam-Ticket" policy, and the Constitutionality of the program.  Some
communities have refused to "Re-Up" the programs, because they've got their
proverbial asses handed to them in Court.

I'm not sure how successful overall this progam will be, but if there's a
way that local governments can get around the Constitutional Issues;  they
will.



On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Brian Bednarek <bri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I know that here in NJ it's a money maker!!! They also advertise that they
> are doing "Click-it or Ticket" programs for a week at a time and they will
> ticket anyone without a seat-belt on ... same with the various DUI stops
> all weekends where they find things other than just drunks driving!!! We
> have our share of speed traps all over the highways!!!
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:35 AM, 'ray' via PoliticalForum <
> politicalforum@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> Speed limits are nothing more than a revenue collection method imposed on
>> drivers, who have actually caused no harm. Two shining examples of the
>> fallacy of official government hypocritical slogan that ticketing speeders
>> is a safety priority and saves lives: Radar is set up on road to catch
>> speeders heading east. Driver heading west passes speed trap, stops a mile
>> away and begins to flash lights at cars heading east. The result, is that
>> cars heading east slow down. If flashing light driver caught, a ticket is
>> issued. If safety and encouraging drivers to slow down are primary
>> objectives, why is flasher ticketed for warning drivers? Fraternal order of
>> police issued a statement demanding that the APP WAZE remove the alert for
>> police activity ahead. Most states have a law that drivers must move over,
>> if possible, when they encounter emergency vehicles on side of road. WAZE
>> provides early warning and allows drivers enough time to safely do so, and
>> to slow down. The alleged two priorities of safety Yet, police despise the
>> early warning notice?
>>
>> On Friday, September 16, 2016 at 7:49:15 AM UTC-4, MJ wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> September 11, 2016
>>>
>>> *On This Speed Limit Business *by eric
>>>
>>> What are speed limits, exactly?
>>>
>>> I know … a number on a sign.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Exactly. *But why pay any attention to them?
>>>
>>> I mean, assuming there *isn’t* a cop around?
>>>
>>> They’re not much use as far as advisories about the maximum safe
>>> velocity for a given road. If they were, then everyone (just about)
>>> wouldn’t be driving *at least* that fast.
>>>
>>> Probably, they’d be driving slower.
>>>
>>> If speed limits meant anything substantive, that is.
>>>
>>> Like the redline on a tachometer, for example. That is a *real* limit.
>>>
>>> Most people do not run their engines at or even near redline for more
>>> than brief moments. Because the redline *is* the fastest you can safely
>>> spin the engine without risking engine damage.
>>>
>>> So they don’t do it.
>>>
>>> The idea that driving over the speed limit is risking anything (other
>>> than a ticket) is ridiculous.
>>>
>>> If that were not the case, then most people wouldn’t “speed” as a matter
>>> of routine – because most people aren’t reckless with their own lives or
>>> the lives of others.
>>>
>>> The fact that speed limits are almost universally ignored (by cops, too)
>>> says something about their merits.
>>>
>>> Prohibition comes to mind. Another absurd law that was respected
>>> accordingly.
>>>
>>> But Prohibition went away.
>>>
>>> Speed limits are still with us.
>>>
>>> It’d be nice if they’d go away, like Prohibition.
>>>
>>> It would tolerable if they at least plausibly represented a speed*
>>> faster* than most people on a given road normally drive.
>>>
>>> That is, in fact, how speed limits are*supposed* to be set. Such that
>>> most drivers would *not* be “speeding.” The few who did could then at
>>> least be characterized as driving faster than most other drivers and one
>>> could then at least make the claim that *maybe* these people are
>>> driving too fast.
>>>
>>> But that is not good for *revenue* – which is what speed limits are
>>> really all about.
>>>
>>> By purposely setting limits so low such that nine out of ten drivers on
>>> any given road are “speeding,” it makes it easier to catch “speeders.”
>>> Which means more revenue via tickets issued for this *manufactured
>>> offense*.
>>>
>>> So, speed limits have little, if anything, to do with “safety.”
>>>
>>> They are useless as far as informing drivers about reasonable speeds for
>>> a given (and perhaps unfamiliar) road.
>>>
>>> They are not (for the most part) posted on the basis of traffic
>>> engineering surveys, as they are supposed to be.
>>>
>>> They are arbitrary and typically under-posted, deliberately – in  order
>>> to criminalize reasonable/safe driving so as to give police an excuse to
>>> issue “citations” which just happen to be a major source of local
>>> government income.
>>>
>>> When there is a profit motive underpinning a law – and when most
>>> otherwise reasonable (and presumably sane) people routinely violate a law,
>>> there is a problem with the law.
>>>
>>> And those who enforce it.
>>>
>>> Arguably, the entire concept is flawed because it assumes there is a
>>> single “safe” speed for every driver. But each driver’s abilities vary. As
>>> does the capability of the vehicle they’re driving. A one-size-fits-all
>>> speed limit arbitrarily defines Driver A as a danger merely because he is
>>> traveling faster than a number posted on a sign – even if his actual
>>> *driving* can’t be faulted. And it envelopes Driver B – whose actual
>>> driving *can* be faulted – in the aura of  legality (and “safety”)
>>> merely because he is operating at or below the arbitrarily-set speed limit.
>>>
>>> It might be saner – and safer – to get rid of enforceable speed limits
>>> altogether. Perhaps post advisory speeds – realistic speeds – as an aid to
>>> drivers not familiar with a given stretch of road or curves up ahead. That
>>> would be genuinely helpful as a well as safe.
>>>
>>> But then, it would reduce revenue, by taking away the excuse to pull
>>> over people whose driving can’t be faulted but who did exceed a
>>> dumbed-down, arbitrarily set, least-common-denominator number on a sign
>>> we’re supposed to obey but which virtually no one does.
>>>
>>> http://ericpetersautos.com/2016/09/11/speed-limit-business/
>>>
>> --
>> --
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> brine
> http://brineb.blogspot.com/
>
> --
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PoliticalForum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to