Keith not to change the subject but what is the deal with that sinkhole at the mosaic fertilizer plant?
On Sep 17, 2016 5:03 PM, "Brian Bednarek" <bri...@gmail.com> wrote: > NJ did a two year test on stop-light cameras ... locals loved it, more > gravy, but amazingly the State gov't decided it was wrong and stopped it > ... probably the only time my State did a good job since I moved here 22 > years ago!!! > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> 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. >> > > > > -- > 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.
